Open main menu


Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, SLV100!

-- 06:10, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

Contents

{{Signe Hermanns}}Edit

I am initiating a deletion request on the template. Your tagging all the files individually looks like it will lead to an edit war, and a deleting admin will have insufficient information to make a decision. You are welcome to comment on the deletion request for the template. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 11:03, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Old maps of AmsterdamEdit

Converting a DR to a {{Speedy}} is against policy -- in fact, even a file that has had a previous, now closed, DR, is not eligible for speedy deletion. See Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion, where it says:

"Administrators should take care not to speedy delete pages or media except in the most obvious cases. If a page has survived a prior deletion discussion, it should not be speedy deleted except for newly discovered copyright violations."

Please don't do it again.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 09:41, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion tagsEdit

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | Galego | עברית | Magyar | 日本語 | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Polski | Português | Русский | Svenska | Українська | +/−


 
Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from images that you have uploaded yourself. If you do not believe the image deserves to be deleted, then please make your case on the image's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the image. Thank you.

Motopark (talk) 04:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

A few tips:
  1. Read warning templates before implementing them
  2. Substitute warning templates
  3. I didn't remove speedy from an image
  4. I didn't remove speedy from a page I created
Thanks! -- SLV100 (talk) 04:25, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

TUSC token 574678b9bda54a193bbccb122965c0b4Edit

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Template:RenameEdit

Was this your change?. And why did you remove the template from its documentation? -- RE rillke questions? 22:25, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Which problem are you trying to solve? -- RE rillke questions? 18:17, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
{{Rename}} is only for moving files. -- SLV100 (talk) 18:23, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Yes but what's the problem with the old markup? Why are you not responding to my first question and why do you remove LayoutTemplateArgs? And what's the problem having the template displaying an error when it is not used properly? -- RE rillke questions? 19:30, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Less code is used when {{Iffile}} is used. -- SLV100 (talk) 19:34, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
But this is not the answer to my questions. Why do you remove {{LayoutTemplateArgs}}? -- RE rillke questions? 19:47, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
{{LayoutTemplateArgs}} is restored. -- SLV100 (talk) 19:51, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Communication seems to be really difficult... I still don't know why you removed the template and now restored it. I suggest that you put also the reasons why you do what if it's not obvious into the edit-summary. -- RE rillke questions? 20:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Change to move and renameEdit

Hi SLV100,

this construction has a purpose. People were misplacing the templates and thus suggested name changes were not processed because the files, cats, or pages were not categorized. Would you please stop changing the system without prior discussion. Cheers --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 09:41, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

I will ask you one last time. Please stop changing the central functions of templates like {{Badname}}, {{Move}}, and "rename" without prior discussion. Please also don't editwar about it. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 20:20, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

move requestEdit

Your move request of File:Licensing tutorial tr.svg.png to File:Licensing tutorial tr.svg can't be done because the file is a .png file. INeverCry 03:51, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

There must be a way, because this licensing tutorial should be in turkish. -- SLV100 (talk) 04:42, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
I've asked an admin about fixing this. See User talk:Materialscientist#file - Turkish tutorial - question. Hopefully he'll know what needs to be done. INeverCry 06:17, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
The way to go is convert File:Licensing tutorial tr.png to File:Licensing tutorial tr.svg. I've tried that and the result is less than satisfactory (my svg editing skills are very rudimentary), but I've asked help at Commons:Graphics lab and hope they'll fix my conversion (they did help me in the past). Materialscientist (talk) 07:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

User:AlgaeGraphix/BSicon 28Edit

You have been asked before to leave my pages alone. AlgaeGraphix (talk) 13:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

COM:AN/UEdit

বাংলা | Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Македонски | മലയാളം | मराठी | Português | Русский | Sicilianu | Svenska | +/−


 
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#SLV100. tampering with closed DR. Thank you.

Your account has been blockedEdit

Please be advised that your behavior is not acceptable and the next time your account may be totally blocked. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:52, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "I'm not requesting a full unblock. I'm requesting that my block be reduced to one week for the following reasons:
  1. The edit that ultimately resulted in the block of my account was a test edit that I forgot to revert. Unlike my previos edits, I didn't remove text from the source code. The text was still visible at Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/10/07 and Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/11/03.
  2. After my promise at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#SLV100, none of my edits have removed comments from the source code of pages.
I understand that I should be blocked for the edits I performed before my promise. But can the block be reduced for one more week instead. Thank you. -- SLV100 (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
"
Unblock reason: "Block lifted per Com:AGF --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:47, 20 July 2014 (UTC)"
This template should be archived normally.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Македонски | Plattdüütsch | Português | Русский | 中文(简体) | 中文(臺灣) | +/−

P.S. I was in the middle of maintaining Commons:Categories for discussion when I was blocked. See my move log and:

and search keyword "Housekeeping". There are still many pages to fix. -- SLV100 (talk) 16:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Account unblocked. Reason: SLV100 will stay out of archives and will use the sandbox for experiments. Note: Next time there will be no leeway for an admin and the block may be longer. Please be careful with your edits from now on! Thanks! --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:07, 21 July 2014 (UTC)


You have been blocked for a duration of 3 monthsEdit

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 3 months for the following reason: Again (Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_45#SLV100) pagemove vandalism in Commons:Categories for discussion etc. See movelog and users last edits. See also Hedwig's comment above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:28, 25 July 2014 (UTC).

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.


Azərbaycanca | Български | বাংলা | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Gaeilge | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Simple English | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−

@Steinsplitter: There was no consensus for reverting my edits in Commons:Categories for discussion. As stated at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_45#SLV100, the edits at Commons:Categories for discussion were for maintenance and not vandalism. The edits on talk pages was also maintenance because {{Welcome/zh-hans}} and the other sub templates aren't supposed to be used directly (see the bottom of Template:Welcome/zh-hans). Please share your response below. Thank you. -- SLV100 (talk) 18:44, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

I don't unblock you because you have received enough warnings. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
Which discussion has an explicit consensus that says that the pagemoves at Commons:Categories for discussion are vandalism and not maintenance. Please share the link below. -- SLV100 (talk) 18:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
See above. You where asked to don't do so. Please don't try to play a game here. --Steinsplitter (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
That comment is most likely referring to the edits at Commons:Deletion requests that were explicit vandalism (examples: http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Mark_busking_12.jpg&oldid=128633484 and http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mark_busking_12.jpg&oldid=128632768). None of my recent edits have been blunt vandalism like those edits. And no one else has stated that they agree that the pagemoves at Commons:Categories for discussion are vandalism. -- SLV100 (talk) 19:10, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: This discussion needs more input from other admins. Can you invite Hedwig, Tuválkin, PierreSelim, Sven Manguard, Rillke, EVula, Túrelio, Fastily, Yann, etc.?
@Admins: I was standardizing CFDs in these formats (Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/20YY/MM/Category:NAME and Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/20YY/MM/Category:NAME) into Commons:Categories for discussion/20YY/MM/Category:NAME, but Steinsplitter disagrees. The usage of the three formats before my pagemoves was:
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/20YY/MM/Category:NAME was used in 0.248% of CFDs
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/20YY/MM/Category:NAME was used in 6.827% of CFDs
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/20YY/MM/Category:NAME was used in 92.925% of CFDs
Currently, the usage of the three formats is:
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/Archive/20YY/MM/Category:NAME is used in 0.000% of CFDs
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/Current requests/20YY/MM/Category:NAME is used in 5.716% of CFDs
  • Commons:Categories for discussion/20YY/MM/Category:NAME is used in 94.284% of CFDs
To confirm the numbers above see here, here, here and my move log. Feel free to provide your input below.
@Hedwig: If your comment above also referred to pagemoves of CFDs please provide your input below.
Thank you. -- SLV100 (talk) 04:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
SLV100, I am not an admin; stop bringing me over to this matter, or you risk I will offer my unbriddled opinion about this manner. -- Tuválkin 20:13, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
  Comment I unblocked SLV100 under the condition to leave archives alone as stated above in bold letters. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
@Hedwig: The question is do you agree or disagree that the pagemoves are vandalism. Please state your answer below. Thank you. -- SLV100 (talk) 17:53, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
As I said above: Unblocked because you'll stay out of archives. You didn't. The blocking admin must have had a good day, others would have blocked your account longer, some would have thrown the key away after locking. IMHO you should stay low and mellow. Use the time to find out what you want to do here, then find out if it is a) absolutely necessary and b) won't get you into trouble. Currently I don't know how to help you out here. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Do not revert admin actionsEdit

Feel free to voice your opinion in deletion requests, but do not modify or try to undo administrative actions. Additionally, redirect are not speedy deletable, except in the cases outlined in Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

And to be totally clear: Considering your previous blocks, consider this a last warning. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:32, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@Srittau: Yes, redirects are speedy deletable if they meet CSD G2 like this redirect you deleted. -- SLV100 (talk) 20:40, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
As I wrote, they are speedy deletable if they fulfill any speedy deletion criterium. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:44, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
@Srittau: Both of these redirects also meet CSD G2 -- SLV100 (talk) 20:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
You can discuss this in the deletion requests. This this not change the fact that you can not undo administrative actions. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 20:57, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

@Srittau: Ok, let me share my thought process of why I mistakenly thought your actions were errors. (In retrospect, I should have discussed this instead of undoing your actions.) Lets use File:Volterra - Henri Poincaré l'oeuvre scientifique, l'oeuvre philosophique, 1914.pdf for this example:

  1. You notified Shev123 instead of Túrelio. Túrelio created the redirect and Shev123 made no edits to the redirect.
  2. You referred to the redirect as a "file" in all instances, as seen here.

--SLV100 (talk) 21:32, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Do not convert regular deletion requests to speedy deletion requestsEdit

Just leave deletion requests in any shape or form alone, unless you understand how things work on Commons. Your edits are bordering on vandalism. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:22, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Do not fiddle with the logsEdit

Given your multiple warnings and blocks, as well as the recent AN discussion, I came within a hair's breadth of blocking you for removing Commons:Deletion requests/File:Royal and Ancient Clubhouse at St. Andrews-1977.jpg entirely from Commons:Deletion requests/2018/05/13. While it is clear that the uploader is failing to do what he is trying to do, and should use {{Rename}} instead, removing all inbound links from the log just makes the situation worse. Please stop fiddling with logs, even if you think you are improving things. Storkk (talk) 19:21, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

@Storkk: I had to learn the hard way. Here is a very strong example that supports your (and other admins) point:
  1. I fiddle with the logs thinking I'm improving things: [1] Commons:Deletion requests/File:Acropoles-Night-Athens.jpg (I changed DR to Duplicate tag)
  2. I don't let the user know that it wasn't done the proper way
  3. The user does it 2 more times: [2] Commons:Deletion requests/File:Band, Trooping of the Colors, London.jpg (I changed DR to Duplicate tag) and the most recent one you fixed.
The example above shows that by editing the logs I shot myself in the foot. I'm going to make a list below showing all my wrong edits to the logs so they can be undone. On the topic of the DR logs, I would like your input on listings done by Vandalism-only accounts. Jeff G. [3] and I [4] undid Vandalism listings in the DR logs. Some of those DRs were deleted by Yann and the rest are here. -- SLV100 (talk) 20:13, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Vandalism is not appreciatedEdit

العربية | বাংলা | Čeština | Dansk | Deutsch | English | Español | Suomi | Français | עברית | Magyar | Bahasa Indonesia | Italiano | 日本語 | Македонски | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Polski | Português | Русский | Svenska | Tok Pisin | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | +/−


  
You have vandalized the content of Wikimedia Commons. Please stop. If you continue making inappropriate edits, as you did here, you may be blocked from editing Commons. You may test freely in the sandbox.

  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:30, 14 May 2018 (UTC)


You have been blocked for a duration of 1 monthEdit

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 month for the following reason: you've been warned explicitly, in multiple discussion, and by multiple people, not to do things like Special:Diff/prev/301174377.

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.


Azərbaycanca | Български | বাংলা | Català | Česky | Dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form) | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | English | Esperanto | Español | Euskara | فارسی | Suomi | Français | Gaeilge | Galego | עברית | हिन्दी | Hrvatski | Magyar | Italiano | 日本語 | 한국어 | Македонски | മലയാളം | မြန်မာဘာသာ | Plattdüütsch | Nederlands | Norsk bokmål | Occitan | Polski | Português | Română | Русский | Simple English | Slovenščina | Svenska | ไทย | Türkçe | Українська | 中文(简体)‎ | 中文(繁體)‎ | ಕನ್ನಡ | ತುಳು | +/−

Storkk (talk) 12:11, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "SLV100".