User talk:World's Lamest Critic

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, World's Lamest Critic!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:31, 8 November 2016 (UTC)


You reverted some edits on the category blackface. that category "Blackface is a form of theatrical makeup". So I changed 'cosmetics' to the more specialised category 'make-up'. Cosmetics also involves parfume etc and that is not the case here. I removed 'caricature' as only certain theatre plays involve caricatures. Please put images related to blackface in minstrelsy shows to the underlying category "Blackface ministrelsy' as that is especially focused on the use of blackface style from ministrel shows in American theatre culture. --Hannolans (talk) 13:09, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

We're already discussing your misunderstanding of blackface on your talkpage so let's keep the discussion there. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
ok --Hannolans (talk) 00:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Your language[edit]

In this edit] you're calling me a racist. It could be that in your culture that is not offensive, but in my culture this is really offensive and criminal. I'm really upset that you use such language to me in what should be a collaborative project. --Hannolans (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

If your actions suggest that you're a racist, you will probably get called a racist from time to time. You should get used to it. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
If you are against a categorisation, you can discuss it with arguments, but not this inhuman behavior... --Hannolans (talk) 00:24, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Please be civil[edit]

العربية | català | čeština | Deutsch | English | español | suomi | français | עברית | magyar | 日本語 | македонски | മലയാളം | Nederlands | polski | português | русский | Simple English | svenska | українська | +/−

Stop hand nuvola.svg
You are acting in an uncivil manner. Please remain civil and don't resort to making personal attacks or instigate edit wars. If your behaviour is not moderated, you may be blocked from further editing.

Calling others racist as you did above is unacceptable in this project of ours. Wikicology (talk) 08:34, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

I will try to control myself the next time I encounter a racist editor. Thank you for the warning. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Guantanamo disposition - Final Dispositions as of January 22, 2010.pdf[edit]

Hi, please don't remove licenses. If you think there is a copyright problem, please nominate for deletion instead. Jcb (talk) 17:14, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

@Jcb: why have you restored an invalid claim of public domain? This is not the work of Navy personnel. Why would I nominate for deletion rather than hope that someone knows the correct license template? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Because you are creating unnecessary maintenance workload. If you don't know where the general {{PD-USGov}} template is, please ask in the village pump instead. Jcb (talk) 15:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jcb: if something is has an invalid claim of public domain, I don't think that should be ignored. User:Geo Swan's incorrect use of the PD-USGov-Military-Navy template necessitated the "unnecessary maintenance workload" but I'm sure it was just a simple mistake. Do you plan on fixing the template, or should I nominate it for deletion as you first suggested? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
For your information, several users have been blocked in the recent past for removal of licenses they disagreed with. If you remove a license this way, this is much more time consuming for maintenance volunteers than if you start a DR. We are already quite understaffed, nobody is in need of even more workload. Jcb (talk) 16:41, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Why on earth would you block users for removing licenses that are obviously incorrect? How does that help Commons or our users? I'm not sure would you bring up blocking in this discussion at all. Are you threatening to block me? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I told you about the blocking to emphasize how disturbing this removal of licenses is. I hope I am clear enough, because I am not wasting more precious time on this single file and discussion. Jcb (talk) 16:54, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jcb: as a volunteer you choose what to spend your time on. As an admin, I would expect a better explanation than a threat of blocking. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:01, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm interested in getting another opinion. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:15, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Shōnen Jump first issue.jpg[edit]

Hi. I'm not sure, but does the Public Domain Day not calculate here? Regards, ptjackyll (leave a message) 21:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

If it did, wouldn't that mean it wouldn't be in the public domain until January 1, 2019? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 00:28, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
"The year after 50 years". You're right. Sorry, my mistake. Thanks for your vigilance. Regards ptjackyll (leave a message) 18:20, 1 April 2018 (UTC)


I just made you autopatroller, because you have made a lot of good work. Taivo (talk) 07:30, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


Hi! Regarding, the picture you linked here features a full-size copy of the photograph I took, which precedes this article by about half a year. If you still think there's any copyright violation, do let me know how to fix it. Hope this is helpful. --Salman Dawood (talk) 03:40, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

@Salman Dawood: You may have taken the photograph, but who holds the copyright? Was the image previously released under a public domain or open license? If you are also the copyright holder, please read Commons:OTRS. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 03:52, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

You are very right, oversight on my part. Have provided sourcing - I am the copyright holder, and the image was released previously under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0 license. --Salman Dawood (talk) 04:45, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


Blocked Indefinitely
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Commons. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.
See the block log for the reason that you have been blocked and the name of the administrator who blocked you.

العربية | azərbaycanca | বাংলা | català | čeština | Deutsch | Zazaki | English | español | فارسی | suomi | français | עברית | हिन्दी | hrvatski | magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | italiano | 日本語 | la .lojban. | 한국어 | kurdî | македонски | മലയാളം | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | polski | português | português do Brasil | русский | sicilianu | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

You had best better explain yourself without posting any additional information that could be considered private or personally identifiable. As of right now, in light of your additional oversight block on the English Wikipedia, I'm seriously debating on just revoking talk page access and being done with it. --Majora (talk) 22:09, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm not sure how to respond to that. I was accused of "libel" by an IP in regard to something I posted on User:Drmies talk page. I posted the contents of a publicly available message from a public Wikimedia mailing list to back up what I had said. Then a brand new account came along and deleted it. The name of that new account also implied that I was libeling someone, so I posted the same message on their talk page and asked them to identify the libel. They removed it. I did not restore it. And now we are here.
The person involved was a prolific vandal and sockmaster on Wikipedia. They were banned in 2007. In 2014 they were unbanned after appealing to ARBCOM. They have violated the conditions of that unban from the very start. More recently, they were involved in sockpuppetry and conflict of interest editing regarding their business. In relation to the latter, I overestimated the amount of leeway given about "private information" in COI investigations. I was blocked for that (and I understand why). I am happy to provide evidence for all of these claims if you will allow me to name accounts and post links. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:04, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
What occurred at enwiki is really none of my concern. Bringing enwiki problems here is also not something that people should be doing. If there are issues that have to be dealt with please bring it to the attention of administrators at the appropriate board, COM:ANB or COM:ANU. For all intents and purposes, what you posted was not acceptable and you did it not once but twice. Public mailing list or not that is using information posted outside this site to out someone when they have not personally stated such information here, on this project. Doing so will not be tolerated. Period. This isn't a game of connect the dots. You cannot use outside information to post personally identifiable information. I am willing to give you one more chance provided you promise that you will never do that again but that is it. If you break this promise I will reblock you indefinitely but this time it will be with talk page access revoked. Do we have an agreement? --Majora (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
The only reason I posted that email was to counter the claim from the IP user that I was "libeling" someone. That's a serious accusation and I don't take it lightly. I do not recall the context of the original message on Drmies page, but as I recall it there was nothing libelous about it, nor did it name the individual behind the accounts. I promise to follow the conditions you have laid out if you are willing to unblock me. If not, that's fine and I understand. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:12, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Your account has been unblock pursuant to the agreement above. If there are problems in the future with claims such as that please bring it to administrative attention without posting personally identifiable information. --Majora (talk) 22:35, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
Understood. Thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:55, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Please watch your language[edit]

Hi, you reverted with 'What the fuck?'] as comment. Can you please watch your language, not so polite. Thanks --Hannolans (talk) 00:35, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to be polite. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

A note regarding deletion discussions[edit]

Hello! You've nominated a number of images for deletion under the rationale "Image of sign. 2D works like signs are not covered by Freedom of Panorama in Canada". However, many of the signs consist of nothing more than simple shapes and text, thus are not copyrightable in the first place because they do not cross the threshold of originality, rather fall into public domain via {{PD-ineligible}}, {{PD-text}} or {{PD-shape}} (see also COM:TOO Canada). The word "Stop" cannot be copyrighted, nor the color red, nor an octagon, and so standard stop signs are below the threshold of originality. Similarly, there is no underlying copyright to the sign in File:Maximum 120 BC cropped.jpg. And even if photograph includes a legitimately copyrighted work, it is not always a violation: if the copyrighted image is small and inconsequential to the image as a whole, it may fall under de minimis. Thanks, and if you have questions feel free to ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright. --Animalparty (talk) 04:47, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


Hi, Stop doing useless deletion requests. It is a waste of time for everybody. Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:07, 16 January 2019 (UTC)

File:Chad would make a great sexy librarian.jpg[edit]

File:Chad would make a great sexy librarian.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 file, 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.

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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

E4024 (talk) 03:03, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

File:The Sexy Librarian and Some Blonde Woman.jpg[edit]

File:The Sexy Librarian and Some Blonde Woman.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 file, 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.

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 | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | norsk bokmål | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Yann (talk) 11:26, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Why Did You Make a Deletion Request?[edit]

In regards to the 'Authors XI' book photo in Wikimedia Commons:

You requested that a photo I took myself, of a book that I own, be deleted on the grounds that it violates copyright because I took the photo off the web. I didn't and said so. Like people said above, stop wasting everyone's time with useless deletion requests Lilipo25 (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

You seem confused. No one accused you of taking a photo off the web. The image was deleted because the copyright of the book cover belongs to the publisher. You can upload it on Wikipedia, which allows "fair use" images (with conditions). Thanks for coming by and taking the time to read the discussions here! World's Lamest Critic (talk) 03:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)


You've got mail. RhinosF1 (talk) 21:16, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the email. I wanted to ensure that the images were deleted quickly, not when the WMF got around to looking at it a few days later. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:35, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
In future, contact an admin using #wikimedia-commons on Freenode IRC and type !admin@commons PM and someone will pm you quick enough. Given the situation and global impact a steward in #wikimedia-stewards may have also taken action in the meantime. RhinosF1 (talk) 05:36, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't do IRC, but thanks for the tip. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 14:27, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Oh wait - did you think that Mara Norah was a child? I would handled it differently if they were. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 14:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't have much information only being aware of it following an alert in an IRC Channel when the account was locked but it seems like they could have been. I'd rather this discussion continued privately, I'm RhinosF1 on IRC or over email. In future, with situations like this do IRC. Use something like [1] for quick access. RhinosF1 (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
No thanks. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
To which part?? RhinosF1 (talk) 19:33, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, remind me of who you are and why you're involving yourself in this? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 20:13, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
I'm a guy from enwp that got alerted to this through someone posting information about it in a Public IRC channel. They got some stren words given to them by an enwp admin on IRC about how to handle this and I thought I'd advise you about more sensitive and private ways of handling these kinds of things. I guess i'm probably used to enwp where you have many private ways of handling things and get responses pretty quick to issues via email and IRC. RhinosF1 (talk) 22:20, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, thanks for dropping by with the advice. See you around. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:38, 18 April 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem with MY OWN work?[edit]

Okay just checking what’s wrong here:

I ask my photograph to take a picture of Lufisto with her new championship.

She put it on her Instagram too

I put it on her wiki (she thanked me herself for it because she like it better than the old one)

So I am in copyright violation for using MY OWN picture on HER page WITH her autorisation? Laluttecvrai (talk) 14:25, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

People create accounts here and upload pictures of celebrities (or porn or just stuff they find on the internet) that they (falsely) claim are their own work. This happens constantly. When you created your account and uploaded a picture that was already on Instagram, I flagged it as a copyright violation and an admin deleted it. It's what happens in these cases. So if you are the rare case where you really are the copyright holder, let me say sorry. Read this. It will explain how to confirm that you are the copyright holder. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:10, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

So it is MY job to correct YOUR mistake? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laluttecvrai (talk • contribs) 18:50, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

If I made a mistake, I'm sorry, but I've told you what to do if you want to upload your image here without it being deleted. Follow the directions at COM:OTRS and wait for a response. Otherwise, the same thing is probably going to keep happening. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 03:00, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


Hi, When you are alone, and 6 people tell you you are wrong, you should stop arguing. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:08, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

That is very solid advice. :) World's Lamest Critic (talk) 20:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)

Please do not edit war[edit]

Deutsch | English | français | magyar | italiano | português | русский | sicilianu | +/−

Nuvola apps important.svg
You currently appear to be participating in an edit war (at File:Armenian tortoise.jpg). Users are expected to collaborate with others, and once it is known that there is a disagreement should discuss the issues on the relevant talk page rather than repeatedly undoing other users’ contributions. If necessary you can ask for more input at Commons:Dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to ask for temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing – even if you are right about the content issue.

~riley (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

No problem here. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:41, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

"A subtle hint"[edit]

I'm afraid you may have to be a bit less subtle. I'm no stranger to SPI, but I'm not getting the connection. GMGtalk 18:27, 28 January 2020 (UTC)

KKKNL1488 was not included in that sockpuppetry case, but was also blocked on Wikipedia as a sockpuppet of the same user. User19004 is participating in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rencontre East - Isolated And Loving It.jpg for a file uploaded by KKKNL1488. They have exactly the same interests in right wing Canadian politicians and a city in Newfoundland because they are the same person. To make it clear, KKK = w:Ku Klux Klan NL = w:Newfoundland and Labrador 14 = w:Fourteen Words and 88 = Heil Hitler. I have very little tolerance for that. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:06, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: Just FYI, User19004 has been blocked on French Wikipedia for starting pointless deletion discussions about porn performers. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Explanation required[edit]

Your previous block here was primarily due to you posting mailing list emails here, on wiki. I was under the impression that we had an agreement that you would not post any more off wiki material here. Could you please explain to me why you think this post you made recently at the village pump is appropriate? Do you believe that it meets the standards I gave you as a condition to unblock your account? You once again posted a quote directly from a mailing list, once again using off wiki information here. I'm very concerned you are not living up to your end of the agreement but I'd like to hear your side of it as well. Thanks. --Majora (talk) 01:52, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

To be honest, I had forgotten that the previous incident involved the mailing list and was following a simple "don't out anyone" rule. If you think I have violated the agreement with my post, I will understand if you block me for that alone.

This is simply Fae trying to get me blocked rather than have a reasonable discussion about issues where we disagree. A week ago in this COM:AN/U discussion, Fae tried to get a user blocked by falsely claiming that they had accused editors of child sexual abuse. The user had not done that and the images under discussion were cartoons, so the accusation would not have made sense. In this AN/U discussion from earlier in January, Fae falsely claimed that an editor was making "criminal allegations" because they had referred to someone as a "pedophile". In neither of those cases was the user blocked, but my participation there apparently made me an enemy of Fae.

The only reason I had read the mailing list post was because Fae linked to it in a discussion I was following. Not, as he alleges, because I was "stalking his off-wiki activities". The Village Pump discussion was about Commons:Deletion requests/Nudity from Flickr by Avril1975. In that deletion discussion. the argument that images could not be deleted because they were "in use" was offered by multiple commenters, including Fae. I quoted from the mailing list post because it was directly relevant to the discussion. I did not need to name the author. After I posted the quote, it was another editor who remarked on the connection between Fae the mailing list author and Fae the editor here.

While I did not out Fae, threaten to out Fae, or imply that I might out Fae, the whole thing is ridiculous. We are talking about something that is both obvious and cannot conceivably be construed as any kind of threat to Fae's privacy or safety. This isn't connecting a pseudonym to a real name. This is connecting a pseudonym on Commons with the same pseudonym on a Wikimedia mailing list. I have no doubt that I searched, if I could find an example of Fae making that connection himself. If Fae were truly concerned about "outing" he wouldn't a "wiki cv" on his userpage with links to off-wiki stories about him. This is nothing but an intimidation tactic. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:41, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
All you had to say was that it was linked to before by the person in question. Can't be outing if the link was given previously onwiki. At least not in my understanding of the policy. Thank you for the explanation. --Majora (talk) 18:18, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

File:Aleksandra Albu.jpg[edit]

Was in copyright violation for "Obvious flickrwashing". Could you explain what that means, so I'll know what it is I should avoid.

Thank you.

Vattav (talk) 16:59, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

You took the image from Flickr. That Flickr user just gathers up stuff from other sources. They don't own the image, so they don't have the legal right to claim that image is freely licensed. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 17:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Create a new account[edit]

Hey I know who you are. Better to create a new account to stay anonymous ;) 20:54, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

I only need one account, thanks. But it's too bad that you are blocked, because I'm pretty curious now. Who am I? Am I famous? Come back and let me know. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Blocked for a month[edit]


As you may recall, you aren't allowed to out people. It's not productive, it's not helpful, and it's against policy. Even if you think it's a really good idea.

I've blocked you for a month to cool down, but given your indef ban on enwiki maybe it should continue here. I'll leave that to the sysops at large in the usual manner.

James F. (talk) 00:37, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

@Jdforrester: What are you talking about? Where have I outed someone? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 03:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
I see from your recent edits that you have removed my comments on GorillaWarfare's talk pages. I felt it was important that an editor who had been majorly involved in a earlier related discussion be notified of a new discussion about the same subject. Are you saying that I outed an editor by posting a diff where that editor voluntarily acknowledged that they used a particular IP? In what way is that outing someone? World's Lamest Critic (talk) 04:27, 26 February 2020 (UTC)


Your account has been locked from editing on any wiki.

Many months ago you were blocked in Commons for a similar reason to the current block. At the time you promised "not to repeat the infraction".

  • It does not matter what the context is but you should not take it on yourself to publicise someone’s IP, even if their long-dead great-grandma comes out of the grave and announces it with fanfare. If it is crucial to inform someone, use the appropriate channels e.g. email or IRC.
  • You do not have a free license to import disputes from other wikis to Commons unless it concerns licensing, copyright, usage etc.
  • Your outing behaviour on ENWP got you an indefinite block there and you’ve been blocked here twice for the same behaviour.
  • You have been warned about the civility of some of your edits by more than one user.
  • You have also been warned about edit warring.
  • If you were to behave in a similar manner in real life, you would almost certainly be censured. In this online environment it is not difficult to be civil and to behave politely to others.

The two blocks for the same reason mean your account now a cross-wiki problem and has become eligible to be globally locked from editing any Wikimedia wiki. Please note there is no fixed appeal procedure for a locked account. Once it is locked, it is very unlikely to be unlocked for years.

You can email us at to discuss the lock. -Green Giant (talk) 11:04, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Image Search Engines[edit]

How to find an image that already exists on the internet? Please help me! Boom Jayson (talk) 11:21, 7 April 2020 (UTC)