Finally, User:Parabolooidal, please stop immediately that xxx kind of 'campaign', or in your words harassment, i repeat, in that public way, after refusing every opportunity to discuss from Wikimedian to Wikimedian, imho a very good reason to contact Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems so you repeat that, your words, kind of public "harassment" again !!
PS: it's your turn to end that 'kind of different oppinions', and of course it's ok to revert, but don't REPEAT that kind of imho 'public harassment' again !
Roland zh, I honor your views and no longer am categorizing images that are uncategorized. I did 4,653 image categorizations in the four months I was active. You were the only person to complain, but others may have felt the same way and just not voiced their opinion to me. My apologigies to all I have offended in my attempting to help here. Although I was learning, I guess I was not learning fast enough. Best wishes, Parabolooidal (talk) 18:48, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Category:Rotterdam_School_of_Management has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Hi, please do not tag files for copyvio(s) if there is uncertainty instead you can add "Missing permissions". So the uploader will have the chance to confirm permissions. Thanks.-- ~ Nahid Talk07:56, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - today you removed two categories from the above mentioned file. Why was that? I think those categories are valuable… --Till (talk) 17:57, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, sorry for doing that. If you think they're valuable, feel free to please put them back. I ran into some problems with the category, and you can probably see your way through what mixed me up. I apologize to you. Parabolooidal (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please be more careful with the categorization and avoid the duplication of categories (for instance: Boudhanath) and over-categorization, like you did in the Kali Gandaki Gorge. Thanks. --Stegop (talk) 01:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ok, I am sorry and I will try. Sometimes the titles and descriptions are confusing, so I make mistakes. Thanks. Parabolooidal (talk)
Sorry, you don't seem to be trying anything. For instance: see what it is en:Natural heritage and tell me if man made monuments can be such a thing. And you keep creating duplicate categories. My patience is almost over... Regards. --Stegop (talk) 20:46, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry. Please explain as I don't understand. I'm going by the designation "Cultural heritage monuments in Nepal with known IDs" and using the name on the item so designated. For example, everything in the Bhaktapur Darbar category (which I notice has been deleted by you?) was put there because each image put in there has that ID designation on its file. Look at , for example. It is titled that by it's official ID. The file says:
DescriptionParabolooidal
English: Bhaktapur Darbar
This is a photo of a monument in Nepal identified by the ID
What is the point of the official IDs if they aren't to be used? Is it meaningless? I looked around for instructions but there aren't any that I could find. Why does the Commons bother to have people upload "Cultural heritage monuments in Nepal with known IDs" if they're not used? Please explain so that I can understand what's going on. Thanks, Parabolooidal (talk) 21:06, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that I made a mistake in using "Natural" vs "Cultural" for which I'm sorry. But it was mistake that can easily corrected by changing a few overall categories, and one that I would have quickly caught myself. I don't think what you corrected took "countless hours". I would have caught the Category:Bhaktapur Durbar Square duplication also. And I correct plenty of errors made by others without fussing about it. Have you looked at the thousands that I have correctly categorized? And almost all of the hundreds of categories I have created still exist or were immediately corrected by me. And you avoided answering my question. Why don't you try to be helpful? Please explain some things to me rather than being rude, using all caps. How are the template names put on thousands of images to be utilized? Do you really want to discourage new editors from trying to help sort these many many images uploaded with the templates? (I see from your talk page that you've made enough mistakes that perhaps you could be tolerant of those newer editors make.) Please try to be understanding and helpful to others. Parabolooidal (talk) 23:16, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to discourage anyone, I appreciate the effort you have been doing and I am tolerant, otherwise I would have request that you were blocked. But since you have the work, it isn't better if it is well done? I am only bothering you because you keep repeating the same kind of mistakes. BTW: Sure I make mistakes, but nearly everything you see in my talk page isn't related with mistakes I have done, but with images that I moved from wikipedias to Commons which didn't respect the rules, so the mistakes were not mine, but from those who posted the images in the wikipedias. Regards. --Stegop (talk) 00:32, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. But I will point out that in moving images from wikipedias to the Commons, one of the tasks is to check whether the image complies with the Commons standards first. Yes, you made common newbie mistakes, but one I have been careful to avoid making in any of my moves! (Blowing my own horn!) I think if you really look at my what I have done, my good work far out ways my learning mistakes, which usually I fix myself. I work in a wide variety of topics, and I admit that I know less about Nepal than most others areas and made stupid mistakes. But get me blocked if that is your judgment. Parabolooidal (talk) 00:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Category:HanumanTemple has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Category:Big_Bell has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
Please, stop your destructive work in the Ghana-portal!
What shall that? What is the objective of your virus-like deletion of categories at Ghana pictures? Maybe you had can talk with me in concerning to your plans? The Ghana-categories "Category by city by year" were justly in the process of erection after the pattern of the city-categories of European countries. So, what is wrong on a category "....city by year"? And, that a country, which is located on the sea coast have a coast and on this coast also beaches, is well clear... So, why eliminate you than these categories from the pictures?
In only 2 days have you destroyed many work which was invest in the time before in order to bring a certain state of order in the Ghana portal. A such state of order shall help at the search after certain Ghana criterions for more rapid and better researches on the Wikimedia Commons. So, why an order (one of several) to sort pictures after time, how at European cities, should be so wrong at the Ghana category tree? And "sort by time" = subcategory of "History of...".
I'm very sorry. But who are you? And how was I to know that you had special rights over the categories for Ghana? And why do you object to putting images into categories that are typically used for countries, towns, villages, people etc. Is there another country that categorizes people by year? I removed the categories because I couldn't find the images and I accidentally discovered they were stuffed away in those categories by years that hindered their accessibility. Is there a rule somewhere that specifies that these year categories should be used? It makes it very hard to figure out what images are available in the usual categories. There are categorization rules that specify that the least about of categories should be employed and that images should be place in useful subcategories. How are all those layers of years useful? Parabolooidal (talk) 20:30, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(your post seems to have disappeared while I was writing this answer)
Thank you for the information. Some places like forts are categorizes by more than one name, so it's hard to figure out. The Ghana categories are not helpful for finding images of places. It all seems concentrated on Colonial architecture, commerce and not about the individual places and people of Ghana. The "Slave trade" is important to the Cape Coast Castle because it was a main slave castle in the Atlantic slave trade and figured prominently in the history of slavery. The US president made a point of visiting there with his family to educate them about slavery.
We toured Cape Coast Castle, a place for centuries where men, women, and children of this nation and surrounding areas were sold into slavery. I'll never forget the image of my two young daughters, the descendants of Africans and African Americans, walking through those doors of no return, but then walking back those doors of return.
It is strange that the categories on Cape Coast Castle downplay this. I guess the editors there rather concentrate on "Retail", "Commerce", "colonial architecture" etc. and ignore other major issues. Everything is categorized according to year Category:Ghana by year but most of those images aren't categorized in other ways so they are difficult to find unless an editor checks through all those years. Other countries don't stuff away images by years primarily. I get the feeling that people from certain European countries are categorizing for their own reasons, and not to make images of Ghana accessible to the world. Look at the way Category:India
Category:Architecture of India doesn't even have a "Colonial architecture" category. The Commons has Category:Colonial architecture which contains Category:European colonial architecture in Ghana. For some reason Category:Elmina Castle isn't in one of the informative European architecture categories. I think those with ownership over the Ghana "colonial architecture" categories actually don't know very much about architecture. Just my opinion. But it's too bad the Ghana doesn't draw editors that are actually interested in various topics, like India editors are.
Thanks for stopping by and giving me your thoughts. Since I'm considered an "abusive editor" by User:Katharinaiv who reported me on a noticeboard somewhere, I'm just going to undo my Ghana edits and leave the place alone. Parabolooidal (talk) 22:49, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I' m appreciating your decision to co-working with me now instead to work against me.
Firstly once I've to excuse me because of my English language and my severe words. English is a foreign language for me and anyway I had no English teaching in the school. But in countries how Russia, Lithuania, Japan, the West African countries and self in South Africa one had understand me quite good until to here. But I'm working on an improvement of my English language knowledge.
Here are many things relating to images in the Ghana-categories about which one has to reach agreement. Okay take we one problem under several: the forts of the Gold Coast and questions connected with that.
Your category "Fort Jajo" in Elmina see I as error because it's identical with Fort Conradsburg. Is was erected on the São Jago hill (San Tiago in Spanish) by the Netherlanders and until 1872 never possession of another European power. Probably because of the frequent wars between England and the Netherlands show historical maps of the English never Dutch names. So. why a new category with an English name in a wrong spelling?
And before you come up with the idea of the creation of a category "Ussher Fort (Accra)" or so similar, it was until 1868 the Dutch "Fort Crèvecoeur". By the English it was called in times before "Little-Accra" and from 1868 onwards (or later) "Ussher Fort". (Alone the name Ussher (after Herbert Taylor Ussher) is in my eyes a provocation towards to the Fantis and other peoples of the Gold Coast.)
That's the same at the Brandenburgian (from 1701 onward Prussian) settlements. The Dutchmen have given their own names to these.
I agree with you, that the word-term "colonial" at the architecture categories is not very correct. Anyway it's justified to use the adjective "colonial" firstly from the mid of the 19th century onwards. In the times before the forts were merely "trade posts". But I haven't seen a comparable category on the Commons until to here.
Why the overemphasis of the "Slave trade" with regard to Cape Coast Castle? There were other centres in West Africa (Gorée and Jakin/Offra and later Whydah). And anyway, even if, than concern it only the time in which the King of England possessed the "Asiento de negros" (1713-1739 and 1743-1750). and 1801 the English slave trade has ended. And, anyway, one would must classify each European coast fort as "slave trade post" (at least the most), but the most had had well "supply difficulties" which exception of Elmina, which had a good relationship to the Asantehene through all times so long the Netherlanders were present there. And anyway, the surge is very hard on the most sections of the Gold Coast, so that greater landing or shipment actions were quite difficult there. It has given dead persons already always on this coast at accidents and that not only under transported slaves. Solely Sekondi has a natural harbour and here was in the history the single place on the whole West African coast between Senegal mouth and Cap Santa Catharina on which one could repair ships.
I think you are extremely misled. I don't intend to work on Ghana anymore except to undo my edits that upset you so. I'd rather work on countries whose controlling editors are a little more enlightened. Over the years I've done a lot of category work so although I make mistakes, I also do a lot of very good work on the categories of many countries over the years. Parabolooidal (talk) 22:59, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You have been blocked from editing Commons. The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.
Hello! I am sorry I had to block you but it seems this is the only way to get your attention. Please refrain from undoing your edits out of anger. This doesn't make any sense and as a matter of fact is vandalism. So, please stop what you are doing! --Hedwig in Washington(mail?)03:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you could have given me a warning on my talk page. I said several places that I would undo my edits to Ghana articles, after User:Katharinaiv reported me as an "abusive user" for my Ghana edits. So I am undoing the edits that upset User:Katharinaiv so much. I also stated that I would no longer edit Ghana articles, except to put uncategorized ones into Category:Ghana. This is what User:Katharinaiv wrote at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems:
User-problem with aggressive deletion behavior
I have to complain about the behavior of the User:Parabolooidal. His manner is equate to an "ulcus cancer", because around his appearance dies the existing category trees how the flies. There are deleted important categories, which shall serve as collection and base point for further subcategories. In this special cases it concerns the city-categories in the Ghana portal. Here were destroyed structures how "markets by city", "housing by city", "commerce by city" "city by time" and the displaced pictures to great parts placed in "shops by city..." and "street vendors by city" and other unexactly categories of an own creation for Ghana. At that are deleted my own deletion-applications without any explanation and categories which were deleted by administrators are presently again a half hour later. The single result is a contribution to the creation of the state of a greatest-possible chaos under hundreds of pictures which were already categorized on order structures so that one can find searchrf pictures rapidly beside of a contentual points of view. After this manner were destroyed several weeks work in only two days and that without of any communication in the prefield about sense or nonsense of faulty categories. Is that the professional policy of Commons co-workers with administrator rights....?
In special case it concerns the categories:
Category:Retail in Ghana by city, the term "retail" shall correspond to the German "Einzelhandel" - a translation which is used also in other country portals of the Commons.
Categories how: History of city by period]], and there subcategories according to century, decade and year, for instance corresponding to the example category:Magdeburg by year
Like you, User:Katharinaiv did not warn me first on my talk page and gave me no opportunity to understand. A couple of users have contacted me on my talk page and I have learned. Your method of blocking is quite a different lesson, and not a motivating one. It really doesn't tell me how to improve, but only to be rather afraid to edit here. Parabolooidal (talk) 04:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You got your warnings above. It seems that you don't know what you are doing. I had to spend nearly two hours to repair the damage you created abd I just found even more. :((
Yes, my method of blocking you is a different lesson, other lessons didn't improve your editing. This lesson I hope you might take seriously and learn about the category system without creating hours of work for other volunteers. You really want to know how to improve? Then read about the category system. Think about this: The categories are many years old, made by users who knew about the topic. What makes you think you know more than them? Relax, lean back, and think before editing.
You have been blocked from editing Commons for (3 months). The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.
Well, since you don't take advice and revert my edits AFTER I gave you a full page of tips, hints, and explanations your account has been blocked for three months. That will give you some time to reflect,read about what Commons is about and learn how the category system works. Further, you might actually learn that communication is better than edit warring. --Hedwig in Washington(mail?)00:55, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you created this category, 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!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
If you created this category, 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!
Category:Sheik_lotfolaht has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry.
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
File:Imam reza1 1 1 1.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: Low resolution, missing exif, blocked user
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!
Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.
If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have 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 them, 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!
If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category.
In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!
.JPG)
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Richard_Lui_reports_on_human_trafficking_in_Ghana.png&diff=next&oldid=130768948){kind=link}
Info Until further notice I removed autopatrolled form this account. Your edits have to be seen in the RC. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 05:33, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
_Shrine.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}