User talk:Vicent.Dissident

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Vicent.Dissident!

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 14:26, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Evolución Lingüística en Europa Sudoccidental (S.XI - Actualidad).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!

Coentor (talk) 09:21, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Linguistic Evolution in South West Europe (11th Century - Today).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!

Coentor (talk) 09:40, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove deletion requests[edit]

Bahasa Indonesia  বাংলা  Deutsch  English  español  français  magyar  Nederlands  Nederlands (informeel)‎  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  svenska  Türkçe  suomi  македонски  русский  українська  മലയാളം  日本語  עברית  فارسی  +/−


Please do not remove deletion request tags from images before an administrator has closed the debate. If you do not agree that the image should be deleted, you can express your opinion on the deletion request page. You can find this page via a link in the deletion request tag or at Commons:Deletion requests. Thank you.

Revent (talk) 07:22, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked Indefinitely
Blocked Indefinitely
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Commons. 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.
See the block log for the reason that you have been blocked and the name of the administrator who blocked you.

azərbaycanca  català  čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  Bahasa Indonesia  italiano  kurdî  la .lojban.  magyar  Nederlands  Plattdüütsch  polski  português  português do Brasil  sicilianu  suomi  svenska  Türkçe  Tiếng Việt  Zazaki  македонски  русский  українська  हिन्दी  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  עברית  العربية  فارسی  +/−

Steinsplitter (talk) 10:35, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request[edit]

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: "It seems to have been a misunderstanding. Today in the morning, I was blocked by Steinsplitter administrator, who alleged "Single Purpose Account". My user account is just 2 weeks old so, in my honest opinion, that's a very short time to know whether an user account was created with a particular purpose, which, by the way, Steinsplitter didn't specify. In that timeframe, all I did was upload just one file, which I was talking about due to a DR. After re-uploading a new file version, I decided to remove DR template (my bad; now I know I was wrong) because, from my point of view, the reason user claimed to include the DR template, no longer made sense. My last edit was yesterday. Today, I received a friendly warning from Revent administrator, BUT I already stopped doing changes yesterday. Shockingly, 3 hours later since Revent friendly warning AND without doing any further template change since yesterday, my user account has been blocked indefinitely by Steinsplitter, which I think it's a so much hard punishment evaluating what actually happened. The decision taken by Steinsplitter seems punitive rather than preventative.
  • Wikimedia Commons Block Policy states:

    Before blocking: For blocks based on disruptive behaviour, such as vandalism, repeated copyright violations and manual promotional activities, ensure that the user has been appropriately warned, preferably using a block warning template.

When blocking: As blocks are preventative rather than punitive, use a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour.

So, from what I said, I would like the decision was reconsidered. Thank you all administrators in advance.--Vicent.Dissident (talk) 17:54, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
"[reply]
Decline reason: "Your only purpose here seems to be creating POV maps and placing them in articles cross wiki. You got reverted several times. Given the fact that you seem to know a awful lot about Commons policy makes me wonder if this is your first account. Of course this block is not punishment, it is here to replace projects against you uploading inaccurate maps and dropping them in articles cross wiki. And yes, by checking the edits of this account not only here but at all Wikimedia projects this account has edited makes me come to the same conclusion. Natuur12 (talk) 19:02, 21 June 2015 (UTC)"[reply]
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)  +/−

Hi @Natuur12: I think you are wrong. This is my single account. I know about Block Policy because I was reading about it once I was blocked. On the other hand, I signed up 2 weeks ago. My only purpose in here is to improve Wikimedia and Wikipedia content. That's why I uploaded a file, which, from my point of view and from what you can read in Wikipedia, is more accurate than the one is being used right now. When a DR was created, I was talking about my improvement several days with other wikipedians before removing the DR template. I'm newbie. After being reading about Wikipedia policies, I realized I was wrong when I removed the DR template. I didn't know an administrator must make a decision regarding the uploaded file before DR template can be removed. Yes, I was wrong removing the DR template, I'll be much more careful next time and before doing any change, I'll argue it even more. I want to be useful. Please, like Block Policy states, reconsider your decision using a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour. This is not about unlocking me, but just adjusting ban duration proportionally. Thank you in advance. --Vicent.Dissident (talk) 13:00, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Second Opportunity[edit]

Unblock request granted

This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request.

Request reason: "One year ago, on 21-JUNE-2015, I was blocked at Wikimedia due to some mistakes I made when I was a beginner. Now, one year later, I'm asking for that decision to be reconsidered. I would be very thankful.

About my block one year ago:

  • On one hand, I didn't do any changes in the meantime in between when I was warned (with the inclusion of a block warning template in my user talk page) and when I was blocked.
  • On the other hand, I just signed up two weeks before I was blocked, being just a beginner.

In spite of those two aspects, I was blocked indefinitely. Keeping in mind what Block Policy states, I think block's time span was so excessive: "As blocks are preventative rather than punitive, use a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour."

As you can see, last year I've been collaborating, editing and creating articles at spanish Wikipedia, helping to improve Wikipedia content. In all the time I've spent in Wikipedia this last year, I've learnt so much about how Wikipedia and Wikimedia work and about their policies.

All I'm asking for is just a second opportunity. Thank you all so much in advance for your time and comprehension. --Vicent.Dissident (talk) 17:53, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
"[reply]
Unblock reason: "Second chance has been granted, please review our local policies before proceeding to edit. ~riley (talk) 20:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)"[reply]
This template should be archived normally.
(Block log)
(unblock)
(Change local status for a global block)
(contribs)

čeština  Deutsch  English  español  français  hrvatski  magyar  Plattdüütsch  português  suomi  हिन्दी  македонски  русский  slovenščina  Tiếng Việt  中文(简体)  中文(繁體)  中文(臺灣)  +/−