User talk:R8R

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, R8R Gtrs!

Tip: Categorizing images[edit]

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 | 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, R8R!
Tip: Add categories to your images

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:


2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

BotMultichillT 06:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about Fluorine[edit]

Please don't get discouraged. -vanished TCO. 21:33, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Valence atomic energy levels for At and Uus horizontal.svg[edit]

The file File:Valence atomic energy levels for At and Uus horizontal.svg which you flipped horizontally already had such an inversion at File:Valence atomic energy levels for At and Uus horizontal flipped.svg. The versions are cross-referenced in the file descriptions. I therefore reverted you, and updated the line weights on the latter.

I think it's preferable we maintain the 3 versions as they were - seems confusing otherwise. I didn't alter any articles using the file, so if you want to, please do, but where we have multiple versions of a file I think it's preferable we maintain consistency rather than have confusing edits.

Thanks. Begoon - talk 13:38, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, no problem; I didn't notice the flipped pic already existed by that point. Thanks for taking your time to explain this.--R8R Gtrs (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks for the time you took to update and consolidate all of the files. Begoon - talk 12:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

File:EU28-further enlargement map.svg[edit]

Hi, Please discuss before making any change to this file. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:30, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

I have promptly been trying to have a discussion with the reverter at de:Benutzer_Diskussion:Kolja21#File:EU28-further_enlargement_map.svg. I repeated my edit only after he didn't reply in a week while still being active. I am absolutely ready for any wider discussion.--R8R (talk) 16:49, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked[edit]

Ruthven (msg) 09:03, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Very disappointed. Not because I've lost an opportunity to do something in these three days -- I was not planning to do anything anyway -- but because the block is outrageously unjustified. I have once re-reverted one file revision but before that, I engaged in a discussion with the reverter and I only re-reverted after I had no response for a week, assuming he could no longer object. To consolidate this: there was one re-revert in total, and that re-revert happened over a month after the edit that started this story. Is this edit warring? (And given these timescales, do you think three days could play a role anyway?) That only re-revert was also accompanied with sources to justify the change -- the picture used to have none -- so I cannot understand neither the "edit warring" accusation nor the "inserting nonsense material" (which is plainly your opinion anyway!) one. --R8R (talk) 10:09, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
I reply you here, so you'll see the notice. The edit war starts when you re-upload a content without the consensus, like in [1]. Maybe for you it was not an edit war yet, because you waited some time, but apparently it was for Kolja21 that signaled you (see Revision of Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections) in the Administrators' noticeboard. The block of 3 days was then to stop a further excalation of the reverts in the page (if you were a vandal, the block would have been undef). Because the file is widely used, you are expected to wait for the consent before re-uploading the file, it doesn't matter if it takes 1 week, 1 month or 1 year (that's when your mistake was, essentially). Cheers, --Ruthven (msg) 13:55, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
@Ruthven: I see. Thank you for the reply.
One question, though: does his re-re-revert not qualify as an edit war act? It seems a little wrong to me that we were making exact same actions and only I got punished ("slowed down", or anything). (Not asking to do anything like that, of course, it's too late for that to be reasonable at all; just asking.) Is there a particular rule about this?--R8R (talk) 15:37, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
There are no general rules. In several projects, the definition of edit war is doing 3 reverts in a row (or 3 contradicting edits)... but we are talking about minor edits, not something that affects dozens of pages simultaneously. His re-re-revert could have qualified as restoring the "correct" version (or the "wrong" one, depending on points of view; see m:The Wrong Version), and to stop (or slow down) an edit war, you just need to block one of the users. --Ruthven (msg) 15:45, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I see. Again, thank you.--R8R (talk) 15:51, 1 September 2017 (UTC)


Hi R8R,

please take a look here: Commons:Licensing#Multi-licensing and here: Commons:Multi-licensing too. Regards, --Alchemist-hp (talk) 19:12, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Alchemist-hp: Great! Thank you very much for explaining.--R8R (talk) 19:24, 17 December 2017 (UTC)