More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel irc:wikimedia-commons #wikimedia-commons (direct access). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at Commons talk:Licensing.
|(P.S. Would you like to provide feedback on this message?)|
- 1 Tip: Categorizing images
- 2 Your linking of Korean editors' contribution to your user page on German Wikipedia
- 3 Hey!
- 4 정말 한국어를 읽을 줄 아신다는 겁니까?
- 5 Edit warring
- 6 File:Ancient_Korea_Taihougun.png
- 7 You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week
- 8 Look at the ja:利用者‐会話:トムル#失礼します.
- 9 Hey!
- 10 Draft sexual content policy
Tip: Categorizing 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.
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]]
When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").
BotMultichillT 04:22, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
- Image:Korea south map.png was uncategorized on 6 September 2009.
I happened to know yesterday that you have linked several editors' account to trace down their contribution. All of their contribution are closely associated with Korean images or maps.
- The people below are in "your list". http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Valentim#Meta-Projekte
I think that your such behavior is totally inappropriate, and they should have the right to know of your so-called secret "sleuthing" for months. I also noticed that you've edit warred to delete only Korean websites regarding Dokdo and left only Japanese sites, which is highly biased. Your contribution tell everything and you've been accused for being anti-Korean for pro-Japanese sake by someone on German Wikipedia. Back to the point, the image file was taken and thankfully released by by a Korean editor. The image was obtained by "conversations" with the photographer who wished that the image should be under the name he put. So I added more accurate descriptions and "English translation on the Korean text" regarding the file for those whom want to follow and check the original source. However, you erased my good faith contribution with no good reason. If you continue edit warring to push your POV, I'll seek appropriate venues for this. Regards.--Caspian blue 19:47, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- Regarding the list: So what? / Regarding your opinion about me as an "spy" (= slander): If you think so... To be honest, I don't care what you think personally about me and why I made this list.
- Regarding deleted websites: You are free to start discussions on every article and edit, which does not fit to your realism.
- Regarding your accusation: Sorry, don't care what you think personally about me. But if you are so sure, why don't making a formal complaint?
- Please note, that your statement here does not explain your edit you made here.
- I also want to inform you, that I'm not going to tolerate any more harassment on my user discussion page. Greetz --Valentim (talk) 22:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- 1) I left the above notice to inform that your "secret list" of people is indeed inappropriate. If this website is your blog, you can do all you want, but you've got the wrong place. The sneering response like "So what?" is not a good attitude on your part, and you do not realise that how your list would case distress to the people in your list. You do not care about my thought, I will notify all users whose main activity is Korean Wikipedia.
- 2) Why "your realism" has to do with the concern about your conduct? Please clarify it with your English.
- 3) You should care about people since you're responsible for your edits and if you do not like that fact, please find other good place for your taste. I already notified two admins, so don't worry about the formal procedure.
- 4) That is your POV. You deleted my contribution based on your POV. My contribution adds more usefulness to the file for readers.
- 5) User talk page is about discussion or consult, so my above message perfectly suits the purpose of user talk page. Before directly going to report you to German Wikipedia and Common's noticeboard, my above message is a first step to make the dispute resolved peacefully. We know that whenever valid criticism or warning is given to people who did wrong, they are inclined to discredit it by disparaging. However, your such bogus accusation constitutes personal attack and rather harassment, so please do not engage in such behavior anymore.--Caspian blue 22:52, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- 1) If you are so sure about my intentions of the "very secret list of whatever purpose", why don't you write a formal complain instead of openly threatening me?
- 2) Read again your first statement with a little "distant" towards your feelings, than you will understand. More important: If you are only "concerned", why don't you write it in that way? Why do you have the need to threat other users? If you wouldn't be so aggressive towards me (why? what have I done that I deserved to be so badly treatend by you?), we could have a nice little chat about attitute, POV, behaviour, edits, files, ....
- 3) -
- 4) I already gave you an answer on File talk:Dokdo 080628.jpg#Your latest Edits.
- 5) Again you are twisting facts: I never made accusations, but you more than twice (That's why I linked to Commons:Blocking policy above). I would be so glad, if it would be possible to hold an discussion with respecting each other in all ways, but your total behaviour, your fact twistings and problem mixing is outrageous. We rather should speak again tomorrow, maybee you than have reconcidered your attitute. --Valentim (talk) 23:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
- 1) I do not believe directly reporting somebody's wrongdoing to authorities is a good way of handling the issue. The person who gets criticism should be aware that why his/her edits are considered inappropriate, If the person repeats or is willing to continue the same behavior as opposed to the addressed concern, then, the next step is "seeking appropriate venues". That is a recommended procedure for fixing somebody's error. The list is not about "your edit", but "your poor conduct", so I came to here in hope that you acknowledge what you did wrong. If you continue making the bogus accusations, I think I can not expect you would improve yourself and fix the error that you made.
- 2)I do not appreciate your slandering of me. So are you saying that you would be perfectly fine with the assumption that somebody has been secretly checking your contribution to A language Wikipedia by listing you on his/her user page on B-language Wikipedia that the people do not visit at all? Such making a blacklist is considered a blockable offense (several people who made such lists were blocked on English Wikipedia), but I did not say or demand you to be blocked. My criticism is "calling a space a spade", not about . If you do not like your wrongdoing is pointed out by others, please "don't do that". Don't forget that I did not still notify the people of the list.
- 3), 4) I don't find your reasoning logical
- 5) You're the one twisting facts and inventing things that I did not say. Please recognize that not only your secret list makes me very unpleasant, and overall your lack of judgment and bad faith are appalling, so please don't do that.--Caspian blue 01:01, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
I deleted the list . Not because of you but due to regulations on de-wp and admin decisions on similar cases. So further talks and answers are not anymore necessary.
Let me just give you an advice for future talks (I mean that honest way): Point 1) of your last statement: I do not believe directly reporting somebody's wrongdoing to authorities is a good way of handling the issue. The person who gets criticism should be aware that why his/her edits are considered inappropriate, If the person repeats or is willing to continue the same behavior as opposed to the addressed concern, then, the next step is "seeking appropriate venues".: I agree 100%. But in my opinion that's not all; It is one of my basic believes to assume a "good faith edit" made by any user. And exactly that is it, what you haven't done (at least). And maybee imo this is the reason why you got emotionally so infurate that exactly that happend, what is described on w:en:Wikipedia:AGF#Accusing others of bad faith (see also your first statement on my discussion page here). Don't you think this problem could have been resolved faster and without stress with another attitude of yours? Greetings --Valentim (talk) 21:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
- I have a question for you. According to your answer, you did not remove the blacklist not due to my warning to you, but you admitted your error because your act did not comply with the German Wikipedia's policy. Then, why the sudden enlightenment? Then are you admitting that you have violated the German Wikipedia policy for about one year even though you knew that is against the German Wikipedia policy? Answer the question. Your act of making and maintaining such blacklist is a form of harassment and Wikihounding. Do you acknowledge the act or not?--Caspian blue 18:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Blacklists are in general forbidden on de-wp. Fortunatly for me this list was not intended as such. For other purposes than blacklisting there is no official policy regarding this topic on de-wp, only judgments on particular cases. After you noticed me I searched for such decisions but couldn't find anything compareable to my case. However, there was an discussion about a very similar case but discussion was cut off due to the remove of the list by the user who created that one. All you need to know is that discussion was on August 09 (when my list for whatever purpose was already made) and went not well for this user. The list was not disputed because of its existence but of the way it was created. This was the reason, why I removed the list.
- Please, don't misuse it to make personal attacks to me. en:AGF does not cover the obvious en:WP:SPADE and your inappropriate en:WP:Wikistalking and en:WP:HARASSMENT for the long time. Making and maintaining such "blacklist" indeed has made some people sanctioned such indefinitely blocked/banned on the English Wikipedia because that is very offensive and intended to make ill-advised purposes. Given the accumulated history, we don't say such act is "from good faith". I'm also curious why you don't quote possibly pertinent "German Wikipedia's policy" since you thought that the blacklist could not be a problem to German Wikipedia unlike English Wiki. Isn't that ironic to your own quoting and practice on German Wikipedia? I think you need to read the recommended policies since I'm really concerned about you. Could you also link the discussions on the German Wikipedia that you "suddenly enlightened yourself as you alleged? Don't worry about whether I can read German texts. I just was wondering whether you received a warning from admins there. I have questions for you, do you know Japanese or not? Yes, or no would be your way, so I'm benchmarking it. :-) Also why is your home Wiki German Wikipedia since a few people only pay attention to your "long-term interests"? --Caspian blue 03:55, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- P.S. I have millions of things to do here as you might have already checked on my contribution while you know your edits are not accepted to many others such as the people on your blacklist, and another Korean editor. I think you can wait for me to resume the discussion for a little longer. Given that you've shown a great deal of patience for the issue for abut "one year", I guess you can have such leeway. If not, then you can discuss about the matter with the people on your blacklist, and the others who edit-warred with you in the past for your revert campaign. More people come to talk, quicker consensus may form. Just tell me, I will notify them on behalf of you. That would decrease your effort to contact them. :-)--Caspian blue 04:02, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- "en:WP:NPA", "en:AGF", "en:WP:SPADE", ...: Nice to see how you can twist facts. Remember: It is your assumption, only yours, and only your assumption, that this list had been used as an blacklist.
- ""link the discussions": I'm not going to help you making your personal crusade against me , , , ...).
- "Given the accumulated history, we don't say such act is "from good faith.": We? Who? Are you wikipedia? Knowing nothing and despite making yourself a very strange prejudice about me let me feel uncomfortable seeing you working on an cooperative project. Btw: Seeing your history on en-wp and comparing your point of reference for comparison for me on yourself I assume that you should block youself infinitive (Don't forget: The scale here is set by your own POV)...
- "I have questions for you, do you know Japanese or not?": You surely mean on de-wp or elswere on sister projects, right? So, even this is a not-private question, I'm sorrowful for you: I thought I wrote once very clear that I'm not interested about your feelings towards Japanese or in general about political tensions between Japan and N.-/S.-Korea. Your question elucidates one of the reasons why I gave you an advice to think about what you are doing here  due to [[en:Wikipedia:Conflict of interest]]. To give an answer to your question: On de-wp we are not interested in nationality someone hold. And to be honest: I'm not interested in that information.
- "contact": Everyone is invited to take part on discussion (exeptions can be found here (infobox on top of page)). --Valentim (talk) 20:20, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, I don't understand your English wording, so please try to make sense of them for communication. Not mention, don't make further personal attacks. You again misquote policies such as the conflict of interest. When something comes up, all related people are eligible for discussing the matter. After all, this matter is about Korea and Japan. The people on the black list and who edit warred are all related to this matter and have every right to know about your behaviors to them. If you don't feel like you did not violate anything or shameful things to them, you can easily defend yourself. I've given you enough time for changing your attitude, but you have not. Open notification under your acknowledgment is not even comparable with your secret Wikihounding for one year. --Caspian blue
You told message in 
But, I don't understand and I think 'sea of japan(east sea)'(permit).
So, here change.
However, you rollback for my contribution.
- I have already given a detailed explanation in my comments. If you got further questions about regulations or have some very specific annotations about some edits you can also ask me in Korean; I think that would speed up our discussion. Greetings --Valentim (talk) 18:26, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
정말 한국어를 읽을 줄 아신다는 겁니까?
이 글을 읽으실 수 있는 지는 모르겠지만, 한국어(Korea)가 가장 설명이 잘 되므로, 한국어로 설명합니다.
제 기여를 반달리즘(Vandalism)이라고 표현 하셨는데, 제 기여(contribution)는 정당(right)합니다.
왜냐하면, 제 기여는 새로이 만든 것이 아니라, 처음 작성자의 파일로 돌려놨기 때문입니다.
그리고 문서는 공정(POV)할 필요가 있습니다.
영어 위키피디아(en.wikipedia)에서 '일본해'(Sea of japan) 또는 일본해 우선 표기 후 괄호 동해(East sea)가 되었다 하더라도,
여기는 위키피디아 공용(commons.wikipedia)일 뿐만 아니라, 그 표기는 언제든지 바뀔 수 있는 것이 아니겠습니까?
(물론, 일본어나 중국어 쪽 사용자의 반발로 인해 무산되겠지만요.)
그러므로, 제 기여는 반달리즘이 아닌 정당한 기여입니다.
- I have some difficulties on two sentences to understand, but I have a good guess of the meaning. Do I translate your statement right? :
- Do you rally speak Korean? I don't know if you can rally read this, but as I can explain myself best in Korean I write now in this language. You say my contribution is vandalism, but it is right. Because my contribution is not new; The fist file was also done so. Due to POV-rule said that it should be made in fairness. If there is really a rule in en-wp to write there first "Sea of Japan" and than "East Sea", despite that isn't here on commons everyone allowed to change order? (Of course people who can speak japanese and chinese will vanish). Therefore my contribution is not vandalism but right.
- If yes, here is my answer:
- 왜냐하면, 제 기여는 새로이 만든 것이 아니라, 처음 작성자의 파일로 돌려놨기 때문입니다.: That is no reason. The user maybee was not aware of those regulations or did it for vandalism. Your logic indicates, that no pictures shall be changed upload. Don't you agree that this is nonsense? By the way: Than on what reason did you make changes on 1, 2, 3 and 4??
- 그리고 문서는 공정(POV)할 필요가 있습니다.: POV = Point of View. It is not our (= Commons) duty to say who is right and who is wrong. Those decissions are made on every single wikipedia, and every wikipedia for themselve (see Commons:Project scope/Neutral point of view).
- 영어 위키피디아(en.wikipedia)에서 '일본해'(Sea of japan) 또는 일본해 우선 표기 후 괄호 동해(East sea)가 되었다 하더라도, 여기는 위키피디아 공용(commons.wikipedia)일 뿐만 아니라, 그 표기는 언제든지 바뀔 수 있는 것이 아니겠습니까?: Why do you still doubt that this rule is existing in en-wp? I gave you very often the link (have a look here!). So it is also for the ko-wp where rule says that 동해 shall be written instead of 일본해. If we don't do so this maps couldn't be used in the different wp's. And so it is done, e.g. here. For the second part: Yes, that is possible and noone will hinder you to download your version of that file to a seperate file with a proper filename (see a) and a proper discription (see b) (otherwise it will be changed in the same way or be deleted due to redundance). So did I here after you changed original file here. I also didn't change from "Sea of Japan (East Sea)" back to solely "Sea of Japan" as I don't know naming rule on zh-wp.
- (물론, 일본어나 중국어 쪽 사용자의 반발로 인해 무산되겠지만요.): Sorry, that is a sentence I don't understand. Everyone has the same right as long as he/she behave within the projects rules. That is also for Koreans! By the way: Simple and continuosly reverting instead of discussing is here seen as vandalism. Making a discussion on a disputed content does not give you permission to start an edit war, especially if you do not understand the language you make edits to.
- Again to map 1 and map 2
- 1 is a copy of CIA Worldfactbook (as already given in file name and discription). It is absolute inproper to make changes on such content (in any way).
- 2: In North Korea the "Sea of Japan" is not called "East Sea" but "Korean East Sea" solely.
- Don't argue with me about changing rules, I didn't make them, but we have to take notice of them.
- Let me also give you an advice: Please stop making changes until discussion has been finished. Thank you.
- If you wish I can write you this in Korean (but without Hangul :-( ).
- Greetings --Valentim (talk) 13:53, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- 약간의 이해가 안 가는 부분은 있습니다만, 그것보다도 당신의 한글 이해 능력에 놀라움을 금치 못합니다! --Idh0854 (talk) 14:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- Kam-sa-ham-ni-da :-) And again my offer: Show me the parts you have difficulties to understand and I try to write them in Korean. Greetings --Valentim (talk) 14:10, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- 약간의 이해가 안 가는 부분은 있습니다만, 그것보다도 당신의 한글 이해 능력에 놀라움을 금치 못합니다! --Idh0854 (talk) 14:06, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
- 시간이 조금 흐른 뒤, 이것에 대해 다시 토론 해야 할 것 같네요.  --Idh0854 (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- 한국어로 써 주신다면 감사할 따름이죠.: Oh, you misunderstood. I costs me a lot of time to write everything in Korean.
- 그런데, File:Japan sea map.png의 경우에는 back을 할 필요가 있나요?: Yes, that needed to be done due to that the map is written in English, the main point is Japan and the en-wp-rule states very clear in that case how to name this sea.
- 시간이 조금 흐른 뒤, 이것에 대해 다시 토론 해야 할 것 같네요.: Not here on commons. But if South Korea really succeed you might consider reopening naming convention discussion on en- and fr-wp.
- Greetings --Valentim (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
- 시간이 조금 흐른 뒤, 이것에 대해 다시 토론 해야 할 것 같네요.  --Idh0854 (talk) 13:35, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- 밑의 분께서 '영어 위키피디아(en.wikipedia)의 토론(talk)'을 위키피디아 공용(commons.wikipedia)에 적용시키지 말아달라고 하시네요.: Yes, as we don't care for politics here.
- 그렇다면, 롤백(Rollback)을 해도 되는 것으로 간주해도 됩니까?: Yes, until someone disagrees (as it happened in your case). And I gave you damn good reasons for disagreeing. In that case I can only repeat myself by saying "[...] noone will hinder you to download your version of that file to a seperate file with a proper filename (see a) and a proper discription (see b) [...]" (). It is the same procedure as I did here after you changed original file here or User:84user did here after you changed original file here ().
- I advice you to read all of Commons:First steps, it will help you to understand how commons works and what it is made for. --Valentim (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- Oh..;; New file?! Why.. This is no "POV". Please..! Don't make the not POV file. E-HYU. (...) --Idh0854 (talk) 15:35, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- I don't like keyboard warrior & quarrel. Please, I don't want to separation of file. JE-BAL, I-REO(RO)-JI-MA-SE-YO.(Maybe, I want to tell you, "Es ist mir unangenehm."(≒ 나는 이것을 원하지 않습니다.)) --Idh0854 (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- There is nothing else I can do for you, sorry. --Valentim (talk) 17:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey! Don't comment "vandalism" to me! My contribution is not "vandalism". Do you know? Your opinion is out of joint "POV". "guessing meaning of your sentences" You said me. Yes, so I more tired English. Do you know this? This is 'get a shock for me.' My english is bad. But, my contribution is advisable! I demand you to study for "tolerance(tolérance)". Now, I'm sad. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 11:31, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
- No, but you are repeating yourself and are not willing to listen to neither me or other users. Everything has been said already. --Valentim (talk) 12:17, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
- I have created a derivative image in an attempt to stop this pointless edit warring. This is addressed to all readers.
Each Wikimedia project can now choose which version they want to use. Creating derivative images such as these at the left and the right is how to resolve such disputes. Other variants can always be made and created as new files with new file names without affecting the existing files. No edit warring needed at all.
|File:Ancient_Korea_Taihougun.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk.
The file you added may soon be deleted. If you believe this file is not a copyright violation, please explain why on the file's talk page.
Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week
|You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 week for the following reason: Edit warring. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires.
You were warned previously over your edit warring about Japanese/Korean naming. You were told that the way to resolve this was to create a derivative work which has the opposite naming convention to the other. SO WHY ARE YOU EDIT WARRING NOW? This behaviour is not appropriate for Commons. Take a week out. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:22, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
- Look at her uploaded version of File:Korea south map.png and her comment. User:Idh0854 wrote that she uploaded the original version of User:Electionworld. But the very first version uploaded by Electionworld differs. Furthermore, Idh0854 wrote this comment twice, but every time she uploaded another version. For me this behaviour is bad-faithed vandalism. Take a good look direct above the words Sea of Japan/East Sea. Do you see the difference? And he knows what he has done.
- For the accusation here I can say that all files I once reported here were never again touched by me after User:Prosfilaes made his uploads. Also another file which was reseted to its first version by User:Idh0854 argumenting with the same opinion I didn't revert (File:Map of korea.png).
- Please check my statement I gave here. In my opinion blocking me is totally inappropriated. --Valentim (talk) 15:48, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
Look at the ja:利用者‐会話:トムル#失礼します.
Look at the ja:利用者‐会話:トムル#失礼します. I request him change file. He is agree to proposal. So, basic file is include 'je-ju'. And historiquement, according to an ancient record(《Samguksagi》), 'Tam-ra'(Tamna) is dependency of Baekjae. Thank you. --Idh0854 (talk) 01:50, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
- Hello Garam, we are talking about File:Three Kingdoms of Korea Map.png, right? I rechecked your version and have to say you are right: Transkript of "탐라" is "Tamra", not "Tamna". But now I'm confused as the en-wp writes "Tamna". Tamra as an reference for Jeju-do is unknown there (w:en:Tamra (disambiguation), ).
- I've noticed User:Kwj2772 hereby, he is a korean administrator on Commons. He might tell us, what to do. Due to that it looks like you were right I've reverted to your version of this file until matter is clearified.
- By the way: You don't need to get the permission of the uploader of an image as long as the licence does not demand this. Greetings --Valentim (talk) 15:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
You don't NOV. Because, look at the name of this file. This is, "make dumbfounded". Well, name of this file is bad as all that. But I find it difficult to hide me disappointment when I see this file. This is same "Vehicle wheel rims matter". :( --Idh0854 (talk) 05:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Draft sexual content policy
here you indicated your oppososition of the draft commons Sexual Content policy, however you did not provide a reason so your opposition may not be counted. To make sure it is please update your oppose vote with a reason as to why you oppose this draft policy. Thanks! Barts1a (talk) 00:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)