User talk:Multichill/Archives/2011/October

online personalities

The situation that was here when I left was not good.

People who at one time were writing functional software were abusing the glory of having written this software; personalities that had been those of bright, enthusiastic and clever dissolved into textbook defined personalities who were only capable of making minor edits existing code pieces, maniacs who were abusive and condescending to other users and allowed to be this way because of glories so far gone it would not have been allowed to continue this way in the real world. Real life would have kicked the crap out of you and at one time, this job of getting the crap out of this nick would have itself taken a very long while and perhaps more than one tough person to do this nasty job....

I actually became embarrassed that I had at one time shared a same opinion with this nick.

The code that I saw in that bot code was perhaps not something that you should be so quick to take credit for. It is going to be 5 years soon since the person manning this nick started to write python. Where is the evolution? Where is the learning and the improvement?

I suggest that if this nick is going to be active here, that some reasonable explanation be provided for the lack of growth and for the personality change that occurred after this nick was told "google would probably be interested in this stuff you wrote here".

I can only come up with one explanation. That explanation, if it is the truth of the situation, would require that this account be deactivated and apologies and properties returned to those who are deserving of it.

In the meanwhile, I spent a few hours being embarrassed for you about the code in that bot that I looked at. Me being embarrassed is probably not helpful since I did not write that and had I written that, it would have been rewritten by now to ease my embarrassment. 5 years is a long time to be embarrassed for.

Consider deactivation. -- Queeg (talk) 16:19, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a clue what you're talking about. You talk in riddles. Who is "this nick"? What code are you talking about? Multichill (talk) 12:26, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

When I was a young child, long ago, sometimes I would get caught having done wrong or done the bad thing or lying or doing something that was if not against the rules, against the spirit of the rules; I would, oh so quickly, make up a reason that my misdeed was acceptable or even expected or perhaps, good for all involved. Recent activity here has the stench of this type of behavior. To have conducted this without an explanation, written in natural language to innocent people (me, for instance) is perhaps further evidence that you are (still) not capable of working with people in a community project such as commons is.

Once again, I with as much respect as I can scrape from the bottom of what is left of my good feelings of you in 2007, I ask you to deactivate this nick and consider starting over and this time, be real.

This nick, assuming it is a single user and the same user which started it, seems to have reached a boundary in evolution and learning ability back in 2008-9. Such things should not disqualify contributions, but such things should be considered for disqualifying for leadership or anything that might require decent natural language explanations be provided for other users.

I would not work with the 2009 MultiChill, nor would I have this person willingly in my life for very long (suggesting separation via shift changes or the firing of if no one wanted to work with them from the people who could do this). And, it seems that you are not doing so well working with people. The mid-2007 MultiChill was a different person and one that made me happy to be here.

Your own talk page rules require that people "Be Polite". Polite is an interesting phenomena and I can honestly say that sometimes "Be Honest" is far more polite than any politeness your history can provide. "Polite" is not condescending. Condescending is condescending, polite is more often like understanding the person and the expectations and making suggestions based on this. It is with this type of politeness that I ask you to look over your own history here, and consider starting a new nick and use your own experiences manually doing what your bots have done and re-write them using your own experiences. That is how I write python and my authoring has evolved and I even found a bug or two in the language and I have also been the start of a suggestion (I think) because I needed a way to simply truncate a string and python had no way to do this.

I admit, I am thinking that the python that appears here has been stolen from my desktop. The suggestion at the pump that people hand edit the names of the NARA files are such a thing that makes me think this. Such a sad and sorry way to learn a skill -- and this qualifies a person for eh, what beyond being a creepy person who is qualified for what? Maybe you do this, maybe others do this -- maybe I am wrong. A way to prove that I am wrong is to write a bot using your own experiences. I write python for a different project and have a place to put this online and sometimes I do this. You are supposed to be writing python for this project.

Do you also find it as interesting as I do that I had no real problem here until my other nick was identified? Please consider deactivating and starting over. It was good for me. It should also be good for you. Do some mundane work here and consider how it could be managed with software. Remake yourself as not a creep who has reached his intellectual boundary years ago. Learn how to communicate with real people. -- Queeg (talk) 04:12, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

Commons:Flickr batch uploading

Hi, I just posted a request there and was wondering if I could participate in the workload with my bot. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 17:03, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Template:Cultural Heritage Russia

Please do not make inconsistent changes in this template! Have you written comments and objections received here. This template will be used to automatically categorize - but not in the general category "Cultural heritage monuments in Russia", but in sybcats by regions, districts and cities. Category "Cultural heritage monuments in Russia" will contain _only_ subcategories. Current filling of this category is temporary, just are not ready yet our tools for analysis and correction of file descriptions and categorisations. There was no need to transfer all the new category "Cultural heritage monuments in Russia still categorized by a template".--Kaganer (talk) 00:57, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

WHAT AT ALL are you doing with the template "Cultural Heritage Russia" and the categories? Would you please return all the changes about removing the categories? They have their special purpose!--PereslavlFoto (talk) 18:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Maybe you should calm down a bit before posting. Using templates to add categories is considered bad practice here. I manually added the categories and after that removed the template categorization thing. Multichill (talk) 21:10, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I see that was an insult, and this is why I changed the words. You may be sure that your deed is much more than my word. Especially because I will spend many hours reverting your bot change.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Let's speak about the aim. Please imagine an image uploaded. A human being takes a huge labour to fill the description, a great amount of hard work to add this template, an unusual mental hardship to fill all the fields. Don't you think that such user gains an ability to avoid excessive & useless adding of the category in case a template can add the category itself? Please compare two phrases: "Township" (8 letters) and "Category:Cultural heritage monuments in Township" (48 letters). What is easier to type, 8 letters or 48 letters? Another question: you see a template with the fields that are to be filled. You state the place and thus set the category. But if you don't see the field, how do you know that the item has to be added to category? How can you imagine there is a category you are to fill in? In my opinion, this is too hard to keep in mind. The template helps to minimize this work.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 21:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

---

Dear Colleague Multichill! You obviously do not understand how and why we use this template. This template is only in appearance similar to other heritage markers, but its purpose and method of use is different. Ways to work with this pattern is also different. This is a real works of real group of experienced Commons users. Please, in future, before you improve something in the template, ask us, whether you understand everything. Thanks in advance! --Kaganer (talk) 22:10, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

bad practice

You say: This template got a lot of extra info. — You are right: this template was prepared exactly to show that extra information. This is a special template to carry the official data from Russian cultural heritage registry. The fields in the information template do not fit to carry the data fields from the above-mentioned Registry. Proclaiming their place to be at some wikipedia you automatically state that Commons is an appendix to some wikipedia; we cannot second this point of view and thus we will foster this template henceforth.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

What about automatic categories, they are not automatic at all. They are labelled by a human being filling the special part of the template. The template's field was appointed to keep the category for the convenience of us, users of that template.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Now this looks like — you take the template and break its functionality and keep it from fulfillment of its tasks. This is not a true way of acting without consulting other template users / creators. Shame on you.--PereslavlFoto (talk) 19:09, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Category:Media needing categories requiring human attention

Category:Media needing categories requiring human attention

What meaning do you find in this?

I ask because your bot put images there and then you were rude, abusive and allowed mindless button pushers to be rude and abusive to those humans giving those images some attention.

How do you, master bot author, interpret the meaning of that category? -- Queeg (talk) 05:18, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Sanderhoogendoorn.jpg

File:Sanderhoogendoorn.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

MoiraMoira (talk) 17:28, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Jerusalem_Mill_Village_Gilmor's_Raid_Marker_Dec_09.JPG

File:Jerusalem_Mill_Village_Gilmor's_Raid_Marker_Dec_09.JPG has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:56, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

File:JVerlanderin4thofnohitgame.jpg

File:JVerlanderin4thofnohitgame.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

_→AzaToth 21:44, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

A few templates for the crap-filter

Hi! Next time you edit the script you could perhaps add a few templates ("Orphan image" + "Copy to Wikimedia Commons"). Check File:Truncated octacross.svg. --MGA73 (talk) 07:47, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi MGA73, I actually did that already. Just forgot to commit and svn update the other bot. :-( I noticed this after about 7 files. Killed the bot. Updated the software and fired it up again. Still have to clean up some usage of {{Orphan image}} and {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}}. Multichill (talk) 19:41, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments 2011 has finished

Dear Multichill/Archives/2011, Thank you for contributing to Wiki Loves Monuments and sharing your pictures with the whole world. You are very welcome to keep uploading images, even though you can't win prizes any longer. To get started on editing relevant Wikipedia articles, click here for more information and help. You can find all uploaded pictures in our central media collection Wikimedia Commons. Many photos are already used in Wikipedia. The contest was very successful with more than 165,000 images submitted throughout Europe. To make future contests even more successful, we would like to invite you to share your experiences with us in this survey. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team

Message delivered by Lucia Bot in 20:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - New York City municipal airports, WPA poster, ca. 1937.jpg

 

Pay attention to licensing

Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content: images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. File:Flickr - …trialsanderrors - New York City municipal airports, WPA poster, ca. 1937.jpg seems to be free (or it would be proposed for deletion), but it was identified as having a wrong license. Usually, it is because a public domain image is tagged with a free license, or because the stated source or other information is not sufficient to prove the selected tag is correct. Please verify that you applied the correct license tag for this file. If you believe this file has the correct license, please explain why on the file discussion page.

The reason given by the user who added this tag is: Please see the file's page for more info.

Saibo (Δ) 02:11, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

NRHP tagging by bot

Why did BotMultichill stop adding the NRHP tags? It's a great idea, so I don't want it to stop. Nyttend (talk) 01:42, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

It crashed and it produced some odd results so I first want to take a closer look at it before I fire it up again. Multichill (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

File:User_debivort_travels.png

File:User_debivort_travels.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Ciaurlec (talk) 14:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Weird category

Hi, some pictures of motorways appear at Category:Mespilus. I can't imagine a reason for that, but thought that you might not want me to just delete them. Nadiatalent (talk) 20:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Weird category indeed. This happens because the image was taken near a hamlet called Medlar. Look where Category:Medlar redirects ;-) Multichill (talk) 20:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Canada - Wiki Loves Monuments

Hello. Thanks for the note. I have raised the issue on the discussion pages at Wikimedia Canada, and today created a project page over there. I don't know if anything will come of this, but it's never a waste to at least have discussions/explore ideas. Thanks for the two links - that's a great help. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Andrew_lanza.jpg

File:Andrew_lanza.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Hekerui (talk) 19:57, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

File:IMG_SaggartNote4903e.jpg

File:IMG_SaggartNote4903e.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

MGA73 (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

File:CompNewArtAug2011.png

File:CompNewArtAug2011.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

MADe (talk) 09:18, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Test geslaagd. Multichill (talk) 09:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Mawlamyaing.png

File:Mawlamyaing.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 see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Missvain (talk) 16:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

request for creating a upload campaign

Can you help me create and configure the upload campaign for the Tamil Wiki media contest. It looks like getting the technical documentation and community rules in place for obtaining a user right will take a fair bit of time. We require the user permission only for the initial setup and dont need it afterward (we can use the categories for tracking). I have created the necessary templates and categories for the contest. I will provide the campaign details if you are ok with this request.--Sodabottle (talk) 15:52, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Attend the award ceremony of the Dutch Wiki Loves Monuments 2011

Dear Multichill/Archives/2011, We've already thanked you for your contribution to the Wiki Loves monuments photo contest. But with a contest, there are prizes to win! The award ceremony will be held in Utrecht on Saturday the 5th of November, at the end of the Dutch Wikimedia Conference at Media Plaza, held the same day. Media Plaza is located next to the Central Station in Utrecht, in the middle of the shopping mall. Admittance is free from 3pm onwards, just in time to catch the last few presentations at the WCN. Off course you can join us for the full day conference as well and enjoy a day full of information on wiki's and cultural heritage. After the ceremony, our location sponsor generously offers a free drink to everyone! Remember: in order to make a chance to win, you need a confirmed e-mail address added to your Commons settings. Kind regards, the Wiki Loves Monuments team and the Dutch Wikimedia Conference team

Sent by Lucia Bot^talk in 23:15, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons has a specific scope

---

Thank you for your contributions. Your image or other content, File:Starr 020226-0052 Metrosideros polymorpha.jpg, was recently deleted, or will soon be deleted, in accordance with our process and policies, because it was not, or is not, within our scope. Please review our project scope, but in short, Commons is targeted at educational media files including photographs, diagrams, animations, music, spoken text and video clips. The expression “educational” is to be understood according to its broad meaning of “providing knowledge; instructional or informative”. Wikimedia Commons does not contain text articles like encyclopedia articles, textbooks, news, word definitions and such. Each of these other kinds of content have their own projects: Wikipedia, Wikibooks, Wikisource, Wikinews, Wiktionary and Wikiquote. If the content seems to fit the scope of one of those other projects, please consider contributing it there. Otherwise, consider an alternative outlet. If you think that the deletion was in error because the contribution really was in scope, you can appeal it at Commons:Undeletion requests, giving a reason why it fits our scope to help others evaluate the matter. Thank you for your understanding.

 

--Túrelio (talk) 07:11, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:47 Ursae Majoris b-v1.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:47 Ursae Majoris b-v1.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 09:59, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:AP Lima Casavac.jpg

This media may be deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:AP Lima Casavac.jpg, is missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work. If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

High Contrast (talk) 10:03, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello, Multichill/Archives/2011. You have new messages at Adrignola's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

File:Flickr_-_Erfgoed_in_Beeld_-_Arnhem,_KNIL_Monument_(2).jpg

File:Flickr_-_Erfgoed_in_Beeld_-_Arnhem,_KNIL_Monument_(2).jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Rob K. aka pa3ems - erfgoedfotografie 09:21, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

File:Flickr_-_…trialsanderrors_-_Stern_of_Zeppelin_LZ-4_airship,_1908.jpg

File:Flickr_-_…trialsanderrors_-_Stern_of_Zeppelin_LZ-4_airship,_1908.jpg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

84user (talk) 09:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)