User talk:Nilfanion

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Commons-logo.svg

If you want to leave a message to me on any issue relating to Commons, or Commons-hosted imagery please leave it here. Please only leave messages on my en.wikipedia talk page if it is strictly an en.wikipedia matter.

Wikipedia-logo.png
Commons maintenance announcements [+/−]

More translations are needed for:


Backlogs:
as of 18 February 2010


Yo Ho Ho[edit]

Category talk:Falkirk[edit]

Hi, I've made a proposal for a change of name here, and invite your input. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I've now finished this work and Category:Falkirk council area is now the top-level, and Category:Falkirk is the town. Cheers. Rodhullandemu (talk) 17:39, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Canadian Forces Flags[edit]

Just so you're aware, there is a discussion ongoing at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the Royal Military College of Canada.svg in relation to the copyright status of the RMC Flag, and by extension the rest of them. Trackratte (talk) 20:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Lion statue[edit]

Re this, no issue at all - I am of course fully aware that temporary sculptures are not FoP. However these specific uploads were not likely to have been made out of ignorance of that (and even if I didn't know that in 2011, I obviously know it now). But I can't actually even remember uploading these images at all. The best I can think of is that they were mistakenly uploaded when I was just figuring out the Flickr too - which is borne out by the fact I never touched them subsequently. Ultra7 (talk) 11:15, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

HIGxxx[edit]

As you probably saw, someone closed that DR. FWIW, I don't think the closure is right - as I see it, the ad is either DM and thus Commons shouldn't have to blur it, or it isn't and it should. Not sure where to go with this - issues of confusing/illogical/random DR closures seem wholly systemic with this place. Ultra7 (talk) 11:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

I'd say closure is clear enough: "Its a bus picture. Blur the ad, its still a bus picture. Therefore its DM". I would point out if the ad was blurred the picture would be junk quality (like File:Stagecoach bus 19419 (MX58 FUA), Gorton, 4 April 2011.jpg is). See no reason to take that one further.
Your general comments, yes I agree somewhat there's a few major issues on Commons IMO:
  1. Insufficient involvement by editors, and early closures by admins. The bus DR is an example: The closure is more "I think the ad is DM" than "on basis of discussion above, consensus is the ad is DM".
  2. Language barrier - causes overly terse comments, or cause non-personal comments to be taken personally. Flip-side is that is used as an excuse to cover up personal attacks, as "innocence" can be claimed and not disproved easily.
  3. Low admin count. One issue with this is when there are personality clashes. If an editor pisses off some of the highly active admins, its likely to impact on that editors interaction with admin corps as a whole - there aren't enough left who have no opinion. And on many things the admin corps gets divided into two camps, making any resolution impossible.
One thing I'd suggest to you is dial-back the tone a little. eg The last sentence of your initial comment on the DR was unnecessary. If it had been closed as delete and you weren't happy then, first stop is ask admin for clarification. You should get a more detailed answer - which may avoid need for UNDEL, or clarify the need for it. If you don't get a better answer, then there's an issue with the admin to take to the AN. Don't presume badness until badness happens; it looks needlessly antagonistic. That could well alienate others who have no gripes with you.--Nilfanion (talk) 19:15, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
OK, I guess it could be read that way. Obviously I'm happy with that then, and obviously I disagree it would be junk, but we've covered that to death. As for the general points - 1. admins supervoting at DR appears to be accepted Commons policy, the issue I have is the lack of logic or accountability you often see; 2. Definitely; 3. Colin says it best - it's an inescapable truth that on a well run project, admins hold the office not only because they have the knowledge but also because they have the temperament and the people skills. And that last line was based on experience - badness does happen here, and in reality in my experience, it's practically impossible to get it rectified after the event, which is why I feel I have no option but to approach DR with 'all guns blazing', as it were. Ultra7 (talk) 10:38, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
I meant the quality of the pic as of a bus with a blurred out ad would be junk (unless done with much greater care than on that Stagecoach bus which looks utterly unrealistic as a result), its much more usable as a pic of the bus without any "censorship".
I'd strongly suggest you avoid "all guns blazing" when possible. Yes, you are probably right in many cases that bad stuff will happen (unfortunately). But try not to present yourself as overly hostile in advance of anything untoward actually happening. It won't stop the badness, the other side can say "you started it", and it makes you look antagonistic to outsiders. None of those actually benefit you ultimately.--Nilfanion (talk) 11:00, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot[edit]

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)