Open main menu

Wikimedia Commons β

User talk:Giggy/Archive4

< User talk:Giggy
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.


I tried this today on images uploaded by Sjömansskolan, but it brought up only one image, ignoring the 20 or so copyvios he uploaded on 3rd June. Any ideas why? --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:53, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

I've found the same sort of issues (not that that helps!). I'm still using Lupo's script - more reliable. Info would be good though. --Herby talk thyme 08:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Nuke shouldn't work for images, or it didn't last time I tried. If it brought one up, I've no idea what the problem is - they were all uploaded around the same time so it can't be a time issue. I'm using Lupo's script too, for now. Sorry I can't help more. —Giggy 12:51, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm sure I saw a posting from Mike somewhere saying it was now working. The odd time I tried it it gives some of the images but not all which is "unhelpful"! Cheers --Herby talk thyme 12:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I was thinking Mike too. Was going to ping him but I see you have. —Giggy 13:01, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Last info I have is Bryan had implemented this. There was an error with his fix the first time. If it's not listing all the images that it should be listing, you can re-open the bug (or I can do it for you if you're unfamiliar with bugzilla).  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Never mind. Special:Nuke is only supposed to list things in Special:RecentChanges, which goes back only to June 6. So anything before that isn't supposed to be there. There's no bug; "fixing" it would be a feature request.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 14:26, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
This guy had contribs in this month only. Any ideas as to what happened there? —Giggy 14:34, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Yeah - with giggy here but special nuke has 1 image. The user uploads waay more than that on almost a daily basis. --Herby talk thyme 14:54, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
A nuke on my name only brings up one image; Image:Dampier-nh2-03.jpg, despite my having uploaded a stack of those on the same day (see Category:William Dampier). :S —Giggy 15:22, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
OK, so that is a bug then. I'll re-open it now.  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 16:23, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Mike. —Giggy 07:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Crops please

OK, I learnt how to make a picture using Bryans bot. Now would it be possible for you to make a crop with from this picture, of MJ in the purple flag. They will be great for keeping track of his changing appearance. Can you do that? Pretty Please ;-) --Realist2 (talk) 17:21, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Hmm.... the purple flag of MJ would be considered a derivative work if the image was cropped so that it was the focus. So sorry, but no. :-( —Giggy 02:22, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

You're on Commons Now?

That is commonly amazing! ;) America †alk 05:33, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

I've always been on Commons! :-) —Giggy 05:34, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I know. That was just the exact message you received on Simple. Cheers -- America †alk 20:46, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Racing videos

I have taken several short (1 lap long) videos of different types of racing, I have uploaded one video Image:Figure8RacingWIR07192007.ogg showing figure 8 racing. Before posting any more, I wonder if there might there be any copyright issues with these videos with respect to the race track possibly owning the copyright to any work taken at their track, similar to what musicians have with their concerts or television networks have with their programs. The racing program is what they are selling. As far as I am concerned, I (as the creator) am willing to use the CC-by-SA licensing. Where would be an appropriate place to hold this discussion? I opened this discussion on the English Wikipedia, and I did not get responses. It would be good if a U.S. copyright attorney reviewed this situation for a legal opinion. Royalbroil 15:40, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Interesting question - actually, I was thinking about something similar the other day (if you record a band playing at a concert what's the copyright status? If you record it off a TV show it's def. copyrighted to someone...). The honest answer is that I don't know. I think the best place to ask would be the Commons:Village pump or Commons talk:Licensing; both pages are heavily watched, and I'd be interested in the answer. Good luck, and sorry I couldn't help more —Giggy 06:06, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I was just asking for directions on where to post my question, so your answer was right on target! To answer your question, Youtube copyright tips, in its "examples of copyrighted content" states "Even if you took the video yourself, the performer controls the right to use his/her image in a video, the songwriter owns the rights to the song being performed, and sometimes the venue prohibits filming without permission, so this video is likely to infringe somebody else's rights." It looks like youtube's lawyers reviewed the situation. Thanks! Royalbroil 14:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
Saved by Youtube - whould'ave thought? :-) Glad I could be of some use. —Giggy 01:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)


Hi. I hadd already blocked the license-remover for three days. You 'd like me to remove the block?Lycaon (talk) 09:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Nah, don't worry about it. Your block is legit, if not the path I would have taken. —Giggy 10:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Motivational message


Quick, quick!! Get movin'!! Rise an' shine. Up an' at 'em. Let's go, go, go!!! - Alison 17:35, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

PS: {{huggggsss}}
Hey! I was going to give the motivational message! Well giggy you're doing great work as an admin, and as a bureaucrat keep it up! --Kanonkas(talk) 18:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
But Kanonkas, we're on Commons, where are the pix? (Erm... don't actually do it ;-)). Thanks Ali!! —Giggy 03:44, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


Hey Giggy.

Yesterday I uploaded two images, Image:Plant by side of road.JPG and Image:Unknown plant by side of road2.jpg to ask someone on en:WP:REFDESK what the plant was called. Someone told me, so I updated the descriptions.

The reason I am coming here is because I was wondering if I should re-upload them with more descriptive file names, now that I know what the plant is.

Thanks for you time,

J.delanoygabsadds 14:21, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, now that you know what the plant is, uploading with a more descriptive file name would be a good idea. When you've done that, you can tag the old images for deletion using {{badname|new image name}}; see Template:Badname for more information.
Cheers, —Giggy 23:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Luigi Chiesa

Hi Giggy, since you declared the user Luigi Chiesa as trustworthy concerning renaming, I would like to hear your opinion on this. If I need to check the renaming actions of an user who was declared trustworthy for renaming images, then that user is not trustworthy. The painting is something where it was obvious even without much background knowledge that Luigi did something wrong, the weapon things were not that obvious. That's why I now spend quite some time repairing the damage. -- Cecil (talk) 16:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello Cecil. It is a shame that sometimes a user is approved for a tool and uses it innappropriately; when this happens, the solution is generally to revoke their access to the tool. I have removed Luigi Chiesa's access. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Cheers, —Giggy 23:11, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Incorrectly licensed image, from OTRS

Hey Giggy - we received an OTRS e-mail from a third party (i.e. not the copyright holder) about this image. It apparently came from this site, which includes a copyright notice decided not compatible with being hosted on the Commons. I notice that no permission or similar has been archived at OTRS for the image, so I'm not sure what protocol is around here for that sort of thing. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 00:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Steve; Collard has deleted the image. In general, tagging as a copyvio ({{copyvio|URL and other information}}) and mentioning the OTRS ticket in your edit summary ([[otrs:TICKET NUMBER]]) should do the trick. —Giggy 09:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I was more wondering where the assumption of good faith lay - if the copyright holder contacted OTRS to complain, that would be clearcut, but in this case it's quite possible that the copyright holder really did license it under the GFDL, but still left it on the website with a general non-free copyright notice. Procedure in those cases is to assume it's non-free unless there's something archived at OTRS? Sarcasticidealist (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
Firstly, for reference, since I didn't look through the deleted edits when replying last time; Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Brandiuse.jpg. It was tagged as a copyvio from
If the copyright holder really did GFDL it by uploading it here, but also had it hosted elsewhere as nonfree, then no, we wouldn't assume it's nonfree since GFDL is non-revocable. In other words, if they ever licensed it as GFDL, anywhere, we ("we" being someone other than the copyright holder) can rehost the image somewhere else as long as we fulfill the GFDL terms. Which we ("we" being Commons) do. So no, if the copyright holder GFDLs it here, we don't have to delete it if they call it nonfree elsewhere.
The issue, though, is knowing if the uploader is the copyright holder. That's where OTRS comes in; to (hopefully) confirm/deny this. So we ask the uploader to send OTRS some proof that they own copyrights in a situation like this. They generally send release it under GFDL while contacting OTRS, but technically, in this situation, that wouldn't be required.
Anyway, tl;dr summary; we would need OTRS confirmation that the uploader is the copyright owner. —Giggy 04:44, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Changing_username - What now ?

Thank you for help. Now I add all diff's. What now ?
Hi. --Indu-pl (talk) 12:30, 20 July 2008 (UTC)
It has since been   Done by Eugene. —Giggy 04:35, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Flickr images

Thanks.--Londoneye (talk) 11:22, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Attack Cake

The attack cake is NOT a lie. Enjoy. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 05:45, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

thanks for the thumbs up

there is a theory that the Australian use of the word civility is often preceeded by the word "bloody" which means something different there which it does here (in the United States). Please forgive my editing of this comment, btw. -- carol (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

No (bloody?) worries. :-) —Giggy 06:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Christgau images

Hi - I came across [1] which uses Image:Robert Christgau.jpg, then noticed your image has no exif data. Would it be possible for you to provide this in some way, since it was uploaded after that article was published? Otherwise, several of your (valuable) images could be suspected as copyvios. —Giggy 14:46, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

What is "exif data"? Jody used my image without crediting me; I dropped him a note to ask for a credit, but he never got around to it. Since he's an acquaintance, and I like the guy, I decided not to push the matter. - Jmabel ! talk 16:49, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Actually, if you search for my name (that is, "Joe Mabel") on the page you linked, you will see that they did eventually credit me, just not right next to the photo. - Jmabel ! talk 17:03, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
BTW, the image was formerly on en-wiki. If you are an en-wiki admin, you can verify this at - Jmabel ! talk 16:51, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Further question: wouldn't I have exactly as much right to upload my own photo to Commons if it had already been published elsewhere? I've had photos published in (for example) several textbooks, National Geographic's guide to Romania, etc., not to mention dozens of bands' web sites. I never sell exclusive rights; prior publication doesn't prevent me from donating an image to Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 16:53, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
Sorry if I wasn't clear, so to answer your questions in order as best I can.
EXIF data is technical data encrypted in the photo by most digital (I think) cameras. You can usually see it at the bottom of the image's page on Commons.
I did a search for your name and found that, thanks.
I'm not an EnWP admin... I'll ask another one to confirm that for me.
Yes, you're allowed to. The point I was getting at was that there was no proof that you actually took the image, as opposed to taking it from that site. But you're credited there, which is proof, so there's no issue. Thanks for your help. Cheers, —Giggy 06:42, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
I am an an EnWP admin. Is there any reason in particular you don't trust me?
The picture was cropped and colormapped before upload, so it is not a raw image, hence the data from the camera is not present. Since I took it over two years ago, I doubt I am still holding on to the raw image.
By the way, this is exactly the sort of reason I have been arguing at Commons:Village pump#When should administrators SILENTLY delete content? that admins should be cautious about assuming they've found a copyvio without consulting the uploader. - Jmabel ! talk 17:19, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware you are. I assumed if you provided me the link to check, you actually wanted me to take a seperate look as well as your word for it. But yes, I trust you.
Thanks for the explanation; there's nothing wrong with that.
And since I mostly agree with you there (I should comment at some stage), I didn't delete, but instead contacted you first. —Giggy 23:46, 26 July 2008 (UTC)


No, Giggy, there really is no need to edit the template, and it's safer this way, so, cheers :) - Badseed talk 05:50, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Cool, thanks for the reply. —Giggy 09:23, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


Would you want to move this to the template namespace maybe? It was just what I was looking for. :) Rocket000 (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure, go for it, just don't delete the redirect. —Giggy 22:31, 28 July 2008 (UTC)


What do you know about botany? -- carol (talk) 08:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Not much. Year 10 Biology is about the limit of it; I'm more of a physics person. I'll happily do what I can to help you and EP communicate, but I know little about the subject matter. —Giggy 08:29, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I went with the physics in college for three reasons and they were in this order as well: Vonnegut, my not liking to memorize things, a surplus of males in the classrooms, I wanted to know everything.
The botany is a shadow of a science until the recent dna sequencing and it appears to have been (often) more political and financial than scientific with the naming of plants. The ICUN is dreadful for this; there is nothing else that looks more like a "money cover" than the ICUN. That is what I have seen these last few months of learning what "botany" is and the study of it. The way that those particular letters in that acronym expand is also kind of a pain.... -- carol (talk) 08:43, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
What book did you use? I am assuming college physics, btw. Sorry if that is wrong. I used the standard text in the eighties, I am wondering if it still the standard is the reason I ask. -- carol (talk) 08:55, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
I'm in final year IB, using something similar to this. —Giggy 09:15, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
That is kind of interesting -- for me, everything was kind of standard. I am quite sure that everyone my age in United States learned to read from the same books, for instance. Home schooled was not an option. A lot of people from other countries came to United States to study, so it could not have been too bad. Here is my personal problem with the more open-ended studies. Me in study hall which was an hour of "study anything that you would like to study". I rarely studied anything. The community college I attended had a good thing going for the algebra. It was study at your own pace from books with really good examples and a lot of practice problems and a teacher available to assist when needed. I was much more successful learning algebra there and while in Calculus where it was actually needed and where all of those numbers and the supporting algebra created what still seems to me to be the most beautiful descriptive language I have ever encountered; a beauty which survived the tainting by Calculus 2.5 (Differential Equations).
That being said, I am really sorry that you do not know your college text yet! -- carol (talk) 09:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for participating

  Thanks for taking part in my RFA. It passed 29-5-0, and I appreciate and will take to heart all of the feedback, and do my absolute best to better Commons with the trust placed in me by the community as a whole. rootology (T) 17:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Request for username transition

Hi there, I notice you are a bureaucrat. I would like to transition all of my Wikimedia accounts to one single-user login account, but unfortunately here on Commons I have a different username. Is it possible to transfer my current account (User:Lucis) to User:Samuel Grant? Thank you. Lucis (talk) 20:21, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lucis. Yes, this is possible. To do so, please make a request at Commons:Changing username/usurp requests. —Giggy 22:58, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
Right, I didn't realize each wiki had a request page. Thanks! Lucis (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

harboring issues or documenting crimes or even documenting how broken systems function?

It is a curiousity to me. The justification and the activity that occurs after all that. You are suggesting that I should have problems I think?

To me, if that admin has a problem with having what actually happened documented (in an unbiased way by me, btw) that admin should probably change their mind about what they did with an apology. If it is really how things "function" there, then what is the problem with documenting the "functionality"?

What did you see that was enough of a problem to delete that screenshot? -- carol (talk) 08:00, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Put simply, you have had a lot of trouble, on this project and others, because of your difficulty in admitting mistakes. To have a page dedicated to the showcasing of percieved blemishes against your reputation does you no good, because it makes it clearer that you have difficultly letting go. It also does Sarah (in this case) no good. You're welcome to keep private screenshots of the blocked message, but please don't try and use them as a weapon against others. —Giggy 08:24, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
What mistake did I make that I did not admit to? I am busy editing mistakes here and explained that I am editing mistakes here very recently. -- carol (talk) 08:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
(ec) Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#CarolSpears and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Unwanted contact can probably answer that. —Giggy 08:28, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
I wasn't told about those thing that I know of. If contact is not wanted then perhaps not working on a community project is the best approach for people who don't want contact. Nice private little projects not on community property and somewhere that does not have to consider the whole world, all earthlings and the other critters. -- carol (talk) 08:39, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict paste)

What you deleted, something to build your perceptions with:
  1. My IP block was over. I added an intrawiki link to an article.
  2. My IP became blocked as being a "sock" of my blocked user name
  3. The blocking admin reverted the edit and then added it back manually because the edit was fine and good.
  4. I took a screenshot of it because I am, by definition there an unbiased observer. No way to express an opinion there and only the ability to document "how" it works here. It is actually "how it worked" there, and interesting and revealing and all the things that documenting actual actions activities are.
My opinion is that if there was a problem with the edit I made, the blocking admin should not have repeated it. My opinion is also that if there was no problem with that edit that the blocking admin should have unblocked. These are opinions of how I would like for things to work and I suspect that others seeing that screenshot have opinions different than mine. Documentation of the activities is like that. In the real world, activities are more important than words -- usually. (and i can't say actions because photoshop own$ that word kind of) -- carol (talk) 08:26, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
These opinions are valid, but they can be made without posting screenshots of the block screen all over the place. However, something you fail to note is that this minor incident was hardly the only issue that got you to where you are on EnWP. —Giggy 08:29, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
That is the first time I expressed my opinion or even felt inclined to. The screenshot tends to speak for itself. You fail to note what the reasons were -- I didn't see any reasons, I saw a bunch of stuff similar to the events in that screenshot. -- carol (talk) 08:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

what do you do?

Allow me this one quick little opinion laden and rude like question. If it is too offensive, help me to figure out a way to ask it less offensive-like.

What are you good for other than hanging around and gossiping? -- carol (talk) 08:44, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Not much, but I do what I can. I write a fair few articles on Wikipedia and try and help out with issues here where I can. —Giggy 08:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Of course, now that I've answered, are you willing to do the same? :-) —Giggy 08:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Sure, what is your question? If it is the same that I just asked, lately I am running around trying to find help with COMBotBot. Rocket000 is helping a lot with the templates. I asked Dschwen who communicates a lot like Rocket, btw who has expressed an interest in authoring in python (I can actually help having experienced the tuples myself occasionally). I enjoy (usually) reviewing the QIC images; see Dschwens talk page for how the enjoyment there has been manifesting itself. And to be honest, I don't consider my location physically on this planet right now to be actually in a real world. That being said, I experienced an interesting sequence of events that makes me "the joker" in the recent and extremely excellent Batman movie and Dschwen is the president of the mob bank. I helped to edit an image of Hong Kong via QI and I saw the same thing yesterday on IMax.
I am currently tackling the organization of the botany pages here; it is the kind of impossible task that I enjoy and also the people who can be "up" for a challenge like that, like Rocket. Three different systems of category trees, one only used in Germany, one antiquated and one about to be antiquated and the "things" being categorized are in a fluid state that defies description. Doesn't that sound cool for software? Linneas was a sick-bastard due to his healthy brain; or something like that.
I started here with the rocket images. I was embarrassed because it was a bunch of rocket images and difficult to put the launch with the payload and a rocket without a payload is an embarrassment for so many reason that I am not going to outline here. I think my love of the categorization here has more to do with using the classic skin and also being lazy to make "articles" here where I enjoyed that at wikipedia.
My goal at wikipedia was to author an article that qualified as a Did You Know article but only had one actual line of text. I am still very very very pissed off that I was stopped from doing that; I was close to that I think.
I also feel like that little kids book "Are You My Dad" today, asking admin "What do you do?" I can easily get over that though.
I enjoyed commons more before the wikipedia incident. The users here were less sensitive and more fun. Actually, I was the sensitive one. I get over things easier and easier every passing year. I am probably too old for you also. -- carol (talk) 09:38, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Some mental associations that might be a problem. Your user name always makes me think of Quagmire from Family Guy. Was that on purpose?
Nope, nor does it refer to this. It's a real life nickname. —Giggy 09:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
That does nothing to change the image!! -- carol (talk) 09:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 ;-) —Giggy 10:04, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
"Mike the lifeguard" has it worse (I think) because I always think of a person I went to high school with when I see that name. -- carol (talk) 09:41, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

because of the things I don't do

I do not visit the images for deletion very often. I understand some of the copyright laws, but not all of them. Mostly I understand the "spirit" of them. I really don't like to look at contributions and determine credibility like that, I do however often make opinions when paths cross. In short, I don't want to be an admin.

There are a lot of things about QI which are not so fun. The images really cause me often to think of me or something I did -- that little thing I described about that movie is kind of an example of this. The incident was such mostly a nothing compared to the big story on the movie -- but movies are supposed to do that somewhat, remind viewers of themselves so I just go with it and occasionally admit to it.

Here is the thing about that movie and that brought me back here. Images from QI of places that were in that movie. They were beautiful to look at full size on the computer and if you look at them before seeing the movie, I think you will really enjoy that movie that much more. The cream of what I do because of all the things you do that I don't want to do:

Hong Kong
New York Ferry
Lower Manhattan

I don't know if the Manhattan image was an area that was also "in" the movie, but it is really beautiful too look at.

Commons actually needs more photographs of ugly weeds, but these images are so beautiful. I don't know about the Hong Kong image, but the photographer of the two New York images swears that a tripod was not used. I don't know how much you know about photography, but I find this claim to be unbelievable, almost.

So, grab a properly chilled beverage when you have the time and let me know if you would like to look at any not so beautiful images of native plants.

Oh and as an extra fun thing, dig one of the versions out of the history of these and see if you can see the spots in the sky. I don't know that they are as invisible as they like to say they are. Although my graphics software color picker can't "see" them. -- carol (talk) 10:45, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
And you should return that image and that gallery because that admin was seemingly proud to do that and deserves that it be available to remember what she/he did in the case that that administrator wants to do the same thing again and forgot exactly how it was done the first time. I think you think they did something terribly wrong and that they are terribly embarrassed by it or something. I think that you should not act for them this way. If it is embarrassing or wrong, the best thing is for those people to figure that out and change it. The situation doesn't change there so obviously, they feel it is a good thing they did. -- carol (talk) 10:55, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
It's a shame you can brighten up my day with some beautiful images (thanks! I can't believe a tripod wasn't used...) and then go back to complaining about the deletion. And yet, I expected it, somewhat.
If Sarah is proud of what happened, she is welcome to request I undelete it. —Giggy 11:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
If it is "protecting" that you need to do, protect the process that created the screenshot. If Sarah is not proud of what happened, deleting it will assist forgetting it and recreating a more convenient set of circumstances and I think that has a way of snowballing into larger problems, regardless of how good it feels at the time. If Sarah is not proud of it, don't you think it would make more sense for Sarah to ask me to remove it? -- carol (talk) 11:34, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
This one! Beautiful image; great to see before the movie.

File:Pierre Bourdieu.gif

Hi, Why did you remove this picture ? I mean : you can not seriously justify this speedy deletion with only one link on the web ? Maybe the copyright violation is in the other direction ?! Maybe that's the same author ! Maybe an other explanation ! Who the author on Commons, did you contact him ? Regards ? Kelson (talk) 12:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. To answer your questions in order...
Yes, I can justify this deletion with a link that clearly indicates a copyright violation (this image had been turned 180 degrees but was otherwise identical).
I very much doubt it's in the other direction but am happy to be proven wrong.
If there is another explanation I'm happy to hear it and consider it.
Considering it was uploaded with no information provided (empty fields in information template), I don't think it likely I'll be proven wrong here. But I'm happy to be, if you (or anyone else) can do so.
Regards. —Giggy 12:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


Hello; who was the person that asked you on IRC to restore this file ? Thanks in advance, Erik Baas (talk) 14:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Hello Erik. It was requested by the file's original uploader (who had also requested its deletion). —Giggy 01:01, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
I doubt it; but since you don't seem to want to mention his name... - Erik Baas (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
It was requested by Sterkebak, the original uploader to Commons. It has since been deleted by its initial creater. See logs. —Giggy 05:36, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
OK, thank you. Let's hope that's the end of this sto-o-o-ory... ;-) - Erik Baas (talk) 23:58, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Yep, at least on Commons - I never like to see other projects import their issues here. Cheers. —Giggy 00:50, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

care to review another?


I'm unsure what to do about the older image in the Commons upload history; it's a not-as-good-image, but I'd like to know if I messed-up by overwriting it with a better one I found on jv:wp. The original on id:wp has been deleted per Now Commons (I can get it undeleted easily enough if need be). Should it be uploaded to another name? There is prior discussion about the whole idea of moving many of these images at;

Also on the general issue of reviewing, I've been assuming that I should not remove that tag on my own transfers. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:36, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the best idea would be to upload the two with different file names, then change the image name wherever it's used on the original wiki.
And I generally review my own transfers - all that says is that you've checked that it copied the attribution OK and that it didn't blow anything up. Not a big deal. —Giggy 12:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I'll upload it to an alt file name. The older image is not used and I don't know that it every will be. These are currently used on infoboxes and navboxes for the 'Kabupaten'; a Regency, a subdivision of a Province; there are 370 or so plus 95 'Kota' which are the city-version of a Regency. Thanks for the various bits of advice. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
User:CommonsDelinker/commands works if you want to change a lot of pages. If you want to leave the templates here I cant take a look and copy them over for you. —Giggy 13:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
It's only two pages and two templates. I would like to figure out how to run the CommonsDelinker for bigger batches. Thanks. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:21, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
I've uploaded the one from id:wp to;
and given the details for it; the original on id:wp has been deleted; its log
the image from jv:wp is still at;
and I tweaked the description &c. to refer to the top image (from jv:wp) which is still there; Pras doesn't delete in a hurry.
Only other thing we might do is delete that and go through the transfer again to lose the one on the bottom of the stack; I have the text saved, so no big deal other than that it'll break those pages for a bit. I don't see this as necessary as it only tangles the history further. Oh, there are no pages to change as I have already hooked every usage up to the better name[2]. I still have to add the navbox template to third tier kecamatan pages on jv:wp, starting here: w:jv:Baula, Kolaka. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
All looks good - nice work! —Giggy 14:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Terima kasih; now used on 33 pages on two projects. I'll look into the delinker. Cheers, Jack Merridew 14:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I just found the above category and almost all of the files in there are one I uploaded. Should I just go thought them and remove the bot tag if I feel all is fine. I'd review a bit and might add bits like an {{en}} wrapper on descriptions? Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I say go for it if you feel it's fine. —Giggy 10:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
ok, I'll get on it; mostly tomorrow as it's coming up on dinner-date time.
for the new navboxes these are all getting used on; Sulawesi is a batch that's still in progress. I'm about half done. Cheers, Jack Merridew 10:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)


May I ask where the discussion regarding White Cat's request is taking place?  — Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 01:25, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

We (several of this project's 'crats) have been having an email discussion over the course of the last few days. —Giggy 03:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Is this suggesting it's entirely up to bureaucrats? This is an honest question and is in no way an accusation, a complaint, or an insinuating remark. It justs seems to be the opposite of what should happen—where 'crats enact the community's decisions and not privately decide things on their own. If there's some reason for the secrecy, fine. If it's to avoid drama, fine. Actually, I don't even care about that part. I'm just curious as to how this is going to be decided. With or without community input? Rocket000 (talk) 06:01, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
My personal opinion is that it should be sent back to the community via an RfA, and I've argued as such (White Cat's comments on COM:AN/UP were in response to my stance). Clearly (by the lack of onwiki "decision"), we haven't reached a consensus yet, and it may end up that White Cat is sysopped based on our private discussions. It depends what the others say (and I'll leave it to them to speak publicy if they wish). —Giggy 06:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
The question is whether we believe White Cat "resigned under a cloud" or not and is entitled to his bit back. There is no consensus on the matter. I've spoken to White Cat and told him we'd revisit it in another month or so, perhaps he'll earn enough goodwill in the meantime to be able to successfully pass an RFA without any bureaucratic intervention. He had a history on Commons before his third (and first successful) RFA; anything can happen. Bastique demandez 08:16, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
Agree with Cary. —Giggy 08:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for the kind thought. I think it is a little quieter here! I love Queensland; I lived there for over 10 years, in Brisbane and the bush and would move back there in a pinch, especially at this time of year. Cheers, Mattinbgn/talk 09:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

You should. We need more Brisbane-cabalists :-) —Giggy 09:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

an email decision has been made

That image you deleted is going to be replaced soon. The discussion via email was very thorough and it was decided that one admin should not make decisions for what another admin does and intervene in the way that you did.

I appreciate your concern, however it is a better environment when admin are actually responsible for their actions and documentation is what it is all about. -- carol (talk) 09:29, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, that's cool. Replace it if you wish. Just try and think about what I (and others) have said to you. —Giggy 09:37, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


Good day Giggy, I was wondering if you could lift the protection. I can hardly see any edit warring (disruptive) at the image. Regards, --Kanonkas(talk) 20:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The silly warring over the license needed to stop; this was intended to send that message. It expires a week from when I set it. —Giggy 22:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

'crat discuss stuff

Thanks - I was finding it a bit boring! Still at least we have teh required info to hand now. Cheers --Herby talk thyme 06:49, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep... just remember to update the last updated thingo at the top of the section when updating... —Giggy 08:14, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
So - that is update the update thing when updating....:) OK! --Herby talk thyme 08:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


Who are you? I'm Pérez why did you block my IP? Pérez (talk) 15:22, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm Giggy. I blocked you for the reasons noted in your block log, see your talk page. —Giggy 23:32, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Giggy/Archive4".