User talk:Contributor2020/CY 2020-21

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

Copyright status: File:Macaw parrot sitting on a tree branch.jpg

Copyright status: File:Macaw parrot sitting on a tree branch.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Macaw parrot sitting on a tree branch.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:07, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Full moon on the view from sea.jpg

Copyright status: File:Full moon on the view from sea.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Full moon on the view from sea.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 16:08, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Pixabay

Please include the {{Pixabay}} license template when uploading works from Pixabay. Please also note that images published on Pixabay after 9 January 2019 can not be copied to Commons. Let me know if you have any questions. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:41, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Trees on the sides of the road.jpg

Copyright status: File:Trees on the sides of the road.jpg

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Trees on the sides of the road.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 11:05, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Picture of Ladakh when going to Leh.jpg

File:Picture of Ladakh when going to Leh.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: License review failed: Uploaded to Pixabay after 9 Jan 2019, only licensed under the non-free Pixabay license

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:50, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Pronunciation file names

Please use language code prefix for pronunciation file names. See Category:French pronunciation for examples. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Licence review

Hello, I've closed your licence review request as not done - Editors should generally have 2-4 years of solid editing under their belt however in your case you only have 2 months or less of experience which isn't sufficient. Continue uloading files (although be careful as Pixabay isn't compatible here post-2019), learn about copyright and deletion requests and if you want retry in 2023. Thanks and happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 10:50, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Davey, I did so much work and so much practice. I just forgot to log in so my activity is not showing on my profile. I studied a whole 1 year on this topic hoping to be ready. Can you please give me one chance like at least 3 months of tenure on a benefit of doubt. Please, its never to late. Thanks, Contributers2020 (talk) 14:02, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Sorry but anyone can say that - Common sense should've told you to edit under your account so editors can see what you've done thus far but either way that's not our problem. As I said please re-apply in 2 years time. Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 16:17, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Maybe you're correct, but you can consider me please. I should be paid off my working. If you can do anything, that would be very grateful for me. And also, please don't use rude language like "wasting community time". You can tell the same by rephrasing the phrase. That phrase discourages reviewers. Hope you understand. Thanks, Contributers2020 (talk) 16:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

Again you edited under an IP and not your account so again this isn't our problem. You've been here 3 months and haven't done a great deal in the time you've been here ... so your request was wasting communities time and I stand by my comment and the closure. I shan't be replying here any further as my time is now being wasted too. –Davey2010^Talk 19:41, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

File:Some Emojis which are used in WhatsApp.png

File:Some Emojis which are used in WhatsApp.png has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.

The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.)

This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Copyrighted by WhatsApp Inc.

Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Afrikaans ∙ asturianu ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ Lëtzebuergesch ∙ magyar ∙ Malti ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ oʻzbekcha / ўзбекча ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ тоҷикӣ ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

— Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:09, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Hey Jeff sir,

May I know why did you mark it as CopyVio. It's uploaded before 9th January 2019, pictures or emojis don't match with the whatsapp ones, and author and source correct. You can't make wrong alegations on me. Request to please check and explain why did you take that step.

Warm regards,

Contributers2020 (talk) 14:15, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

So it's fake? You didn't ping me. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Jeff G.Jeff, I didn't ping you because of you are stressing me out so much. Yes, it's not particularly fake but different. Also can qualify for Thresold of originality.Contributers2020 (talk) 15:03, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

File:Everyone holding hands.jpg

File:Everyone holding hands.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!

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

Lymantria (talk) 13:55, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 02:41, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Note to myself- I signed every recent post I have done in like last two days. I don't know why did it come. Contributers2020 (talk) 02:52, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 13:47, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 03:17, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

File:STS002-13-291 - View of China (Raw scan).gif

File:STS002-13-291 - View of China (Raw scan).gif 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!

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

Askeuhd (talk) 07:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

File source is not properly indicated: File:Everyone holding hands.jpg

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−

This media was probably deleted.

A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Everyone holding hands.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Everyone holding hands.jpg]]).

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!

Yeeno (talk) 18:39, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Discussions that you have started

Please do not close discussions that you have started, you could just write withdrawn, also you have not closed this discussion properly as you do not have the tool to do so.--- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 20:46, 14 August 2021 (UTC)

{[reply-to|FitIndia}} Can you please explain where we will find the tool to close the DRs. Does it need advanced rights? And I also will remember telling Withdrawn if I started it and ending it.

--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 04:43, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

I don't think you should be closing any discussions for now, its best if you gain some more experience and then move into these areas. You have also closed this discussion at COM:LRR which was later reverted, at LRR requests are closed only by sysops or other reviewers.--- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 16:52, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

@Fitindia: I know I know FitIndia, so as you wish. I know now no one will give me advanced rights because I am just being hated by everyone, even from you. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:42, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

File:A graph which shows all articles in Wikipedia redirects to Philosophy.jpg

File:A graph which shows all articles in Wikipedia redirects to Philosophy.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!

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

–Davey2010^Talk 11:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism warning

العربية ∙ বাংলা ∙ čeština ∙ словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ македонски ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tok Pisin ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

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

Please slow down - You're nominating images under FOP where FOP doesn't apply

You're nominating categories for deletion based on FOP where FOP again doesn't apply

and you're nominating 10 year old images on the basis of "out of scope" despite these being categorised appropriately

Please stop with such ~~nonsense~~ edits otherwise I'll have no choice but to report you at ANU which I don't really want to do. Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 14:03, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Then tell me what should I do? Participate in DRs- Have a problem

Vote in LRR: Get it collapsed

Upload a Picture: Immediately find at DRs

Have a advanced privilege so I can contribute- Everyone, I mean everyone has a problem.

So, can you please explain me what in the world should I do. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 14:36, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I really do understand your frustration but unfortunately without sounding horrible so far you've caused issues at: the CFD (categories for deletion), at FOP related images and non-FOP related images.

I don't really have a great deal of understanding when it comes to FOP so I don't nominate FOP images .... I don't participate in things where I don't have a basic understanding of it or I atleast wait until I do.

Just help out naturally and just let things sort of happen naturally I guess (You're not going to know and understand everything here within 2 weeks it all takes time).

I apologise for calling your edits nonsense that wasn't the word I should've used. We appreciate you trying to help but it's sadly becoming more disruptive now. Just upload images and categorise files and I guess participate in DRs that you're knowledgeable in, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Closing everything before 17-08-2021 as per below topic. -Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 17:06, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Note to myself and following users

Hello everyone. I am Contributers2020, and as you can see, I have done vandalism to Wikimedia Commons as per highly experienced users such as Davey2010. I apologize for every vandalism and possible disruptive edit I have made till this time (17-08-2021). As you can see in my Contributions as well as LRR requests, I always wanted to be a License Reviewer. These events happening such as Vandalism Notice, huge DR templates, etc. depress me as I get one step behind my goal of LR.

So, what is the main reason I am writing is that- I request to forget whatever happened in the past. If I applied for LR again in the future, I would request not to assess whatever happened before 17-08-2021.

I promise to always try to be constructive to Commons, and- please do not, ever, use a depressing adjective to me, such as a dumb, newbie and inexperienced anywhere, to me. It doesn't matter if I am new. I always try to be best.

I will, as well, close all previous discussions. Let me start something like a afterlife. I want to just renew my everything.

Thanks for reading. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 16:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Contributers2020, today you filed disruptive deletion requests like Commons:Deletion requests/File:Manilajf9532 33.JPG. Please stop this. A little bit of research (all necessary infos are present at Commons or at Wikipedia) could have helped you to understand that this building is not a problem (see my analysis). Competence is required in copyright law before you begin to nominate FOP cases or ask for LR. All the necessary infos are available at Commons like at Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Philippines. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 17:37, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, @AFBorchert: . Please give me chance. That is why I have written this message- I need a afterlife. Please. Forget about my past. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 17:55, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I suggest you don't aspire to be a license reviewer. License reviewer is a position of trust that generally requires a few thousands edits and a few years of tenure. You should focus on learning information about copyright, as mentioned above. When the time comes that you are experienced with copyright and have demonstrated it, then perhaps you can apply to be a LR. You shouldn't have the ultimate aim to earn a user right, hat collecting is discouraged, you should apply for the user right because of the edits, not make the edits because of the user right. Yes copyright is confusing (especially FoP and I can see why you would be confused), but once you understand the basics, it becomes very easy. I still make copyright mistakes occasionally, and so do all admins and experienced users (I'm sure even Davey2010, whom you look up to, makes the occasional slipup). You're rushing into some areas a bit fast; learn the ropes first, then start making DRs on complex copyright statuses.
I can see you're doing this in good faith, and I wish you the best :)
(P.S., in your initial edit you transcluded your userpage, which pinged a lot of people (everyone in your dashboard), so some other people will probably chime in here) — Berrely • ^T∕_C 17:59, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

@Berrely: Berrely, everyone has a dream, and I just mentioned it. Moreover, I will apply for LR after 1 to 1.5 year or so, and I will ensure by that time, everything is clear to me. And thanks for wishing me all the best. :)--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 18:19, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

As you are opening this up for discussion, I will comment that you have been a disruptive editor. Please read the Wikipedia article on disruptive editing. Specifically "Editors may be accidentally disruptive because they don't understand how to correctly edit, or because they lack the social skills or competence necessary to work collaboratively. The fact that the disruption occurs in good faith does not change the fact that it is harmful to Wikipedia." Your actions require time and attention to correct. Time and again you make an egregious error and then ask forgiveness because you are new and should be given special treatment. I suggest you just stop the behavior. Specifically, please stop tagging images for deletion on Wikipedia Commons. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 19:09, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I never asked special treatment, WomenArtistUpdates I just want to forgive and start a new thing from today. I just asked not to use depressing adjective on me, and not to assess me in the future about this. My father passed away because of COVID-19 some few days before, maybe inputs were affected by it. I also promise to stop disrupting edits after yesterday. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I would like to suggest you to unite with your family so you can help each other with the mourn. My condolences, Slade ☯ 09:12, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

You seem to be a young user eager to do a lot of stuff here all at one time, You need to slow down and try and learn by watching other DRs and read up on the rules. I know you mean well and you want to help out but inadvertently you are adding more work for others to clean up. Also please dont take any inputs from other users personally they are just informing you that you have been making mistakes. Last of all if you need any help please ping me or contact me on my talk page. Take care and sorry for your loss. --- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 11:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Archiving

Hi Contributers2020, I noted that you attempted to close previous discussions. This is ok but I would recommend to setup automatic archiving of your user talk page instead. See User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo for instructions. Once you add an archiving template to your user talk page, ArchiverBot will take care of that. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 17:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

I tried archiving it but with fail. If you can set it up I would be very happy. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 17:53, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Contributers2020, I've set it up for you as requested. Please check whether you want to adapt the configuration, the individual parameters are explained at User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. In the current configuration threads will be archived if there is no activity since two weeks and at least two threads will always remain at the talk page. I've setup a standard configuration where your talk page will be archived in consecutively numbered archives and an archive box (see top right on this talk page) which links to all archives and allows to search in them. Usually archiving will be done once per day. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 20:44, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a lot @AFBorchert: . I like the config as well. -Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:00, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Kindly don't go stalking through my edits to see which files you can nominate - I am very much aware some of my recently uploaded images are blurry and if you bothered to open your eyes you would see none have been categorised because at present I've not had time to sort them.

Don't poke your nose in where it's not wanted. Nominate my files again in this manner and I will report you to ANU (I have no problems with you nominating my images after I've categorised them but kindly don't nominate them before I've even got the chance to LOOK at them). –Davey2010^Talk 10:22, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I didn't understand, User:Davey2010. The images which is out of scope, I nominated it in DR. Its like I stumbled it from the random files, and then I saw a whole lot of things that are so blurry, we can't even understand what is it. I don't know why did you report it. Even when it is not categorized, it still is a file, right? And also, you can't speedy delete your own file DR. I don't care if you have even seen the images or something, my work was to nominate for deletion and I did the thing. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:54, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

That's rubbish you haven't just stumbled upon them at all.

Understand this - I have not looked at the files prior to uploading - If the images are blurry I will speedy delete them which is what I do when I finally review my own images. I have no doubts the images you've nominated are all poor and if they are they WILL be deleted. They're not being kept here however I will review my files in my own time C2020. I have a lot of images to sort through here and tons more internally so like I said I will review the files in my own good time, There is no rush here. –Davey2010^Talk 11:07, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Then why the hell did you give me a vandalism warning huh. Its your problem, it's not mine. Take that back or I am going to go in COM:ANU -- Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 11:09, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Because I percieve your edits to be diruptive editing/vandalism. Yes and like I said to you my problem will be reviewed in a couple of days time. My problem is not your problem. No the DR can be deleted, the DR template can stay reverted and when I get time the images in question will too be deleted if they're of poor quality. Again the files are not categorised so there is no urgency to have these deleted. –Davey2010^Talk 11:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Tell me how my edits were disruptive here. This is a unjustified reason. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 11:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Because you stalked my edits and nominated my files even tho they weren't categorised and they weren't under the "uncategorised"category either. Having then told you not to DR these you then reverted all of my edits which reverted you. That alone is disruptive.

You've only nominated my files because I nominated yours a week ago although difference is you've seen your image and categorised it .... I haven't.

If you don't like vandal/DE warnings then don't be disruptive. It's as simple as that. Now kindly leave my images alone. If I want your help I'll ask for it.

I'm now heading out for the day so I will say goodbye and happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 11:39, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Davey2010: I literally said that I stumbled upon that file by clicking the Random File button. I NEVER STALKED YOU. And, show me a rule which mentions You can't nominate a file for deletion if it is not categorized. This still is a unjustified reason. You can't close a discussion of your pictures whenever you want! Take back the vandalism warning or I will have to go in COM:ANU--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 11:28, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Keep telling yourself that. –Davey2010^Talk 20:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

File:A goat sitting on seashore.jpg

File:A goat sitting on seashore.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!

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

Bidgee (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 03:02, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Please sign your postings

čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ +/−

As a courtesy to other editors, it is Commons:Signatures policy to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, deletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you.

--SignBot (talk) 03:20, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Npd

Hi, thanks for your interest in DRs. However, if a file is already nominated for deletion, you shouldn't add a PROD-like tag like {{Npd}} on the file, as it's unnecessary and doesn't help the backlog at all. If you want to raise the DR to admins, you can post to COM:AN.

Also, you should consider installing the Quick Delete gadget on your Preferences, if your browser can handle it. It will make your job easier. panda kekok 9 03:36, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pandakekok9: Where do we find the gadget. I need it so badly. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:38, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets panda kekok 9 03:39, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
@Pandakekok9: Just one more thing. I want the DelReqHandler, without being a admin because I see so many deletion requests which are just lying. I have done over 30 by hand but now I am tired. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:43, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that gadget is coded to only enable when the user is in the sysop group. If you're skilled in JavaScript, you can remove that feature, but I wouldn't recommend that if you don't want to find yourself in AN/U. It's probably best if you ask the admins first at AN if they are okay with releasing DRH to all users and just turn off the delete function if the user is not a sysop.
And btw, your ping didn't work. When pinging a user, you also need to sign. So if you already wrote a message and forgot to ping, you need to sign again separately when you're going to ping. panda kekok 9 04:07, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Closing deletion requests

Please do not use {{Vd}} and {{Vk}} when you close DRs – these templates are not intended to use in such places. Also they have been translated into many languages and when a user has in their preferences interface language other than English, e.g. such nonsense can be observed: File is Usunąćd by Jdx with the following reason…. --jdx ^Re: 08:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't know that. I would keep this in my afterwards. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 12:31, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Personal attacks are not welcomed

Hi Contributers2020, it was ok to open the COM:AN/U thread but it is now time to move on. If you continue to pester Davey2010 with comments like this one where you compare him to a “11 year old” you are resorting to personal attacks. Why can't you let this go? Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 18:11, 25 August 2021

@AFBorchert: Do you think I want to continue. I stopped commenting when Pack my Box and Davey were doing some war. So do you expect me to just watch? But still, I apologize. I also don't want stop communications with Davey as he is a experienced editor and he helped me big times. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:38, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Contributers2020, I expect you to avoid personal attacks and to move forward. The latter is more important than just adding another response to some heated back-and-forth match. Commons can be a great place where we work in cooperation for an amazing project. I hope you will find that here. Best, AFBorchert (talk) 08:15, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Closing DRs

Please do not close a DR in which you have participated, such as Commons:Deletion requests/File:2009-365-349 One of the Arizona "C's" (4189572794).jpg, even if the result is obvious, and especially not before 7 days have elapsed. (The only exception is that if you are the nominator and no one else has voiced an opinion to delete, you may withdraw the DR at any time and close it yourself.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Ok @King of Hearts: . I will keep this in mind next time. I am really sorry for the mistake. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:00, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

I see that you closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Bell Telephone Magazine, 1965, but failed to remove the {{Delete}} templates from the individual files. You really should consider refraining from closing DRs completely when your block expires. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:06, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: To give credit where it's due, at least some of Contributers2020's closures appear to be fine. For example, I nominated two files for deletion back in June as possible copyright violations. JuTa (talk • contribs • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • rights • rights changes) deleted the files but didn't close the DR, which Contributers2020 did. The only caveat is that Contributers2020 incorrectly identified JuTa as a member of the VRT team. Ixfd64 (talk) 22:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I'm so sorry for that 😞. I had previously marked the file {{Subst:npd}} and then saw that these things are deleted so.....But sorry I was mistaken. And That's not that. I closed many red linked DRs, as I think, perfect.--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

SignBot

If you didn't know, you can use {{NoAutosign}} either on your userpage or talk page to stop getting those notices. panda kekok 9 06:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pandakekok9: You're a real lifesaver. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 07:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for closing my DR's - not sure why that happened Gbawden (talk) 09:04, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

No problemo @Gbawden: , I rather loved doing it lol. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Problem tags

Can you please watch your tagging? You didn't explain why this file needs evidence of permission. And we don't just speedy files like File:Amazon logo.svg which are highly in use and uploaded years ago. panda kekok 9 02:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Pandakekok9: That file needed NPD because this woman/man shown in the picture is quite famous, and considering it as own work? I don't think so. For the logo, there's no policy where we have to leave files which are a obvious Copyvio. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:23, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

So if I take a picture of, say, Vice President Leni Robredo, and I supplied all that is necessary to prove that I was the photographer (like EXIF data from the camera and the original resolution), you'd still consider it as NPD? Sorry, but that's just paranoia, not a legitimate copyright concern. panda kekok 9 04:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Contributers2020: This is exactly why I have blocked you: you don't understand the difference between copyrights and trademarks, and don't know where the threshold of originality lies for the United States. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry, I may have done that mistake. But 72 hrs is so much for that. Please unblock me. For a single mistake blocking is huge. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:36, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

It's not for a single mistake. In the past week, there have been nonstop complaints from different users about your behavior on your talk page. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:39, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

So instead of blind trusting them, you can just visit the archive. If it is truth (and after the note I gave) I will agree the block. Let me also know where was I incivil. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Forgot to ping you @King of Hearts: . --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Where you called Davey2010 an "11 year old" on August 25. You even apologized on August 17, but kept on doing the same thing you apologized for. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:02, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

And even if we ignore the past week, it's still not a "single mistake". You got a perfectly below U.S. TOO logo deleted. Imagine if I or nobody else watched what you're doing. This is exactly why I opposed your recent request for patroller privileges. panda kekok 9 04:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I am okay with opposing patroller but the Logo was well above TOO and that's why the Admin deleted it.. it's not like I forced him or anything. He thought I am correct and he did that. And for @King of Hearts: , Davey called me such peculiar things such as a pathetic Twait and f**k you, thats clearly not a problem. But what I did, compared him from a 11 year old, and I got blocked?? Clearly unjustified. I kept civility at the top priority.--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 04:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Admins are not infallible, and most of them probably automate the deletion anyway, which makes mistakes inevitable. So since you believe that the WVIT logo is above U.S. TOO, I'd like to see you tag the NBC logo (which has the same "flower") for speedy deletion after your block expires. You'd probably anger a lot of Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects using the logo, but that's fine, because you're not wrong, you're always correct. panda kekok 9 05:08, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) @Túrelio: This is why, whenever I am patrolling Category:Copyright violations, I send any ambiguous logo to DR, even one I would personally !vote to delete. Because everyone's standard is different. I also believe this one is below COM:TOO; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:MSNBC 2008 logo.svg for the last time the flower was discussed. You should probably restore it. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Contributers2020: Anyways, while I believe this tagging was wrong, it's not so wrong (as with the Amazon logo) as to be a contributing factor behind the block. It's the sum of all your issues that led to your block. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:09, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

So it's not so wrong, right? We didn't talk about incivility so I would consider that's also not wrong. Whats left?? DRs? So as per your wish. Ill not close any DRs until the file is red-linked. @King of Hearts: @Pandakekok9: Now will it be reasonable to unblock me? If you see me closing DRs anywhere, just block me for anytime; I'll not appeal it and will have no problem. Can you please unblock me now???--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Failure to listen is a big part of why you're being blocked. I already explained to you that the Amazon tag was bad enough to be a contributing factor. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:00, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Note- if a admin agrees to close DR with a blue-linked file, A block shouldn't occur.

Yes yes yes yes, every experienced editors have no (hindi-bhao). --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 07:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

As my comment's been mentioned here I just want to add my piece if I may - The "pathetic ****" comment was in frustration to C2020 DR'ing my (uncategorised) images within an hour or 2 of me uploading them (and at that point I was done with the project (so I didn't care about being indeffed etc))

Anyway it wasn't just a random comment - Frustration or not there was no excuse for what was said however it was only said purely from extreme frustration.

I expect this to be brought up but yes I made the exact same comment at EN (here) a year ago and was nearly indeffed for it - Not proud of the comment there and certainly not proud of using it here (although until today I'd forgot all about the ANI incident), If King of Hearts (or any other admin) wants to block me for that comment I certainly wont kick up a fuss over it. Again the **** word can mean 2 things - I was calling you a pathetic idiot and that term is usually what is meant here in the UK.

I certainly regret calling you what I did but when you're angry like I was you don't really think of things like this.

Anyway context matters is what I'm trying to say.

You also cannot blame the incivil comment(s) solely for your block as that's not the case at all - It's a contributing factor but it's not 100% the sole reason. I apologise for coming here but given my comment's been flying around here today I felt it was only right to address it. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:55, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 72 hours

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 72 hours for the following reason: Multiple COM:CIR issues in just the past week, including: incivility, improper DR closures, and improper speedy taggings.

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.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

I highly suggest that you do not attempt to involve yourself in administrative areas such as deletion until you familiarize yourself with the basics of copyright including: COM:CB, COM:FOP, COM:TOO, COM:DM, and COM:US. Please use these three days to read up on these areas. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:01, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

I didn't say "you can't speedy old files". You still can, but only if it's obvious (which most likely isn't if the file is old). Obviously, this is not the case here. panda kekok 9 04:25, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

@Contributers2020 I have declined your unlock requests. There were multiple comments from multiple users about your participation here but you don’t hear this feedback and continue operating in the same way. This block is intended for you to have a break for some self reflection: unless you change something in your activity and understand what bothers other editors, there is a high risk of escalation here rubin16 (talk) 07:14, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:全红婵.jpg

I'll let you know that your speedy tagging of File:全红婵.jpg was fine, but your closure of the DR before the image was even deleted was incorrect. Please just stop closing DRs since you are making mistake after mistake. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: Sorry, can you please explain when I see a copyvio in a DR, how should I do it speedy. Should I just attach the template, or close the deletion request in a special way? --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 07:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I recommend you don't tag images as copyvio at all for the time being, as the case of the Amazon logo shows that you don't know when you should use the copyvio tag. Just stick to opening normal DRs. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:21, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

By the way, when I said "fine", I meant that the image deserved to be speedily deleted. But I just realized you had made another error when tagging for copyvio; you should never remove other templates, such as deletion templates or licenses, when tagging for copyvio. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:23, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Don't block me again for this rationale lol. But I will keep in mind. Sorry for the inconvenience.--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 07:37, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

BTW @King of Hearts: , can you check [|this file] I just nominated for copyvio. Also as well, I am discontinuing anything which is related to logos as I seem to don't understand COM:TOO. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 08:07, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

I've closed the DR, but honestly this kind of speedy tagging is unnecessary and simply contributes to the Category:Copyright violations backlog. There is generally no need to tag an image as speedy just to get a DR closed quicker. Admins have finite bandwidth, so by getting to your image first, they are no longer getting to some other image; overall there is no net benefit to doing this. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: . Umm okay, I thought copyvio should be deleted at priory so was doing it. I may do it again but will not if it does violate any policies of Commons. Will it be okay if I ping you for a file that I think should be deleted like rn instead of marking Copyvio? --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 08:18, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

If a DR has been sitting around for a month without being processed, it can't be that much of a priority. By getting one copyvio deleted faster, all you're doing is making other copyvios get deleted slower. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:50, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

DR

Hello, Could you please explain how you found yourself at my nomination-DR (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo cadena1 1984.png) (dated 31 Aug) ?, Your 2 contributions prior were to Commons:Deletion requests/File:MATTHEW GÉCZY.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pedro Rodrigues Costa.jpg both of which were 22 July and neither DRs had Category:Threshold of originality related deletion requests/pending in them (mine did) .... so how did you come to find that DR Contributers2020. ?

Just curious. I'm sure you're intelligent enough to know harassment is a very serious crime in real life and on any website but I would hope you have a good explanation and that you didn't comb through my contributions again. –Davey2010^Talk 12:15, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes @Davey2010: , like DR can't be seen on daily DR notice board, right?--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 12:25, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
What daily DR notice board ?, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:38, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Davey2010: This is something what you call 'Daily DR noticeboard. Your DR is on 8th position. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 12:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Didn't you state that you'd voluntary stop interacting with Davey2010? @Davey2010: I'd strike "I'm sure you're intelligent enough to know harassment is a very serious crime in real life and on any website but I would hope you have a good explanation and that you didn't comb through my contributions again." Falls into the grey area of COM:NPLT and can seen as not assuming good faith. Bidgee (talk) 12:56, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

There's 191 DRs there so why would you comment on that specific one even more so after the recent hoo-har we had ?, Surely common sense would've told you to not comment on that specific one given my name is right there. Anyway kindly don't insert yourself into my nomination-DRs again.

My apologies Bidgee I wasn't trying to threaten them or anything like that but harassment can have consequences here and in real life so it's not something to be toyed around with, but agree it wasn't good faith so apologies for the bad faith there.

If you don't DR my images or comment on my DRs (where I'm nominator) we wont have a problem and you wont see me here on your talkpage. Happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 13:12, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Your recent edits to my talk page and to the image Aerial image of the Herzogenaurach airfield.jpg

Hello Contributers2020, you nominated my photo Aerial image of the Herzogenaurach airfield.jpg as a valued image candidate. I would like to thank you for the nomination as such. However, what I dislike is that you created promotion entry on my talk page and you yourself added the valued image template to the image. This circumvents the valued image process, which you can find on the following page: Commons:Valued_image_candidates/Promotion_rules. Please study the process carefully. In particular, you will see that there is a period of 4 or 7 days during which the nomination is up for review. That period has not expired for the image you nominated. After the review period has expired, someone will promote or decline the image on the nomination page. After that, the VICBot2 will promote the image and create the entry on the user’s talk page. Because you circumvented the process, I had no choice but to revert your changes. After reading the promotion rules, this should not surprise you, which is why I also reverted your corresponding entry on my talk page. In the future, please observe the rules and procedures for valued image candidates if you nominate an image. --Carsten Steger (talk) 06:44, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

@Carsten Stegar: sorry, the promotion rules indeed mentioned it. I thought VICbot was not working. I am so sorry about it and honor your honesty towards it. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 08:10, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Re:Ignoring my QI nom

Hello! Sorry, I didn't notice that. I promote 2 pictures from User:Alexander-93 and not yours, because I'm not familiar with flowers and that macro-shot style of photography hoping that someone else can review your nomination. I just saw that you renominate your picture, I hope that someone promote your nomination. --Halavar (talk) 16:06, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I have nothing to tell. I'll simply just wait for the .25% QI reviewers who are a critic for every file. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here}

Copyright status: File:Mango inner.png

Copyright status: File:Mango inner.png

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Mango inner.png. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

Duh whoever did this didnt sign.....This wasnt getting archived!!!!--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 11:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Flugplatz Herzogenaurach airfield (aerial picture).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

File:RNP MCTI e CNJ (50280320997).jpg

Your speedy tagging here was not correct. You cannot rely on the source website, e.g. https://www.gov.br/mcti/, to tell you whether a Flickr image hosted by an authorized account is validly licensed. Wikimedia Commons allows dual-licensing with NC and/or ND licenses so long as at least one of the licenses is valid for our purposes. See Template:FAL or cc-by-nc-nd for an example of permitted dual-licensing with an unacceptable license. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:06, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

King of Hearts Duh, the Template:FAL or cc-by-nc-nd as per me is something different. I don't understand how that image is a art. Please throw light here. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:11, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

The website says "All content on this site is published under a CC-BY-ND 3.0 license." That does not imply that the copyright holder (i.e. the Government of Brazil) cannot also release it under a different license elsewhere. Flickr has a valid CC-BY 2.0 license. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:13, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

King of Hearts Duh again, so complicated. Lol I don't really care about this now.--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:54, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

It's OK to take a break, and take a step back from all these complicated rules. But in that case you need to stop tagging images for deletion, because learning the rules is a requirement for doing that. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:57, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Schwabach-Büchenbach airfield (aerial view/image).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Problem in VI

Thank you for this report. I hadn't seen that the promotion rule had been broken. I will monitor the process for the next image. I think our friend is carried away by his enthusiasm. For the first image I'm sure what the label deserves. We wouldn't see it downgraded. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Your nomination of Black-winged stilt courtship behaviour.jpg as a quality image

Hello Contributers2020, with this edit, you nominated the file image File:Black-winged stilt courtship behaviour.jpg as a quality image. Again, you didn't observe the required process. The photo was taken by User:Ryzhkov Sergey. Therefore, as described in the following page Commons:Quality images candidates, you should have added (by [[User:Ryzhkov Sergey|Ryzhkov Sergey]]) to the nomination to indicate the photo was taken by another user. Your failure to do so creates the misleading impression that the image was taken by you. This is the third instance in which I feel compelled to point out to you that you did not observe the proper process. Therefore, I would like to upgrade my request from my previous feedback: From now on, please refrain from nominating any image for any award until you are fully capable of following the process that is required for each kind of award.

Furthermore, I cannot fail to note that the image File:Black-winged stilt courtship behaviour.jpg was already promoted as a Featured Picture in 2015. This is the highest award that an image can receive on Wikimedia Commons and it implies that the image is also a Quality Image. What is your point in nominating it as a Quality Image six years after it was promoted as a Featured Picture?

Best regards, --Carsten Steger (talk) 09:33, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I'll keep this point in my mind in the future. Please please allow me to QI your images @Carsten Steger: . --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 09:48, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

My request that you do not nominate any of my images (or any images of other users) for any award still stands. Instead, I suggest that you start to take useful images yourself and contribute them to Wikimedia Commons. Then, if you want, please nominate your own images to show that you can and want to follow the rules. Best regards, --Carsten Steger (talk) 09:55, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Please one more chance. Unfortunately, I don't have a DSLR or a high quality camera which can contribute to QI. I'll prove you I will follow the rules but just a permission to nominate your files. Please please please--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:00, 11 September 2021 (UTC) @Carsten Steger: --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:00, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Why is it so important to you to have permission to nominate my images? --Carsten Steger (talk) 10:03, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Also, you state on your user page that you are a "pilot with the rank of chief captain in the airline 'Spicejet headquartered india in real life". Surely, you can afford to buy a decent camera? --Carsten Steger (talk) 10:06, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't have means I don't have. Please, give me ONE last chance. If I nomed your file incorrectly in any way, Ill just retire commons @Carsten Steger: --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I am sorry, but you haven’t answered my question why it is so important for you to have permission to nominate my images. Therefore, I see no reason to change my mind. —Carsten Steger (talk) 11:22, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

File:A view from a top of a building from Katra, Jammu and Kashmir.jpg

File:A view from a top of a building from Katra, Jammu and Kashmir.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!

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

- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 17:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Your recent promotion of my image Aerial image of the Schwabach-Büchenbach airfield.jpg as a Valued Image

Hello Contributers2020, you recently promoted my image Commons:Valued image candidates/Aerial image of the Schwabach-Büchenbach airfield.jpg. As in your previous nomination of my image Aerial_image_of_the_Herzogenaurach_airfield.jpg, you did not follow the Valued Image process. The process for promoting an image is described on the following page: Commons:Valued image closure. In particular, the process prescribes the following: "Any registered user is allowed to close nominations provided these closure rules are followed. Please do not close any nomination on which you have voted within the last 48 hours. Nominations can be closed after a period of 4 or 7 days (4 days for opposed and supported candidates, 7 days for discussed and unassessed ones), but only if more than 48 hours has passed since the last vote." (my emphasis). You closed the nomination a mere 56 minutes after a vote of support was added by Archaeodontosaurus. As a result, I feel that your nomination and, with it, my image has become tainted. This is the second time that I have asked you to adhere to the process. It appears to me that you are unwilling to follow the process. Therefore, I ask you to refrain from nominating any of my images for any status that requires review in the future (in particular, not as Quality Images, Valued Images, or Featured Pictures). Best regards, --Carsten Steger (talk) 05:31, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Is my account compromised??? I didn't close ANYTHING @Carsten Steger: . --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:53, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Whether your account has been compromised is for you to find out. The fact of the matter is that with this edit, you closed the nomination. --Carsten Steger (talk) 06:00, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm really saying: I didnt do it. I just changed my password. I'm really sorry. This will never ever happen again @Carsten Steger: . --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

@Contributers2020: Is your account compromised or did you make that edit could you please clarify. Thank you. --- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 10:54, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Fitindia: It am pretty sure it did. Because I'm sure I didn't close anything (lol please don't block my acc for this). --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 11:15, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

@Contributers2020: So this edit where you have promoted a image you nominated yourself was not you or was not from your IP address right? --- FitIndia ^{Talk ✉} 12:48, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Ampfing-Waldkraiburg airfield aerial view..
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:22, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

partial restriction

hello. I have asked you to refrain from reapplying for different flags for a certain time but you continue to pursue various statuses despite being denied again and again. I have restricted your editing rights for the request pages till the end of the year. Please, just keep contributing as a normal user, be respectful to others and don't create problems in communications and you would have better chances next year rubin16 (talk) 05:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@Rubin16: Please, understand. I want to upload MP3 files, and just for 15 days, that is that. I don't know why AFB is going here and there.. Please, reconsider. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:57, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Why do you need additional rights in order to upload? Just upload them, as normal. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:44, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: , @Rubin16: Incase you didn't know, MP3 files can't be uploaded without autopatrol, patrol or admin. Autopatrol is the best option here. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:03, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Can you point someone else at their sources? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:04, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Also, what is in those files? Who created them? Why are they in scope? On what platform are you forced to use a MP3 to OGG conversion program that would cost you money, and what program is that? — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 10:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I know it but yes, it is a restriction. For example, you can't edit some templates with additional rights, etc. And receiving additional rights is connected with some sort of additional responsibility which is not a case here. rubin16 (talk) 10:27, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: for info see COM:RR on my nomination. I have mentioned all information on what is inside and how it is important to commons. @Rubin16: Wow, great connection of template editor vs. a fellow contributor who simply want to upload some MP3 files which can't be uploaded in ogg or wav format because of...im not trusted because I applied 4 times in a year. and/or I was blocked for a completely different reason. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

GG, I found the old British India footage. Sadly I can't upload it- why- cuz I am childish(by Fitindia) or I applied 4 times in a year(by Fitindia+rubin+AFB)--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Solicitude

Hello Contributers2020. Could you help me to delete these two files I uploaded? They are of low quality and does not contribute anything that is not already provided by the other images available on the subject.

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Los_Baños_de_la_Marrana,_Cabo_Tiñoso_y_la_isla_(2006)_-_(No_watermarks).jpg

- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Iglesia_de_Isla_Plana_restaurada_(2008)_-_(No_watermarks).jpg

I will really appreciate any help you can provide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LosMadriles (talk • contribs) 05:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hey @LosMadriles,

Hope you are having a good day

I would like to tell that 2nd picture of yours is completely in COM:PS as it is depicting a church which you have mentioned the location and you can withdraw the deletion nomination as well, unless and until you haven't copied it from somewhere like google or something and indeed your own work.

The second image is a little bit disputable, and I guess will need community decision on to whether delete it or not. You can wait for it.

If you badly don't want the images to be uploaded in Wikimedia Commons, you can tell me or you can just speedy del on your own.

Warm Regards, Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

And also the first image is not at all low quality. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Contributers2020 It would be great if you could delete them. They are mine and I uploaded them a long time ago, but now I'm having a hard time deleting them. I would be very grateful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LosMadriles (talk • contribs) 06:11, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@LosMadriles I would really appreciate if you can tell the reason, as I see them a beneficial image for Commons. Old images are okay. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:19, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Of course @Contributers2020. I uploaded this two images to contribute to the project but, now, I am writing a book telling the history of the place and those are two special photos that I did. That's why I need them back. But, I have uploaded a third higher quality photo to replace the old ones. The project will not be affected. I hope you can understand me. Thanks for your time and sorry for the inconvenience. Hope you are having a good day.

@LosMadriles I'll give you the best idea. As you are the author of the image, you have the copyright to it and no one else. You can use the images in the book freely and no one will dare stop you. -- Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

@LosMadriles: I came here from Commons:Deletion requests/File:Iglesia de Isla Plana restaurada (2008) - (No watermarks).jpg. To clarify, as the copyright owner, you may freely use the images in a book or anywhere else. But you no longer have exclusive rights - even if you succeed in having the images deleted here. Creative Commons licences (and other licences accepted on this site) are irrevocable. Brianjd (talk) 10:09, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "I was blocked for editing on COM:RFR and COM:LRR. Why, because rubin16 thinks that applying 4 times in a year is wrong and sort of vandalism. Firstly, there is no policy that explains repeatedly applying (to be noted repeatedly and that sort of words means 4). The 4th time I applied was to upload MP3 Files but got declined because IDK. And also, I don't have any interest applying again for any post till 1st Jan 2021, but I want to !vote in COM:LRR. Let the COM:RFR block exist (even tho its wrong) and unblock my COM:LRR access. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 04:49, 27 October 2021 (UTC)"

Decline reason: "No consensus to unblock, you must remain blocked until end of the year. Taivo (talk) 08:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)"

Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.

(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ हिन्दी ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

Oppose - You were told not to apply at RFR again but you applied there again anyway so the block was justified. There's a lot more to Commons than !voting at LRR or editing RFR - Being page-blocked from both doesn't impede you from editing here. You're only blocked till 31 December 2021 so only 2 months away from the block expiring so I'm sure you can wait 2 extra months.....

TLDR IMHO the block should remain in place and I see no valid reason to lift it. –Davey2010^Talk 10:15, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Closing undeletion requests

Hi, Please do not close undeletion requests, as you did here. Only admins should do that. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:05, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry Yann, but no policy says that only admins can close. Moreover, it was a very clear case and admin opposed it with a good and acceptable rationale. Thanks, --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 13:34, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
Wrong Contributers2020 It is esentially the same as w:WP:UNDEL — only admins will do the closures, regardless the outcome of the UNDEL request. And regardless if the discussion is obvious, only admins will do the closures. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)
LOL where @JWilz12345. Not even Wikipedia suggests that. Far away Commons. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 05:11, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
There may not be a policy on this, but it has been a common practice that closures on UNDEL must be made by admins only. Also, the closure on the involved thread was made less than 8 hours before the cutoff time for archival, which means there is still ample time for the requestor to visit the UNDEL page and see the outcome (before the thread goes archived the next day). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 05:27, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't care about a common practice that is not written anywhere. Your words must is not applicable here as there is nothing you can do to prove at @JWilz12345. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 09:54, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
We've noticed. That's why minor issues, like your requests for rights posts, keep getting rejected. This is also why I don't believe you're a pilot, because pilots who think "common practice is for everyone else, not for me" soon become very unpopular. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
@Andy Dingley I don't think so you understand what I mean. I don't find a sentence which mentions Admins only do closures or A common practice is that admin closes the UDRs or even something near that. I don't understand that when my UDR closing was correct, what the hell a problem exists. This should be even good, as the number of dumb requests are being closed. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 17:57, 4 November 2021 (UTC)
I think you should better get rid of statement like "There is no such policy of allowing/disallowing of doing something". This kind of behavior is COM:POINTY. You're like playing an edge ball, your luck will worn out one day.--A1Cafel (talk) 04:46, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

When an Admin tells a person not to do something, the generally accepted behavior is to not do that thing. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:54, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, I would like to mention, Ignore all Rules policy Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 19:00, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

This is ridiculous. This is not the first time I have seen a non-admin close a UDR. COM:DR has clear instructions on who may or may not close a request. Why not just add a statement to COM:UDR? Brianjd (talk) 02:02, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

TBH, I also have closed an undeletion request (non-admin closure, but long ago), but only for procedural close, such as the file on UDR was not yet deleted. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:37, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

To be fair, "{{Nd}} Procedural close, file is not deleted." has been acceptable in the past. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

I repeated my question at the Village Pump. Brianjd (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Valued Image Promoted

File:A digram for eyes.jpg

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Informational placards on the operation of the iris, PCMC Science Park, Pune, India.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

Comment Is this a photograph of an exhibit in the Science Park? In which case, whose copyright is it because I doubt it's a free image, see COM:DW? Rodhullandemu (talk) 21:33, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Info @Rodhullandemu This is taken by me. Everything in the PCMC Science Park is free and can be used by anyone. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:20, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment Great! Then I think we can pass this, but not in this scope. First of all, "pictures of..." would mean that this is a photo of a picture; second, I think it would make more sense to make this scope more specific to leave room for any number of other useful photos others may take at PCMC Science Park, so I would suggest "Informational placards on the operation of the iris, PCMC Science Park, Pune, India". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 8 November 2021 (UTC)

Question @Contributers2020 Can you please supply a citation showing that this image is free of copyright. COM:FOP_India tells me that unless there is a specific rule applying to the park, then these images are a breach of copyright. Martinvl (talk) 16:26, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Martinv Sorry, but unfortunately I can't. But there was a sign existing in the park saying All text and pictures used in this property is in the Public Domain. It would take me 7 days to proof that so I can take a picture of it.

Ikan Kekek I have made the modification. Thanks --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:30, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Comment @Contributers2020 - You need to be sure that the copyright waiver is attached to the file - if in a years time somebody looks at the file and does not see an appropriate copyright statement, they will not look here to check up. Also, the waiver needs to come from the copyright owner themselves. You have two choices - you can follwo the procedure outlined in Commons:Volunteer Response Team or you can photgraph the waiver notice yourself, upload the waiver notice and link it to your file. Martinvl (talk) 17:51, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Support Useful, and I'm satisfied with the statement about copyright, but Martinvl is right that in 10 years or whatever, someone will nominate this for deletion because they like to assume bad faith and will claim that your statement is invalid as sufficient evidence. So definitely take a photo of that waiver notice or find a photo of it somewhere if at all possible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Ikan Kekek and Martinvl, I have submitted a OTRS request successfully. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 01:21, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose => promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

--VICBot2 (talk) 00:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Separating roles.

Here is more feedback that I did not get a chance to add before you withdrew the proposal.

You wrote:

And if non-admins close them, they will immediately take action on us(who are non-admins and non favorites of them).

This is rubbish. I have performed plenty of non-admin closures of DRs. I follow the rules (only close non-controversial "keep" DRs opened by other users), and follow the correct procedure for updating affected pages. I have had only one complaint, from another non-administrator who believed that a particular DR was controversial, but an administrator agreed with the way I closed it and declined to take further action.

I don't understand why community administrators would be able to grant licence review rights, but not possess such rights themselves. Or did you mistakenly leave this off your list?

Other users have hinted at what I said: certain situations call for the application of multiple privileges, and it is good to be able to have one user, who possesses all those privileges, handle the situation immediately. Presumably administrators have well-established routines and tools built around this idea, and would not appreciate this disruption. But I cannot speak for them, and none of them responded to your proposal. You might want to seek some feedback from them. Brianjd (talk) 04:15, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I am working on my proposal, Brian Sir. I have made a sandbox which I will list all the problems and make solutions to it. I'll also survey 2-3 administrators, stating their thoughts. I also applied the P.S. on the first time just because I think (my personal opinion) that some of the administrators just want power in their hands and nothing else however this is just my personal opinion. I promise I will not renominate this VPP until and unless this is perfect and with no problems. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 04:39, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

One account

Hello Contributors2020, Please only use one account - There's no need to create and use User talk:C2020 Proposal Sandbox. There are indeed valid reasons to create 2 accounts (as per WP:SOCKLEGIT) however unfortunately your reason isn't one of them,
I've also moved your sandbox to User:Contributers2020/Proposal Sandbox/Separating roles because I was unaware at the time you'd created a new account.

If you continue to use the C2020 Sandbox account you could be blocked, Thanks, –Davey2010^{<sp
an style="color:navy;">Talk} 14:22, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

I just created the account for only in the usage of the sandbox in order to not depict repitetive bot-like edits. I guess I'll just stop using it... --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 15:46, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Ah okay, Unfortunately that still wouldn't be a valid reason as you can make repetitive edits under one account. Okay cool, Happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 16:11, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

You should better stated the relations with your alternative account clearly by using templates like {{User Alternate Acct Name}}. Otherwise, you may be considered using socks illegally, especially you currently have blocks. --A1Cafel (talk) 06:36, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

TimedText:Kim Jong-Un Pronunciation.ogg.en.srt

TimedText:Kim Jong-Un Pronunciation.ogg.en.srt 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 timedtext, 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.

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

Pacha Tchernof (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Closing DR

Please stop closing DRs entirely. Your closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:David Gamboa.jpg was inappropriate, as we routinely grant requests by uploaders to delete unused personal images of themselves even if the 7-day deadline is passed. In fact, we would probably delete this image as out of scope if someone other than the uploader had filed for deletion. It has been a consistent issue whenever you participate in administrative tasks that you focus too closely and literally on following one rule, while ignoring other considerations and common sense. If you close any more DRs, you will be blocked from the Commons namespace. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:53, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

I see that you (Contributers2020) closed this request as "speedy keep" because it was not eligible for speedy deletion: this is not justified by any rule, nor by common sense. Brianjd (talk) 02:46, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Sorry. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:37, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

King of Hearts I have closed a completely obvious DR, which is this, it was deleted by AntiCompositeNumber but he didn't close the DR, so I closed it. I hope there is no problem with it and you'll not block me for that. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 04:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked you from the Commons namespace, the main reason being that in a variety of situations, you continue to test the limits when everyone is telling you to stop. Allowing you to close such "obvious" DRs will only embolden you to stretch the limits even more. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Not only was this action directly contrary to King of Hearts's directions, but it was completely unnecessary. We have a bot for that. Brianjd (talk) 06:22, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Unblock request declined

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion.

Request reason: "So,

WTF? So King of Hearts blocked me for closing a DR whose file is deleted. Can someone please tell me how doing this is doing anything wrong? Some admin unblock me for this misconduct of King of Hearts. (Just unblock me from the Commons namespace don't unblock me for COM:LRR and COM:RFR if you don't think so that is correct"

Decline reason: "Please read COM:DR: "Non-admins may close a deletion request as keep if they have a good understanding of the process, and provided the closure is not controversial." You violated Commons policy, closing DR as deleted, and block for that violation is fair. Taivo (talk) 10:58, 25 November 2021 (UTC)"

Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.

(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ português ∙ Simple English ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ हिन्दी ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ 中文（臺灣） ∙ +/−

Oppose I wasn't sure whether to comment here. Now I know. The blocking admin's rationale speaks for itself: the admin clearly threatened a block, the blocked user clearly disobeyed the admin's advice, and the admin simply followed through on their threat. If we start supporting empty threats, the entire system of rules falls apart. Brianjd (talk) 06:01, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Also, the threat itself seems to have been justified. It was triggered by a clearly-inappropriate DR closure, as explained at the time. There is no indication that the blocked user challenged this threat through the proper channels; instead, the blocked user deliberately and knowingly disobeyed the admin's advice, creating grounds for this block, as evidenced by revision 609760961. Brianjd (talk) 06:07, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

So @Brianjd is this fair to 1. Block me for whole Commons Namespace? What the hell? If even for COM:DR it would have been sensible.

2) For 1 month? If it were for COM:DR for 7 days it, again would have been sensible. 1 month? Reconsider Brian sir. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:08, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

And it is not like I did something wrong? The DR closure was correct, isn't it? Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:09, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

I suspect that blocking you from the entire namespace was necessary for technical reasons, though the comments about testing the limits certainly apply outside of DRs as well, so that may also be part of the reason. I won't comment on the length of the block, as I am sure that admins are far more qualified than me to make such judgements. Brianjd (talk) 06:13, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

@Brianjd Can you mention which comment you're talking about. And no, there is no technical reason for which only COM:DR can't be blocked. Either way, it is again insensible to block me for anything (except COM:LRR and COM:RFR]] as my COM:DR closure was entirely correct and has no problems in it. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:17, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

KoH did state here " If you close any more DRs, you will be blocked from the Commons namespace - Common sense should've told you not to close any DR for the foreseeable future. Honestly surprised KoH hasn't just indeffed you from the project at this point. You're only blocked from Commons for a month - not the end of the world. –Davey2010^Talk 13:37, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Board election: voting is open!

Dear member of the Commons Photographers User Group,

The voting phase for our group's board election starts today. Please consider casting your vote. Voting ends on December 17.

I wish you all the best for the rest of the year 2021. Stay safe and healthy! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:03, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Umm Frank, I nominated for myself days before voting but after this diff, you deleted my nomination. Is there some problem, or can I again, add my name?. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 01:45, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure if you can edit in Commons talk namespace, but anyway, I find the removal of one candidate by another candidate without explanation to be disturbing, and I have asked about this at Commons talk:Commons Photographers User Group/Board Elections 2021#Removal of candidate. Brianjd (talk) 02:33, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks @Brianjd for at least starting a discussion. I appreciate that. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:56, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
After much discussion at the election's talk page (and the apology below), I consider the issue resolved from my point of view, and do not intend to participate further. The election coordinator invites you to make further comments, if you wish, wherever you are able to post them. Brianjd (talk) 06:41, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks again Brianjd for the discussion you have made. I also consider this thing resolved, and nothing else can help. I'll participate in the discussion if the election coordinator wants me to. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:57, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

I apologize

Dear Contributers2020, I apologize for not notifying you that I removed you from the list of eligible candidates in the Commons Photographers User Group election. I was assuming that you had followed the discussion on the talk page. However, that's not an excuse for me not explicitly contacting you. I could have done better and I regret my behavior. All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the apology Frank Schulenburg. Also it was not a that of a big deal as even if you notified or not, either way I won't be able to participate. Hope you have a good day. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 06:59, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

An unofficial unblock request

Hello King of Hearts,

I humbly request you to reduce the block to just COM:DR, COM:LRR and COM:RFR. I am so sorry for not adhering your directions, and now I am understanding it. I also accept that I should get a fair share of punishment, but Commons namespace, is, not required. I mean, I didn't do any vandalism or incivility or breaking a policy with the exception of COM:DR. Please, please consider. And also I promise, after the complete unblock on 1st Jan 2022, I'll not close any DR, even if it is deleted previously. Just please, unblock me for Commons namespace. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 08:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

You might want to sign your post. Brianjd (talk) 08:44, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Yeah sorry actually I have a habit of the reply tool. That is why. Pinging King of Hearts again. --Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 08:47, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

For the first time, actually. Pings only work in signed posts. Brianjd (talk) 08:51, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes I know @Brianjd, that is why I pinged him again. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 10:04, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

That is not technically possible; blocking you from Commons:Deletion requests does not prevent you from closing individual DRs, as there is no way to do a partial block on all subpages of a page. However, if you voluntarily agree to never close any COM:DR or COM:UDR request, indefinitely and with no exceptions, I can lift the Commons block on you. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:01, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I swear on God I'll never close any DR or UDR of any type till a time like you feel fit for that. Thank you so much for this second chance King of Hearts. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 03:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Done. There are various other things you can do to get a better understanding of Commons policies, such as participating in DR discussions. Just stay away from tasks that are normally done by administrators. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:03, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

@King of Hearts I want to get the Commons:Account creators rights as I have found a flickr user which has many images licenced under what is mentioned in COM:L. But there is a rate limit because of which I can't upload the files. I want to take this right but want to ask to you first as I want to play safe and shouldn't be blocked because of this. Please tell. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 16:36, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Please don't apply for additional permissions. Just import the Flickr files under the rate which you are allowed to upload. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:53, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Unsigned

Thank you for using it, but please ensure there is a timestamp. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 14:03, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Keeping that in mind, @Jeff G., I have added one more {{Unsigned}} template, keeping your suggestion in mind at COM:HD#Upload Text File (Information). Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 14:18, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. — Jeff G. ツ_{please ping or talk to me} 15:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Archiving typo

Pretty sure you didn't mean to do this! Andy Dingley (talk) 13:02, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Andy Dingley a lot. I was copying a User Talk page and I mistakenly did it, However I intended to make the 14d to 1d to reduce clutter and also as all the above discussions are concluded. Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 13:06, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

	Merry Christmas Contributor2020
	Hi Contributor2020, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very happy and healthy New Year, Thank you for all your contributions to Wikipedia, –Davey2010^Talk 12:51, 25 December 2021 (UTC) Share similar holiday wishes by adding {{subst:User:Davey2010/MerryChristmas}} to your friends' talk pages.

Thanks a lot Davey2010. This means a lot to me!--Contributers2020^{Talk to me here} 13:56, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you to and everything of the best for 2022 Gbawden (talk) 08:51, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks so much!

Hi, thanks a lot for your Christmas wishes. I hope you had a wonderful time yourself. For 2022 I wish you, your friends, and your family all the best! Stay safe and healthy, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

User talk:Contributor2020/CY 2020-21

Copyright status: File:Macaw parrot sitting on a tree branch.jpg

Copyright status: File:Full moon on the view from sea.jpg

Pixabay

Copyright status: File:Trees on the sides of the road.jpg

Pronunciation file names

Licence review

Please sign your postings

Please sign your postings

Please sign your postings

File source is not properly indicated: File:Everyone holding hands.jpg

Discussions that you have started

Vandalism warning

Note to myself and following users

Archiving

Please sign your postings

Please sign your postings

Npd

Closing deletion requests

Personal attacks are not welcomed

Closing DRs

SignBot

Thanks

Problem tags

You have been blocked for a duration of 72 hours

DR

Your recent edits to my talk page and to the image Aerial image of the Herzogenaurach airfield.jpg

Re:Ignoring my QI nom

Copyright status: File:Mango inner.png

Valued Image Promoted

Valued Image Promoted

Problem in VI

Your nomination of Black-winged stilt courtship behaviour.jpg as a quality image

Your recent promotion of my image Aerial image of the Schwabach-Büchenbach airfield.jpg as a Valued Image

Valued Image Promoted

partial restriction

Solicitude

Closing undeletion requests

Valued Image Promoted

One account

Closing DR

Board election: voting is open!

I apologize

An unofficial unblock request

Archiving typo

Merry Christmas

Thanks so much!

Navigation menu

Search