Open main menu
Nick's Talk Page Archives 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Nick is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries. Please use e-mail to make contact urgently if you need to do so.


I'm an administrator on English Wikipedia, if you need source or copyright information from an image that has been deleted on en.wiki, please leave a message below and I'll provide all the information that I can find. I cannot guarantee how quickly I will be able to respond.

Contents

File:David Garrity (32500068280).pngEdit

 
File:David Garrity (32500068280).png 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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Leoboudv (talk) 06:59, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Pachycerianthus multiplicatus - Fireworks anemone at Loch Fyne.JPGEdit

 
File:Pachycerianthus multiplicatus - Fireworks anemone at Loch Fyne.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

143.234.101.119 13:09, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

File:Jaguar XKR-S arrives in Bahrain (7179185587).jpgEdit

 
File:Jaguar XKR-S arrives in Bahrain (7179185587).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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 12:50, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Jaguar XKR-S arrives in Bahrain (7364403626).jpgEdit

 
File:Jaguar XKR-S arrives in Bahrain (7364403626).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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 12:53, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

ReguylaEdit

You guys should really look closer at that Reguyla block by Michael Maggs. It is sketchy as hell. A largely inactive admin shows up not once but twice, after periods of inactivity, to threaten an active editor, provokes a response, then uses it as justification for an indef block with no community input. Really? Is that how you guys operate here? And before you ask, no I am not them. I saw their posts with links on several Quora posts and on a couple other sites I watch. I am sure there is more to the story, I am sure you will assume I am them and I am sure I do not care. I am basing my judgement on links I have seen and what I have read based on the current situation. But this site is not looking very good at all. If you are wondering why I came to you of all editors on this site, it is because your name is linked there in the Reguyla thread.

 
An banana boat, yesterday
Hello Reguyla. I didn't come up the Clyde on a banana boat. If you're going to tell fairytale, don't do it from your usual US Navy IP range. Nonetheless, I've spoken with Michael and I'm awaiting his proposals on the appeal for your block (and that of at least one other user with the same block as yours - indef with talk page access disabled and e-mail disabled).
I would add, I agree "this site is not looking very good at all" but part of the problem is the way you imported a dispute about your block on Meta onto Commons. We cannot have users being harassed here because of actions they took elsewhere, Commons isn't blessed with a massive number of editors who focus just on Commons, most of our active editors and much of our administrative team have a 'home' wiki which isn't Commons, they need to be able to separate out their work on their home wiki and their work here on Commons, or we'll have fewer and fewer contributors happy to work across different WMF sites. Nick (talk) 20:49, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
I just want you to know Nick, and believe this or not, but that wasn't me. As much as some people may want to believe, I am not every person in the Navy and certainly not the only one that edits or reads these sites. The whole navy uses 4 proxy IP's (1 East coast, 2 west and one in Hawaii), it's isn't just me. But you're right, I shouldn't have done that. Just like I shouldn't have been indef banned by one admin over a minor disagreement, I shouldn't have been threatened by Ajraddatz here, I shouldn't have had admins making personal attacks and insults directed at me, etc., etc. But hey, as long as Reguyla takes the abuse, insults and degredation and doesn't say ANYTHING, he can edit and everything is ok right! Hell, I even gave links about the personal attacks and no one cares including you. So what should I really think? It's pretty obvious I have no one here that appreciates the work I do.
I busted my ass to do 400, 000 edits in 5 months and no one bats an eye. And that's not even counting the Video transclusion files I was helping Revent with or the work I was doing in Quarry. In fact, no one said a thing about me being blocked except Fae and no one argued it and I have seen people here do a hell of a lot worse than try to have a conversation with 2 lousy admins about why they are trolling, attacking and bullying me. And I would do that on meta but surprise, they already blocked me there, which is why they do it. Just to get under my skin and because they know no one is going to say anything...and they were right...so I did. Contrary to what some try to argue against, I am the victim here and I really don't care if anyone believes me at this point. The evidence is there, clearly evident whether you or others choose to read it or ignore it and pretend I am this huge asshole when I'm not. Everyone treats me like a vandal instead of a dedicated editor so maybe I need to do what everyone wants me to do and just be a vandal. Because that is all anyone wants me to do anyway. Reguyla 2601:5CC:101:2EF2:F903:AEB5:4EED:AA56 00:27, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
PS, If you want to unblock me then there needs to be a community discussion to unblock me on all the Wikimedia sites at once including IRC and I need to be unblocked in that venue in order to participate in that discussion. This piecemeal shit isn't working and people are going to continue to harass, troll and bully me as long as I am blocked somewhere. I still believe in these sites and I still want to improve them but I am done getting fucked over by a couple trolls and bullies in the community that only want to stir up drama and not create anything like Michael Maggs, AlexZ and others. 2601:5CC:101:2EF2:F903:AEB5:4EED:AA56 00:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

@Nick, Fae, MichaelMaggs, Ajraddatz, Billinghurst: Oh shucks, no comment on my demand to be treated fairly on these projects, that I not be bullied, trolled, insulted and baited by admins to justify unjustifiable blocks and bans, that if I am being bullied then the admin who is doing it needs to be addressed? Big surprise there. Of course it is completely reasonable for the community to have had a discussion to decide the merits of the bullshit indef block Michael Maggs put on me and that would have been needed for any other editor but because I have criticized admins for violating policy and common respect towards editors, I guess there is no reason for them to follow community practice and do that right? Because god for forbid they actually prove me wrong rather than follow the discretion and demands of one admin with a history for extremes because a Steward (Ajraddatz) threatened to use their global block Steward powers if Commons didn't give them what they want and block me. No comment on personal attacks and insults directed at my by Billinghurst and Ajraddatz?

No one wants to help get an obviously positive editor back to editing and no one cares that Michael Maggs made an overly aggressive decision to indefinitely ban me twice, although only active enough in the past year to retain the admin and bureaucrat tools themselves, or that it is preventing edits from getting done? A lot of them. Also no big shock there. You comment that we don't have enough editors here, well, stupid decisions to block the high output editors who are doing the work and favoring abusive decisions by inactive admins just because it's being done by an admin are the reason for the lack of edits getting done and the length of backlogs. Help me, help the projects and remove these stupid and abusive blocks. My ban is up for review in EnWP on the 18th. So it would be good to just have a discussion somewhere like meta and tie all these bullshit blocks into one package for unblock and be done with it. Because I would rather be a positive editor than the vandal that some people want me too be and keep pushing but that is up to you all. I am going to continue to edit either way. So we can either do it with the drama, disruption, threats, name calling, personal attacks and insults direct at me for no reason and only do a few edits or do it without the drama and I can do a shit ton of improvements made. It's your choice. If the community here want me to be a vandal and a complete and utter disruption far beyond what I have been fighting bullies and bullshit abusive blocks that have no merit then please, let me know so that I know the community here has no interest in editors improving it. If the admins here and the community are unwilling to stand up to bullying for a high output editor like me that has been editing these projects for over 10 years and has shown a high degree of passion for the projects success, then it shows that there is no respect for the community in general nor the editors doing the work. Many of whom do not desire to be admins. Reguyla138.163.128.41 15:17, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

PS, by all means if you want to show that you don't want editors to be able to get a fair trial and be able to request unblock, then just delete my comments. That will be a good example of what I am talking about and would be a sign to me what I need to do next and that editors are not wanted here. Everyone knows I care about the projects or I would have left already, so arguments of trolling, disruption and not being here to improve the projects are straight up 100% lies and if anyone actually believes it then they are stupid for believing it. People who argue I am being disruptive are the ones who don't want me to be able to edit because I believe editors should be treated fairly or want to justify unjustifiable blocks. There is absolutely no merit to it. I am just an editor attempting to get a bullshit block revoked and always have been. If that makes me a disruption for fighting the conduct of bullies and trolls then so be it. But if that is the case then the WMF projects have serious problems beyond just getting editors. Reguyla 138.163.128.41 15:52, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I've other things to do, other than just focus on your complaints. I presume you have missed [1] but to reassure you, I am progressing the issue when and where I can. I didn't know about your en.wp block being up for review on the 18 March, nor can I possibly support the blocks on English Wikipedia or Commons being 'tied up' and discussed just on one project. You know the community on each site has ultimate supremacy over the decisions that administrators make, unfortunately there's no mechanism here (yet) which allows the community to discuss this block. I would think, given the situation, we will need to discuss and review your indefinite block at some point soon, but how, when or where that takes place, I don't, as yet, have any concrete answers I can give you. Nick (talk) 15:59, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
I did see that you asked about it and I appreciate that and I do understand there is no existing process. I also appreciate you have a lot of other things to do, as do we all. I could for example be renaming files, importing images, adding categories, etc. but I have to make time to fight this BS.
IMO, there is ample ability to simply have a discussion on the Community portal, the Village pump or at the Commons ANI page. All of those are, IMO, adequately places for such a discussion so although there may not be a "procedure" for dealing with overarching admin blocks against editors, I would think that a simple discussion on one of those venues would suffice. Arguments will be made for and against the block/unblock but IMO the important thing is that one minimally active admin should not be the deciding factor on indef banning a high output editor twice and forcing that work on other members of the community who already have things to do. I do disagree that the community has supremacy, because regardless of the outcome of a community discussion, if the admin says no then the block won't be lifted. I am sure you have seen instances of that as I have. I have even seen communities approve someone for OTRS and the OTRS admins decline to do it. In my case it could very well be that the community here would rather me not improve commons, but I think that indefinite bans of people who are actively contributing should be decided by the community and not by any single admin. 138.163.128.42 18:04, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
@Nick, , MichaelMaggs, Ajraddatz: Greetings Gents, I know you're busy but I was just wondering if you think we are looking at days, weeks or months here? I'm just wondering because it shouldn't be this difficult to have a community discussion about an over zealous admin block for a discussion that was over and archived. In both block occasions Michael Maggs provoked a comment from me by threating me before they used that as justification to unilateral ban me from commons without a community decision.
I simply don't agree that attempting to engage two admins who participate here in a discussion is problematic. They were knowingly violating policy by making personal attacks and threats directed at me. Regardless of the site they were doing it on, with the new global accounts on the WMF projects these projects are more intertwined than ever. Ajraddatz even threatened me here stating he would use his Steward access to globally lock my account if he didn't get what he wanted. Threats and personal attacks should not be acceptable on any WMF project and it certainly shouldn't be tolerated by someone who is a Steward or a Global sysop. The only reason this is even an issue is because I am only an editor and because I have been outspoken and passionate in my believe that admins should also be required to follow the rules here on these sites. The notion that it's controversial to expect that is staggering to me and defies logic.
It really shouldn't be unreasonable to ask for the actions of one minimally active admin who took it upon themselves to jump straight to an indefinite block twice after provoking me with threats not once but twice and because I was trying to discuss the problematic actions of two admins. All they would have had to do was apologize, that's it and we could have moved on. But because this is a WMF project were admins are above the law the victim got banned. It's absurd! I really do not think a community discussion about the validity of the block is too much to ask given my dedication to the projects and my high volume of productivity. Am I really that naïve in thinking/expecting that? Cheers! Reguyla 138.163.128.41 19:51, 10 March 2017 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:The Red Arrows roll upside down in tight formation during display training MOD 45147906.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Red Arrows roll upside down in tight formation during display training MOD 45147906.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 05:06, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Reminder: Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2016 is open!Edit

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2016 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Nick,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2016 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the eleventh edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2016) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1475 candidate images. There are 58 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category.

In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 20 April 2017, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
--Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 08:42, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

FP PromotionEdit

This image has been promoted to Featured picture!

The image File:RAF Search and Rescue Helicopter in the Cairngorms MOD 45155350.jpg, that you nominated on Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:RAF Search and Rescue Helicopter in the Cairngorms MOD 45155350.jpg has been promoted. Thank you for your contribution. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so.

 

/FPCBot (talk) 15:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

File:Evoque in Dubai 099 (5957859156).jpgEdit

 
File:Evoque in Dubai 099 (5957859156).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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Daphne Lantier 08:17, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Your VFC installation method is deprecatedEdit

Hello Nick, we are aware that using the old installation method of VFC (via common.js, which you are using) may not work reliably anymore and can break other scripts as well. A detailed explanation can be found here. Important: To prevent problems please remove the old VFC installation code from your common.js and instead enable the VFC gadget in your preferences. Thanks! --VFC devs (q) 16:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

File:Double-compound-pendulum.gifEdit

Hello. Out of curiosity, why did this image require protection after it was no longer transcluded on the English Wikipedia's main page? —David Levy 02:37, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

It was still transcluded when I protected it, the bot that normally manages protection of the English Wikipedia Main Page images on Commons was confused by your image syntax on the English Wikipedia page ([2]) and tried to protect a non existent file at File:Double-compound-pendulum (DYK).gif rather than File:Double-compound-pendulum.gif (see [3]). I did try fixing the cascading protection page [4] but the bot simply changed it back again [5] so I restored to manually protecting it, just for a couple of days (and I've since lifted it, as it's no longer needed).
I was intending to ask you and @Krinkle: or @Steinsplitter: today if you could work out what happened with the protection. Nick (talk) 09:43, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
@Nick: From what I can see, the bot was not confused. David Levy first used File:Double-compound-pendulum.gif (and got auto-protected), he then locally uploaded w:File:Double-compound-pendulum_(DYK).gif on English Wikipedia, and changed the page to use that instead (edit). At which point the Commons file is no longer used, and after the next sync the Commons file will indeed no longer be auto-protected (check). It wasn't confused, as "DYK" was actually part of the file name. In fact, the bot doesn't actually look at the syntax. Rather, the bot queries the internal wiki API for a list of files actually used by the Main Page. This system, unfortunately, doesn't differentiate between local files and Commons files. Either way, the auto-protection for files from Commons will always work as expected. And every once in a while, when the Main Page uses a local file, those will also get referenced on the auto-protect page, which looks silly but doesn't cause any problems. I hope that makes sense! --Krinkle 18:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I see the way David's image syntax worked (but I kind of wish I didn't, since it opens a can of worms). David used a locally uploaded version but linked to the original Commons version, so it looked like the Commons file was being displayed when in reality it was the local version (with the slightly different file name) which was in use. I understand the issue now, but I don't know if it's great that we're allowing the use of image syntax which sends users to an unprotected file on Commons which they could choose to vandalise in an attempt to vandalise the en.wp Main Page, rather than just dumping them on the protected locally uploaded file they can't alter as we would normally do (not that this is in any way a criticism of your bot, Krinkle). Nick (talk) 19:00, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
The "can of worms" was opened more than six years ago, when we began routinely linking specially modified images to the normal versions' Commons description pages. I'm aware of no instances in which the type of vandalism that you've described has occurred (so if it has, it's been resolved without any major disruption resulting). It certainly is possible, but so is the vandalism of any unprotected page simply linked from the English Wikipedia's main page. Vandalism of the day's featured article (which we avoid edit-protecting whenever feasible) is vastly more visible.
The template used for main page images at the English Wikipedia could be modified to invisibly transclude the file specified via the "link" parameter (thereby triggering the bot's protection), but I've seen no evidence that such a measure is necessary. —David Levy 00:12, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of Image on Dan WagnerEdit

Nick, you have deleted the image I uploaded on Dan Wagner. I do own copyright to it and have now added the OTRS license notification to the original location. Please see https://www.dan-wagner.com/home/category/Corporates. Can you please now restore the file?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Techtrek (talk • contribs) 07:50, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid we don't permit images released under the No Derivative versions of the Creative Commons licence. We can only accept images under the CC-BY (Attribution) and CC-BY-SA (Attribution ShareAlike) versions of the Creative Commons licence. I would also suggest, for ease of record keeping, you send permission via e-mail to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org where an OTRS agent can discuss the licencing issues with you and if all is correct, undelete (or ask me to undelete) the image. Nick (talk) 09:10, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
@Nick: We have received a request at OTRS ticket:2017070210005607, Have asked for further clarification but till then could you please temperley undelete the file. Thank you Fitindia (talk) 14:28, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Talk: Headlam GroupEdit

Template:Request edit

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Timkatoga (talk • contribs) 09:32, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

INCEdit

Hi, I don't understand why you ping me in INC's checkuser page, i.e. " (as Yann should know)". What do you mean I show know? Regards, Yann (talk) 18:46, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

UsernameEdit

Hi Nick, Sorry for the confusion. My username is Kong of Lasers with a "s". I fixed it in my signature. You're not the first to make this mistake.

Regards, --Talk to Kong of Lasers 23:55, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

NotASpyEdit

  NotASpy
For your exceptional work NOT being a spy. -- とある白い猫 ちぃ? 21:27, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

You're in the newsEdit

From this:

“Many allegations made against Heath, who was Britain’s leader between 1970 and 1974, have been doubted, especially those from an accuser known only as Nick, who has been labeled a “fantasist.”

Well done! :)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Liên Khương (talk • contribs) 14:23, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
er, I doubt this Nick is the same person. Probably not sensible to make such connections, as they might well be construed as libellous to someone completely uninvolved. Rodhullandemu (talk) 14:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm afraid I was only ever abused by Margaret Thatcher, and only then when she stole my free milk (although thinking about it, I don't remember it being particularly pleasant milk). The "fantasist" tag could be right though. Nick (talk) 15:29, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Thank youEdit

I've rotated the .pdf's and concerted them online to .djvu files, I will link them here after I've uploaded them so you can review them. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Something went wrong, can you please delete File:Annam and its Minor Currency (Eduardo Toda y Güell).djvu and File:Cash coins from Annam and its Minor Currency (Eduardo Toda y Güell).djvu? --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:33, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

I rotated the .pdf files using this website and the file appears rotated on my phone, it was only after I uploaded them to Wikimedia Commons that they rotated back to how they were. Can you advise me a better tool or should I upload the roster pdf files to the Internet Archive first? --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

For reference this is how the .pdf file appears on my cell.-phone, I converted this file to djvu for Wikisource but it rotated back, I am not sure if this will happen again if I use the IAUploader. (Update: It does rotate back if I use the IA-uploader) --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

DREdit

Hi Nick, At Commons:Deletion requests/Commons:Canvassing you said "The page existing is an irrelevance, the community will need to decide whether it wishes to formalise the current informal understanding it is working under concerning canvassing (which is 'don't canvass')"
Would it be a good idea if I were to copy the main paints from the EN article instead?,
FWIW the page at the moment doesn't make much sense because it was written by someone who's first language isn't English so I wasn't sure if for now atleast the best idea would be copy the lede from the EN article,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:20, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Davey2010: I don't know, to be honest. The DR you've closed is for a page, not a policy or guideline (the page would only become a policy or a guideline if ratified by the community) and I do wonder if having a discussion and writing our own canvassing policy might be the best approach. You're of course welcome and entirely free to try writing whatever you want, before putting it to the community to decide if they want to ratify it and make it a Commons policy or a guideline, but I also think this page existing right now is a case of putting the cart before the horse, the community should be asked if they want a Canvassing policy or guideline before anybody - you, Yug or other, spends their time working on such things, I would have said. Nick (talk) 16:42, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Okie dokie well I'll leave it be and someone else can do whatever they want with it, Thanks for your help anyway :), Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 19:38, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Serzh Sargsyan official portrait from president-am.jpgEdit

Hi Nick, the problem is far bigger than this one file. In the half hour I worked on this case, I found already 9 similar files, as they are from the same source. (However, I am going to sleep now.) As the index file is on Commons since 2014, IMO it's justified to take some time to sort this whole mess out (also as it's not Getty Images on the other side, but the just the presidential PR dep.). --Túrelio (talk) 22:04, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

@Túrelio: I would think asking for permission would best be done when we're not technically violating their explicit copyright and stalling deleting their legitimately licensed No Derivative content. It needs deleted and it needs deleted now. Nick (talk) 22:10, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Then do it. It's late in my time zone. --Túrelio (talk) 22:15, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Rotating.djvu filesEdit

How can I manually rotate files after uploading them to Wikimedia Commons as I don't think that I can rorate the file outside.

P.S. I have archived the previous discussion (regarding this subject) as that was already resolved. --Donald Trung (Talk 💬) ("The Chinese Coin Troll" 👿) (Articles 📚) 12:59, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

(a) Please don't archive discussions on my talk page (or any other user's talk page) without their explicit permission.
(b) File rotation will depend on the file type and associated meta data. You may need Adobe Acrobat to rotate PDF files, for JPG files, a free program like GIMP will be able to rotate files for you. There may even be an image editor installed on your computer which can rotate files for you, depending on operating system and the like. The image editing tools on the Lumia 950XL can, for certain. Nick (talk) 14:47, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

ThanksEdit

Thanks for coming to the rescue!, Was just about to report the idiot and waa laa you turned up :), Should this be revdelled tho?, Thanks again, –Davey2010Talk 00:12, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes, one of a number of diffs I've now deleted. Nick (talk) 00:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Ah great thanks. –Davey2010Talk 00:14, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Derek Williams (musician)Edit

You deleted an image 'Derek Williams conductor.jpg' on the grounds of Commons:License laundering. This image is a screenshot from a video owned by my subject, and uploaded to Flicker.com with Creative Commons Share-alike attribution. Since it is an image of Derek Williams, and owned and uploaded by him with what I thought were the correct license attributions, I am at a loss to see how this came to identified as License laundering. Can you please detail the steps necessary to have this image legitimated for use in this article? Thanks. Chrisdevelop (talk) 14:53, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Chrisdevelop: The information you need for providing evidence of ownership and/or permission can be found at COM:OTRS. In the case of the YouTube screenshot, it linked to a video uploaded on YouTube under the standard YouTube license, which isn't compatible with Commons. If/when you clarify ownership through the OTRS system, we can restore that file and any others, as appropriate. Nick (talk) 15:05, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt reply! I was under the impression my subject had taken the screenshot from the video running on his computer, rather than from YouTube, although I did place a link to the live video of the rehearsal where he was conducting as per photo. I also received notification this morning about all the other images I obtained from my subject's Flickr account, and can't find it now, but I'll go to the page you mention in due course and fill out the form. Does that take care of the deleted file too, and all the other images, or should I ask my subject to take another screenshot from his video of the Edinburgh Festival rehearsal video and upload that again? Chrisdevelop (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
@Chrisdevelop: It'll depend on what information you provide when liaising with the OTRS team but we can easily undelete files when permission is received. It's not necessary to re-upload files. Nick (talk) 15:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
@Nick: I am informed Dr Williams has sent the permissions email. Turns out many of these are now likely to be deleted from the article following the decline notice just in, as I am going to have to heavily prune the article, and the number of photos was criticised as "excessive". Anyway, at at least the permissions are now granted for those that stay. Chrisdevelop (talk) 20:14, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
@Nick: re File tagging File:Derek Williams with Calma Carmona recording Glenfiddich 21yo ad.jpg Dr Williams has advised me this image was taken by an employee of the studio where the recording was taken, acting under his direction, in the presence of studio staff. Please advise what we have to tell the person who pressed the shutter to do in order to have this image released. Chrisdevelop (talk) 21:29, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
The photographer will need to provide permission as detailed at COM:OTRS. This is no different whether it's your brother or sister taking the photograph, a parent or child, an employee or volunteer working under your direction or a professional photographer covering an event for a photo agency. The law doesn't make distinctions with regards to copyright and the relationship between the subject and the photographer unfortunately. Nick (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
@Nick: Dr Williams has informed me he has now been able to contact all the copyright holders and they have agreed to the Wikimedia Creative Commons Share-alike attribution 4.0 for the photos they took. If you would like the ticket numbers for these, please let me know, otherwise you should see them anyway in the normal course of events. One issue I can't work out is with his InfoBox photo, taken by Lucas Kao. That has vanished, but doesn't appear as deleted in the Page History. Would you mind taking a look into where it has gone? Mr Kao sent in a copyright clearance email last September, as a result of which the photo has remained in the InfoBox ever since, until a few days ago. Thanks. Chrisdevelop (talk) 16:22, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Intel Classmate Computer with Windows XP.jpgEdit

 
File:Intel Classmate Computer with Windows XP.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 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!

Afrikaans | العربية | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | বাংলা | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | español | eesti | فارسی | suomi | français | galego | עברית | hrvatski | magyar | Հայերեն | Bahasa Indonesia | íslenska | italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | 한국어 (조선) | македонски | മലയാളം | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | norsk nynorsk | norsk | occitan | polski | پښتو | português | português do Brasil | română | русский | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | shqip | српски / srpski | svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | українська | Tiếng Việt | 中文 | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | +/−

Yann (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Commons talk:Internet Relay ChatEdit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello.
You said off-wiki that “Commons has no control over the Commons IRC channel”. But may officials of #wikimedia-commons disrupt discussions about the channel on-wiki? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:14, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

It is not somewhere for you to ask for the removal of channel operators, a grossly disruptive action following on from several grossly disruptive actions you have made on IRC and on-wiki today and in recent weeks which resulted in your ban from the channel. You really need to seriously think and reflect on your behaviour, how it appears and the consequences (intended or otherwise) it is having on aspects of the community. Nick (talk) 18:56, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
A proposal for removal of privileges is no disruption. For example, you’re threatening me with block on Commons – who says it is a kind of disruption? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
It's disruptive partially because it has no standing but primarily because it's nothing more than you seeking petty vengeance on someone who has been forced to take action in light of your behaviour to enable globally locked users to evade those locks and to disrupt our projects. Any discussion about the removal of permission needs to take place with the Group Contacts on IRC (or via e-mail). I have not threatened to block you - though I will formally note if you continue to enable globally locked users with your behaviour, I envisage you will be blocked at some point. Nick (talk) 20:09, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
There is no such concept as “globally locked users”, there are globally locked accounts and users who stopped doing disruption for which their accounts were locked are generally permitted to edit Wikimedia sites, unless they are explicitly banned. The third time, please, read what did I actually say. If this particular troll in not banned from Wikimedia, then don’t please make me a scapegoat for it. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
To be absolutely clear, the IP you have been cheerleading for is evading a block locally on Commons AND is evading a global lock against at least two primary accounts (Vote (X) for Change and Miletian), and furthermore, it only came to your attention when it was blocked for disruption on Commons yesterday (which completely blows your utterly moronic comment about users who stopped doing disruption for which their accounts were locked are generally permitted to edit Wikimedia sites clean out of the water). I'm beginning to wonder if you have anything like the required competency to be editing, given you've completely failed to notice the disruption the IP you've been cheerleading for is causing. Anyway, I've had enough of this and I've had quite enough of you, conversation closed and you're no longer welcome on my talk page. Nick (talk) 08:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

File:BWF flag.svgEdit

Hi Nick. You deleted this file as well as quite a number of files uploaded by RainbowSilver2ndBackup. While I've come to realize that this editor might not have a very good grasp of image licensing requirements, etc. from my interaction with him/her on Wikipedia, I'm curious about this file because it seems to be bascially the same as File:2012 BWF logo.svg. Was the problem that the uploader was claiming this as "own work" or is the design actually too complex to be {{PD-textlogo}}? If s the latter case, then it seems to me that the 2012 logo should be deleted as well. Since I can't actually see the file you deleted, I'm just assuming it's the same as en:File:BWF flag.svg which the uploader re-uploaded locally to Wikipedia as non-free content.

Another file you deleted was File:ISSF flag.svg and this one too was re-uploaded locally to Wikipedia as en:File:ISSF flag.svg. However, there is already an existing file of that logo uploaded as {{PD-logo}} locally to Wikipedia as en:File:ISSF logo.svg. Like the above file, was the issue that the file is too complex to be PD or was it that the uploader was claiming it as their own work. If the file is really too complex for PD, then the local PD version would most likely also need to be deleted from Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:36, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

It's a bit complicated and weird - what I have deleted is a selection of flags generated by RainbowSilver2ndBackup which make use of the existing logo, that I cautiously am concerned nudges over the threshold of creativity, as there's a little more work involved. I'm happy to undelete anything you think I've been over cautious in deleting though. Nick (talk) 23:11, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
The editor seems to have uploaded lots of files to Commons in a relatively short span of time. After these were deleted, he/she basically repeated the process locally on English Wikipedia with the same files because apparently someone mentioned something about fair use being OK there. Problem is that many of the files already existed (even in the same format) under different names or under a PD license, which means the new uploads might have to be deleted. The two non-free files mentioned above seemed to be essentially identical to existing PD files and thus cannot be kept as non-free per en:WP:FREER as long as the licensing on the PD versions of the files is OK. I think it is, but just want to make sure since the files were deleted from Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:29, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

User:John shaftmanEdit

I am honestly not convinced that John shaftman is a sock puppet of RapwriterWiki, nor do I think that "User:John shaftman" is a paid editor, I do think that "User:RapwriterWiki" is REDACTED (an employee or owner) or someone else associated with that company but I can't find any compelling evidence that "User:John shaftman" is anything other than a dedicated fan. Could you please explain your reasoning behind your decisions? --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:39, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

@Donald Trung: I asked a checkuser and they confirmed they're the same person. Nick (talk) 15:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Ah, case closed then as I didn't see the SPI here, but probably should've checked the English Wikipedia first. Good day. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 15:32, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Nick".