File talk:Dokdo 080628.jpg

Your latest Edits

... here, here, here and here. To face the problem with your changes:

1. Regarding categories: You put some categories into the article, which are not part of the subject of the file; To be exactly: The subject is given by the given lemma (see Commons:First steps/Upload form#4. Set an appropriate file name, Categories#For more appropriate categorization). In our case, only Category:Liancourt Rocks is the right one. Or maybee I misunderstood something and you can give me another definition how to derive the subject of a file?
2. Regarding description: You made an exeption in sorting order for a special language. Why I don't know, and I can't explain myself, why you've done that. Wanna tell me?
3. Regarding your comment here: Yes and no: Indeed, Commons is a multilingual project, but/therefore it is NOT made especially for one language group! (See Commons:Project scope#Aims of Wikimedia Commons)

Unfortunately, after your very intensive (and also personal) attack by harrasment and threating on me and after your very aggressive behaviour here (btw: Do you know Commons:Project scope/Neutral point of view?) I am really full of doubts, that you're willing to react like a "gentleman" and firstly discuss here further until reaching an agreement (based on common-rules)...

Therefore, I'm willing to take part in a meta:Mediation. Or do you have other suggestions how to solve this "dispute"? Greetz --Valentim (talk) 22:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Response to User:Valentim

Since you, Valentim disparage here about my perfectly legitimate message on your inappropriate "secrete list", I should say here a bit. User talk:Valentim#Your linking of Korean editors' contribution to your user page on German Wikipedia I consider your "secrete list" on your user page on the German Wikipedia totally unacceptable and spooky. The list looks like "blacklist" to sleuth their contribution to Commons in secrete, so the list should be deleted. In English Wikipedia, such list-making is a subject of formal complaint to administrator's noticeboard for harassment and personal attack or even of being submitted to the Arbitration. I hoped that you realise what you did, but you're rather resorting to personal attacks and making bogus accusations to smear my valid criticism. Since you said you do not care about how I would evaluate you, I must ask you; how do you think the people on your list feel about the list? Are you going to say that you do not care? If so, you're hihghly irresponsible for your conducts.

As for your response on my edit, your reasoning is neither persuasive nor logical. Every picture has "data" including the used camera type, date, and editing programme. The page was originally written in Korean, and uploaded by a Korean user after the Korean photographer was consulted via Email. I added the "season" and "year" categories to show the accurate information of the scenery. The environment changes according to season, so the islet's scenery and weather are not the same all the time. In the light, your insistence that the photo should only have Liancourt Rocks is just unreasonable. Category and its file name are used for more utilizing the given information.

You must forget the fact that Commons is multilingual project, and adding description in other languages are just to give more information. I added the original title written in "Korean" and English translation for more accessibility. Moreover, there is no rule that English should come first in order. Whenever I upload images, I tend to place the native language template of the photographer over English one, because that is one way to attribute the photographer's donation. He wished that his photos are well taken care of by WiBold textkipedians, and I feel your description in favor of Japanese view is not good. If you argue that the naming convention should follow English Wikipedia, why don't you follow the order written in English Wikipedia? Regardless of whether you like or not, the islets are administered by South Korea, not Japan. This goes the same to other territory disputes. I don't see why such crucial info should be deleted.--Caspian blue 23:33, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but you seemd to be a litte bit confused:

1. Paragraph: No significance/answers to my statements above.

2. Paragraph: See Categories#For more appropriate categorization as well as Point 1 and 2 of my statement above.

3. Paragraph: It's not about that english comes first (not my opinion; why do you assume that?), it is the sorting order by language code used in this template (e. g. de - en - fr - ja - ko - ru). I also don't care, if it is written "Dokdo (Korea), Takeshima (Japan)" or "Japan (Takeshima), Korea (Dokdo)". What you also seem to have overlooked while looking to my contributions: I don't care about that Liancourt Rock dispute. I just restored the hole description content, because I was not aware of this change due to your missing declaration of this change on your edit comment (You remember?).

Would you now be so kind to answer on my questions I statet above and here? good night --Valentim (talk) 00:05, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, it is crystal clear that you're the one in confusion.

1. I have never claimed that the Category:Liancourt Rocks should be removed and readded Category:Dokso, so please do not invent things that I did not say. Did I ever remove the Category:Liancourt Rocks? If you can not prove that I did so, you should not misquote for unfit guide. The file name is perfectly fine itself.

2. The answer is the same as above.

3. Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying, so please clarify your statement more clearly. I don't see any problem with the improvement. The site is written in Korean, and if you look at any image file uploaded by Flickrhelper, the source link is accompanied with the original text on the source. If you do not like that fact that the image comes from a Korean blog, please find other good images. No, sorry, as far as I've known, Wikipedia arranges like en-ko-ja in order because of the align like English, Hangueo, Nihongo. Why do you think that I believe your POV is equal to NPOV regardless of the fact that your edits are not neutral, and you side from your POV? You are not guideline or policy. Please be reasonable.--Caspian blue 00:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Answer will follow tomorrow. --Valentim (talk) 22:30, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

1. Your aw "I have never claimed that the Category:Liancourt Rocks should be removed and readded Category:Dokso, so please do not invent things that I did not say.": Show me where I wrote that. Show me by diff-Link or by copying this text phrase! Otherwise I have to assume, that you are either confused and not be able to think in a clear way (that indicates, that you are not aware of your mistakes you made with your edit) or you just are trying to force your edit.

2. Your aw "The answer is the same as above.": What you are saying is, that everything about a file (= subject + content + making conditions of a file) should be categoriesed, and that you also would support adding a category named "Category:Cameratype" (e.g. Category: Codac-Camera) (That is, how I do understand your answer and for me there is no other interpretation). On that your believe you put some categories into the article. The problem is: Only categories following the the subject of a file shall be categorised, so is common-rule. The subject is given by the given lemma. Therefore I gave you links to Commons:First steps/Upload form#4. Set an appropriate file name and Categories#For more appropriate categorization. If you now say, the subject of this picture is not or not only Liancourt Rocks, I offer hereby a second time the possibility of meta:Mediation.

3. Yor aw "Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying, so please clarify your statement more clearly." Very simple: You said, I would prefer seeing english first and I responded, that I only sorted alphabetically by language code of used templates.

Additional: 4. Now you are saying sorting order should be based on local language name. Fine, that's an argument. But why didn't you make this in your edits?? Again my question Nr. 2 of my first statement here: Why did you prefer in all your edits Korean [1], [2], [3] and [4]???

Additional: 5. Again your proposal "content of descriptions should be sortet by local language name, not by alphabetical sorting f the language code.": You based your proposal with the assumtion, that your proposal is normal in all wikis (-> "[...] sorry, as far as I've known, Wikipedia arranges like en-ko-ja in order [...]") and based on that again you say, that everything else is POV. Sorry, that's wrong, many wikis do have other sorting orders (see meta:Interwiki sorting order). Now, we cleared that point I have to ask you again: Where is your base for changing sorting order? Btw: My argument of sorting by alphabetical order is based on here...

Greetings --Valentim (talk) 12:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

At glance, your replies to me enters into the realm of en:TL:DR, and nonsenses. I think you're making "straw man". What is "aw"? Please use common language that everyone can easily understand since we both use the non-native language, English (regardless of whatever your native language would be). I've been heavily stressed out by you for these days, so I will not intentionally reply to you within "this weekend". Enjoy your weekend as well.--Caspian blue 13:57, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, thought that "aw" is a common abbrevation for "answer" also in english [5]. Now, there should be no more reason why you can't gave an adequate answer. --Valentim (talk) 17:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, there is no entry to show that "aw" refers to an abbreviation of "answer" in your provided link (the site can be edited by anyone by the way, unreliable for sure). Please don't insist with such the "bogusness". You really should be more familiar with concept of "common English". As far as I've known, "aw" is generally used to express "dismay" in common English usage, and any reliable English dictionary or even Wiktionary do not have that meaning that you used. That's why I could not understand your intention to use it. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/AW Moreover, I said my reason already (I don't want my weekend to be ruined by you), so please do not invent things that I did not say as you've done so far. I've fully acknowledged your mission on the subject since you've listed this image link and made a blacklist on your user page. All you need to do until Monday is "enjoy your weekend too". :-) --Caspian blue 21:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

I already excused myself about my error, and I used the link to show it to you; But it seemed you misunderstanded this, so just forget it.

I'm sorry to read again, that you made already a prejudice/preconceived opinion about me. Nevertheless I still wait for answers to this mine statement:

1. Your reply "I have never claimed that the Category:Liancourt Rocks should be removed and readded Category:Dokso, so please do not invent things that I did not say.": Show me where I wrote that. Show me by diff-Link or by copying this text phrase! Otherwise I have to assume, that you are either confused and not be able to think in a clear way (that indicates, that you are not aware of your mistakes you made with your edit) or you just are trying to force your edit.

2. Your reply "The answer is the same as above.": What you are saying is, that everything about a file (= subject + content + making conditions of a file) should be categoriesed, and that you also would support adding a category named "Category:Cameratype" (e.g. Category: Codac-Camera) (That is, how I do understand your answer and for me there is no other interpretation). On that your believe you put some categories into the article. The problem is: Only categories following the the subject of a file shall be categorised, so is common-rule. The subject is given by the given lemma. Therefore I gave you links to Commons:First steps/Upload form#4. Set an appropriate file name and Categories#For more appropriate categorization. If you now say, the subject of this picture is not or not only Liancourt Rocks, I offer hereby a second time the possibility of meta:Mediation.

3. Yor reply "Honestly, I don't understand what you're saying, so please clarify your statement more clearly." Very simple: You said, I would prefer seeing english first and I responded, that I only sorted alphabetically by language code of used templates.

Additional: 4. Now you are saying sorting order should be based on local language name. Fine, that's an argument. But why didn't you make this in your edits?? Again my question Nr. 2 of my first statement here: Why did you prefer in all your edits Korean [6], [7], [8] and [9]???

Additional: 5. Again your proposal "content of descriptions should be sortet by local language name, not by alphabetical sorting f the language code.": You based your proposal with the assumtion, that your proposal is normal in all wikis (-> "[...] sorry, as far as I've known, Wikipedia arranges like en-ko-ja in order [...]") and based on that again you say, that everything else is POV. Sorry, that's wrong, many wikis do have other sorting orders (see meta:Interwiki sorting order). Now, we cleared that point I have to ask you again: Where is your base for changing sorting order? Btw: My argument of sorting by alphabetical order is based on here...

Greetings --Valentim (talk) 12:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

If you have the time to make further edits regarding (or against?) me ([10], [11])why not also spending some time for some simple answers? --Valentim (talk) 15:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

The holiday season is over, and your POV campaign during the time and personal attacks are noteworthy. The change reflects NPOV and accurate description on Hanbok. Please tell why you wiped out the information and insert "Takeshima"? There is no proof that the fishermen are Japanese, while the women were Hanbok, not Kimono. I forgot what was the locus of the dispute, so I will answer to your question one by one.--Caspian blue 20:05, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Could you explain yourself by giving diff(s)? --Valentim (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

Language sorting order by native name was proposed by Rocket000, please see Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2009Aug#Language_order. Regards – Kwj2772 (msg) 08:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Category

{{Editprotected}} Please change from Category:Flags of South Korea to Category:Photographs of flags of South Korea. --Smooth_O (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Hello Smooth O, to request an edit to a protected page you need to add {{editprotected}} to your request on the talk page. I fixed that for you. Greetings --Valentim (talk) 18:45, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Justass (talk) 22:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Description

{{editprotected}} Please correct:

• {{de|Die [[:de:Liancourt-Felsen|Liancourt-Felsen]] (Dokdo in koreanisch, japanisch Takeshima; koreanisch Dokdo).}} to {{de|Die [[:de:Liancourt-Felsen|Liancourt-Felsen]] (japanisch Takeshima; koreanisch Dokdo).}} (remove of double description)
• {{pl|[[:pl:Dokdo]]}} to {{pl|[[:pl:Dokdo|Dokdo]]}} (hiding source code)
• {{zh|[[:zh:獨島]]}} to {{zh|[[:zh:獨島|獨島]]}} (hiding source code)

Thank you. --Valentim (talk) 08:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

 Done --Mormegil (talk) 13:52, 20 August 2010 (UTC)