User talk:UED77/Archive1

User: UED77

Info | Talk | Projects | Gallery | Category

Hello. Here you can contact me in English, Hungarian, or elementary German. However, if the matter is of importance, German might not be such a good idea after all :)

Status · (history)

UED77 is generally inactive.

Babel user information

hu-N	Ennek a szerkesztőnek magyar az anyanyelve.

en-4	This user has near native speaker knowledge of English.

de-1	Dieser Benutzer beherrscht Deutsch auf grundlegendem Niveau.

Please start new topics at the bottom, or just use the "+" tab. If I start a discussion at your talk page, please don't reply here, I'll be watching your page. However, I expect that to be true in your case, and I will probably reply here if you post here.

Commons:FAQ[edit]

That would be great (if you could add to it). I also made a proposal to divide the FAQ into 2 or 3 distinct sections (see the Talk page). I think the FAQ needs some serious editing. We can't expect people to refer to it when it's so incomplete and brief. pfctdayelise 05:13, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may also be worth having a glance through the commons-l mailing list archive. It's not so active now but it has been in the past. Keep in mind some policy has changed, though (like en stopped hosting NC and ND images). pfctdayelise 09:27, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Magyar: (missing text)
[edit]

Hi UED77 (I thought your username was familiar! now I see I've left you a comment before :)). I was wondering if you would mind having a stab at translating User:Pfctdayelise/Translations. It's only two short lines. (I also asked User:Rodrigo, so he might beat you to it, or maybe not.) Many thanks if you can help! pfctdayelise (translate?) 11:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cc-by-sa-2.1-jp[edit]

Not 2.5, but it exists: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.1/jp/ But anyway the name is wrong, so I'll delete the template. pfctdayelise (translate?) 22:49, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, wow! OK, I hadn't seen that page. :) Nice work. pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:45, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hungarian translations requested[edit]

We need tanslations for the new multilingual Special:Userlogin :

These 4 are already available :

Could you translate those two ?

Teofilo 11:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gábor, thanks for the translations. A minor problem: your version of MediaWiki:Captcha-createaccount at MediaWiki:Captcha-createaccount/hu doesn't have a link to the help page at MediaWiki:Captchahelp-text/hu. Also, we could use a translation of MediaWiki:Loginprompt. Thanks! User:dbenbenn 23:36, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

&uselang=_links in _language_menues[edit]

Ello UED77,

I would be glad to receive more comments from non-English-native- speaker users on this question. See :Commons:Village_pump#&uselang=_links_in_language_menues and Template_talk:Lang-mp#&uselang=_links Teofilo 11:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin[edit]

You are now an admin here on the Commons. Congratulations! Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops. Image deletions, however, are permanent, so please be especially careful with those. Cheers, User:dbenbenn 17:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations. I am very happy to see this because I think you'll be a very good admin. :) If you ever need some advice or if you're not sure about something, feel free to ask. pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks![edit]

Hi! Thanks for your vote of support on my administrator request. And my congratulations to you on becoming an admin yourself. JeremyA 03:40, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: Ukraine election images[edit]

Does "symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations" in section (d) of Template:PD-UA-exempt not apply in these cases? --PlatypeanArchcow 18:28, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cape Cove[edit]

Hi Gábor. I noticed your featured picture, Image:Cape Cove, Oregon.jpg (it wasn't listed on Commons:Featured pictures, so I added it to Commons:Featured pictures/Places). Anyway, I just wanted to say: if you still have the originals from which you stitched the panorama, it would be awesome if you'd upload them! That way there's the possibility that someone else can improve on your stitching work in the future. (I'd recommend just uploading them over Image:Cape Cove, Oregon.jpg, with the upload summary saying something like "part 1 of the paranorama", "part 2 of the panorama", ..., and then reverting afterwards.) Thanks, User:dbenbenn 18:49, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello David. I do have the originals, and I would be glad to upload them; I was actually planning on doing so, but didn't know what the reactions would've been — I would've asked first. I'll soon proceed to upload my 8 source files, but, my, there are horrible :P Nevertheless, hopefully someone can do some elite brightness enhancement on the left cliff without affecting the sky too much. And whatever else they think is best. I love CC-BY-SA :) —UED77 23:33, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, now I'm curious to see what these horrible pictures are, that you managed to make a featured pic out of them! User:dbenbenn 23:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I might have been exaggerating a little. They are up, see here. Thanks for the idea! —UED77 00:41, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coor dms[edit]

Hello Gabor, I used the template created by you for Template:Location. I would like to ask what to insert in Variable No. 9 ( {{{9}}} ). Longbow4u 11:11, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Langs[edit]

Hi, this template does not work. Using "FULLPAGENAME" means that the image file name is inserted, but I think you wanted Template:PD-Art to be inserted. I have reverted PD-Art for now. Thuresson 23:56, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page move rollback[edit]

Hi Gábor. Thanks for moving my talk page back. I notice you had a little trouble. Perhaps you're unaware of one of the admin tools, page move rollback. In a user's page move log you get "revert" links, which automatically fill in the correct destination field. Cheers, User:dbenbenn 20:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello David. Indeed, I was not aware of that, and I was actually planning to complain to the devs about the lack of such a function. This is very useful. Thanks for telling me :)

In the meantime, I think you should move-protect your pages. Not so much edit protect, as that might have its uses, but who would move a user's page anyway, especially without their consent? —UED77 20:44, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They were protected before, but I unprotected them. My idea is the following: if a vandal decides to move my talk page, I'll see it immediately and catch him. On the other hand, if he can't move it, he might go vandalize something else, something that actually matters, or something that will take longer to find. I'm happy to use my talk page as a honeypot. User:dbenbenn 20:46, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I18n on search mask[edit]

Hi you edit [1] sadly didn't work (it linked to the Mediawiki pages themselves). I think that we don't need language templates tehre as we can make direct translations with /lang-code sub pages in MediaWiki namespace. Arnomane 01:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Coor d[edit]

woopsiedoo] - thanks :) -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 23:32, 8 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Expanding ~~~[edit]

So you think there is no way to do it? :( pfctdayelise (translate?) 01:43, 11 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions[edit]

Hi - when deleting duplicates, please make sure the imagesyou delete are not used anywhere - you deleted Image:Arm muscles front superficial.png and Image:Bmi.dienstsiegel.kennz.JPG today; both where used on the german wikipedia: I have fixed that, nut they may still be linked to elsewhere.

We really have to make sure we do not needlessly disrupt other projects - it's annoying if images just vanish without a good reason. Copyvios etc can be speedied even if used, cleanup is in the responsibility of the "offending" uploader, or the people using images without checking the license info. Duplicates, on the other hand, or no ones fault - so it's our responsibility as admins to make sure not to disturbe anything when we remove them. -- Duesentrieb^(?!) 01:20, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UED77, regarding to the deleted Image:100zl_r.jpg and Image:50zl_r.jpg and the words of Duesentrieb above, please check the usage prior to deleting. Thank you. --Raymond de 04:51, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sysopery[edit]

Hey, thanks for your message and support. I hope to cut my teeth on the nosource and speedy delete categories and send them into oblivion mwahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaa.... Arniep 21:54, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

speedy del cats/options[edit]

Hey UED77, I didn't realise until just now that you intended to do away with a option to write in a reason for speedy deletion alltogether. (Was that your intention? CAT:CSD seems to be up to date but Template:Speedydelete does not mention the new templates badname, etc.) Anyway I just wanted to say please leave an option for people to write in a reason, otherwise we will just get more deletion requests clogging up COM:VP, COM:DEL and any other place they can think of. :) (Some people just want to write a reason even if there's a template applicable to them.) It's hard to keep it simple...! pfctdayelise (translate?) 07:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Elise,

My intention when I created the Category:Incorrectly named, Category:Against policy, and Category:Duplicate was to separate three types of speedy deletions. Allow me to explain.

Category:Against policy (invoked by {{Copyvio}} or {{Fair use}} was meant for those files that could be deleted on sight, after warning the uploader. It was meant to encourage lazy people like me to frequent CAT:SD by providing a "choose a random picture and delete" sort of environment. Of course, I am aware that this is a bit of an exaggeration, as the uploader should nevertheless be notified and the validity of the copyvio-claim should be checked, but if that is performed, IMHO, the admins' responsibility ends. Honestly, I doubt any admin — except for maybe Fred — is eager to replace usages of a copyvio and notify other projects that use that file, so CAT:SD-AP is meant to be ultra-convenient for Commons admins, plus, it's beneficial to the project itself as the most urgent deletions are separated from less crucial, but nonetheless still speedy deletions.
Category:Duplicate (invoked by {{Duplicate}} was meant to replace one specific use of the dozen uses of Category:Redundant/{{Redundant}}. Specifically, it's meant for images that are exactly the same, so one of them should be deleted. Looking back, I'm certain I made this a speedy because redundant was also a speedy, but now I'm thinking more and more about changing it to a mere marker tag.
Category:Incorrectly named (invoked by {{Badname}} was honestly intended to be a simple tag, but it has generated quite some confusion. I've read your comments on its talk page, and I understand your confusion. {{Badname}} was meant specifically for the oft-occuring situation where a user uploads a file, but realizes soon after that the name contained a typo, misspelling, etc., and proceeds to upload the same image with (hopefully) the same description under the right name. In this case, the uploader would tag the wrong one with {{Badname}}, providing admins with, if that's even possible, a deletion category even easier than CAT:SD-AP, as hopefully these incorrectly named images would not yet be used anywhere. Unfortunately, I haven't explained the specific use of this template in sufficient detail, so that needs to be corrected on {{Redundant}}. If the file in question is already widely used, despite of technically possessing a "bad name", {{Duplicate}} is more appropriate. I do need to find a way to make this very clear.

I have not yet changed {{Speedy}} yet, which is somewhat of a mistake, as I was doing these changes at around 03:00 in my time zone, and I was tired and wanted to get speedy deletion categories and templates rearranged in the least amount of time possible, in order to not disturb the ever-active Commons too much. After that, I typed up a longish post in VP and crashed, and I never got around to changing {{Speedy}}. Just three days ago, I created a user copy of speedy to experiment with a few changes, but I forgot to mention the new templates... again. I when I'll apply some aesthetic changes to Speedy in the coming days, I'll mention the new, more specific templates.

As for trying to eliminate a reason for speedy deletion altogther, I have thought about it, but my current stance (as seen on my user copy of speedy) is to make it optional. However, my intention was to replace a generic {{Speedy}} with a set of more specific tags that would supply a reason to a pseudo-meta template speedy. I'm mainly aiming to make the jobs of admins easier, as well as to standardize the set of reasons, in a way, for an optional eventual attempt by the likes of Teofilo to translate the reasons, if they feel that is necessary. Sure, I agree the option to give an override reason should be given, but otherwise, I feel that copyvio, uploader mistake (badname) and duplicate are, however strange that might be, a quite comprehensive set of reasons for speedy deletions, and will remain so even if duplicate is made a marker tag. —UED77 15:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO @ WarX's message below. I guess it's not only me and Fred that remove the copyvios from use...

Back to the issue at hand,sorry if I've been overly critical! I am just concerned that changing the deletion process too much confuses users and results in more misapplied deletion requests (I especially want to lessen the number of wrong requests at COM:DEL, ie. requests that can be handled as speedy cases). Having it simple for admins is good, but having it simple for users is more necessary since they're the ones that implement the whole thing. So one thing that is very confusing is having different references say different things (one thing says "db", one says "speedydelete", one says "badname"... they give up and list on COM:DEL).

Also I very much think duplicate should remain a deletion tag. Since it is quite likely to be used instead of badname, at least for a few more months. pfctdayelise (translate?) 23:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, yes, apparently I'm great at upsetting people :P

No, you weren't overly critical at all. I understand your concerns; the deletion process needs to be explained on one page in multiple languages in detail, as well as briefly in every cat / template, to benefit the users who are — understandably — confused about the different types of deletions.

All right, duplicate will be kept as a speedy tag for now; in the meantime, I'll work on a way to concisely explain the specific niche {{Badname}} is used for. And I'll modify the {{Speedy}} template soon as well :) —UED77 23:47, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and also, regarding {{Badname}} and its likes putting images in both a specific speedy-cat and CAT:SD, it doesn't increase the size of CAT:SD, at least to my understanding. Once the image is deleted, regardless of which category it was found in, it disappears from the other, no? :) —UED77 00:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But if images like {{Badname}} only go into one category, we'll be able to weed out all the old non-specific speedy requests. CAT:CSD can be kept for the generic write-in-a-reason speedy requests that will require more attention than just deleting a duplicate. Having CAT:CSD with literally hundreds of members makes it quite useless as a category. I just don't see the value in double listing an image in a more specific cat and a generic one, when the specific cat is a subcat of the generic one. pfctdayelise (translate?) 01:03, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, okay. That makes sense, and now I'm somewhat surprised why that didn't occur to me. I'll change the templates in question before the cats are hopelessly flooded :D —UED77 01:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

All right. Please check out the new {{Redundant}}, {{Copyvio}}, {{Fair use}}, {{Duplicate}}, {{Badname}}, and {{Speedy}}, and tell me what you think. —UED77 02:23, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks better, but don't forget COM:DG should be the primary reference - so it needs to be updated too. (It still mentions redundant.)

I think we should make a big flowchart, COM:DG is too dense. Hm I will think about it... pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:40, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ack! That page scares me. Well, some tasks must be left for tomorrow, and this seems like a perfect one to do that to! :) I'll condense and refactor it later in the day (by UTC), hopefully. —UED77 02:57, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine how it looks to noobs who just want their image deleted! I started a flowchart at User:Pfctdayelise/test#.5B.5BCOM:DG.5D.5D_flowchart (incomplete, yeah I should work now...). If you can think of ANY conceivable reason for requesting deletion that I didn't mention, you're welcome to add to it. I would like to make something really pretty like Commons:Multimediahilfe. :) pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting images[edit]

You are admin for more than 1,5 month, so you should know, that deleting images, that are linked on wikis is

STUPIDITY

Hope you won't do that any more...

--WarX 22:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear WarX,

Thank you for that wonderful oversized red text. It spices my talk page up.

However, let's get a few facts straight. The images in question were copyright violations. It is clearly stated in Commons:Licensing (probably our most linked-to page), Commons:Project scope, the upload text, the edit warning, and probably a dozen other places (in many different languages if the user so desires, might I add) that "Copyright violations will be deleted!" The Złoty images you are talking about were copyright violations, so, naturally, they were deleted.

Are you aware how many images are awaiting speedy deletion? Out of these, how many are copyvios? 825 are copyvios according to CatScan, and there is no telling how many speedies there are altogether, as CatScan aborts the query after reaching 1000. Dozens of new files are tagged as speedies daily. There is a huge backlog of urgent deletions. I hope you understand that there is no way we can warn every project that uses a copyvio, wait until they respond, keep track of all the discussion, get cooperative replies, and then delete the image once all uses have been removed by friendly and understanding users. Notifying projects would take insane amounts of time, pushing the backlog even further. Besides, even if notifying all projects were possible, the more projects we notify the more users will argue that an obvious copyvio is actually freely licensed — or worse, Public Domain!

As much as I hate to cause disruption, I firmly hold to nothing else but the Commons licensing policy. I am not mentally challenged, and do not have a personal vendetta against certain images, or certain projects for that matter. I go by the book, and while I do amit, I have been sporadic in notifying the uploaders of copyvios in the past, I will always notify the uploader in the future, on Commons. But that's it.

What drives me is my desire to better Commons, and I'm one of the few admins here who are primarily concerned with Commons, as opposed to another project. That means that I put the needs of Commons ahead of the needs of other projects, and every project that decides to use files from Commons should understand that. And you should too. Please, I don't want a full-fledged war to develop between Commons and other projects — not nl.wp, pl.wp, or any project for that matter. However, I must do what I must do. The software doesn't help us, the lack of communication doesn't help us, and the constantly growing pile of copyvios doens't help us. I'm sorry if my actions, or the actions of any other admin leave holes in other projects, but please, understand our situation. Thank you. —UED77 23:09, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Bugs[edit]

Hey UED, maybe you know some I don't? If so, please add them :)

BTW User:UED77/Lang templates is completely awesome! Really good overview, so simple. --pfctdayelise (translate?) 14:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Great leap forward-Backyard smelting 1.jpg.jpg[edit]

Hi, first of all, thanks for your note :) Secondly, I think the image requires that {{PD-China}} be used, as "all photographs enter the public domain fifty years after they were first published". However, unfortunately I don't have the author/photographer. And without knowing Chinese I can't find out. Could you advise? Should the photograph just be deleted, or is there somewhere I can go to find a Chinese user to scan the page for an author?

Many thanks - FrancisTyers 14:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

According to w:Great Leap Forward, it lasted from 1958-1962. So even without reading that page, I don't see how it could be more than 50 years old. I will have a look at it when I get home though (characters don't show properly at uni). pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:53, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the image caption says: 一字排开的土高炉，尉为壮观. A row of open tall-earth furnaces. (something) spectacular. OK so that's just an image caption, no source or licensing mentioned. At the bottom of the page: 版权所有（©）All Rights Reserved. Hm but at the top of the page: 这个网站在制作过程中，使用了少许其他网站上的内容，或者模仿了一些网页设计，如果涉及版权，请与本站站长布龙联系，布龙会尽快删除. This website is under construction, it uses the content of other people's websites, or copies some webpage design. If it infringes on (your) copyright, webmasters please contact us, it will be removed ASAP. So basically it's just a grab-bag of stuff that they haven't even acknowledged the source of. D'oh.

Good image, though. Hope it gets transferred to en.wp as fair use. pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, thanks for looking at that. I should have realised, so we're 2 years away :) See you in a couple of years then ;) I'm not sure that it qualifies as fair use... - FrancisTyers 08:57, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help requested with hu: user[edit]

Hi! I need some help to contact hu:User:Lily15. She has uploaded many files on Commons, some of which miss source information and, I believe, have been tagged with the wrong licence. These "offending" works are listed on User Talk:Lily15. As she doesn't appear on Commons anymore, could you please contact her? Thanks, Jastrow 07:11, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. Jastrow

Let the deletion begin! :-) Thanks for handling this. Jastrow 14:13, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Welcome/hu[edit]

Hey, I am a bit concerned to see bolded links to non-existent key pages such as Commons:FAQ/hu and Commons:Licensing/hu. The welcome message should actually be helpful... could you at least link the English pages in brackets after the redlinks, so that something is available? thanks, pfctdayelise (translate?) 01:41, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Would the this scheme do for a couple of days until the translations are finished? —UED77 01:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, that's fine, if you actually are doing the translations, that's fantastic. :) pfctdayelise (translate?) 02:12, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I am. I am glad you like it. If all goes well, I should have them ready in at most two days. —UED77 02:18, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted images[edit]

Hi. On your page you characterized yourself as a perfectionist. I believe, you care about how the articles on Wikipedia looks like. A month ago you did delete Zloty pictures. I admit they was images againt policy and it was correct to delete them. BUT! Please consider unlinking images! For nearly a month four red links appear in Zloty article, just because you did not unlinked it. Doesn't seem to me as perfect solution. I understand it is hard work (I am admin too), but if you told me, I would unlink it myself... we could cooperate on this. Best --Zirland 05:39, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

category:against policy[edit]

woo under 200 :D pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:47, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

107, woo!!! (just sharing my excitement :)) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 15:28, 11 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

untitled[edit]

hey!! do u design the main page n stuff?

i ws just readin sum of ur convos about the deletation of sum pictures..

even i had loaded a pik but i donno sumting went wrong or wtw so i ws just thnkin if u cud make a little more clear.

neways i really like what u do wit the pages! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tulika 99 (talk • contribs) at 05:24, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I apologize for the delay in replying. I'm sorry, I don't think I understand what you mean with "loading" pics... you mean "uploading"? And could you describe what went wrong?

Oh, and frankly, the page design is not my work. Credit goes to Arnomane for that :D —UED77 04:58, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Commons-l subscription[edit]

Hello UED77,

as per Commons talk:Administrators, I am asking all admins to subscribe to commons-l, a mailing list for Wikimedia Commons policy and project discussion. Since many admins are only on Commons infrequently, this is a good way to alert people about important happenings. The mailing list is nominally multilingual, but predominantly English.

If you are already subscribed to commons-l, I apologize for bothering you, and you are free to ignore this message. If you don't want to use your regular e-mail account, feel free to leave me a message, and I can send you a GMail invite. Traffic on the mailing list is relatively low, and we do not expect admins to read all messages to the list, but it would be nice if you could check on it at least every few weeks. Thanks for your time,--Eloquence 23:17, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Against policy[edit]

Got it down to 90 (-25). Gee, that was the most fun 90 minutes of my life! And that was just deleting the easy ones... And when we get it below 50, then we'll be right to work on the Welcome (back)log which should only be a few hundred users by that stage. Ever get the feeling this is fruitless? :/ --pfctdayelise (translate?) 16:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Protection bot[edit]

I saw the stuff on IRC...making a bot to protect pages would be pretty simple. It would of course need sysop privileges, and therefore additional support from the community. If it's to be done, I prefer for it to be under a different account than Orgullobot, so that Orgullobot doesn't accidentally do somthing admin-like. Cheers--Orgullomoore 10:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

beiratkozva/bejelentkezve[edit]

Szia! Ki kéne javítani a magyar fordítást a MediaWiki:Anoneditwarning lapon, a beiratkozva helyett a bejelentkezve szóra. A beiratkozva pontatlan, és a magyar projektekben a bejelentkezve szó használatos. Köszi: FBöbe 88.209.198.57 13:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Köszi, hogy szóltál, kicseréltem a helyesre! Minden jót —UED77 15:31, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin news[edit]

Hello,

If you consent for statistics to be published about your actions as an administrator, please sign here: Commons:Administrator permission for statistics. (I expect that most people will not have a problem with it unless you are especially concerned with privacy.)

Also, please be aware that we now have a Commons:Administrators' noticeboard. Please put it on your watchlist, if you haven't already!

cheers, pfctdayelise (translate?) 05:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC) P.S.: Pardon if this is a repeat (bot debugging...)[reply]

Yay, you're back! :D I'll look forward to seeing you around. (We did some housekeeping while you were gone...) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 12:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yay, you're back... again! *grins* Have a nice, relaxing, productive Thanksgiving. :) --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:01, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1956-os Photos[edit]

Hello UED77! Could I ask your help in a copyright issue? The Hungarian Revolution of 1956 page is up for Feature Article Candidate on the English Wiki and it uses several photos from the Hungarian American Foundation [2] which holds copyright and states on its homepage [3] that these photos (and audio files, which we are also trying to convert) are offered for use as a resource to commemorate 1956 - this is exactly what we are doing. There are no explicit restrictions however the scope of permission is not equal to "unrestricted" either. It is clear to all that we can use the photos here, however it is not clear which tag, (and how to fill it out) should be used. Ive already got a note threatening to delete them, which would sink our chances of becoming FA by 23 Oct. The editors of 1956 are not skilled on the commons and very much appreciate your guidance in this. BTW, we invite you to browse the article - we are very proud of what we have accomplished so far. Istvan 16:02, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there. I have read the article, and I must say, you and all the editors have done an amazing job! It is extremely thorough and makes for an interesting read!

I am in the process of contacting the Hungarian American Foundation for an official permission email: there is actually a system in place for this specific type of issue. I certainly hope they will grant us permission.

Best —UED77 02:29, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the praise and good luck getting a response - I think they may be a volunteer organisation and may not check their messages every day. Most of the 56 editors have also left phone messages and emails. On their homepage [4] they have a link directly to the EnWiki 1956 page (right column 40% down) so there is no doubt we are putting these photos to their intended use. I dont think they understand the copyright standard on the Wikipedia, and this group of editors doesnt either - at least not well enough to explain it confidently. It gets complicated, I suppose. Now we are trying to get this up on the main page for 23 October. Thanks for your help and support! Istvan 03:24, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Mr. Bagdi from the AHF called, was pleased with our Wiki article (they have it linked) and agreed to put up a statement clarifying the copyright status. This is up now on their portal page (source of photos) at [5] right above the photos. I certainly hope this clarifies the issue - do you think we still need a different tag? In any case, we are hoping it is FA for 23 October to put 56 in front of the entire world. Istvan 20:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UED77, First I have some very good news: 56 will be EnWiki Feature Article on the Mainpage on 23 October! This is what we were working for the whole time. Secondly, the AHF put a statement on their 56 portal[6] page saying that they believe the photos are in the public domain (therefore the copyright statement at the bottom of the page obviously refers to the webpage itself?). Newly-minted Admin Matt314 says "pick out a public domain tag" and in the list I can find {{PD-author}} that seems to be closest, but I'd like your opinion. What to do? We are less than one week from the anniversary, we're up on the world stage, and we really want to avoid problems.Istvan 05:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. I am immensely glad the problems got resolved. The situation still isn't too clear, though: the AHF did not actually take the photos in question, and the original authors (who are nameless to best of our knowledge) have probably not been dead for 70 years, which would guarantee us Public Domain status. However, we should go by what the foundation tells us and label the pictures PD, with a prominent link to the statement that cites it so on their webpage. Congratulations on your article and success, and I might actually go about and tag the pictures appropriately in a few hours. Best, —UED77 01:43, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello UED77, Thank you for your offer to tag those photos, I would kindly request this - Its not that I am lazy, but rather deathly afraid of making a mistake which would lead to the photos' summary deletion - changes attract notice and if I do something wrong then there may be 50 admins ready to pull the photos down. In any normal circumstance this would not be a big deal, but in this one it is, because the subject matter - 1956 is sacred to many, it will be feature article on 23 October, these photos make that article shine brilliantly, and the eyes of the world will be on Hungary that day. My inexperience shouldnt lead to some pedestrian logistical mistake which sinks the whole ship and embarasses everyone. I trust your abilities much more than mine. Istvan 15:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please help to defend these photos during the 56 article's tenure on the front page today. thanks in advance Istvan 23:23, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hibás rendszerüzenet[edit]

Szia, leszednéd a MediaWiki:Loginerror/hu végéról a pontot? Ha nem írom be a jelszavam belépésnél, akkor emiatt a pont miatt hármaspont van benne: „Belépési hiba.: Password entered was blank. Please try again.“

--FBöbe 08:49, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Köszönöm a tippet; a pontot eltávolítottam :) —UED77 16:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Image:Gnome-icq.svg[edit]

Hello, I would like to ask you why you have deleted Image:Gnome-icq.svg. It was used in the german Wikipedia in the article about ICQ and in some other cases. I don't understand your comment. Sorry for eventual mistakes. --217.233.5.167 12:39, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I deleted the said image because I compared it to the ICQ official logo at w:ICQ, and the two are almost identical except for a thicker stroke and gradients on the leaves. I agreed with the original nominator and considered the image an infringement of copyright of the original logo. I am aware the image was a GNOME icon, and GNOME icons are supposed to be open source, but I think this one is a stretch. However, I can restore the image if you wish to upload it elsewhere where it will comply with policy. —UED77 14:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the answer. At the german Wikipedia there is now no ICQ-Icon anymore because "Fair Use" cannot be used in Germany, but I understand your reason. --217.233.5.167 22:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

But the Logo (even the original logo) can be used in the german wikipedia, because it has a low threshold of originality (Schöpfungshöhe) --80.171.81.28 12:59, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of Image:EscudoProvSalamanca.JPG[edit]

Hello. Why did you delete this image without removing it from the articles were it was used? Aren't you supposed to check every image use before deleting, and to warn the uploader? Johnbojaen 13:29, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize; I realize the uploader has not been warned. I restored the image and warned Moríñigo; I hope there will be some discussion, as the image is useful. —UED77 14:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, unless the uploader can prove that his upload is indeed GFDL as he says it is, then it has to go. It does appear to be merely taken from a website. Normal waiting time is 7 days; realistically, it's around 14. —UED77 14:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll expound the case at the es:wiki, looking for someone to make a free version of it (better if it's SVG). Johnbojaen 21:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re: Ground zero[edit]

Well done. :) BTW!!!! Guess who is the only other person on livejournal with an interest in 'wikimedia commons'? :D --pfctdayelise (说什么?) 14:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshotok Windows alatt[edit]

Szia! Törölted az EMule search screen.png képet azzal a kommenttel, hogy jogvédett UI elemek vannak benne. Ez pontosan mit jelent? A fájl-ikonokat? Az ablak skinjét? A Commons:Licensing#Screenshots nem ad használható támpontot. Gondolom, nem lesz minden Windows alatti screenshot automatikusan jogsértő... --Tgr 14:58, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AWB.png[edit]

Is there a special reason for why you deleted the above image rather than cropping away the WinXP style as sugested on the discussion page? /Lokal _Profil 01:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome log active again[edit]

Hi, on User:Orgullobot/Welcome log you are listed as a helper. Orgullobot hasn't been active for a while and SieBot has taken over the welcoming a few days ago. There is fresh output again. I thought you might be interested in that info. I do hope on your continued participation in checking newbie edits. Cheers! Siebrand 09:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Texas[edit]

Kedves Gábor,

A wikipedián olvasgattam Texasról, mikor megtalalátam pár képet, amit készítettél. Február elején utazom Dallasba. A munkámmal kapcsolatosan részt veszek egy egyhetes tanfolyamon, és utána még egy hetet ott töltök. Szeretnék megnézni pár szép helyet, nevezetességet. Ezügyben kérnék segítséget. Ha tudnál tanácsot adni, hogy mit érdemes megnézni Texasban, illetve akár még kicsit távolabb is Amerikában hálás lennék érte. v_andrusik@yahoo.com -ra várom a válaszod.

Üdv, Viktor

POTY 2006 competition[edit]

The arrangements for the Commons Picture of the Year 2006 competition are almost complete, and voting will take place between 1st and 28th Feb. All the featured pictures promoted last year are automatically nominated. As the creator of one or more images nominated for the election we invite you to participate in the event. Alvesgaspar 23:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deprecated language templates[edit]

Hi,
I've just edited your talk page to replace the deprecated {{hungarian}} template by the corresponding valid one: {{Hu}}. I hope you'll don't mind :)
Best regards from France,
-- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 12:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Un delet[edit]

- Why it was delete it, have a look at the licenc.User:Hipi Zhdripi/Ne Udhetim 13

Call to arms[edit]

Hi UED77. I write to you and all other users listed on the Welcome log helpers list, except for EugeneZelenko this Call to arms. The reason for it is that I have seen very little activity on the project by you. Because of this we have most probably failed to check the contributions of thousands of new users and have not been able to inform them of the practices on Wikimedia Commons in a timely fashion, causing more work for us and the contributor later in the process.

I would like to urge you to make a habit of checking at least 10 or so new user's contributions from the Commons:Welcome log each day you are active here. We welcome about 200 new users with contributions each day and we currently have 19 users on the helpers list. You can find links to some helpful scripts on the welcome log page, that are likely to make your life a lot easier. If there are no users to be checked that have been welcomed today, please attend to a previous log. Thank you for your renewed attention. Cheers! Siebrand 12:20, 25 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative notice[edit]

Deutsch

Hi. This message is sent out to you because you are an administrator on Commons, and you made little use (or no use) of the admin tools lately: less than 5 times in the last five months.

Commons has a new policy on admin activity, Commons:Administrators/De-adminship, taken into use on June 13, 2007 (after a poll among users). According to that policy, admins who use their tools infrequently will be asked whether they still need their adminship, and if they do not respond or require them the removal of the tools will be requested.

If you feel you still need your admin tools, please sign at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section within 30 days from the date this message was sent out. However, if you then don't make 5 admin actions in the following 5 months, you will lose the adminship without any notice.

This is not a comment on the considerable help you have given to the project in the past but reflects the wish of the community to see active administrators and to ensure that possible security breaches are minimized.

This message is sent out by bot. If you want to give feedback on it, you can do so here — 08:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Delisting[edit]

Hi, Sorry to say that I have put one of your images up for delisting from FP status because of the stitching errors in the beach. Image:Cape Cove, Oregon.jpg Benjamint 10:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

De-sysop[edit]

Hi! You have been de-sysoped because of your inactivity. Links are here and here. If you want to get your rights back please start a new Request for Adminship. Thanks for your work and best regards,abf /talk to me/ 18:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]