Ali Mohammad Khilji (talk | contribs) |
→Last block and something to notice: new section |
||
Line 322: | Line 322: | ||
This deleted file is also available on other name but actualy this( "File:File Hayat 1. jpg.jpg) one has been disappeared from the face book viewers page, how can the other one should be appeared,--[[User:Ali Mohammad Khilji|Ali Baba]] ([[User talk:Ali Mohammad Khilji|talk]]) 09:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC) |
This deleted file is also available on other name but actualy this( "File:File Hayat 1. jpg.jpg) one has been disappeared from the face book viewers page, how can the other one should be appeared,--[[User:Ali Mohammad Khilji|Ali Baba]] ([[User talk:Ali Mohammad Khilji|talk]]) 09:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC) |
||
== Last block and something to notice == |
|||
I've replied to you on the block section on my talk page which you might want to read, in specific, I didn't revert him as a reaction to the block and rather before you blocked him (I've closed that discussion anyway but you should know that I do get drawn to editwars some times but I don't editwar by myself.. will try to improve on the former). |
|||
There are a few things which are making me very suspicious and I'd rather that you take a look at them. I mentioned an editor ([[User:DBigXRay]]) who was once hounding me on your talk page while commenting on some previous issue. JCAla 'needlessly' informed him of being mentioned on your talk page to which he has now replied with a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DBigXray&curid=33070626&diff=470053375&oldid=470038937 blatant attack]. Next, Darkness Shines nominated the article [[Indians in Afghanistan]] for deletion... Mar4d was the creator and me the only some what significant contributor with few edits on the article... how does JCAla know that it was nominated for deletion and goes there to comment for a "strong delete"? My contributions or the email feature? Next to shift it from suspicious to obvious, DBigXRay [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Indians in Afghanistan|comments there]] with the same although he surely can't be watching that page either. --<span style="text-shadow:#396 0.2em 0.2em 0.5em; class=texhtml">[[User:TopGun|<b style="color:#060">lTopGunl</b>]] ([[User talk:TopGun|<b style="color:#000">talk</b>]])</span> 13:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 13:17, 7 January 2012
-----> FAQ: My Maps <-----
|
Mass move to Commons
Hi! Hope everything is ok at your place and you have a nice hollyday to look forward to :-)
When someone move a file to Commons without adding a original upload log or with a wrong license it could take more time to repair than if we had moved the file ourselves.
So I was thinking that it would be nice if we could move a lot of good files to Commons in no time to reduce the number of "bad" transfers.
The best idea I could think of was to find users that upload a lot of good "own work-files" and move those.
So I have been looking at User:Multichill/top self uploaders. I pick a user. Check their uploads. Add puf or ffd on possible unfree files and useless files. Make my bot move the rest without checking them manually.
So a lot of files will show up in Category:Wikipedia files reviewed on Wikimedia Commons by MGA73bot and there may be a few files that should not have been moved.
If you want to join the fun you could pick a user and check for copyvios and bad files and then either move the uploads or leave me a note with "I checked the uploads of xxx and they are ready to move" and then I can move.
You may ofcourse also tag if you find that any bad files have been moved. --MGA73 (talk) 10:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- That's actually a pretty good idea; better yet, you could have your bot create a gallery of all their images, and scan them en masse, and then just remove the offenders. Once the offenders are removed, your bot would transfer them, and you or I could use twinkle mass delete. Only caveat: if we do that, we should only do it on files that have the same name on Commons, because the deletion summary needs to have the new name on Commons, and any relevant talk pages need to be moved. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:59, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes if file has a different name then we need to do it manually. Cat scan can help us find files with a DYK-template or a Keep local-template. It would be really cool if we could move a lot of files in no time :-D Let me know if you know any good candidates. --MGA73 (talk) 21:01, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
Time for me to stop for today but first list is here User:MGA73/mtc. It is all files uploaded by one user. The best would be to make a list of files that excludes fair use and files nominated for deletion and files with a NowCommons and ...?... --MGA73 (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- OK, but wouldn't it be better to have the bot prune fair use works before they're placed on the subpage? This is how I would do it: see if there are any templates on the page whose name starts with Non-free (it is easy to get a list of templates... it's an API function). If not, see if there is a free use template on the page, pruning for known templates. You could make a list of known templates, and if any images come up without any such templates, depending on the nature of the template, you can a) nominate them as {{subst:nld}}, b) add the license template to the blacklist, or c) add the license to the whitelist. That's how I would do it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:08, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Sure... First list was just a test :-) I updated the list User:MGA73/mtc with a new user. Now the list only have files in Category:Self-published work and all files with a puf or a fdd are excluded. That should take care of fair use files and files with known problems. --MGA73 (talk) 16:34, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
- Would you consider pruning everything in Category:All non-free media and checking for Category:All free media? This could be an issue for File:1974 Iceland 1100 year coin (reverse).jpg, for example. Magog the Ogre (talk) 14:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Oh... Well I think that mixing free and unfree files like that is a mess. I would prefer that the free license was removed from files like that. But untill that happens I could exclude files with category All non-free media. --MGA73 (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Right. Well it does happen sometimes, and it's not just me who does it, so best to keep it simple and prune the category. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:59, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Yep... But not all likes the mass transfer. Was reported to AN/UP on Commons ;-) Have you looked at User:MGA73/mtc? --MGA73 (talk) 21:17, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- I'll look at it now; currently I'm working on tools:~magog/ogrebot.htm; have you looked at that yet? Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
I did not know that tool... Cool... Sadly my connection is very slow today so the tool takes veeeery long time to show up... --MGA73 (talk) 21:54, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, the text alone is 13MB, so the entire page will take a long time to load. I should have broken it into smaller pieces. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Cool. I added a new user :-) --MGA73 (talk) 23:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps you could fix the first files in Category:Wikipedia_files_reviewed_on_Wikimedia_Commons_by_MGA73bot (Older versions to Commons). --MGA73 (talk) 21:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- What do you mean fix them? Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:59, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
They have old versions. Perhaps we should move those to Commons. --MGA73 (talk) 22:39, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- Oh definitely: tools:~magog/oldver.php. I'd say if your bot finds any files that have more than one version, it should not tag the image as immediately deleteable. Or if your bot is particularly intelligent, and can compare sha1's to see if all the uploads are the same (you'll want to purge the cache first if you do that; for about 1 out of every 3000 images, MediaWiki misreports the sha1 as being the same for a subsequent upload, when it is two different files). Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:42, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- All files I mentioned above is now fixed...
- My bot only marks files as reviewed if it has moved the files to Commons itself. So the hash value should be ok. Perhaps the easiest way is to open the category with reviewed files check all photos if there is a puf, ffd, dyk, keep local, coordinates outside the information tempate or if there is older versions that should be moved and if not delete the file manually.
- I updated User:MGA73/mtc with a new user. Funny mix of files. --MGA73 (talk) 14:44, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
Got an anonymous IP committing vandalism on these two pages. I've reverted at Parthian twice and Balochi once. --Taivo (talk) 01:36, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- That doesn't immediately strike me as vandalism, more like a content dispute. Are you sure it's vandalism? WP:NOTVAND. Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Yes. It is a Kurdish nationalist placing the words "Kurdish" throughout these two articles about Iranian languages--replacing the term "Iranian" with "Kurdish" or "Iranian Kurdi". It's not a content dispute. --Taivo (talk) 18:10, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- OK; looking more closely, it looks like a an automatic text replacement. While it might have been well intentioned, it probably wasn't. I would call it vandalism. If it happens again, place a warning on the user's page (if not already done) and report to WP:AIV. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:14, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks
For the image work, much appreciated if you could look over my contributions some time Sfan00 IMG (talk) 17:53, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- OK, if I see anything awry, I'll let you know. Do you have anything specific you were thinking of? Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:06, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
- Not really, but the pattern of my contribs in the last few days might suggest areas you may wish to look into in more depth :)Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:35, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
I'm NOT seeing a deletion disscussion at Commons, Can you provide a link? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:45, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- Resolved - JPG/jpg issue Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:25, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
FAL images
Would you mind adding this to your to-do list? I'm seeing some things in it that I'm not sure about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:FAL&namespace=6&limit=500
Sfan00 IMG (talk) 11:23, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Season's tidings!
FWiW Bzuk (talk) 04:27, 25 December 2011 (UTC).
OTRS
Heya; the "article feedback" category is for things that relate to the Article Feedback Tool, particularly the new version, not just issues with articles. Thanks! Regards, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 04:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- I knew I was gonna get something wrong. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:45, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, don't worry about it; it's a brand-new category, and I pretty much expected to misunderstand the purpose (we really should come up with a more unique title...). Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 07:14, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
JCAla again
Second opinion request
Would I be able to get a second opinion on Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Edit_warring#User:Prashantkharat_reported_by_User:Mkdw_.28Result:_no_violation.29? I know this is unorthodox and generally frowned upon when a decision has been made by another admin, but I feel that it was very clear that this editor broke the 3RR by directly reverting 4 times in a row the same unchanged content, and then added a citation and reverted it two more times after that. I shouldn't have mentioned the single purpose IP's but that doesn't change the fact that if you exclude them he's made over 6 edits of reintroducing the same material. Just baffled how an admin came to the conclusion of no violation. Mkdwtalk 19:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- Done Unusually, I agree and have blocked the editor. I don't mind blocking because I don't think I was reversing an administrative decision, rather blocking for disruptive behavior. Please note the slight rebuke I've left you at AN3 though. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:44, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
File:1007thevibe logo v2 cropped.png
On File:1007thevibe logo v2 cropped.png, there is now a {{NotMovedToCommons}} tag, but the reason shown is "because see template", and the template itself doesn't seem to have any further details about this file. I can't see to find anything on English Wikipedia or on Commons that mentions this file coming up for review. Why has the tag been applied? Is there concern that the file will come up for deletion on Commons for having more artistic creativity than simple shapes under Commons:Template:PD-textlogo? (I noticed that some of the items in Commons:User:Magog the Ogre/questionably PD-ineligible content are even simpler and seem to be well within the usual standards for PD-textlogo on Commons: e.g. File:1023BOBFM.jpg, File:Acc name.JPG, File:Api logo.jpg, File:Random.org logo 2009-10-23.png, File:TheCrystalBucket.jpg.) --Closeapple (talk) 20:38, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
- To copy the wording of {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}: "This image is believed to be non-free or possibly non-free in its home country[, Canada]. Some countries, particularly other countries based on common law, have a lower threshold of originality than the United States." See commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Two British logos for relevant information regarding British commonwealth countries. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:53, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
OK, that makes sense. But what about File:1007thevibe logo v2 cropped.png then? It's certainly American, unless it is derived from the logo of another country. (Granted, I could see someone bringing it up for nomination on Commons to get consensus because of the concentric waves off the "i" in "Radio".) On a side note: one might find a country parameter useful on the {{PD-ineligible-USonly}}. --Closeapple (talk) 01:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
- Well boo; I had that one listed as Canada. I'll fix it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
On a related file: I think I've got Commons:File:Fortran acs cover.jpeg solidly in the public domain in the U.S. now. (I don't know how long corporate authorship copyright lasts in any countries that recognize copyright on U.S. works despite the U.S. itself not recognizing the copyright; that's probably irrelevant for Commons though.) --Closeapple (talk) 04:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
CC-BY-NC 2.0
Any idea if this version of CC is ok for uploading? Image is here. - Sitush (talk) 01:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
- No, it is not OK, except as fair use, which is basically never. See commons:Commons:Licensing/Justifications for information on why it's not OK. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I had not come across that version of CC before. - Sitush (talk) 07:19, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
TopGun
Athens Landsat
Hi!
About File:Athens Landsat.jpg
I know I had taken it from a NASA page, but that was back in 2004, and I'm trying to find the original source URL.
Anyway I found a similar looking pic at http://www.ldcm.nasa.gov/images/archive/c0024.html
WhisperToMe (talk) 06:55, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- Do you have any general idea where you got the image? The reason we require the sourcing is that sometimes images on NASA's website aren't in fact created by NASA; sometimes they're by the ESA, for example. Are you confident it came from the Landsat project (http://www.ldcm.nasa.gov/)? Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:43, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
I have added the source information to the Commons copy. I assume that means the en:Wikipedia copy now meets CSD F8 and will be deleted, so I don't need to source that as well?--Keith Edkins ( Talk ) 10:15, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
- Deleted as F8. Correct. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:41, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --lTopGunl (ping) 14:46, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
Darkness shines
I've reported Darkness Shines for his continued hounding editwar at a range of articles including deletion of citations from the already resolved Taliban article at AN3 [6]. Whether actioning your self or not, you might want to add comments there. --lTopGunl (talk) 17:09, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
- OK; my eyes just glossed over trying to read that. Can you, like, summarize? Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, the pages are protected (except Taliban which needs attention now, you'll know as you read through) but I'll still summarize it and the wiki wide incidents since JCAla is implying a lot of things wrong in a post below and the issue needs a context:
- User:Buddy431 blanked the same content as Ashok (who was blocked by you for obvious canvassing blanking and getting a speedy deletion of a good page tricking Fastily by adding a db-hoax tag to it) at Separatist movements of India - I only reverted him once and then went to talk page to contest and I told him I didn't really cared about the content but plain blanking (another Indian User:AshLin previously also agreed on this by reverting an SPA User:Hynaboy). Darkness Shines entered the talk page right in with minor personal attacks of which he was told at ANI to refrain from and Buddy431 was a bit uncivil already on my objection only with a single revert that was mainly based on Ashok and things mentioned above.
- Some time later Ashlin added a citation needed tag to a sentence at Anti-Pakistan sentiment and I added a reliable citation there with in minutes of that. Darkness Shines came in and added verification failed tags to it (while I had properly reviewed the citations previously). I reverted him and told him that in the edit summary. He continued to revert so I left it there and went to talk page where he asked for the quotation which I provided. Then he started to troll on it (please see for yourself) while the quotation exactly said what I pointed out. Then Ashlin reverted Darkness Shines calling my citation exactly what was being mentioned - Darkness Shines made another revert adding a dispute tag to the article.
- He then removed a reference from the dispute on Taliban even when it did cite Pakistan's claim though mentioning other claims against it (but it was there to prove that Pakistan denied which it proved even with the author being against it). After two reverts he debated uselessly over it at talk even when it was decided before.
- Further escalating - a previous page which I got protected at RFPP Inter-Services Intelligence for a dispute between me, Darkness Shines, JCAla (who was 'invited' to 'advise' on his talk page) and Ambelland - Darkness Shines started to add duplicate information and other contentious content which I had my self added previously to the proper sections on his insistence.
- So I reported him for all the attempts to draw me into editwars (noting that JCAla had left him a message to turn on his email - which he might have turned on n now off) and the page got flooded... Buddy431 just came in to that report to add comment against me for a single revert. Also I'm being implied to be 'wrong' for having disputes? There's nothing wrong with having many disputes, but it is wrong when many people are attempting to draw you into editwars, escalating, asking each other for 'advise' who would then come and revert. There's also an IP which commented on your talk page which is very clearly trolling, it flooded the AN3 report. It was blocked for editwar on the 71 war article with 4-5 editors and is editwarring again now (check if it needs a block).
- And just now JCAla and Darkness Shines have edited Taliban article weaseling around the same content which had no consensus on talk... They've also called in a WP:POINT RFC for it after not getting a consensus at talk page, NPOVN and DRN. This is getting funny now. I don't want to revert them and get blamed for editwarring but this has to be seen through. Darkness Shines is also using the source of my signature on his talk page which implies the discussion took page on his talk page or I signed there... I refactored it to plane text which he has reverted. --lTopGunl (talk) 12:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- Magog, excuse my editing your page, I know you requested that I do not. However, you have but one option here, take the glaze from your eyes and read the full AN3 report, diffs and all. Either do your job as an administrator or do not bother to comment on my actions. I will not deign to comment on what TG has written here, it is incorrect. Darkness Shines (talk) 12:59, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Re: Auburn high school sources
Message added Lissoy (talk) 05:20, 2 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
About
A happy new year to you.
I am trying to explain to you my point of view as best as possible, and hope you try to understand it.
- As you might have noticed I never used personal attacks in disputes and I simply expect this from everyone else, especially from people which have special responsibilities through the rights they have been granted. It doesn't take a lot to offend someone sitting securely in front of a PC. If I had said to you, "you don't realize it (many people lack the capability of seeing through the things whether due to culture, upbringing, education or genetics... for many, it's an unfortunate side-effect of being human)", would you have considered it a personal attack? I think it is a very sophisticated personal attack. Calling someone a "dimwit" or whatever is just ridiculous compared to the sentence above. There are parts in the world, where I do not advise anyone to say that face to face to other people. People may perceive this differently depending on their culture.
- In the moment I perceive you as making an unbalanced use of your administrative rights. Among the reasons:
- 1) Although I might have forgotten about complaining to you instead of the edit warring notice board (and I truly forgot that part of the agreement, I prominently remembered the part about not turning a talk page discussion into discussions about another editor's pov, agenda or motivations) I did have a valid complaint and the editor I reported was indeed involved in six edit wars (which I was definitely not). The dispute I had with TopGun was a non-dispute. The names of the two regions of Pakistani Kashmir are gilgitbaltistan.gov.pk and ajk.gov.pk according to the government of Pakistan. Replacing the regions' name or the internationally used term "Pakistan-administered Kashmir" with "Azad Kashmir" (Free Kashmir) is politically motivated vandalism. And there is every right to revert that. Would you revert if someone put "One Nation under God" or "America the Beautiful" as the header of the USA lead? Would you discuss that? Normally, administrators will take the time to look at both editors. I think you looked at only one.
- 2) The same goes for your actions against User:Ashok4himself. You were referring to "Indian nationalists" in relation to User:Ashok4himself who never was blocked before, who mainly so far concentrated on the issue of railway sytems and cuisine. Ashok (and I have no relation to him other than the two sentences we shared on my talk page) never used Indian nationalist words. But when he came into contact with a certain editor, he ran into an dispute which had two editors involved. You blocked one and even championed the other for discovering "lousy editors".
- 3) I perceive you as glossing over what so many different unrelated editors are writing. User:Buddy431 certainly has not been an involved editor in this conflict so far. But he says the same as I do. Also, Darkness Shines was part of the Taliban talk. A certain editor reported him (same what I did with regards to certain editor) and even called you to support him without taking all the measures you told me to take before reporting someone. How can you perceive the same thing as disruptive done by one editor and ignore it when done by the other?
- 4) There are other reasons, but I don't think listing them all here will make any difference.
- What I did at ANI was a comment and complaint directed at you for what you wrote at that very topic. If I had wanted to make a sophisticated complaint about you to others, I would have listed all my reasons and arguments with references.
- I have given you many reasons and provided many arguments to you in our previous discussion. So I see no use in repeating or expanding on it. I think you have been put on the wrong track by my unfortunate dispute with TP (the only dispute I had with an editor other than TopGun recently). But I want you to consider one thing in the future: Who is the conditio sine qua non in this series of disputes? And who is the single one editor who is involved in all these disputes? Is it me? Is it User:AshLin? Is it User:DBigXray? Is it User:Buddy431? User:The Last Angry Man? Is it User:Ashok4himself? Who is it?
- If you see not one single point in any what I wrote, I would ask you to let any dispute which includes me be handled by any other administrator. If you do see a point, I would ask you to carefully consider the positions of all the involved editors in the future. Can you agree to this?
JCAla (talk) 11:54, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
I hope the above discussion now again started by TopGun will not keep you from truly considering the discussion between the two of us. JCAla (talk) 13:18, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- I don't even know where to start. I guess I'll tackle this head-on:
- 1) You haven't engaged in personal attacks. No need to defend yourself on that. Your behavioral problems are in mostly megalomaniacal POV (see below).
- 2) I wouldn't know Kashmir from Waziristan from Bombay. And no, it's not a clear-cut issue; the fact that you think it is is a master case of megalomaniacal point of view. If he's showing too much POV, then edit within the confines of WP:DR and you'll find it will get removed soon enough. But if you keep edit warring you'll get banned from the article, and then your point of view will never come across. Have some patience.
- 3) Who cares if Ashok4himself was never blocked before? He was acting like an ass now, so I blocked him. No one else was nearly as bad as he was, save for an pro-Pakistani IP who I blocked for even longer.
- 4) I don't care what Buddy431 has to say. Argue things on their own merits, not on what someone said.
- 5) TopGun is the link. And TopGun is probably editing from an overly strong Pakistani-POV which should be fixed. But here's the problem: TopGun is being civil, not hounding anyone's contributions (à la Darkshines), not engaging in meatpuppetry behind closed doors (that I know of), and his edit warring is no worse than anyone else. The people engaging against him, however, are pursuing a heavy-handed attempt to get his POV utterly pushed off every page on the project, by means of revert warring, personal attacks (i.e., making editing an unpleasant experience for him), and by reports to noticeboards which are perfect cases of WP:BOOMERANG.
- I'm warning you right now: you're coming closer and closer to getting yourself a topic ban. You say you're willing to negotiate, but any time someone disagrees with you, you edit war and just reinsert the material under the guise that no sane person could agree with his edits, and then go elsewhere and have the chutzpah to complain about the user engaging in edit warring. That's not acceptable. So, I'm saying, stop. Now. Pay attention to what I'm saying. I'm for you, not against you. Start negotiating, start sucking up your pride and accepting that the article will not appear 100% the way you'd like it, or you will be banned from it. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Anytime someone disagrees with me, I edit war? I disagreed with many editors over the years and did edit war only with Lagoo sab and TopGun because I guess I expect them to abide by a certain norm and use/understanding of reliable sources. Anyways. I am paying attention. And I think what EdJohnston wrote on ANI is very good news. Chutzpah, huh?! JCAla (talk) 20:31, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- This is exactly what I'm talking about: [7]. DS saw something in TG's suggestion that was never there. He was unquestionably projecting; it wasn't even close. And yet you're incapable of seeing any fault in someone from your own side, and the very fact that I do means I'm being unreasonable. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
No, the fact that you do not see and act on any fault of the other editor, means you are being unreasonable. I am fine with someone seeing "my fault" as long as he sees the fault of the other editor as well - which other administrators did do. But again, chutzpah. JCAla (talk) 20:46, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
May I make you aware of this and this without comment?! JCAla (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'll make a comment, looks like a sock to me. Might be worth getting a checkuser on it.--v/r - TP 04:28, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
- I already blocked said likely sock. Magog the Ogre (talk) 04:30, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Multiple file versions
Could you check whether File:Ives quarter tone fundamental chord arp.mid has more file versions than the ones currently shown? If so, those versions might need to be copied over to Commons. The history of the file information page suggests that there are files from 2009, but the upload history only shows files from 2010. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- You know they really don't have to be, actually; the uploading user deleted them (as erroneous), which is a valid deletion under WP:CSD#G7. But my bot can transfer deleted versions, but only when it's running on my local machine (it would be dangerous to let average users do this). Magog the Ogre (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Your conditions on Talk:Taliban
Are your conditions for content discussions on talk pages valid or not? Give me the answer by your reaction to the below recent comments. Thank you.
- TopGun: "WP:CC doesn't apply here in any way since the same editors are not hearing."
- TP: "I feel that JCAla has misrepresented many of the sources by neglecting the timeline of events and what support was provided."
JCAla (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- An administrator makes a "no attack" clause solely because User:A is too incompetent to have serious discussion without strict rules and can't figure out how to act like a gentleman and discuss without attacking other users;
- User:A attacks other users anyway, gets blocked for it, but is of course incapable of seeing fault in himself.
- The result of User:A's action is an explosion of vitriol and personal attacks; pandora's box has been opened.
- User:A cherry picks an adversary's diffs to find where said adversary was breaking the clause that was created solely because User:A shows incompetence as mentioned above. User:A reports said adversary despite the fact that people he's collaborating with are 50 times as guilty as said adversary.
- As mentioned above, User:A is too proud or incompetent to see any of his own faults, so he sees no irony in this situation.
- I'm sorry, I'm not going to enforce a rule that is no longer enforceable due to the fact that you personally broke the thing into a thousand pieces. Not to mention, it was another attempt by you to hound people you don't like off the page (you completely ignored the many faults Darkness Shines, who is 50 times as guilty). Absolutely not. Magog the Ogre (talk) 17:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay. Then I ask you to stay away from taking any administrative action related to me. There are plenty of other administrators who can do this if I would ever show the behavior you described above. Unless you are the one hounding because of your missing competence and perceive yourself as indispensable, you should agree to this. JCAla (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- I think JCAla is the one who called you to help and he told us that you are most neutral admin he knows. Now that action has been taken against him and the change of statement - everything speaks for itself even when unsaid. That is all I'll say to the allegations made against me. His thread at ANI to remove you from administrating any issues involving me or him was closed as an "unfounded claim". --lTopGunl (talk) 18:03, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
- JCAla: this is not how it works. When an administrator steps into a dispute, and notices who is acting poorly and who isn't, and then calls someone on it, that administrator is not involved. If there are any other admins, even one, who will take action on this, go ahead and find this admins. Good luck with that. Didn't I tell you I know what I'm doing and you should listen to me not fight me?
- TopGun: please stay out of this. Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Notice of discussion at the Administrators' Noticeboard
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --lTopGunl (talk) 18:35, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
File:Frazier Peak directional sign.jpg
So you decided to remove this? It is very difficult to assume good faith in this incident. How can I get it back into the article? Sincerely, still your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:07, 3 January 2012 (UTC)
- Please read the note I've placed on your page, regarding having the copyright holder (who doesn't appear to be you) sending permission to our email address. Magog the Ogre (talk) 00:20, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
File disappeared from face book page
This deleted file is also available on other name but actualy this( "File:File Hayat 1. jpg.jpg) one has been disappeared from the face book viewers page, how can the other one should be appeared,--Ali Baba (talk) 09:39, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Last block and something to notice
I've replied to you on the block section on my talk page which you might want to read, in specific, I didn't revert him as a reaction to the block and rather before you blocked him (I've closed that discussion anyway but you should know that I do get drawn to editwars some times but I don't editwar by myself.. will try to improve on the former).
There are a few things which are making me very suspicious and I'd rather that you take a look at them. I mentioned an editor (User:DBigXRay) who was once hounding me on your talk page while commenting on some previous issue. JCAla 'needlessly' informed him of being mentioned on your talk page to which he has now replied with a blatant attack. Next, Darkness Shines nominated the article Indians in Afghanistan for deletion... Mar4d was the creator and me the only some what significant contributor with few edits on the article... how does JCAla know that it was nominated for deletion and goes there to comment for a "strong delete"? My contributions or the email feature? Next to shift it from suspicious to obvious, DBigXRay comments there with the same although he surely can't be watching that page either. --lTopGunl (talk) 13:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)