User talk:Kai3952

Note: Please do not give me "barnstars" or "awards".--Kai3952 (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Category:Pinglin Tea Museum

Let's talk about just one of this subject.

I try to group museums in one city (e.g. New Taipei) to be in Category:Museums in New Taipei. And after that, the parent category of Category:Museums in New Taipei is Category:Visitor attractions in New Taipei (all museums are obviously visitor attractions). That's why I remove the Category:Visitor in New Taipei from each museum name (e.g. in this case is Category:Pinglin Tea Museum). If not, we will have redundant categorization that Category:Pinglin Tea Museum is visitor attractions in New Taipei, and Museums in New Taipei (parent category of Pinglin Tea Museum) are also in the Category:Visitor attractions in New Taipei. I hope you understand this kind of categorization.

Same case like Category:Visitor attractions in New York, you cant find any New York museums there (directly under that category), because all museums have been categorized inside Category:Museums in New York, which is the child category of Category:Visitor attractions in New York. I'm following this more well-established format of categorization. This is exactly the same format as what I've been doing to museums in Taiwan with regards to visitor attractions in each of its municipality/city/county. Chongkian (talk) 13:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Please put into correct category

Please put File:Yuli Wildlife Sanctuary+ fu tang chen+005.jpg into the correct category. - Takeaway (talk) 10:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Beigang Creek, Renai Township, Nantou.jpg

Hi. You wrote "The photo shown is not Beigang Creek." in your summary of this edit. From the geocoding, it appears to be a nearly dry creek bed viewed to the north northeast from Qingfeng Road overpass (200' north of the Qing Liu Tribe bus stop, 1000' south of Nantou County Police Bureau on Mingyue Lane, 2000' north of Zhonghua Road (Route 80)), Ren’ai Township, Nantou County, Taiwan. If the flowing water below is not Beigang Creek, what is it? More importantly, what should the file be named?   — Jeff G. ツ 02:32, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Re: Category:Views from buildings in Penghu

No, the problem was mine, not yours. I've reverted my own edit. --Howard61313 (talk) 14:50, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

File:觀音山眺望社子島關渡FUJI4450.jpg

Ho, Kai3952, I was wondering how the Sacred Heart High School for Girls is related to this image. Thank you for your time. :) Lotje (talk) 14:22, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Public art at the junction of Provincial Highway 20 and Provincial Highway 21.jpg

File:Public art at the junction of Provincial Highway 20 and Provincial Highway 21.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 03:24, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

File:Tunyuan Trailhead.jpg

File:Tunyuan Trailhead.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 03:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Please stop canvassing.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 08:46, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

File:Visitors in Corridor of 10th Floor, Cin Building, NTNU before Speech 20151230 retouched.jpg

File:Visitors in Corridor of 10th Floor, Cin Building, NTNU before Speech 20151230 retouched.jpg 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. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: The source, author, date, and license of the underlying topographic map of Hualien County are not specified. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

  — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 03:35, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

關於Category:Shanghua Renai Building

集集大地震已經經過18年，但是臺灣中南部到現在還有很多待拆除重建的危樓。像是2018年2月8日才開始拆除的雲林斗六祥瑞大樓，如照片所見，雖然外觀看似尚可，但內部早已不能住人，這些建築當然算Earthquake damage，還是足下對Earthquake damaged buildings的認知不同，願聞其詳。

如果說足下認為尚華仁愛大樓中有仁愛尚華大樓的照片而有疑義，已有人創建仁愛尚華大樓分類並加調整，至於尚華仁愛大樓拆除改建的經緯，請參考這裡。--玄史生 (talk) 12:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@玄史生: I have already answered here.--Kai3952 (talk) 11:37, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

about File:History Gallery of Chien-Chiao Air Force Academy in Axiation Museum 20130928.jpg

框內這些1930年代空軍官校創校初期的照片是在中國浙江省杭州的筧橋所拍攝；照片框展示於桃園機場原航空科學館，也是1981年開設時即有的展示品，絕對不是2013年的高雄照片。如果以屬地論，最多只能算「2013年在桃園拍攝的照片」。--玄史生 (talk) 19:11, 22 February 2018 (UTC)

@玄史生: We can know from these two messages: "Please stop tracking my edits" and "Re: about File:History Gallery of Chien-Chiao Air Force Academy in Axiation Museum 20130928.jpg", I have evidence that can tell you why it is tracking and why it is harassment. I want to let everyone know that I have told you, thus I speak English again. The evidence is as follows:

1. This is your first time: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and [6]. These are a large number of you back or modify the status quo, but you did not write a reason in the edit summary and you have not notified me in my talk page.
2. [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57], [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], and [70]. Among all 64 edits, you make the same edits as you did for the first time. Therefore, I think that your behavior is vandalism. See: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Vandalism/Archive_10#玄史生.
3. I see you told me in your reply, I did not add Category:Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage at File:張善政出席大甲鎮瀾宮媽祖遶境進香回鑾安座儀式 03.jpg, so you say that I think it is not "Dajia Mazu Pilgrimage", and you emphasize that "you cannot because this photo was taken at the Jenn Lann Temple".
4. You remove my edits here, and then you said to me on my talk page: "The appearance of the building was not damaged, but it is still damaged by the earthquake".
5. In this one edit you stated: "The content of this photo is: Shihgang Dam has been repaired".
6. In this one edit you stated: "This photo not show any trains".
7. In this one edit you stated: "The Photo Frame was not Photoed or Display at Kaohsiung. and Historic Photographies in Frame was Photoed in 1930's".

As can be seen above, he would have ended up in these file I've edited with to somehow oppose me. Especially at 3, his behavior told me he was tracking my edits; otherwise, how does he know which I edited? Also, like he is in 4, 5, 6, and 7, he has many reasons! This looks like a farce to me. In every time, it turns out that it's not my problem but what that he made a mistake or his own problem. For example, 3 and 7: these six files(refers to all the photos in Category:Shanghua Renai Building) did not show that the building was damaged by the earthquake. As for 7, before I edit, he has added Category:Republic of China Air Force Academy when uploading File:History Gallery of Chien-Chiao Air Force Academy in Axiation Museum 20130928.jpg. In his every act, I was forced to listen to him for his sake. Otherwise, he will continue to back or to remove my edits. Feeling I wasted my time because of his problems makes me mad. I hope User:玄史生 can stop his own behavior. If the same thing happens in the future, I will not read the message he left for me and I will not answer him. Because I had repeatedly advised him not to do so. See: "Please stop tracking my edits" and "Re: about File:History Gallery of Chien-Chiao Air Force Academy in Axiation Museum 20130928.jpg".--Kai3952 (talk) 11:13, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Do not tag me in an edit summary ever again

I don't like the numerous notifications a d plus those are wrong edit summaries. Artix Kreiger (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Re:File:Taipei Bus 045-U5 out of service 20131203.jpg

這張照片是位於在新北市板橋區新府路上拍的。--捷利 (talk) 12:13, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg 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. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: There is no freedom of panorama exception for anything other than buildings in Taiwan. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Ww2censor (talk) 22:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.jpg

File:Monument for the Yoshino Immigrant Village in Ji'an.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

Túrelio (talk) 18:20, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Re: Please STOP TRACKING my edits

You made an outrageous misunderstanding. I didn't track anyone's edits, What I really track are the categories about Taiwan. What I really care are the improvement and the adding of translations of the categories, it's not a matter of who the former editors are (that is, whether those are your edits or not, I'll do the same thing). Stop removing my translations to the page, which is a nonsense reversion because you are the one who tracks all my edits, no matter what I've added.--Howard61313 (talk) 23 April 2018 (Mon) 12:13 (UTC)

I know that you mean no harm on me, and that you didn't distort me deliberately. I appreciate that. But you still misunderstood me unintentionally. I hope my explanation will solve this.--Howard61313 (talk) 23 April 2018 (Mon) 13:16 (UTC)

I've been away from Wiki for some days in order to deal with something in my daily life. I'll make a full reply as soon as I can.--Howard61313 (talk) 11 May 2018 (Fri) 13:22 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:View of the south end of Zhiben Station taken from train.jpg]]). If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Elisfkc (talk) 19:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Category:Categories_of_Taiwan_by_region

Category:Categories_of_Taiwan_by_region has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Auntof6 (talk) 05:04, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Please be careful of your indiscriminate and irrelevant edits

It is fine of you to claim the right usage about automobiles and buses in your edit summary, but what you have edited seems to be irrelevant since you removed ALL the former editions done by me INDISCRIMINATELY, like this one, you didn't change "automobiles" into "vehicles", what you have reverted has nothing to do with your edit summary AT ALL. What you should do is simply change the category for automobiles into vehicles, like what I did on this one. Please correct all the former edits likewise, instead of the wrong way you did.--Howard61313 (talk) 26 May 2018 (Sat) 02:13 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 14:11, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

My response goes as follows:

1. It is DISPENSABLE for a proper noun to add "的", and the adding of "的" sometimes makes itself MORE COLLOQUIAL than those without "的". For example, "交通部政務次長" and "交通部的政務次長", of course the latter is more colloquial, while the former is a proper noun. The reason why I took w:zh:Category:台灣交通 for example before is that the category is named in a LITERARY way as well, instead of a colloquial way.
2. Both "交通工具" and "運輸工具" are used by the Taiwanese MOTC (交通部), I agree that the changing of this kind of term can be hold up for a while.
3. I simply follow the usage on both en.wikipedia and zh.wikipedia. The corresponding category in English for w:zh:Category:台灣交通 is called w:en:Category:Transportation in Taiwan. It is not my call, it is an established practice (既有慣例).
4. There are no problems of the categories you mention here. Nobody says that categories can't be subdivided into small ones if only one kind of such category is contained. It's even fine for a category page to contain files only. I'm the one who should tell you to "stop unreasonable edits".
5. It's fine with me, but one suggestion here: it would be better for those round brackets in such category to be used in fullwidth forms (全形括號). For example, ( 注意：本類別「包括」地鐵站 ) may be replaced with （注意：本類別「包括」地鐵站）, like what I did on this one. The reason why to do this can be seen in the "Manual of Style" on zh.wikipedia (w:zh:Wikipedia:格式手册).
6. I'm the one who should tell you to "try to use your brain and to think what I said": MRT stations and THSR station are not within the NORMAL SCOPE of "火車站", just like buses, which are not within the normal scope "automobiles". Of course there are difference between "鐵路車站" and "火車站" when it comes to the range of usage. Since you mentioned the matter of "colloquialism", it is funny because you don't know that "火車站" is usually used in a colloquial way as well. In Taiwan, the term "火車站" is typically used for the TRA stations only. Your understanding of Chinese language may be insufficient to fully express, like the native speaker in Taiwan to understand in themselves.
7. It seems that your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express as well. I didn't say that "train station" category does not include the MRT station, what I said is "火車站", which is only one of many ways to translate the term "train station".
8. The reason is simple and clear. Taking Collins English Dictionary for example, which defines the term as "the public organizations whose job is to take quick action to deal with emergencies when they occur, especially the fire brigade, the police, and the ambulance service.". Another version defines it as "a department within a bigger organization that deals with emergencies" Don't tell me that you don't understand the meaning of "orginizations" and "departments".

After all, it is you who cause me many problems because you keep removing my edits with FALSE reasons SINCE APRIL, and you even distorted my edits in your edit summary as I mentioned before ([71]). You claim that I insisted on not fixing the edits (concerning "buses" with "automobiles"), but the fact is that I've already stopped insisting on this and even started to fix it, just like another editing history I've mentioned before ([72]). Another problem you've caused is that you indiscriminately reverted all the edit I added, using the distorted irrelevant reason above. This is another good example showing that your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express because you don't even understand what I've edited and removed them all, just like you did in [1]? This is Nonsense.

By the way, if there's so many problems, I have a suggestion that both of us stop editing on such categories, until further consensus is made on the way to improve them.--Howard61313 (talk) 27 May 2018 (Sun) 10:10 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 21:51, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

1. It is ironic that you kept telling me "not to confuse" in your reply, but what you put here shows that you're CONFUSING two irrelevant cases in one, what a double standard. The case concerning "的" has nothing to do with anyone's Chinese ability, because proper nouns without "的" are common-used practices in the grammar of Chinese language already. The cases doesn't show the problem exists with me, but your logic instead. You consider someone to be wrong on case A, which doesn't mean that he/her is wrong on case B, too.
2. It doesn't matter whether you were discuss MOTC/交通部 or not. The case is only an intention trying to explain that both "交通工具" and "運輸工具" are common used under this circumstance, so I'm not insisting on the option of "交通工具" anymore. You may choose between them as you like.
3. Stop pettifogging, of course it is established practice (既有慣例). Wikipedia is not the only examples showing that the term "XX交通" may fits those category named "Category:Transportation in XX" better than "運輸" when XX means a specific country or region, such as the solution to the Taiwanese Junior Civil Service Examination (「公務人員普通考試」解答), in which the term "交通" and "運輸" are defined as follows:
   **交通: "A system in which people, vehicles and roads interact" (人、車、路三者間互動運作之系統) [73], or "the relation between people, vehicles and roads"(人、車、路彼此間之關連), which contains "the state of movement of vehicles and pedestrians within a region or on a route, and the facilities related to such movement" (包含車輛或行人在一個地區或路線的運動狀態，及與此種運動有關的設施) [74]
   **運輸: An economic activity to convey people or goods from place A to place B in order to overcome space barriers (將人及貨物從甲地運至乙地，以克服空間阻隔的一種經濟活動) [75]
   It is obvious that, although "交通" is not the one to be translated as "transportation", it actually fits those categories named "Transportation in XX" better than "運輸" when talking about a specific country/region's transportation in Chinese, because it has a broader definition here. It is impossible for "Category:Transportation in XX" to contain "economic activity" only, the "system, the state of movement and the facilities" must be contained as well.
   After all, that's why I took "Category:台灣交通" and "Category:Transportation in Taiwan" for example here, they can work as counterparts for each other. It doesn't matter whether they're on Wikipedia, Commons or any other Wikimedia sister projects. "Don't confuse Wikimedia.Commons with Chinese Wikipedia"? It is not a matter of confusing, and it's not strange that Pages on Commons can be named after their counterpart on Wikipedia, they're Wiki sister projects for God's sake.
4. So what? Why should I know this? Does it means that categories can't be dealt with like this?
5. You misunderstood. Wikimedia.Commons doesn't have to be Chinese Wikipedia, and w:zh:Wikipedia:格式手册 is only one of many websites on the Internet to introduce proper usage on fullwidth forms. And there's no need for your useless suggestion, I've already been correcting every improper punctuation marks I see there, for many years.
6. Your so-called "ample" proof says "colloquialism" itself: "鐵路車站或簡稱鐵路站，口語慣稱火車站、車頭", right there on w:zh:鐵路車站. Besides, "火車" and "捷運" are indeed listed separately under their normal usage, such as the Holodict of the Ministry of Education (教育部臺灣閩南語常用詞辭典). It looks more like your personal opinion and analysis that "火車站" contains MRT stations.
7. The answer (about the usage of "火車站") is already shown in item 6 above.
8. Who misunderstood? Emergency services equipment is not an organization, because it is "the equipment owned by the organization". What you said didn't change the definition of emergency services at all.

And for those final questions, of course I've already fixed such category here (on 26 May), and I did it in order to show you the "proper way" to fix it (instead of the way how you've messed up the page, indiscriminately reverting anything that have nothing to do with the usage on buses and automobiles). Besides, if fixing at least one page (instead of not fixing any pages) can be described as "insisted on not fixing", then you can be described as "insisting on indiscriminate reverting", it was me who fixed such mistake you've made. What you must know is: don't blindly blame others for being unreasonable while being unreasonable yourself, and I hope you stop. The thing about Wikimedia.Commons and Chinese Wikipedia have been explained clearly above, use your "clever" brain to understand. Finally, I'm glad to see that you claim the discussion containing criticism like "your understanding of English may be insufficient to fully express" as a discussion without good faith, because this kind of criticism is actually quoted from what you've said weeks ago. Well done, mate, now your own words proves that you've started a discussion in a way without good faith.--Howard61313 (talk) 30 May 2018 (Wed) 18:09 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

1. That is not my personal opinion, that's me describing what have happened in the real world. There's no need for discussion there, because the categories named such way are already existing, and working well there.
2.  Done
3. No, I mean that both "交通" and "交通運輸" are better than the option in which "運輸" is used alone. Maybe "交通運輸" can be a better option to save time for deciding which to choose.
4. Maybe. What you have said about this does not persuade.
5. It is not important to you, and I didn't ask you to fix them in the first place, it was only a suggestion.
6. What are you talking about? I always agree that metro stations are railway stations. What I don't agree is that railway stations/train stations can be collectively translated into Chinese as "火車站", which is a colloquial word (its scope differs when being used by different people). Even the term "鐵路車站" is better then that, at least it contains THSR stations, sometimes MRT stations as well. Why do you choose an unclear option instead of a clear one?
7.  Done
8. Thank you, it proves what I've said: emergency services are organizations indeed.

Unlike you, I'm not a person who likes to report others. And you're blind indeed, the way I edit is not only the way of zh.wikipedia, and you blindly, unreasonably object to it upon seeing anything about zh.wikipedia is shown. By the way, it's funny seeing you blaming others on the ability to communicate in English. It's proved that your own ability to understand English is full of flaws, misinterpreting what I've said on this affair outrageously, wrongly translating "Why on earth should I know it?" into a ridiculous translation like "我為什麼要讓你知道", then distorting it as "guilty conscience" (心虛) on the false basis above. What's worse, it may not be the only flaw you've made. If the thing I've said can be distorted like this, how can I ever trust you? What's the use explaining to you if you don't even have the ability understand English or Chinese properly? Of course I would like to be confident in those people you've mentioned, too. I believe that they didn't messed up their own native language and other languages simultaneously like you! --Howard61313 (talk) 31 May 2018 (Thu) 04:08 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 05:13, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

I'm grateful to your apology, which means that you still show some sense here. There is one question left: there are eight items, which one needs annotations? --Howard61313 (talk) 4 June 2018 (Mon) 01:48 (UTC)

@Howard61313: I've answered at "your talk page".--Kai3952 (talk) 02:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

File:蘆洲機廠DSC 5041.jpg

Dear Kai3952 File:蘆洲機廠DSC 5041.jpg & File:二重疏洪道重要橋梁DSC 5036.JPG 皆由觀音山頂拍攝 ~已經加tag Views from Mount Guanyin (New Taipei)感恩Taiwankengo (talk) 01:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)taiwankengo

File:Looking up the exterior of Taoyuan Public Library Lunggang Branch.jpg

File:Looking up the exterior of Taoyuan Public Library Lunggang Branch.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

B dash (talk) 04:02, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons

I have just come across a few images you have recently uploaded from Flickr. I would appreciate it if in the future, you used the Flickr2Commons tool. This tool allows images to be moved to Commons from Flickr without having to download the images to your own computer. It also brings in the largest resolution of the image, as well making sure to list the correct license and url, making it easy for the automated Flickr Review system. Also, it is fairly easy to categorize images with this tool. To use it, you just need to go to the url and authorize it (where it says "authorise first").--B dash (talk) 04:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Entrance sign at Datun Nature Park in Sanzhi.jpg

File:Entrance sign at Datun Nature Park in Sanzhi.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

B dash (talk) 13:55, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Reply

Okay, you may get mad after the image was nominated for deletion, I understand. I give you the F2C comment just want to give you one more method of uploading Flickr files to Commons. Before uploading files, you should check the images that are within the FoP (of Taiwan). Thanks for your contribution. --B dash (talk) 15:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Re

The logo on the board is copyrighted. However, the logo occupied only a small space and it is not the subject in the photo. Therefore, it is regarded as de minimis. It is still acceptable in Commons. --B dash (talk) 03:42, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

• Please use common sense. It is hard to tell the standard. As long as we won't recognise the copyrighted object as subject, that would be fine. --B dash (talk) 04:07, 2 July 2018 (UTC)
  • "As long as we won't recognise the copyrighted object as subject, that would be fine." --B dash (talk) 06:22, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Category:Anticrepuscular rays

I noticed that two days ago you moved many pictures into this subcategory. To my perhaps less experienced eye, the majority seem not to be anticrepuscular. Such rays are seldom photographed, unlike crepuscular ones that are often photographed. Could you check to see whether these moves were correct? Jim.henderson (talk) 12:51, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

My own picture, File:NHP Sunset rays jeh 1909.JPG was made facing west into the Sun. I well remember that evening, bicycling westward towards home. Thus, it's a picture of the usual kind of crepuscular ray; I would have been very pleased to see the rarer anticrepuscular rays. The majority of the pictures that you subcategorized show a Sun disk or other sign of being crepuscular rays, not anticrepuscular, so you should undo all the moves except those for which you have clear evidence that they are anticrepuscular. Jim.henderson (talk) 13:50, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

What is the difficulty? Crepuscular rays are near the Sun. They converge on the Sun. Anticrepuscular rays are on the other side of the sky. They converge on the Antisolar point. The majority of the pictures that you moved are clearly crepuscular; the remaining are uncertain and ought to be returned unless we get evidence that supports the move. Jim.henderson (talk) 15:40, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

我回退了您在 File:Meetup.jpg中的標註

我不會在意被標註出來，但我沒有參加2005年的聚會。即使我記憶可能有錯，但另一個證據是我2005年時在服替代役，有當時在單位出版的書籍為證。台灣役男的髮型規範各單位不同，但不可能留著長髮是一定。--Reke (talk) 06:54, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

另2005台北夏聚紀錄中也沒有紀錄我的參與。我的首次編輯是2007年。--Reke (talk) 06:57, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

@Reke: I am replying to you "here". Also, I already know that you can speak English well, so please don't deliberately speak to me in Chinese.--Kai3952 (talk) 13:19, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

OK, the Mr. Wang is not me. As I said, I did not a long hair man in 2015.--Reke (talk) 15:14, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

感謝閣下對維基共享資源的圖片分類的巨大貢獻

如題，這是很繁雜的工作，我替維基感謝您。克勞棣 (talk) 00:56, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@克勞棣: I've replyed on your talk page.--Kai3952 (talk) 01:06, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

File:Cosplayer of Asuka Langley Soryu and two male visitors in NTCPE 20071014.jpg

我已經刪除cosplayer左右兩側男遊客的臉，請您撤回刪除請求，謝謝。--Solomon203 (talk) 12:48, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

@Solomon203: I've replyed on your talk page.--Kai3952 (talk) 12:54, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Uploaded with UploadWizard

Hello.
When you encounter Category:Uploaded with UploadWizard (hist • logs • abuse log) in the recent revision of any page, look at the page history for disruption like Revision of File:夜拍林安泰古厝.jpg or other anomalies. This category shouldn’t be present in any modern revision because was purged with bots. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:56, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

I didn’t inform Husky221 because don’t understand his/her Chinese comment and unsure whether can s/he understand my English. Another try with «Uploaded with UploadWizard». Imagine you walk somewhere in Taiwanese countryside and step on a lychee fruit. Would you be astonished? Not much. But if I stepped on it walking in Russian countryside, it would certainly be something unusual. Namely, I’d have to conclude that somebody dropped or threw this fruit by mistake or put it intentionally. The same for comparison of 2013 against modern times – the category in question present in old revisions of File: pages is a commonplace. But if you see it in a current revision, then somebody recently brought it from the past, either mistakenly or doing disruption. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Views from automobiles

Hi Kai3952. Please read first Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/05/Category:Views from vehicles before reverting. Note that this category and its subcategories are only for images where a portion of the automobile is visible. Thanks. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

• For images of roads without any part of the car visible, see Category:Views from roads instead. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:07, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
• Window reflections are not a part of the car. Use category:Window reflections instead. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 14:22, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

關於「File:2011年端午節的臺灣新竹南寮舊漁港 20110606.jpg」的分類問題

關於這筆編輯，在下相信自己完全看得懂I did not add Category:Hukou Township, Hsinchu County(我沒有添加"新竹縣湖口鄉"這個分類)這句話，可是在下卻無法理解閣下為何以這句話作為您撤銷在下的編輯的理由。可否解釋一下"I did not add Category:Hukou Township, Hsinchu County"這句話與閣下的撤銷行為的關係？謝謝！克勞棣 (talk) 14:31, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Category:Female's_objects_in_Taiwan

Category:Female's_objects_in_Taiwan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

E4024 (talk) 01:23, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. MorganKevinJ^(talk) 02:08, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Warning

Do not reopen closed discussions. Jcb (talk) 14:05, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

關於Wikimdians in Hsinchu "City"

您好，我是新竹維基媒體社群主持人。Wikimedians in Hsinchu是該社群之英語名稱，服務範圍不僅限於新竹市，之前也有新竹縣人參與我們的活動。本次改動非常不妥，請予以還原。如今日內仍拒不還原，我將會自行修正。祝好。This is Taiwania Justo speaking (Reception Room) 18:52, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Reverting Auschwitz edits

Hi,

There is a reason I deleted the category 'Auschwitz Museum' of some pictures. These pictures were not made in the Auschwitz Museum, but somewhere else in the town of Oświęcim. You could have asked me that, before, without letting me know, reverting all my edits again. Can you correct your mistake, please?

Regards,

Tukka (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. User reverted 50 of my edits wrongfuly, and doesn't acknowledge his mistake.

Tukka (talk) 14:11, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

[76] Practice what you preach! Tukka (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Category:Diagrams_of_township_road_signs_of_Yilan

Diagrams of township road signs of Yilan has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

TimChen _Talk 03:58, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Re:

Because this power plant is located in South Penghu Marine National Park area.--Encore (talk) 17:00, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Edit Summary

When editing a page on Commons there is a small field labeled "Edit Summary" or "Summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary: 

 

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the Edit Summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the Edit Summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's name in the Edit Summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. This is in reference to these 20 edits.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 16:06, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Clouds and blue sky

Re this revert: I can't not see the blue sky in this image. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

File:2015-02-27 中正紀念堂.jpg

The photo is now uncategorized. Can you add a category to the photo? --Mjrmtg (talk) 21:35, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for adding a category. --Mjrmtg (talk) 21:37, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Mjrmtg: I don't know what are you doing here.--Kai3952 (talk) 21:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I responded on your talk page. See: diff/369451891--Kai3952 (talk) 13:54, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

About the recent rollback

Sorry, not sure what happened. I was patrolling your contributions using m:RTRC. I must have clicked the rollback button by accident. Thanks for categorizing those files! By the way, why are not you applying for autopatrol? You make large number of contributions everyday. It is hard for us patrollers to distinguish bad edits from good edits such as yours. Masum Reza^📞 09:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Simone Perele Bra close-up.jpg

File:Simone Perele Bra close-up.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

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: You have been blocked due to trolling - Your recent actions are clearly not benefiting Wikimedia Commons. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

-- ~riley (talk) 09:07, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Since 30 November 2019, you have made 133 edits to discussion-only namespaces or noticeboards about the autopatroller right, your refusal to work, etc. You have not contributed to the file namespace, or otherwise postively contributed to the benefit of this project. In that time, the following inidividuals have tried to assist you or otherwise have commented on your situation:

Admins:

• King of Hearts
• JuTa
• ~riley
• Jmabel
• Rama
• Zhuyifei1999
• Majora

Users:

• Masumrezarock100
• Roy17
• Alexis Jazz
• 大诺史
• Ricky81682

Wikimedia Commons cannot afford to invest more time into helping you. You have cross-posted for help across multiple talk pages, noticeboards and emails and have had countless people offer to help you - you have annoyed people to the point they refuse to talk to you. Your most recent edit on my talk page Special:Diff/380079970 where you said @Alexis Jazz: No, the real problem is not I am autopatrolled now, but you! I will not resume work until the problem is solved.--Kai3952 (talk) 08:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC) shows that you WP:DONTGETIT. You are refusing to work, as you have for over two weeks. That is your right as a user, however, you are impeding the work of other user's by the hours we have spent trying to work with you. I refuse to allow you to continue to impede the work of others and continue this drama. Additionally, I will not continue to allow you to blame Alexis Jazz, as you did in your original work refusal and as you have most recently done on my talk page (quoted above). I highly recommend you take this week to consider your actions. ~riley (talk) 09:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

@~riley: Because Alexis Jazz said: "I will every once in a while complete whatever task you are working on."--Kai3952 (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I was blocked after I became an autopatroller? Oh, I see. The purpose of you asking me to accept the autopatroller right is to block me.--Kai3952 (talk) 10:22, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

The only problem is you never got back to work.. Me completing your work was conditional on you not being autopatrolled. But you are autopatrolled now, so the condition is no longer true. So I won't complete your work anymore. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

The most important thing is that we are respecting everyone's time. Your time, administrator's time and patroller's time. The lengthy discussions that have been ongoing, instead of working on content that benefits others, have not been respecting that time. I am happy to re-assign autopatroller if everyone can get back to work. Thank you Kai. :) ~riley (A) (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2019 (UTC) We have previously talked about drama, and as quoted, the expectation is that you would respect the community's time and get back to work. You did not get back to work and are essentially wasting the community's time. ~riley (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Really? You noted in the block log that my recent actions are clearly not benefiting Wikimedia Commons. Do you mean to tell me that I violated this rule: interest in gaining as many "user rights" or "awards" as possible?--Kai3952 (talk) 04:42, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

zh:Topic:Vcewfhn1wmpmykit is extremely clear on everything that you did wrong and what should have been done instead. Your choices have been given, and one of which has been chosen. So no, I don't care what you misinterpret our words to be, nor your feelings , considering that you failed to do the same for us in return. Good bye and no I don't intend to see you again. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

So am I blocked permanently? Why?--Kai3952 (talk) 06:32, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

'cause you didn't get back to work. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 07:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm thinking about how to get back to work.--Kai3952 (talk) 08:06, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Have you considered Nike's slogan? (after the block expires, if it doesn't get extended) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 08:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't want to say the wrong thing to make things worse.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Riley, you forgot YFdyh000 at [77]. @Zhuyifei1999: from that link, some of it translates to "I can’t rest assured, nor can I believe what the administrator said, after all, there are no rules that can restrain Alexis Jazz from robbing me of what I do. I also know the person Alexis Jazz. He didn't lie to me just once. During November 20-22, he was a lie before he became an inspector. So, I don’t accept automatic inspections and he is staring at me." (這種事不可能因為封禁一星期就會解決，因為我需要靠溝通讓我明白，沒讓我明白，就會像這一次事件一樣，11月20日一直到現在沒解決。既然 Alexis Jazz 都把後果說出來了，我沒辦法放心，更不可能相信管理員說的話，畢竟沒有什麼規則可以約束 Alexis Jazz 這個人不去搶我做的事。我也知道 Alexis Jazz 這個人，他騙我也不是只騙一次，在11月20～22日期間，他還沒當上巡查員就已經在騙人。所以說，我不接受自動巡查被他給盯上，是我倒霉，否則我過去三年不是過得好好的？)

What does it mean when Kai says I was a lie? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

'他还没当上巡查员就已经在骗人' approximate word-by-word translation: 他 he, 还没 not yet, 当上 become, 巡查员 patroller, 就 have, 已经, already, 在 doing, 骗人 lie. The meaning should be obvious now. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons for 1 week. The reason for the block is for harassment, continuing to be dramatic and wasting the valuable time of the community's editors. If you cannot drop it as you have been asked to do time and time again, you will be blocked indefinitely. (block log). 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.

-- ~riley (talk) 02:14, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

@~riley: Why?--Kai3952 (talk) 02:32, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Reasoning is clearly stated above. ~riley (talk) 02:46, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

I use "[[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]]" and not "{{re|Alexis Jazz}}"; so I didn't ping him. I don't know why he say I ping him. Because I speak to Masumrezarock100. I fail to see where I'm "harassing" Alexis Jazz on COM:RFP. I am sorry if I harassed him. Actually, Alexis Jazz has nothing to do with my drama. Because I have an explanation for my statement: "I made ~985 edits on 27 December 2019". This is what Minorax said; so I did not intend to threaten Alexis Jazz. He clarified here that I misunderstood him. I intend to end the discussion there, and then go to User talk:Minorax and talk about autopatrol. So you can rest assured that I won't harass Alexis Jazz anymore. For what it's worth, I'm sorry that I messed up.

You say "you will be blocked indefinitely" - it feels more like an "intimidation". I know you are an administrator, but you still shouldn't intimidated me. There are many ways to stop me. I urgently wanted to be able to communicate reasonably with me. Because my work has been primarily devoted to editing instead of drama/harassment.

Finally I want to tell you about my thoughts, I will tried to achieve what Masumrezarock100 said: "forget your dark past and move on". If you block me indefinitely, then I expect someone to believe my sincerity. Because I have promised Minorax that I will resume work.--Kai3952 (talk) 05:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

You have made many statements but you have failed to follow through on them. You were previously blocked, and warned, for similar behavior. We talked about this type of behavior. You talk about reasonable communication, yet several users do not want to interact or be pinged by you because you are not reasonable to communicate with. You continued discussion on a twice closed request for rights as not done and even after being told "This discussion is OVER", you continue. It does not matter how devoted you are to editing if you are behaving this way. My statement is by no means intimidation, it is a final warning to change your behavior or be blocked for an indefinite period of time. ~riley (talk) 05:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

1. I told you that I did not ping Alexis Jazz. How do you want me to prove it?
2. I don't know what "many statements" means, but I know that my statement is you talk about this type of behavior. Minorax told me: "You made ~985 edits on 27/12, imagine the time taken for the user to patrol your edits", but I thought what he meant was that my edits caused difficulties for patrollers to patrol, or, the autopatrol is not working as intended. And then I got to thinking about I stop editing until resolved; that's why I have failed to follow through on my promise.
3. I don't know if it's a "warning". Actually, you did not close the discussion; rather you blocked my account. If you think that this discussion is over, then you should do like this.

Regarding the above three questions, I hope you can help me instead of blocking my account everytime.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

1. When you use "[[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]]" it works as a ping. If you want to link my username without sending a ping, use {{noping|Alexis Jazz}}.

3. Discussions on COM:RFR are closed with  Done or  Not done or similar, rarely if ever with {{Atop}}. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 06:57, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't mean to, honest. I'm really sorry. I contribute to Wikimedia Commons for three years, but I don't know much about how it works. Because I have been dedicated to editing all files in relation to Taiwan. I feel sad when I see that ~riley misunderstood what I mean by "editing", this indicates what he means: Kai3952's contribution over the past three years is wrong. Would someone kindly tell me clearly? If it is my misunderstanding or my mistakes...I have no idea what he wants me to change, so how am I going to even try?--Kai3952 (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Request reason: "I have self-reflected in my days of blocking account asking myself where I went wrong. I discovered that a big part of this problem is due to the fact that I have an own "unique" way of understanding, and it's directly related to my personality (which included emotions and values) and my social ability (especially in interpersonal interactions). Actually the problem can be solved if I am willing to change myself. Harassment: per Tigerzeng's reply, the notification will be sent when you link to [[User:Username]] and sign you comment with ~~~~. I never knew before that users were pinged by me, because the previous design does not trigger the mention alert that is used on wikimedia (see: Suaveness's reply). Now I understand the root cause of my problem, I also realize what I am doing wrong, and know how to avoid it. Whatever the reason, I have broken my promise to Alexis Jazz. I truly apologize for my negligence. I will continue to keep my word (which means that I'll never connect to with Alexis Jazz) and also never to mention this name "Alexis Jazz" so that I don't cause the same mistake again. And it's important never to lose sight of that. Intimidation: If the community thinks that the statement "I stop all work" is an intimidation (although it was not my original intention to intimidate the community), I apologize for my negligence and I will never do it again in this form as well. Actually, the primary purpose of that statement is to inform people that I am not active, rather than as a tool for drama or intimidation. There are many reasons why I am not active, maybe it's a health factor, go travel for a long period of time, busy in real life, etc. Drama and Intimidation: Maybe I shouldn't wrote "I stop all work", but I did. If I really want to leave Wikimedia Commons, I would write "left Wikimedia Commons" or "no longer active"; however, in the case of I don't working but rather to drama, the statement "I stop all work" is a way for me to punish myself for my mistakes. I'm sorry if you misunderstood me due to my bad English. The reason I punish myself this way is that I put very strict daily requirements on myself to work on certain tasks. However, I suspect the problem may come from my wrong values, because as mentioned below at +, the problem will go away if I accept my mistakes and learn from them. Today I am starting to accept the fact that I am indeed a person without competence, but I can't use my mistakes to escape my own problems (to stop losing myself). I know the world doesn't revolve around me. If I want to get back to Wikimedia Commons and return to work, I had to have the courage to change myself and and my situation. On the other hand, I realized that I was attaching my entire self-worth to one mistake on Wikimedia Commons (which means that my everything depend on how others perceive me), and paradoxically I should not just think of myself but others as well. Ironically, this will be a huge challenge for myself, as the other people either don't have this problem (like me). Drama: I apologize for my ignorance and have a lot of respect for what he do. I never worked as a patroller on any wiki, so I didn't knew that my categorizing work can easily cause cluttered the patrol list. One category collects more than 26,000 files for Solomon203 that is not convenient for us to edit. I assume subcategories would be useful for editors who look for specific files (as it can help we narrow our search files to avoid wasting our time) and helps to make future editing files more easier. However, I am not trying to pass the buck, I just want you to know what I think. If a patroller who is working the same task as me just to make my work easier, then I must have done something wrong that caused him to waste time. I contribute to Wikimedia Commons for three years, but I don't know much about how his work. Also, I analyze as to why it happened — my wrong way of thinking causes a bad situation to get worse, and would think this is his problem. My wrong way of thinking When Alexis Jazz finishes doing whatever task or action I am currently doing, there will be several problems: 1. It is very easy to cause editing conflicts when he start editing files. 2. I have to patrol each of his edits, but I am afraid that this task will take a lot more time and energy than I initially expected. For example, he made ~1560 edits on 29 November 2019, imagine the time taken for the user to patrol his edits. 3. I think that while we can speed up work for this task, it would be a waste of time for both of us. Either he does it or I do it because he can't put time on me to avoid waste of manpower. 4. I take my time to explain it clearly for him so he can understand why he can't do my work. However, this would waste time and does not help Wikimedia Commons. I think he should tell me what he knows about all of this, so that I would not continue to waste his time in this way. Actually, this is not the first time I have seen this happen. When I was adding the "Photographs by 林高志" category to 林高志's file, I realize そらみみ does the same task as me. I discussed this with him, and explained four reasons. Through my self-reflection, the root cause of the problem is that I did not take the initiative to understand how it works on Wikimedia Commons. I should learn by watching and asking questions to users that are extremely experience. I should learn how to take responsibility for myself. I therefore reversed my wrong way of thinking — I accept my mistakes and learn from them (+). I apologize for my ignorance when I indicated that I would not be willing to accept the autopatrol right. I know many users try to make me understand what "autopatrolled" means, but I still believe in what I think it's the user right. Unfortunately, either I seriously misunderstood the term "user right" itself, or I am clueless as to the real nature of all user rights. No one ever has refused the autopatrol right like I did. Because what I think of is...I don't want to be a person who pursues the honor to reward for myself (see: en:WP:HATC). I edit files, categories, templates in a nice manner just to become a selfless person in this way, so I supposed that no autopatrolled can still contribute well for Wikimedia Commons, myself forgot what the user right itself is for (see: en:WP:POWER). I apologize for the annoyance that this has caused to everyone. I often misunderstand what people say to me. To make things worse, I’m quite an emotional person, so I easily tend to take things personally and become moody or irritable when I encounter something that I don't want to happened. As long as I learn to control my emotions well enough to communicate clearly with people. I apologize for all users who were misunderstood by me in the past which included そらみみ, 雅婕, 瑞丽江的河水, 廣九直通車, Alexis Jazz, Jmabel, Minorax (大诺史), Masumrezarock100, Rama. I make all problems and reasons clear for my mistake which I explained so clearly. That was probably the worst mistake I've ever made. Since I do have too many problems, I have to choose which ones should be solved first. I know that this is my final chance to use the account "Kai3952" before being blocked indefinitely. I apologize for my mistake and I will try my best to avoid repeating the same mistake again.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)" Unblock reason: "User demonstrates they have a deep understanding of the multiple issues in play and promises to work with other appropriately while recognizing this is their final chance. ~riley (talk) 23:47, 4 January 2020 (UTC)" This template should be archived normally.

(Block log) (unblock) (Change local status for a global block) (contribs)

First of all, let me thank you for writing all of that down. While a block can be upsetting, it also opens up the possibility to learn more from it. When users are blocked, they should think about why they are blocked and how to improve themselves to not to make mistakes again which lead them to the block. You did exactly the same and I am deeply touched by seeing your improvement. One more thing to note though, you wrote "I know that this is my final chance to use the account "Kai3952" before being blocked indefinitely". If you had evaded your block by creating sockpuppets, you and the other accounts would have been blocked on sight when you get caught. The block was imposed not only on your account but also on you. But that's not going to happen, because you didn't do it and instead took your time to think about your block and how to improve yourself. I fully  Support your unblock. Continue to improve Commons with your contributions. Best wishes to you, Masum Reza^📞 10:54, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I am fully aware that you requested not be pinged by Kai but I guess you would accept a ping from me. :) I wanted to hear your thoughts on this. I think Kai is a good faith contributor. Perhaps you would want to change your decision. Masum Reza^📞 11:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Masumrezarock100: Yes, you can ping me. I have nothing to add though. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

 Comment diffs provided by Kai should be the diffs on zh.wiki (Tigerzeng's reply and Suaveness's reply). Minorax^talk _{(formerly 大诺史)} 13:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm grateful you are here to give me a gentle reminder "the block was imposed not only on your account but also on you." I have made many sockpuppets before I come here (which means before March 2017 that I have been active on the Chinese Wikipedia), so I have no choice but to emphasize the account "Kai3952". But don't worry because I have promised an admin of zh.wikipedia (Chinese Wikipedia) that I will never intend to create sockpuppets, or to evade the block in other ways.--Kai3952 (talk) 13:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Straight highway near Chiayang High School on Aofeng Hill.jpg

File:Straight highway near Chiayang High School on Aofeng Hill.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. 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!

A1Cafel (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Category:Taiwanese_language vs Category:Taiwanese Hokkien

Besides , there are many images of Chinese characters under Category:Taiwanese_language. Should them be moved to Category:Taiwanese Hokkien? --Cangjie6 (talk) 14:11, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done--Kai3952 (talk) 21:04, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

File:Taiwan_Taroko5.jpg

Why have you removed Category:Liwu River? The gray area at the bottom of the picture is the Liwu River.

Why have you removed Category:Taroko National Park? According to this map the place is in the national park. --TheRunnerUp (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Vocalists_from_Taiwan_by_gender

Vocalists from Taiwan by gender has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Adelfrank (talk) 23:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

請不要直接回退他人的編輯

首先很感謝你對於wikimedia上各種內容的關注，我了解你也是希望使這些內容更健全完善，但容我表達我的意見，請不要依造自己主觀的想法，直接回退他人的編輯，如果你認為這些分類有不恰當之處，可以先在我的討論區，就編輯而論，如果有共識我們可以再更改。例如最近你就回退了我數個編輯，包括將數張照片移出Category:Townhouses in Taiwan，以及將Category:Tiles in Taiwan‬、Category:Murals in Taiwan、‪Category:Religious paintings in Taiwan、‪Category:Windows in Taiwan‬、Category:Sculptures of lions in Taiwan等分類移出。確實我在之前不太熟悉分類樹，也謝謝你的提醒，但我認為這幾次的回退，有些並不太洽當。首先就Building ornaments來談，Cambridge English Dictionary中對ornaments的定義是「an object that is beautiful rather than useful」，而英文維基Ornament (art)的定義是「Architectural ornament can be carved from stone, wood or precious metals, formed with plaster or clay, or painted or impressed onto a surface as applied ornament; in other applied arts the main material of the object, or a different one such as paint or vitreous enamel may be used.」、「Ornament implies that the ornamented object has a function that an unornamented equivalent might also fulfill. Where the object has no such function, but exists only to be a work of art such as a sculpture or painting, the term is less likely to be used」，因此我認為Tiles理應是一種建築裝飾，例如也有將Tiles列入建築裝飾。此外關於Religious paintings與Murals，我想這個分類可能也表達的不夠清楚，我想到的是例如潘麗水、陳玉峰這樣傳統彩繪匠師的作品，通常會繪製在寺廟或民居的壁面、棟架、樑枋等，與建築為一體，像是Media:瓦硐武聖廟 (16)八仙彩繪.jpg這樣，此外李乾朗的《台灣古建築圖解事典》也有將彩繪列入建築裝飾中，或者我們可以更進一步將Religious murals in Taiwan‎分為建築裝飾，是更為恰當的。而Windows的部分，確實可能有爭議，因為其中也包含純機能性的窗戶，但也有裝飾性的窗戶，或許可討論出更細的分類。而在Sculptures of lions的部分，例如Media:土庫順天宮木雕.JPG與Media:DSC00388 (16232958260).jpg，台灣的傳統建築時常將獅子的形象作為建築裝飾物，並不是單獨雕塑，但這分類也包含了一些單獨的雕塑，同樣或許也能有更細的分類。另外就是關於之前Category:Townhouses的問題，由於你尚未回覆我的問題，因此這裡再次提出。你認為分類中的圖片必須要有顯示出一整排，才適用此分類，然而此分類的內容是「Townhouses」這種建築「類型」，並不是「一整排的風景」，而理應包含Townhouses的獨照與特寫，例如Category:Townhouses便是如此，否則便會有許多此建築類型被排除，反而會造成此分類的缺失。有些圖片例如Media:Dihua_Street_MiNe-5DII_103-2696UG_(8410546868).jpg很明顯也確實是街屋建築，也有顯示出連棟樣貌，卻不適用此分類，然而像Media:Townhouses_in_downtown_Hsinchu_01.jpg已是獨棟街屋，卻仍適用，實在令人費解。我了解你是希望能讓wikimedia更完善，而我也是希望能歸納整理台灣建築的相關影像，整理台灣建築的文化價值與特色，這過程中是花費許多心力參照文獻並整理圖片，因此希望你未來發現有問題要回退時，可以先進行討論，了解問題並得到共識後，再行處理，謝謝。--地下高雄 (talk) 17:48, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Flickr files uploaded by Tbatb

Hi! Why are you making categories like that? Are you Tbatb? --MGA73 (talk) 19:21, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

@MGA73: Before I answer, tell me what you mean by “Are you Tbatb?”--Kai3952 (talk) 20:32, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I mean if User:Tbatb is your account. As in if you have 2 accounts. --MGA73 (talk) 20:34, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

So what's your point?--Kai3952 (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I ask why you put other users in user galleries categories? --MGA73 (talk) 21:08, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Don't beat about the bush. Tell me exactly what you think about my categorizing work.--Kai3952 (talk) 22:02, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

I do not like to jump to conclusions when I do not have all the info I need.

Categorizing by hand takes a lot of time and I could probably have done most of the work in 1-2 hrs with my bot. Normally we let users decide if they want their files categorized and how. So I was not going to offer to help you unless I know you made sure the user wanted the files to be categorized or you had another good reason to do it.

And here is what I think: I think you are unfriendly so I'm not going to spend my time trying to help you. --MGA73 (talk) 07:51, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

See the diff here, I explained my edits on Tbatb's talk page but he did not respond.--Kai3952 (talk) 08:15, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

關於金門

金門縣是否算是「臺灣」的一部份恐有爭議，應此才把「Historic buildings (historic monuments) in Kinmen‎ 」從「Historic buildings (historic monuments) in Taiwan」的分類分出來。（馬祖地區也一樣）就算現在「省」實質上廢除了，金門、馬祖也是直屬於中華民國而非臺灣。金門、馬祖跟澎湖不一樣，澎湖算是臺灣的附屬島嶼之一，但金馬可不是。--祥龍 (talk) 23:54, 2 September 2020 (UTC)