User talk:Wsiegmund/Archive/Oct2007

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Re: Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff (talk · contribs)

Frankly, hard case. COAs could be drown by hand then scanned, from other side Polish users made many COAs in SVG. Usual photos (birds, vegetables) are made with same camera (where EXIF info present), but always in small resolution. I'll ask help of admins who know this user more from RU:WP. --EugeneZelenko 14:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for having a look. Your comments are appreciated. Walter Siegmund (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
User:Putnik told that Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff had regular problems with copyrights on RU:WP, so this person could not be trusted. His images may be mix of own/copyvios. Putnik suggest to delete all of them for safety, but review of all Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff' contributions are option too. --EugeneZelenko 13:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff has 253 image uploads (http://tools.wikimedia.de/~interiot/cgi-bin/count_edits?dbname=commonswiki_p&user=Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff). That is a task that is beyond my experience and skill to handle, I think. It doesn't help that I don't know Russian. Would you consider taking it on? Best wishes, Walter Siegmund (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

  1. Not 'scanned, from other side Polish users '!!! But from personal archives -- yes.
  2. GNU is not for all works and I define what to give for GNU and that is not present - you of it to impose to me do not awake!
  3. For the best resolution it is necessary to pay and it is not obligatory money.
  4. I haven't problems with copyrights.)))) All of it's -- my work -- not yours.
  5. You, EugeneZelenko and Putnik could not be trusted. You protect and someone's lie thus! And it is the truth on 100 %!

And also more, to all who hides, that Wikiprojects Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff's idea (and it can be regarded as larceny!) is impossible to trust. Besides, these people are afraid of Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff for the truth and criticism of their policy with constant lies. According to the above-stated reasons these people also pursue him constantly, being afraid of the truth. --Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff 19:37, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

  • I did'n so that changes (if is any).( Sorry.) But that is not my 'personal atteck"! That his personal attack[1] against me!!! You see that. --Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff 20:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
It is common to respond to an attack by attacking in turn, but it is not helpful. Other editors who read this discussion can see who is behaves well or badly. They are more likely to agree with you if you behave well. You were warned against attacking other editors and subsequently did so above and at User talk:Siebrand. Please stop.[2] Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Please... please... They must to STOP! I didn't start.)) --Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff 21:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Pogrebnoj-Alex already had his image up for deletion at one time, see Commons:Deletion requests/Pictures of User:Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff, that was closed as a keep. / Fred J 21:18, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • 1st, Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff -- not 'Pogrebnoj-Alex'!!! "...look like advertising..." So?! Can't do I work for adds?!)))) Oh, my God!!! Whay that Image:Butterfly.jpg and that Image:Gsn.jpg is not look like advertising? I am talented and very ingenious! "Something which is also a little bit confusing is that picture is taken with a Digimax 420". So, what?! "Why should he take a photo of poorer quality when he also has a DMC-FZ50?" Becouse! Not your busines! You have only 1 camera - I have 10! So?! --Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff 22:07, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
That history is helpful. However, to update the discussion cited, Image:Buttocks.jpg was identified as a copyright violation and closed by me on 27 July 2007.[3] That appears not to have been considered in the deletion request you cite when it was closed on 28 August 2007. Thank you. Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:42, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • That history is NOT helpful! Because that is children's delirium!!! Image:Buttocks.jpg was NOT identified as a copyright violation, but was closed. To you can seem anything you like, but you were not present at shootings.))) --Pogrebnoj-Alexandroff 22:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Wsiegmund: Yes I had noticed the first deletion of Buttocks.jpg when I voted on the deletion request in August, but Buttocks.jpg was significantly different from all his other uploads. (grainy quality, no EXIF data). I'm not saying his uploads are not copyvios, however, only that a closer look is necessary. As I said, I didn't see where he would have gotten the images from if they were copyvios? / Fred J 19:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi Fred_J; What is the best way to handle this case? Reviewing each of 253 images is a big job. So far, the uploader hasn't been very helpful. Thanks, Walter Siegmund (talk) 21:04, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Bluebird ?

Well spotted! It's Aphelocoma californica (Western Scrub-jay) - MPF 13:47, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Juiced lemon

I'm sure that he's trying to do the right thing at some level, but unfortunately, he never seems to take into account the concerns of others over his own actions, and even when he's aware that other people have problems with certain categorizations, that never prevents him from plowing ahead unilaterally with yet further recategorizations in the same area -- which means that I feel I have to hit him over the head with a lead pipe (metaphorically speaking) just to get his attention. AnonMoos 02:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

You blocked me?

Who do you think you are? Fuck'ya! --Huebi 16:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)