User talk:Mike.lifeguard/Archive 3

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Image:Camus NYWT&S.jpg

Hi, could you please undelete this image per the following discussion. I realize that it was uploaded by a banned account, but the copyright status was reasonable ascertained. Thanks, ˉanetode╦╩ 12:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

The closing admin should do it; I'll leave them a message.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

User Missie - Using Copyright images


Please can you help, user Missie is using 10 photos of my girlfriend & claiming that they are pictures of her, I also notice she has been reported by someone else previously for misuse of images.

I have the original uncropped photos & am the copyright holder for these images so please can you get the 10 photos I reported today removed from the site.

Many Thanks JD

I'm not sure what to do here. Please make sure you open a deletion request for them and someone will take care of it. I'll take a look later as well.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:39, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


hey, thanks for cropping the order of canada photo. Couldn't quite figure out how to do it. Dowew (talk) 22:56, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help. You should try the GIMP.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:59, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
that what I downloaded, but it was hard enough just to remove the Order of Military Merit from the image. I guess it takes practice Dowew (talk) 23:28, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Pictures on Commons Wikipedia===

I initiated the Shiawassee River page on Wikipedia.Org. It then became a Michigan state location article .

I am helping Wikipedia by expanding it --using pictures taken by me of the river

The Shiawassee River is a public natural geograpraphic resource --how can that be beyond the scope ?

Please explain in more detail or in another manner Leave response message on my talk page please

Willi H2O (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, a better reason would be that the gallery contained no images. Feel free to create a gallery with images as appropriate.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:25, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sin escudo.png

Since you can edit locked pages, can you help me recover this file as suggested here? Thanks! -Nard the Bard 23:06, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

✓ Done  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:52, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Please, see my questions :

Yug (talk) 08:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you close the deletion request on Image:Flag of Menton and Roquebrune.gif? CC-SA licensing permission has been obtained Goustien (talk) 22:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


I was looking for it by couldn't find it. :( but thanks for pointing out the link. I will make a handy links page on my userpage so I don't keep having to find it. Bidgee (talk) 01:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Getmoredata → Ajax sysop

Hello Mike. I see you're using my old getmoredata script (commented out in your file), which is obsolete. Do you mind if I replace it with my newer Ajax sysop script (and comment it out)? —Pathoschild 01:31:02, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Meh, I did it. Thanks!  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:30, 19 October 2008 (UTC)


User:Dirac has uploaded Image:Tomohawk engine at al-shifa.jpg and Image:Building destroyed at Al-Shifa.jpg again. I tagged these images back in August and you deleted them. Can you please have him blocked? He continues to violate copyright policies. -- ADuran (talk) 01:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Deleted & given a final warning in French.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Mass nominations

Actually, using the "Nominate for deletion" link for each pic is quicker. Teofilo (talk) 13:57, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

It really isn't. You're thinking of only the nomination process. When many nominations are done for the same reasons, people argue the same points multiple times. It is more work to follow the discussions if you are contributing to them. It is more work for administrators to close the DRs. It is more work to delete the images, and all this causes mistakes. Please be considerate of the entire process - mass nominations are done for good reason, and I encourage you to use them when applicable, as in this case. Thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Which case ? Teofilo (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Apologies, you've nominated only two. I must be hallucinating.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 22:49, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
Actually I have been nominating quite a lot of pictures in the last few days or weeks. I have been using the "nominate for deletion links" even for similar looking cases a number of times, but I also used the group nomination at Commons:Deletion requests/Ice art in the USA, Commons:Deletion requests/Ice sculptures in Japan, Commons:Deletion requests/1994 Papua New Guinean sculptures at Stanford. Teofilo (talk) 13:02, 23 October 2008 (UTC)


For your attention:). Thanks --Herby talk thyme 08:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

van Gogh Cleanup Project '08

Hi, you'd be more than welcome to give feedback on Category talk:Vincent van Gogh to my ideas on thisone, and to promote it among competent people. Most of it is about technical "how-to", about filenames, sub-categories, etc. no need to be expert in van Gogh. Thanks, --WeHaWoe (talk) 08:19, 30 October 2008 (UTC)


Surely 3 minutes is a new record for a process where everyone else waits 5 days...? Giggy (talk) 05:10, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Yep. He'll need a bot account anyways, so reverting that now. Was intended to make FlickrReviewer not have a conniption fit for now & we'll figure it out in a few days once that's done. Good eyes ^_^  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:25, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
bit more explanation on my talk page too :-) cheers all, Privatemusings (talk) 05:32, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
ps. Mike - I reuploaded the GPO building, because I also added it to the article in en... hope that's cool :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:36, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
Sure thing.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 05:44, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

<- Commons:Bots/Requests_for_flags/Privatemusings_notabot_bot - fyi :-) Privatemusings (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm inclined to defer to Multichill.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 00:56, 31 October 2008 (UTC)



I notice yesterday than you have operator status in #wikimedia-admin

Can i update the template that they can ask you for a permanent invite also?

Cheers, Sterkebaktalk 10:54, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Update which template?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Sorry i forget to watch this page. The template new admins get. In that template stands : Ask .... And .... For permanent invite. And some pages on meta says the same. So i was wondering... Can you give permanent invite? Sterkebaktalk 18:51, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I can. It is probably best to point users to the the list on Meta, as that has more information on the channel itself, and would be most up-to-date. (Instead of constantly updating the list here). I've updated it a bit, though you may still wish to edit it.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)


Nice cu-tools you have ;) Have fun with them :) abf /talk to me/ 14:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

congrads Sterkebaktalk 15:09, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Congratulations! Cirt (talk) 15:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Guess I better stop socking here now... ++Lar: t/c 02:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Image:Canadian Bravery Decorations.JPG


the cropping and fixing that you did you the Order of Canada image really helped it...unfortunately I just done have the time to lern gimp. Any change you could fix up this one a little ? Image:Canadian Bravery Decorations.JPGDowew (talk) 02:49, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Done.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 03:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Lecture at Output.jpg

Hello Mike, This is getting totally frustrating for me. This picture is deleted many times, each time for reasons which don't fit the issue. The picture is my property. Commons send me a mail, which I replied (i don't have a copy sorry). All rights are free, the pic on the screen is also my own property. So could you please restore the image and also put them back in all other language Yuri Landman articles, because I' not allowed because of COI issues. I don't understand why all is so difficult on your site. You can verify this message by sending a mail to me personally. On you can find my e-mail address. I'm Dutch not English, so I don't follow all the specs you request from me. Suggest one and I'll agree on that one.

I also will inform Forrester, because he's closely involved with this deletion request too, I assume.

Could you take care of placing the pic back on ALL wikipedia's Yuri Landman? Best wishes, Yuri Landman

Sent you another email.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Policies on Commons

I would like to point out that your comment that I need to observe Wikiquette on Commons directly contradicts a comment that Mattbuck made to me in the exchange that "AGF is not a commons rule". The way I see it, standard wikimedia policies such as AGF and good Wikiquette go together, since neither is expressly listed in Commons:Policy they are both inhereited as part of the wikimedia community - admins can't just pick or choose which wikimedia community standards they think should be followed, and if they do just choose to follow some of them, why can't I be afforded the same privilege.

Courtesy is the primary problem I have with commons - things are deleted, no research is done on the contributors history, no attempts are made to click "email this user", common courtesy is rare amongst those who see it as their crusade to delete images, apologies have not yet been offered for deleting any of my images that were deleted improperly. The focus is all wrong - it is on "lets get rid of everything we can on technicalities" instead of "how can I cure technical defects so this image will still be available".

After reviewing comments on some wikipedia projects (de, en, es) it seems that commons is just accepted as a necessary evil by many editors. Some editors going so far as to only post their images on their local wiki - some allowing others to deal with the commons hassles - others opposing the posting of the image on commons.

This is a problem that needs to be addressed in commons, as for me - in the absence of better conduct - I plan to post my future images on Wikipedia with an appropriate legal restriction that will address my concerns. And other than the emails I've already sent requesting permission to use pictures (btw - this is one of the reasons why it is so frustrating - asking and getting permission for images is time consuming and full of "no" answers) I plan, in the immediate future, to not request permission for any more images. --Trödel 15:05, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it is often discouraging that artists will not freely license their work. However that is not my fault, nor that of any other community member here.
The community is well aware that copyright law is infuriating; again, that's not our fault. We work with the law we're given, and if that upsets people then they should try to change the law.
I'm sorry you'll be leaving us, but I think that this is a misunderstanding on your part. (I should also point out that if you're referring to adding a "don't move to Commons" clause to the license of the images you upload, that won't work as that is an unfree license, and would be rejected by any project.)
Again, I'll be happy to help you learn more about Commons and how to contribute. It saddens me that you have already decided to leave.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:18, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
The problem isn't that people won't freely license their work, the problem is that freely licensed works get deleted by admins based on technicalities, attitude of admins, lack of notice of deleted pictures, etc. Copyright law needs to be carefully reformed and not just thrown out. PS - your assumption that I would put a no move to commons phrase indicates you still think I don't understand what needs to happen for a work to qualify to be uploaded to commons - I assure you that I do understand, probably better than you, the legalities involved. --Trödel 19:00, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm simply trying to read between the lines. I'm unaware of what images of yours were deleted inappropriately on a "technicality" -- not having permission isn't a technicality.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:20, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I've rethought some things and will be trying to help rather than continuing to complain about it. However, I am still considering a copyrightfreeuseprovidedthat license that states "provided that the attribution to wikipedia free image is made, and a link to is distributed with the image. Additionally licensee agrees to upload image to if the image no longer exists on wikipedia." But I am researching the enforceability and free nature of that restriction to verify that it is an appropriate license to use on wikipedia. --Trödel 23:33, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Oh, please do not do that. That is a pain for all involved, is probably not enforceable, and is generally counterproductive. I'm glad you're staying, but the correct way to avoid such issues in the future, is to advocate for better communication from administrators performing such deletions while complying with our requirements on permissions etc. Thanks.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:45, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I'll consider your request it but so far my research shows that a license grant for consideration is enforceable, now I need to find if it is still "free" since there is consideration. The question is whether the duty to preserve the original takes it out of the free definition, since the attribution consideration is an allowed condition on "free" images.
I have tried to ask for better communication from admins, but the response has been that I'm at fault without any helpful suggestions on how I can fix the problem - just dogmatic boilerplate. The latest image was deleted within an hour after a notice was placed on it that it would be deleted in 7 days if I didn't comply with the request - I hadn't even had time to draft the email before it was deleted. Since admins don't feel any duty to follow any of their own procedures in deleting.
Prior examples included deletion because the image had failed to "to properly use the OTRS system" even though significant evidence existed on the image page to verify that the permission had been given (and the image was uploaded before widespread use of OTRS). Finally, the lack of notice anywhere but on commons is a problem - I rarely check my commons page unless I am uploading a new picture. Anyway, time is mellowing me on this.... --Trödel 03:33, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
You can enable "E-mail me when my user talk page is changed" on Special:Preferences. There's only so much we can do to contact users. I will note that admins should be waiting the full 7 days particularly when dealing with long-term users.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 04:02, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip - I use that on my own wiki, but I thought it had been disabled on Wikimedia Foundation projects - I guess it was just wikipedia. --Trödel 04:24, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


Keep an eye on this one. Based on the previous edit one of the socks is not happy to have been blocked (or I got it wrong.....). Cheers --Herby talk thyme 19:41, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Got it.
My templates, let me show you them. Let me show you my templates.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:43, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Re: move.js

Sure, no problem. Yarl 16:32, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

YAYYYY  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:37, 14 November 2008 (UTC)


Hey Mike. Just wanted to ask you if you deleted the template by mistake or was there another reason? The last editor vandalized the page, so I restored it assuming you made a mistake. Let me know if my judgment was correct. Thanks --Kimsə (talk) 07:29, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

Ow wow, that is totally my mistake. Sorry for that.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


Hello Forrester also a copy to you, best wishes, Yuri Landman

Hello Mike, This is getting totally frustrating for me. This picture is deleted many times, each time for reasons which don't fit the issue. The picture is my property. Commons send me a mail, which I replied (i don't have a copy sorry). All rights are free, the pic on the screen is also my own property. So could you please restore the image and also put them back in all other language Yuri Landman articles, because I' not allowed because of COI issues. I don't understand why all is so difficult on your site. You can verify this message by sending a mail to me personally. On you can find my e-mail address. I'm Dutch not English, so I don't follow all the specs you request from me. Suggest one and I'll agree on that one.

I also will inform Forrester, because he's closely involved with this deletion request too, I assume.

Could you take care of placing the pic back on ALL wikipedia's Yuri Landman? Best wishes, Yuri Landman (User:Yuri Landman Hypercustom)

Since Mike has OTRS-access I assume he should care about that. [[ Forrester ]] 10:27, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Hello Mike, can you take care of this issue? best wishes, Yuri Landman
I've already sent you two emails explaining what we need from you. I'll send a third one shortly.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:27, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
It's in a queue I can't access, but I can confirm that the image is GFDL+cc-by-sa-all per  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 15:30, 18 November 2008 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Can you also place it back on all Yuri Landman articles at other language wikipedia's? I'm not allowed because of COI limitations. Best wishes, YL

Views maybe?

here, cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Another one!

Mike can you take a look at these. The basic premise seems to be so very good photographs all explicitly suggesting visiting the blog concerned. I've removed quite a few but you'll get the flavour - two talk page messages were ignored so I blocked for a day. Just like to get another view that I am not being too harsh. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 13:38, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Removed more links. The block is fine, IMO.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Cheers Mike - not on till Saturday now. --Herby talk thyme 17:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

←Doesn't also Shankbone do this? However Shankbone doesn't have in the info box written "Feel free to check out my blog <link here>" --Kanonkas(talk) 20:49, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

Indeed. Linking to one's site for the purposes of legitimate attribution is acceptable, however linking for the purpose of promotion is not. In general, we are concerned with the behaviour moreso than the links.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:53, 20 November 2008 (UTC)


Sic. Thanks for informing me, I did my best to improve. Your answer would be most welcome ASAP. Wolfgang (talk) 08:10, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Handled, mostly.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:58, 23 November 2008 (UTC)
tx, &eod, for now. Wolfgang (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)


Barnstar of Reversion2.png Thank you for quick block and revert of vandalism on commons.   ■ MMXXtalk  06:42, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Not quick enough :)  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 06:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
But effective, and much faster than me :)   ■ MMXXtalk  06:55, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

talk pages

Can we discuss your reversion of my decision to not include that silly discussion on my talk page where everything else which is there (at least around it in that stack) is pro-active? -- carol (talk) 18:40, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

There are some accountability issues here. Please do not become one of those. -- carol (talk) 19:02, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Yes, there are. Durova had a legitimate complaint, which you blatantly disregarded & furthermore attempted to avoid scrutiny of yourself by removing the section. That is not being accountable to the community. I'm glad to know you take such issues seriously & expect you will take both Durova's and my words to heart.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Pasted from User_talk:ABF#accountability:


At the base of my problem with the user with the warning is a desire for users of commercial software to not be "selling it" here or at other locations being managed, maintained and the success due to what started to be a license for free software.

My years with GNU stuff go back to 1997 when I first started to learn how to compile that kind of software with the free compiler.

There was a claim made of an algorythm which guarrenteed accurate color restoration to old and time aged color documents and my request for information about what caused this faith in a formulation went unanswered. Without an answer to a simple question, I am left to believe that the user believes in the magic of the claims made on the side of boxes that contain products. I also think that such users have no place in the world where people work together especially at the point where similar claims of "magic" are questioned for validity by the same user.

What do you think? Opinions of experienced people/users/administrators are welcomed by me. -- carol (talk) 19:00, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

I think that a review of the situation will find that "the heart" is deeper than many give credit for or know. I respectfully called my deletion of that text on my own talk page "renovation" as I think that "restoring the old colors of the image" is the right thing to do....
Now I respectfully ask you to put my changes to my talk page back until a more accurate version can be obtained. -- carol (talk) 19:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
No, her comments will stand.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Perhaps I am not understanding the claims/problems being made and experienced by the person with the tools to delete and block about my opinions (a person without access to the tools to delete and block) and the expression of my opinions being such a problem. Could you explain the situation and the problems that you see that cause you to take such a strong stance with this? -- carol (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
The point is that you are not to remove comments like that. If you do not understand Durova's concerns, then that is all the more reason to leave them and discuss them with her.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
And these are the words that are yours that you want me to "take to heart"? -- carol (talk) 19:49, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Edmeston NY Central School 1939.jpg

العربية | asturianu | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Ελληνικά | English | español | euskara | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Warning sign
This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Edmeston NY Central School 1939.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikimedia Commons (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page. If the content is a derivative of a copyrighted work, you need to supply the names and a licence of the original authors as well.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag, then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multilicense GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find all your uploads using the Gallery tool. Thank you. Teofilo (talk) 17:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Please link images

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | magyar | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | ქართული | 한국어 | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | slovenčina | slovenščina | српски / srpski | svenska | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Hello Mike.lifeguard/Archive 3!

Thank you for providing images to Wikimedia Commons. Please keep in mind that images uploaded to Commons should be useful to all users of Wikimedia projects. This is possible only if the images can be found by other people.

To allow others to find the images you uploaded here, the images should be in some place that can be found by navigating the category structure. This means that you should put the images into appropriate topic pages, categories, optionally galleries, or both of them (see Commons:Categories). To find good categories for your images, the CommonSense tool may help.

You can find a convenient overview of your uploaded files in this gallery.

The important point is that the images should be placed in the general structure somewhere. There are a large number of completely unsorted images on Commons right now. If you would like to help to place some of those images where they can be found, please do!

Thank you. BotMultichillT (talk) 22:02, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Commons Ticker on the English Wikipedia

I was looking at the Commons Ticker pages, and wondered why it is not yet working on the English Wikipedia. The page en:Wikipedia:CommonsTicker has not been changed for many months. Do you have any idea? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:16, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

No idea. I asked once a long time ago and never got a response. I think Duesentrieb runs that?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 19:15, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

Mistaken page deletion

Hello Mike, you or your bot recently deleted my user talk page under suspicion of spamming, vandalism or bot-origin. This was a mistake, though surely in good faith. I've made a fresh start on the page, now under a proper Wikimedia user account and with a bit of content. If your bot flags it again for deletion, can we talk about it before the page disappears? Thanks. Susato (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

No, I deleted it on purpose. At the time, I didn't have an opportunity to go back re-create it with {{subst:welcome}}. Glad to see you're finding your way around.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 18:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)


Image deletion warning Image:Apple-iPhone-001.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 image, 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.
In all cases, please do not take the deletion request personally. It is never intended as such. 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)‎ | +/−

ViperSnake151 (talk) 14:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)


Hello Mike, thanks for your help: This category should be empty (no maps in it) and deleted, as it is redundant to Category:Maps of Prussia. I think deleting in this case is better than redirecting, because it's filled by a bot using CommonSense, and I do not know if redirecting will prevent it from filling it again. Best wishes, --Elya (talk)

✓ Done — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 23:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Doomsday Rule

I'm going to ask that you restore it and nominate it for deletion rather than summarily killing it. What you deleted was a gallery. If you feel strongly about it then go ahead and nominate for deletion and let there be some discussion. Evrik (talk) 17:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

It had one image and four paragraphs of encyclopedic text. I'm adding this to COM:UNDEL.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 17:43, 2 December 2008 (UTC)
  • Really that was uncalled for. You could have communicated with me before deleting it. Evrik (talk) 18:09, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

I just left a note at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Evrik (talk) 19:10, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, 2007.jpg


Thanks for your message but i wasn't involved in the editwar. A time ago when i was still a admin... some people on irc where saying !admin@commons and told me about the editwar.

I was trying to end this editwar by making the cropt version available as Image:Bronze Soldier of Tallinn, 2007 (crop).jpg. see here and here so i wasn't really involved only trying to end it. But i support your protection complete. Sterkebaktalk 06:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure. I just didn't have time to investigate fully, so pasted warnings on anything that moved.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:59, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
Oke. I understand. Sterkebaktalk 17:55, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

hi there,

thank you for your comments. I believe a dispute resolution would be best too since I get the impression that there are two issues here that are getting mixed up. I am also concerned about User:Herrick's actions of gathering votes against me on the German Wikipedia, kinda like a "let's get them" action. Gryffindor (talk) 21:08, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Herrick's canvassing has been noticed.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 21:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

User:Lmbuga#Your recent block(s)

(poor english) I will look for a user who translates to English these words (here)


(Sigo sin poder expresar en inglés ideas complejas por falta de capacidad) Deseo hacer considerar, especialmente a User:Mike.lifeguard, que los bloqueos pueden tener finalidades muy diferentes. Puedo aceptar que se me pida que abandone mis atribuciones como administrador por haber cometido un error, pero no admito ser parte de un parcial y personal listado de actuaciones de los administradores: es injusto. Es injusto porque yo había bloqueado a una ip por 2 horas, y lo hice no como castigo (sería absurdo hacerlo por 2 horas para castigar), sinó porque consideré conveniente (dado que no es la primera vez que veo actuaciones ideológicas de ese tipo y probablemente en esa página) que quedase constancia a otros administradores de esa acción, acción que erroneamente consideré ideológica. De hecho, permití que durante esas dos horas se crease un usuario desde esa ip.

Incluírme en un listado en el que consten simplemente actitudes punitivas de administradores es algo que considero insultante. Insultante no solamente por el proceder que he tenido siempre, también por el proceder que he tenido en este caso y, además, en su resolución.

Es habitual que dialogue con ips, pero esto es entrar a justificar mi proceder y mi historial como administrador en Commons, cosa a la que no estoy dispuesto bajo ningún concepto, puesto que no estoy dispuesto a defenderme dado que no pretendo perpetuarme en ningún cargo: Cuando sobre, sobro y ya está.

Expreso simplemente que las palabras de User:Mike.lifeguard son, para mí, insultantes. En caso de que desee expresarlas y crea que me excedo en los bloqueos, considero que debe proponer que yo deje de ser administrador. En caso de que no ose hacerlo, tanto por no creer que eso sea lo que suceda, como por cualquier otro motivo, considero que debe de estudiar más pormenorizadamente los casos antes de expresarse, considero que no debe equiparar mi actuación con las peores actuaciones que ha visto. El error que User:Mike.lifeguard está cometiendo es muy semejante al que yo he cometido: Mike, no generalice: actuaciones semejantes pueden ser muy diferentes.--Lmbuga gl, pt, es: contacta comigo 00:29, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

As a response to Lmbuga's request of a translation of his words, and even though I don´t speak Queen´s English, I proceed --Balbo (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


I would like, and this applies specially to User:Mike.lifeguard, to take into consideration that the blocks may pursue very different goals. I can accept to be requested to leave my functions as an administrator for having made a mistake, but I don´t admit to have been included in a partial and personal list of administrators` actions: this is unfair. And it is so because I blocked an IP for two hours and I didn´t do it as a punishment (it would be absurd to do it for two hours if it intended to be a punishment). I did it because I considered convenient that the action (which I wrongly considered ideological) could be recorded for other administrators, as it is not the first time that I see this kind of ideological editions, and problably also from that page. In fact, I admited the creation of a new user from that IP during that two hours.

I consider insulting to be included in a list composed simply by punishing actions by administrators. And it is insulting not only because of the behavior I have had always here, but also because of the behaviour I have had in this case, and, in addition in its solution.

I usually dialogue with IPs, but this is close to try to justify my behaviour and, in addition, my background as an administrator in Commons and I am not willing to do so in any case, as I don´t want to defend myself: I dont´want to perpetuate myself in any position: In the moment that I am out of place I will asume that I am out of place, and that is all.

I simply express that the words by User:Mike.lifeguard are, from my point of view, insultant. In case that he wishes to express them and in case that he thinks that I am overacting in my blockings I think that he must propose my resignation as an administrator. In case that he doesn´t dare to do so as much if it is because he doesn´t think that this overacting is happening or if it is because any other reason, I consider that he must study much more in detail the cases before expressing himself. I consider that he must not match my action with the worst editions that he has ever seen. The error that User:Mike.lifeguard is commiting is very similar to the one that I have committed. Don´t generalize: apparently similar actions can be very different.

End of the translation. I hope this helps. --Balbo (talk) 11:12, 5 December 2008 (UTC)