User talk:Mkdw

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Mkdw!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 05:38, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Tagging duplicate files

(reply to abuse filter report from 06:49, 12 January 2013 (UTC))

Because we deal with a lot of duplicate files at Wikimedia Commons, we have a special template and a special script for processing them. Exact or scaled down duplicates may be tagged with {{Dupe}}. If it isn't one of those, you can nominate the file for deletion. -- Rillke^(q?) 17:17, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Greetings

Greetings Mkdw. I noticed the discussion between you and Courcelles here and I just wanted to give you a little history. It should fist be noted that every edit I did improved those articles and when reverting them, Courcelles and others did in fact intentionally restore vandalism and positive improvements that I did. It's also worth mentioning that I never should have been banned in the first place and my ban was only able to get passed by manipulation and completely ignoring policy. Also, the only reason it was even done, was because I vocally criticized Courcelles and others for abusse of thive ueir admin tools or their failure to do anything about other admins who did so. So, while it is certainly true that I have created some alternate accounts and have no intention of stopping improving the project (because Ignore all rules applies) the bigger problem is that the ban shouldn't even be in place and Courcelles and others consider it ok to vandalize and delete positive contributions against policy. Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@Reguyla: I'm not entirely sure of all the circumstances but I see from en:User:Kumioko that the community banned you from Wikipedia. While we do have IAR, there are clearly times when it should not apply. I understand every dispute has its version of events and opinions, but as a training clerk and administrator on the English Wikipedia, it will be my process to find and block any accounts of yours that I come across. I'm not sure why exactly you sought to appeal to me about the issue; I did not block you or participate or put in place the community ban on you. If you simply felt the need to explain yourself, then you have done so but it's not really for me to do anything but merely comment. Mkdw (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

No problem I know you can't do anything but I wanted to let you know that you are supporting the wrong side for this particular debate and wanted you to be aware of the other side of the story since I cannot edit to defend myself there. My ban exists only to punish me for criticizing the conduct of some admins who routinely misuse the tools or who use their status to get what they want and the complacency of the Arbcom for not doing anything about it. I just wanted you to know that by enforcing that, you are only enforcing bad behavior and harming the project in doing so. Reverting or deleting my edits doesn't improve the project, it does the opposite. The only way they could get my ban in place originally was to submit ban requests over and over until one stuck. They finally got one to take (after the 4th attempt) for a minor comment on a users talk page warning them about provoking an admin. Since then, some people continue to manipulate and ignore policy to keep me from being able to edit eventhough the ban does not prevent anything except improvements to the project.

I have always been a dedicated and high output editor and I refuse to allow a few people who don't care about policy to push me out simply as a punishment. I know you can't do anything, they count on the fact that the Wikipedia culture makes it so that once someone is banned and/or labelled as a sockmaster by another admin, only that admin can do anything. I am not going to reward bad behavior by following a ban that shouldn't exist and I intend to continue to edit frequently, making improvements to the project as long as the project exists even if it requires me to create thousands of accounts to do so. So as long as my ban is in place for BS reasons, I will continue to edit using IAR. Because IAR is perfectly valid when another policy is preventing improvements to the project and I am not going to stop just because a few people like Courcelles who don't care about policy want me too to prove they have the power. Reguyla (talk) 10:39, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Also, please let them know I do not appreciate being a homework assignment here. They should be focusing on spammers, vandals and CCI violators, not dedicated, high output and positive contributors they don't like and want to make an example out of by lying and manipulating policy to suit them. Reguyla (talk) 14:00, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

I can't image any of the individuals who have SPI filed about them enjoy it, let alone the ones selected as case studies for training. If it makes you feel any better, it was done at random. I originally selected en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Navyvet2016 and it was only after some follow up that I was informed it was linked to your accounts. Mkdw (talk) 21:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. I bet most of the rest of the folks weren't banned by people violating policy though; nor do they have half a million edits and several hundred articles created, more than a dozen of which are featured, either. I wouldn't be socking if I wasn't blocked. I am just not going to to reward POV pushing policy violators by following ban that shouldn't exist. Reguyla (talk) 23:41, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Greetings, Thanks for the unbiased comment and I'll try not to keep bothering you but I wanted to let you know that you may as well keep that case open over at ENWP. I just wanted to let you know that I have no intention of stopping contributing there because a few people that don't follow policy and rarely do content improvement themselves want me too. Regardless of whether I edit or not, they periodically accuse people on Navy, Verizon or Tmobile networks of being me anyway as well as lie, create a disruption and violate policy to help justify an unjustifiable ban so there is no reason to follow it. I know you are just following orders so to speak, so if you all want to continue to make work for yourselves and insult me just to keep the ban in place and be able to justify vandalizing my contributions then it's up to you. Either way I am not going to stop editing and improving the project because that is what I have done for the last 10 years and will continue to do into the distant future. In fact, you should probably add Editor Zero 999 to your list. I'll create another one in the next couple days as well and let you know what it is when it gets blocked. I am not trying to hide and shouldn't have too. Unfortunately I can't do much except vandalism reversion at this point because any other type of edit will be vandalized. Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 11:06, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Greetings Mkdw. I see your still looking for more non content building work to do on ENWP to help build up your reputation. Since some like Courcelles just accuse positive contributors who are trying to improve Wikipedia of sockpuppetry, this page could use some updating.

BTW, regardless of how many times Courcelles, Gamaliel and others vandalize my edits or block my accounts I am going to continue to make positive contributions forever so I'll keep you all plenty busy until my account is unblocked. That's not meant to be a threat or blackmail, I am just not going to let a few bullies who don't represent the community and who think think they have don't have to follow policy because they are admins drive me out of the project. I am just going to continue to edit positively, with new accounts if I have too, forever per Ignore all rules (notice how ignoring abusive blocks and not bowing to bullies threatening editors with blocks for criticizing abusive behavior isn't exempted from that) if that is what I have to do. Besides, as long as Courcelles and others are just making stuff up and crediting me with accounts that aren't even mine, I can't trust that the admins on ENWP won't just make shit up to accuse me of anyway. So I have no reason to trust they will unblock my account even if I don't edit. After all, the reason I am blocked is because I was advocating they have to follow the rules and hold admins accountable to the same policy as editors. Cheers! Reguyla (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2015 is open!

You are receiving this message because you voted in R1 of the 2015 Picture of the Year contest.

Dear Mkdw,

Wikimedia Commons is happy to announce that the second round of the 2015 Picture of the Year competition is now open. This year will be the tenth edition of the annual Wikimedia Commons photo competition, which recognizes exceptional contributions by users on Wikimedia Commons. Wikimedia users are invited to vote for their favorite images featured on Commons during the last year (2015) to produce a single Picture of the Year.

Hundreds of images that have been rated Featured Pictures by the international Wikimedia Commons community in the past year were entered in this competition. These images include professional animal and plant shots, breathtaking panoramas and skylines, restorations of historical images, photographs portraying the world's best architecture, impressive human portraits, and so much more.

There are two total rounds of voting. In the first round, you voted for as many images as you liked. In Round 1, there were 1322 candidate images. There are 56 finalists in Round 2, comprised of the top 30 overall as well as the top #1 and #2 from each sub-category. In the final round, you may vote for just one or maximal three image to become the Picture of the Year.

Round 2 will end on 28 May 2016, 23:59:59 UTC.

Click here to vote »

Thanks,
-- Wikimedia Commons Picture of the Year committee 09:45, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

CropTool

In the future, I would appreciate it if you used CropTool to crop images. This tool allows users to crop images already on Commons without having to download the images. It also makes sure that, if necessary, the file has already passed license review. It also properly links the images to one another, in case an issue with them comes up later. Elisfkc (talk) 16:32, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@Elisfkc: Thank you for the tip. I had no idea there was such as tool. I will definitely keep it in mind next time. Regards, Mkdw (talk) 17:56, 1 February 2018 (UTC)