Microtoerisme

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Microtoerisme!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 12:57, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

COM:OVERCAT

Please read COM:OVERCAT before doing massive downloads. --Foroa (talk) 08:16, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Don't over-categorize!

Please don't over-categorize your images. Read COM:OVERCAT as suggested to avoid more mistakes. -- Ies (talk) 13:36, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

Again: Please stop over-categorizing. You are causing much needless work for other users who must correct your mistakes. Stop this bad behaviour, please! -- Ies (talk) 16:08, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

File:1208 Stavoren 04.JPG, File:Juli 2012 Den Bosch 053.JPG and File:Juli 2012 Den Bosch 054.JPG

Hi Microtoerisme, please add the name of the sculptor of this statue and the year of installation. --Túrelio (talk) 11:57, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

watermarked images

Hi, you've recently uploaded a large series of watermarked images that have entered a discussion here. You're welcome to add your thoughts. (You are welcome to respond in your native language) – JBarta (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 045.jpg

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 045.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!

Whaledad (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:InZicht Oirschot Petruskerk 054.JPG

File:InZicht Oirschot Petruskerk 054.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!

The Banner (talk) 17:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

File:InZicht Oirschot Petruskerk 051.JPG

File:InZicht Oirschot Petruskerk 051.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!

The Banner (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

COM:AN/B

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Microtoerisme. You may be blocked for spam. (Je mag geblokkeerd worden voor reclame.).

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 were blocked for spamming after uploading thousands of watermarked files with an intent to advertise. (Je werd geblokkeerd voor reclame.). 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.

Mono 14:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I support any unblock request per my comment at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections#Microtoerisme.

Microteorisme—rather than using watermarks, on Wikimedia Commons your attribution would be fully legally protected as a moral right if the attribution you require is added to the licence. Should any reuser fail to give you the required attribution (which may include a link to your website) then I believe you would have grounds to legally claim compensation for damages; certainly that would be the case in any EU country. If you make a simple attribution statement you would like to see, then it should be possible to have this added to all images you have uploaded to date that contain the standard licence of {{self|cc-by-sa-3.0}} that seems to have been applied to your uploads.

Thanks for your patience, and the value of the content you have added to Wikimedia Commons. I hope there can be a common understanding and that you can be encouraged to upload versions of your images without the problematic watermark. --Fæ (talk) 10:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The above message by user Fæ comes from someone who seems to have very little knowledge of the dutch language, and because of that is not in a position to make an objective assessment of the blatant spamming by user Microtoerisme. The above message should therefore be disregarded. LeeGer (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

LOL, please do not discriminate against me because of what you think my cultural background might be, or my understanding of the Dutch language might be. After making well over a million edits to this international project, I doubt my comments here are quite so easily swept away. Of course I will respect your viewpoint if you express it clearly, but I'm afraid I cannot respect an ad hominem dismissal of my mellow approach to encouraging this contributor. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 16:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I do hope the above comment is swept away very easily. As the encouragement of spamming is a very, very bad idea, and also damaging to Wikimedia. And like I said in my above statement. You seem to have no idea how blatant the spamming is. This project might be international, the spamming in this case is dutch. And if you could read dutch on a high level, and understand the spam in this case, I'm sure you wouldn't make the mistake of encouraging this spammer. That was no ad hominem comment. LeeGer (talk) 17:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You are still speculating about my personal background, apparently without knowing much about me, that's pretty much well within the definition of an ad hominem argument. Anyway, I have made over 1.8 million edits on Commons and uploaded over 50,000 images, so you might expect me to have seen quite a bit of misuse, spamming and disruption as well as collaboration, innovation and public service. It's this experience that is most relevant here. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not speculating about anything, that is just your conclusion. I am just stating that anyone that can read dutch, will understand this user is a spammer, and won't make the mistake of encouraging him to continue. LeeGer (talk) 00:34, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

If I said I felt like a chicken would you nibble my legs ? What people say and what they DO are totally different things, there was that Robyn Williams move 'good morning Vietnam' where the US Army intelligence was going around asking individual people if they were 'Charlie' heaven knows some people may well shoot them if they said yes. I certainly found morons of a scale large enough to believe that a null edit was actually vandalism simply because I said it was, and block as a result. So this time I ask, if I say I am a horse, will you buy me a saddle ? He can say he is spamming as much as he wants, and an actual spammer can say he is not spamming as much as he wants. The important thing is to look and see if it is actually a violation of policy. That is the question, unfortunately people who want to find a particular result will go with anything at all to support their position. Penyulap ☏ 11:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, we looked and we saw, and what dit we see? SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! SPAM! That's why he was blocked, not because of what he said. LeeGer (talk) 16:31, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

On the issue of blocking the uploader, I think his block should be indefinite and the lifting of it conditional on his agreeing that any future uploads will be without watermarks, without the advertising blurb, without over catting and in a manner generally acceptable to the community. If he can do this, we should forgive and welcome him back. If he cannot agree or reverts to his old bad ways, he should be blocked permanently. – JBarta (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Unblock request

• Would someone please unblock this user, as there is no policy against uploading watermarked images, there is no policy against uploading thousands of images, and there is no policy to suggest that watermarks are spam. It's not the same thing, one does not equate to the other. Penyulap ☏ 11:41, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
  • There are policies against advertising, and against inappropriate usernames. LeeGer (talk) 16:22, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
    • I won't be unblocking this user unless they file an unblock request or there is broad community consensus to do so. The block ends at Sat, 23 Mar 2013 00:37:28 GMT. —Mono 18:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
      • I would vote for unblocking this user. Over categorisation is something that can be attributed to being a new user, and though we do not like watermarks, it is no reason to block a user. Especially since the quality and usefulness of the images is apparent. I would ask this user to go through OTRS verification to assure us that he is indeed associated with microtoerisme.nl. --Vera (talk) 13:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
        • The user was blocked for deliberate and repeated spamming. This issue is complex and I suggest you review the extensive documentation at the DR and previously at AN. —Mono 20:05, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.jpg

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.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.) Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Vera (talk) 19:30, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.jpg

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.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!

Vera (talk) 22:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

File:1208 Stavoren 09.JPG

File:1208 Stavoren 09.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!

Whaledad (talk) 01:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Mention on the Village pump

Hi Microtoerisme, in order to move beyond certain users' aggressive views on what they personally think is spamming, I have raised the matter for a wider consensus at Commons:Village pump#Request for help for User:Microtoerisme to express the facts of their donation to Commons, without accusations of spamming. I hope this has a helpful outcome here so we can all move on. Cheers --Fæ (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.jpg

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 092.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!

Vera (talk) 19:23, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 056.jpg

File:1302 Eindhoven - HTC 056.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!

Fæ (talk) 06:07, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

copyright op foto's

Beste Microtoerisme, graag wil ik u wijzen op deze discussie: Commons:De_Kroeg#Microtoerisme. Bent u direct betrokken bij de website Microtoerisme? U heeft diverse foto's daarvan gedownload naar Commons. De toestemming die op die website vermeld staat is niet volledig in overeenstemming met de licentie voor foto's die op Commons geldt. Kunt u een reactie geven s.v.p.? Misschien is dat te herstellen zodat de zeer gewaardeerde foto's blijvend geschikt zijn voor gebruik op de Wikimedia projecten. Met vriendelijke groet, Elly (talk) 09:58, 21 September 2021 (UTC)