User talk:Tuvalkin

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

Could you please be more careful...[edit]

Could you please be more careful? Specifically, in this comment, you seem to be asserting that I dishonestly changed the title of the section, in an attempt to undermine the strengths of your argument. This diff, to the original comment in the thread, shows I did no such thing. Haven't you mocked other people, for having less than 100 percent perfect, reading comprehension? Yet your mistake here -- doesn't it illustrate less than 100 % comprehension on your part?

I don't participate in discussions to prove everyone else is "stupid", to use your term. When I participate in discussions I try to do my best to read the comments made by other people closely enough that I can recognize when they made a valid point, even if they could have expressed themselves more clearly. I make a particular effort to understand the people who I think disagree with me, because I remember I am subject to normal human frailty, and I am not always right.

I am going to remind you that you too are subject to normal human frailty, and you too will not always be right. Let me be frank, it seems to me your comments in this discussion show an unhelpful appearance of trying to show how clever and important you are, at the cost of failing to acknowledge, or perhaps even recognize, the valid points made by other people.

If you plan to continue to participate on any wikimedia projects could you please be more careful, in general, to remember that you too are subject to normal human frailty, and that it remains in the best interests of the project if we all do our best to understand our correspondents. Some of our correspondents may be "stupid", to use your term, and yet may also be correct. Others may be very intelligent people for whom English is not their mother tongue. And yet others may be intelligent people, who made their comments at the end of a long day, explaining why what they wrote could have been written more clearly.

I repeat, our goal here should not be on making sure our side of an argument "wins". It should be to make sure our consensus-based decision making arrives at the best solution -- even if that requires us abandoning our original position. Geo Swan (talk) 18:40, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them.
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 | 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Commons-emblem-issue.svg Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them.
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 | 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)‎ | +/−

Affected:

And also:

Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Kwasura and Latin to Cyrillic renamings[edit]

Greetings! And what would be the place do discuss such problems? --Kwasura (talk) 03:25, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Those are two separate matters that need specific discussions:
  1. Filenames:
  2. Category names: Commons_talk:Categories
But certainly not here, on my talk page.
I’d like to advice you caution and patience before starting the discussion you purport to launch (and which you tried already at some unsuited venues): Make sure you understand the current practices, guidelines, and policies, and the the rationales behind them, before you boldly suggest changes. I suggest caution not only because revisiting setlled matters (those which you would yourself acknoledge as such in hindsight) would waste everybody’s time and damage your reputation, but, because I actually agree with some of the points you raised (as much as I can tell for now) and I don’t want to see those topics tainted with unsuitable argumentation which may draw “fence-sitters” away in further discussions and decisions.
-- Tuválkin 04:45, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
It looks like none of the administrators really want to talk about it. Leaves me completely unaware of wherever I did anything wrong or not. --Kwasura (talk) 08:44, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
You’re saying that none of the administrators wants to enlighten you, five hours after this? Okay, go troll elsewhere, please. I have better things to do (as you do too), and, unlike those administrators, I’m not even supposed to put up with your antics. -- Tuválkin 09:01, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
I may be naive and asking too many questions, sorry about it, but I truly think that wrongdoing or trolling is so not cool. Anyway, I took enough of you precious time, won't take anymore. Sincerely --Kwasura (talk) 09:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Image authorship[edit]

File:Anth's moods.jpg, I fixed it. That was a funny day when we took those shots for the unique purpose of posting on my user page to illustrate my moods lol. He will be happy to see it if further used :) Thanks Anthere (talk)

Thank you! Face-smile.svg -- Tuválkin 13:41, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

KarnakTempleFreize[edit]

Olá amigo Tuvalkin. Obrigado por me avisar. Atenciosamente,

(Hola amigo Tuvalkin. Gracias por avisarme. Un cordial saludo,) JMCC1 (talk) 00:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

~

Fotos ferroviárias[edit]

Tuvalkin, Poderia ajudar, o Darwin que estava fazendo as verificações está off,... algumas atualizações informadas pelos autores das fotos ao Commons, algumas com copias para mim tbm. Os arquivos abaixo tiveram autorização enviada, conforme os autores me repassaram...

File:GE 15T 502 ABPF DSC03190.JPG - Bruno Sanches ABPPF - 10/01 o site, com autorização - http://abpfsuldeminas.com/ge-15-ton/
File:GE 15T 502 ABPF DSC01961.JPG - Bruno Sanches ABPPF - 10/01 o site, com autorização - http://abpfsuldeminas.com/ge-15-ton/
File:EMD DDM45 822 EFVM.jpg - Deyler Tose Marchezini- 19/11 ou pouco posterior, enviou via outlook, se for o caso peço que reenvie.
File:GE BB40-9W 1165 EFVM.jpg - Deyler Tose Marchezini - 19/11 ou pouco posterior, enviou via outlook, se for o caso peço que reenvie.
File:GE U23C RFFSA 3920.jpg - Alexandre Almeida - 10/11 ou pouco posterior
File:GE V8 6381 FEPASA.jpg - Ricardo Frontera - 21/01 pelo mesmo e-mail que ele enviou no passado muitas outras autorizações, este arquivo ( File:GE U20C 3846 FERROBAN.jpg ) teve o ORTS implantado.
File:GE V8 6382 FEPASA.jpg - Ricardo Frontera - 21/01 pelo mesmo e-mail que ele enviou no passado muitas outras autorizações, este arquivo ( File:GE U20C 3846 FERROBAN.jpg ) teve o ORTS implantado.
Fiquei meio ausente, ferias, voltei e carreguei algumas fotos, estas minhas ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Meloaraujo&ilshowall=1 ), ainda tem mais alguma coisa para carregar, mas falta tempo...
tem mais esta File:WBB BOX 320 CP - Via.JPG, esta foto é da mesma serie desta File:WBB_BOX_320_CP.JPG, tem mais de 70 anos... e o fotografo é desconhecido, possivelmente um funcionário da CPEF..

Meloaraujo (talk) 11:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Ó Meloaraujo, eu tenho muito gosto em ajudar, mas tem de compreender que eu aqui tenho exatmenet o mesmo nível que vc.: Não sou administrador, nem secretário do OTRS. Portanto aquilo que eu fizer (pedidos no COM:UDEL, participar em discussões de DR, etc.) é apenas aquilo que vc não quis fazer. Veja lá bem isso. -- Tuválkin 12:31, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
Tuvalkin, ok obrigado. Já fiz pedido de UDEL, mas simplesmente foram deletadas as imagens, algumas com o autorização desde de 2009. Meloaraujo (talk) 16:29, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

EMail address in the title of a Wikimedia-Commons-picture[edit]

Hallo Tuvalkin,

the artist Shoshannah Brombacher who painted the picture "Deus sive Natura": File:Shoshannah Brombacher Spinoza Deus Sive Natura, pastel lr.jpg

asked me to put her Email address in the title of her picture, when I use it in my article in the German Wikipedia: W:Deus sive Natura.

Can I do this or is it forbidden by Wikimedia/Wikipedia-rules?

Thank you for your answer.

--Diego de Tenerife (talk) 09:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

If you mean in the filename, I’d say better not — it could have been included in the filename upon upload, maybe, but now changing it would be against COM:FR. If you mean to include her e-mail address in the file page description, sure, go ahead. (But on the other hand you may want to ask an admin: my opinion doesn’t weight much.) -- Tuválkin 12:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
-- Thank you for your answer.
Yes, I meant to include the e-mail address of the artist in the file page description. Can you recommend me , name me, an ADMIN to whom I could put this question? I don't know any admin.
Vejo que você fala tb português.
Tudo de bom
--Diego de Tenerife (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Ó Diego, se é para isso, vá avante: Edite a página em causa e acrescente o tal e-mail, mais nada: Onde está
|author=[[User:Shoshannah Brombacher|Shoshannah Brombacher]]
ponha
|author=[[User:Shoshannah Brombacher|Shoshannah Brombacher]] <{{NonSpamEmail|parte antes da arroba|parte depois da arroba}}>
E já está! -- Tuválkin 20:56, 8 February 2016 (UTC)