User talk:Davey2010/Archive 2019

Archives:

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE[edit]

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE
I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE A HEALTHY AND HAPPY NEW YEAR
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Christmas / Happy New Year} 00:26, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mistake[edit]

This edit deleted a whole section. I think you meant to just add your vote. -- Colin (talk) 20:55, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Colin, Thanks so much for informing me, I had absolutely no idea that had even been removed!, As explained in the edit summary I have a mouse issue - It's hard to explain but basically I cannot copy/highlight anything with it and selecting a certain area of the text it can highlight from a certain point and then when I type I'm then basically overtyping over everything!,

Anyway yeah that certainly wasn't intentional so my sincere apologies for that cock up there!,

Many thanks again for informing me,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:06, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rename request for File:Therme (28899133011).jpg[edit]

Hi Davey2010, you requested this file to be renamed but you didn't provide a new name for it :) Please can you edit the template on the file description page to suggest an accurate new name? Thanks in advance,

Best regards, -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 16:03, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alno, I specifically stated "Criterion 2 (To change from a meaningless or ambiguous name to a name that describes what the image particularly displays.) · name needs to be more specific" (emphasis mine) - The file was transferred from Flickr however I have no idea what the image is or even where it is and so I cannot provide a better rationale.

The image has since been deleted on Flickr[1] so I have idea if it was in an album,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:24, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK, then I'll skip this one :) Thanks for your quick reply! -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 16:30, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alno, You're welcome :), Give me 2 ticks I'll see if I uloaded the image with others - I believe the image was taken in Pompey (or however you spell it), I'll take a look now :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:40, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alno, I've found the image:

(On a laptop) Click > https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles&offset=20170317225218&limit=500&user=Davey2010&ilshowall=1
Press CTRL + F on your keyboard - Search "Therme"
It will be the fifth result

The image seems to have come from an Album that had images from Pompeii and Rome (atleast judging by my uploads),

I hope this helps :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:49, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ANU board[edit]

Hey @Davey2010: . So look, I made a mistake regarding the copyright of several photos I recently uploaded. I have acted swiftly and decisively to rectify them. But I ask of you to please not to cruelly call for me to be "indeffed" and for every single photo that I have uploaded to be deleted without review. My contributions have otherwise been substantial. The vast majority of photos I have uploaded are quite firmly public domain under Australian laws - many of which are for past political figures who had previously had zero photos on their Wiki pages. I have also been working hard to update every federal Australian government Ministry to an acceptable standard. Here's an example of a page before my edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon_Ministry and here's one after: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McEwen_Ministry. Likewise I have been doing similar with the pages of different federal divisions - once again here's one before: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Holt and here's one after: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Division_of_Corangamite. At the very least I ask of you to weigh up my contributions more fairly and without blatant hostility --Thescrubbythug (talk) 06:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Thescrubbythug, Sorry you were meant to have recieved a reply here first, Not to assume bad faith but the majority of people here who upload copyvios etc etc end up blocked .. and then when it expires they immediately return to where they left off which is why I was all "indef and delete" as I thought it was a was just another cut and dried case, Anyway I again sincerely apologise,

I hope you stick around and if you have any questions or need help then I'd be more than happy too :),

Thanks and Happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 14:22, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Request & Invitation for Wiki Loves Love 2019 Jury[edit]

Hello @Davey2010: , Hope you are doing well! I am co-ordinator of [Wiki Loves Love 2019], an international Commons Contest aimed at documenting love in different cultures and the theme of 2019 is festivals, ceremonies and rituals of love. We would be honored to have you on Jury for the contest, which will happen from February 1- February 28 2019. Please let us know if it is agreeable, our team would be excited and thrilled to have you on board. The timeline would be after first week of March to couple first weeks of April. Hopefully, that time would be enough for the jury. And if it is not, then we can always extend. But we will do the pre-work and your work would be to select the winner photographs. Happy New Year to you. Wishing you lots of love and happiness.Wikilover90 (talk) 10:12, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Wikilover90, Thank you very much for your message and for bearing me in mind but unfortunately this isn't really something I'm interested in, Thank you for your message tho I greatly appreciate it:),

I wish you all the very the best with your project and hope all goes well :),

Thanks again, Take care, –Davey2010^Talk 14:29, 14 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:ESC HONEY.svg[edit]

According to previous discussions, this should be deleted?

You could nominate again, listing above links.--BevinKacon (talk) 12:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BevinKacon, Personally I would say the file is copyrighted I certainly don't think it was taken from the source I provided however as you note I did indeed nomninate it where it was closed, If you want to renom it I have no issues with that, Thanks for your message, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tribute, Westminster Bridge (34309489793).jpg[edit]

File:Tribute, Westminster Bridge (34309489793).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

B dash (talk) 15:35, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The VicuñaUploader[edit]

You could always use the VicuñaUploader for mass-uploads or Commonist. At least that way you won't be limited by the 50 (fifty) files selection limit, note that rate limits are independent from upload tools, upload tools are just upload clients, much like how the Google Play app can only upload one (1) file at a time the MediaWiki Upload Wizard is limited to 50 (fifty), so these tools should solve your issues(, hopefully). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 08:15, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Donald Trung 『徵國單』, Ah thanks for the suggestion, Unfortunately all of my images are "DSCN<number>" so I prefer to use the uploadwizard as you can apply names, descriptions and categories to all images with a click of a button and given my mouse on the spare laptop likes to disable itself for me I don't think this would work, Anyway thanks again for your suggestion :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 10:32, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Limit stuff[edit]

Hi! Jarekt found this out a while ago:

go to this stage using Chrome browser
open java script console with Ctrl + Shift + J
paste "mw.UploadWizard.config.maxUploads = 500;"
now if you open an album or a photostream with up to 500 images you can upload them all at once

Just remembered I had this on my user page. --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 09:06, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Hedwig in Washington: That's awesome! - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:32, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry[edit]

Davey, I did not mean to offend, I can see why I might have, and apologize. Honestly, that was a tricky test, that I might well not pass myself; sometimes I give tests with a few clearly good images and a few clearly bad ones, but not a lot of debatable ones like that one. --GRuban (talk) 16:48, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GRuban, Thank you for your apology it's really appreciated and it goes without saying I apologise for my reaction after,

On the LR page Alexis stated let's test. Answer the following questions for each of the following images: 1. Would you pass the image? (ignore scope, only look at the license) 2. Why am I asking you about this particular image? - Now given all images were Pixabay I simply assumed Alexis was referring to the fact Pixabay changed their licence and that they wanted to see if I would pass those based on the licences and without sounding funny Alexis didn't mention copyright stuff etc (I didn't realise it was essentially everything in your reply after) - As I said I simply assumed it was licence-related so without paying much attention to the actual images I spent all my time concentrating on the actual licences .... and then seeing your reply genuinely did offend me because it felt like I did try, The question could've perhaps been much clearer but either way It was my fault for not picking up on the images properly,

Without realising it at the time I think I'd got the wrong end of the stick,

Anyway I don't have a great understanding of everything mentioned in your reply so maybe it was for the best if it was rejected,

Anyway thank you for your apology and for coming here I genuinely do appreciate it and as I said I too apologise for my reaction and comments,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:37, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't really think I was going to make it easy, did you?

I did warn for traps.. Checking the license also includes checking the validity of the license. I just added that note because some of the examples could arguably be out of scope, but that's not really relevant for a license review. I simply collected the examples from Category:Unreviewed files from Pixabay. Unreviewed files, because if I used files with a review, that would be too easy. Actually, I did consider trying to find some upload that was after 9 January, but I found so many more interesting cases so easily I decided to skip that. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 01:29, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just like GRuban btw, I wouldn't have expected or required a perfect score. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 01:31, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll hold on my tongue and simply say thanks for your questions, Happy editing. –Davey2010^Talk 01:48, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if it was unclear.. I knew you had been active on Commons:License review/requests, I thought if I threw you a curveball you'd be able to actually catch it, resulting in an easy promotion.. Without it, I figured people would go and dig up Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tribute, Westminster Bridge (34309489793).jpg or the initial upload from Commons:Deletion requests/File:London June 7 2016 021 ITV EU Referendum Debate Cameron v Farage (2) (26917273454).jpg. So I was hoping to avoid that by throwing you a curveball. That was my mistake. I misjudged. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 02:13, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexis Jazz, Ahhhh I'm with you, Not your fault at all I should've picked up on certain things anyway, There's obviously a lot I don't know (and certainly don't understand) so I said my fault entirely,

As I said on the LR page I'm glad you did ask because despite it all going south there was things I obviously don't know so actually thank you for asking :),

I'm just sorry it all went wrong but anyway new day and all that,

Thanks for your message Alexis, Take care, –Davey2010^Talk 11:59, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Another point of view[edit]

Why not consider your withdrawal may have been rushed and others may appreciate your contributions? Please reconsider . — Racconish ^💬 16:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

+ 1 --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 20:55, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

+ 1 --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:45, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Racconish, Thanks so much for your kind message it's very much appreciated it really is so thank you,

I'll be honest I originally planned to upload the remaining images I've taken, categorise them all ... and then leave the project for good with an indef block,

Not to make a big deal out of it as GRuban did apologise above but their comment here did deeply offend me to the point where I no longer wanted to be a part of this project anymore - I answered the test in good faith and with my full honesty but was instead met with that which as I said did deeply offend me,

I'm still in the mindset of moving all of my images to a category and requesting an indef right now but I know in a few days I could end up regretting that decision so hopefully after a good nights sleep I might wake up in a better mindset than now

Anyway babbling on lol - thanks again for your kind and thoughtful message :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 22:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

---

Hi User:Hedwig in Washington, Thanks and also thanks for your tip earlier :), I'll try it out in a few days and let you know if it works, Hope you're well buddy

:) –Davey2010^Talk 22:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some baklava for you![edit]

Hopefully you had a good night's sleep, and you woke up today in a better mindset than yesterday, so you would remove {{Retired}} from your userpage. 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4nn1l2, I did thanks! :), Certainly feel a lot better than yesterday that's for sure, Thanks for your kind message and turkish treat :),

It's amazing what a goods nights sleep can do!, Anyway thanks again :), –Davey2010^Talk 15:20, 27 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again![edit]

Thanks again for your great help. I will definitely keep uploading images to Wikicommons. I have a ton of great images from my travels and will sort through them in the near future. Another question: Who evaluates the "good pictures"? How do you get on them? Grenz (talk) 23:01, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome Grenz, given the bs that's occurred it's the least I can do,

Oh wow well thank you for sharing them - Having obviously seen the images you've already uploaded I know without a doubt your travel images are going to be amazing! :), I'd love to go travelling but not exactly cheap lol),

I have absolutely no idea I believe people !vote on them (?) (I could be wrong) - We have COM:Featured pictures, COM:Quality images and COM:Valued images - Featured being top dog, Quality being good and Valued being the bottom of the barrel essentially,

If it helps you could always go to Commons:Photography_critiques and "showcase" 4-5 of your best images and then people there will say whether your images are Featured/Quality/Valued-worthy or not (Featured and Quality would be your best bet IMHO),

Many thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:19, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Buses in Oxford[edit]

Hi Davey, no objections to your reverts. I was sorting through the Saïd Business School and the majority of the category was bus images.Aloneinthewild (talk) 22:25, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aloneinthewild, Thanks, I have a feeling I was the who added the school category n the first place but yeah not all needed to be there so thanks for removing them :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:32, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monochrom Eignblunzn (2003), documentation.jpg[edit]

Dear Davey2010! Long time no see/type. Last time you kindly offered to contact you in case I have questions, and now I'm really doing it! :) I just realized that a file that I uploaded has been deleted. I see no reason why and why specifically this image was targeted. Can you make sense of this? I left a message at the user page of the user in charge, but haven't heard back yet. Grenz (talk) 11:18, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grenz, Haha long time no see!, Nah it's fine mate it's not like you're hounding me 24/7 so it's cool :), If I can help in any way then I will :),

Anyway basically someone has again tagged it under No Permission (would be interesting to know who!), Jcb hasn't been on since 22:11 (26 Feb) so it's fair to assume they haven't seen your message yet, If you ask him nicely he always undeletes files (which is appreciated) so it's best to wait it out for now :),

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:39, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :) Grenz (talk) 11:42, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome mate :), –Davey2010^Talk 11:49, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I filed an undeletion request, and the they are not very helpful there. Seems the whole discussion again: Commons:Undeletion_requests Grenz (talk) 20:58, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grenz, Sorry I couldn't of been more help here,

If I were you I would simply stick 2 fingers to this pathetic website and upload elsewhere where my photographs would be appreciated,

If you want to continue uploading here then my best advice I can give is to simply upload at Flickr, and then use COM:Flickr 2 Commons to transfer them here (or I can use Com2Flickr for you) - That should then skip around the whole OTRS bollocks, But like I said failing that stick 2 fingers up and never return,

Quiet frankly I'm absolutely appalled at the way you've been treated here and If I were in your shoes I'd simply leave and join another photography site where my uploads are actually appreciated and are not treated like they're absolute shit!,

I'm truly sorry I can't help in anyway I just wish there's something I could do or say that would help but not being an admin I'm unfortunately limited to asking and praying for miracles here!,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:12, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am used to bureaucratic processes. I understand. Yes, in the future I will use Flickr references with clear CC license. Easier. Thanks! Grenz (talk) 12:31, 6 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just an update, User:Davey2010... the fun keeps going. But I hope it will be settled soon. I'm starting to enjoy how many people have to deal with my images :) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Images_by_Grenz Grenz (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Grenz, Hope all's well,

Haha I suppose that's a plus, I hope you can get all of this resolved and now more eyes are on it it should be resolved a lot quicker (and plus those there have access to OTRS (whereas I don't), Good luck my friend!. –Davey2010^Talk 17:11, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Davey2010 - DSCN6598 33.jpg[edit]

File:Davey2010 - DSCN6598 33.jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

B dash (talk) 03:40, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Back[edit]

I'm finally back after having no internet for a month!,
Once I get back on my feet I'll sort all my images out in May.
Hope everyone's been well :),
–Davey2010^Talk 15:21, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bus categories[edit]

Hi Davey, If I remember correctly, we have discussed this in the past. There is a visible and and identifiable bus in the picture and it should be categorized as such. So, I don't understand, why you keep removing this category. Also, please remember, that it takes two to create an edit war. Best regards, --MB-one (talk) 19:23, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, The main subject of the image is the high street, and unfortunately the huge sign infront of the bus makes the bus hardly seen and so categorising the image is pointless,

Please see here where I tried to resolve this by adding an image note - Whilst it's not categorising the image it either way tells the viewer what the vehicle is. Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 19:30, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Davey,

The file is named after and categorized according to its main subject (a bus) by the photographer and uploader. The subject is partially covered by a sign, but still very well visible and identifiable. Hence, it has to be properly categorized. I have explained this to you multiple times now. Yet, you keep reverting, citing a non-existing consensus and accusing me of edit warring. I really hope, we can finally end these shenanigans.

Cheers,

--MB-one (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MB-one,

The main image is more the high street than the bus - Had the vehicle been taken closer and without the sign then sure but that hasn't been the case here unfortunately,

I disagree like I said the sign visually impacts the image and as such categprising it is IMHO rather pointless - As a whole we should only categorise images that show vehicles in full,

I agree this is rather silly which is why I added a note as a way of a compromise.

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:58, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The question of the main subject is really subjective. I guess we should leave it to the author to decide that. However, if the categorization suggests, it is an image of a bus and especially, if it is clearly and easily identifiable, it should really be categorized by model. Otherwise it will constantly show up in maintenance tasks. Apart from those downsides, I really see no upside to not having it properly categorized. --MB-one (talk) 14:56, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well we'll have to agree to disagree :),

Some categories are near empty which is why I leave the bus categories alone - Whilst imho the bus mode is pointless things like bus colour or bus location aren't,

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this however as I said above I did add an image note as a way of a compromise,

Anyway thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 21:00, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter if you agree. The image shows a bus and should be categorized accordingly. Removing relevant categories from files amounts to vandalism, which cannot be tolerated. Please accept that and stop this pointless and disruptive editing. Thank you. --MB-one (talk) 09:30, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And it doesn't matter if you disagree, The image does not show the entire bus (ie the bus is mostly blocked out by the posts), Reinserting categories despite repeatedly being told not too amounts to edit warring which cannot be tolerated. Please accept that and stop this pointless and disruptive editing. Thank you. –Davey2010^Talk 10:51, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sock/Not sock[edit]

Hey Davey, the pics are my own, no one else's [User talk:Markfree123]

Hi Mark, Apologies for the delayed response, Unfortunately we'll have to agree to disagree with that, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:C.E.O.jpg[edit]

This file has not been uploaded completely due to a software problem (see phab:T190988). Please re-upload it by clicking on "Upload a new version of this file" link below the section titled "File history". Then, please remove the {{Incomplete upload}} tag from the file description page.
At least 30 days after the addition of the tag, volunteers will assess the quality of image and may crop it if being in use or deemed useful. Otherwise, the image may be deleted summarily (CSD#F7).

4nn1l2 (talk) 12:08, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 4nn1l2, This file isn't mine, The uploader was asked in 2018 to reupload it however they don't appear to have ever came back on, I've removed the tag as the image isn't all bad, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 12:12, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page watchers[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:INeverCry&diff=next&oldid=359774258

Talk page watchers actually do care. The uploader can't defend these files, so they may have a look. In this particular case, I doubt the files can be saved, but I did look at it and cared. There are too many erroneous DRs to just take everyone's word for it that deletion is justified. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:20, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alexis Jazz Fairpoint, I myself have stumbled on DRs through talkpages so I was wrong to say that so apologies for saying that, FWIW I didn't realise archive was set up as generally on EN (for blocked editors) it isn't, Duly noted I shan't remove them again :), Thanks for your message, –Davey2010^Talk 13:10, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism[edit]

Hi, how are you. I am a user in good faith. I don't try to vandalize. I will not insist again with the transfer of the Argentine army logo. I hope you understand me because I am using google traslator. Greetings and thanks for your compression.--Malvinero1 (talk) 19:14, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Malvinero1, I'm okay thanks how are you :),

Unfortunately you're disruptive editing which is a blockable offence,

My apologies for the wrong template Commons lacks warning templates and Google Translator is useless so wanted to try and give a warning that would've translated to your language :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I won't do that again. Greeting.--Malvinero1 (talk) 19:31, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Malvinero1, Okie dokie, Happy editing :), Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 19:36, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you![edit]

	The Barnstar of Diplomacy
	Thank you for helping me out on Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:05F2uIhfx0Rv! 大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 02:14, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:大诺史, Thank you so much :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 11:33, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.svg[edit]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.svg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

大诺史 (Talk/留言/토론/Discussion) 10:58, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

wp rfa[edit]

Hey Davey2010,

If you remember, I made a request at WP:ORCP about me being an potential admin. While I was met with zeros, the main concern was my activity being poor in 2018. I’m managing to tag a few pages here and there for speedy and fight vandalism. Your concern was my article count is low due to the article talk and user talk stats being too high. While that may be the case, I have gotten a few articles to GA and managed to collaborate with an experience writer to bring an article to FA (Naruto). With that said, I have a question. In your opinion, when would be the best time to run for it? If I were one, I’d work on CSD (for files and user pages), FfD, PROD (for files), AIV, RfPP, and UAA. 1989 (talk) 19:41, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey 1989, Wow ... if there's anything I regret it's certainly that !vote! - You're one of the best admnins here!),

Unfortunately I don't think RFA or ORCP will go well - Generally people like to see articlespace be #1 (although generally you could get away with Wikispace being #1), You'd somehow need to completely omit talkpage editing first,

Your editing activity is extremely low (Personally I prefer 100 edits a month or more but this can vary between editors),

With AFDs you've only participated in 2 AFDs this year so you'd also be opposed because of that,

Your CSD and Prod logs are fine but unfortunately that's not going to win supports :(

As you're on here the majority of the time it's certainly understandable as to why you haven't racked over 100 edits pm over there but unfortunately being an admin here won't count for much over there :(,

I don't want to say "Quit Commons and start there" but I guess you could do maybe a certain percent here and maybe more there (so 30% work here, 70% there),

Ofcourse you're more than welcome to ignore this and see what others think but unfortunately I think you'll be moaned at as it could be seen as your first ORCP request isn't much different from your second but as I said you could retry and see what others think :),

Many thanks for your message :),

Happy editing, –Davey2010^Talk 12:24, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

renaming of files[edit]

I asked the renaming of these 3 files :

you declined my rename request, although valid reason has been presented for renaming

The purpose was to correct obvious error in filenames (misidentified place) : the correct place is "Kneset Israel B (or Bet)" and not "Kneset Israel A (or Aleph)" For your information, these are two neighborhoods of Jerusalem, and these 3 photos are NOT from the "Kneset Israel A (or Aleph)" but from the "Kneset Israel B (or Bet)"

Please find more information here : Knesset Yisrael

thank you

Djampa (talk) 08:46, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Djampa,

Done - I've moved all 3 images, Not knowing much about Israel I didn't know the As and Bs so at the time my declining reason was still valid - When requesting renames you need to be specific in that if you're changing a letter you then need to say why .... "obvious error" isn't enough on its own as it's not obvious to any other filemover except you....,

Please see Commons:File_renaming#FR3 which gives examples of when "obvious error" should be used,

Many thanks for being specific here :), Thanks, –Dave | Davey2010^Talk 09:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

COM:AN/U[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

--Túrelio (talk) 07:29, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

DYK[edit]

Hey Davey2010,

Admins can no longer unblock themselves. 1989 (talk) 01:35, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 1989, Ah I'd forgot I believe I even !voted in a discussion on that somewhere ... dunno lol but thanks for the heads up :), –Dave | Davey2010^Talk 01:48, 15 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-04-22 ILCE-6300 DSC03507 (28211741511).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:03, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Support[edit]

Hi. Since I cannot edit on Commons:Administrators/Requests/Fitindia anymore, I wanted to thank you for your support on my recent successful RFA, Your trust and faith in my candidature is much appreciated and I could not have done it without your support. Warm regards FitIndia ^{Talk Mail} 15:03, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Fitindia, You're more than welcome :), Thanks for your thanks lol, Happy editing and blocking :), Kind Regards, Dave /// –Davey2010^Talk 19:14, 5 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Astra1999[edit]

I have rolled back your removal of my closure of this DR.

I see nothing particularly wrong with these images. While they will not win any prizes for artistry, they are, as I noted, of good technical quality and are large. They could prove useful to people who want to identify a particular car or for model makers who need good images of front and back. The only possible grounds for deletion from Commons:Deletion policy is "Files that add nothing educationally distinct to the collection of images we already hold covering the same subject, especially if they are of poor or mediocre quality." Note that the linked text calls out "small, blurry, poorly composed snapshot[s]". As noted above, these are none of those things.

Also note, that reverting a DR closure is inappropriate. It amounts to shopping for an Admin who happens to agree with you on a subjective matter. Please do not do it again, either here or elsewhere. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately we're going to have to agree to disagree on this,

Do you a deal Jameslwoodward - Relist it for a week and if no !votes happen again you can close it as keep with my blessing.... does that sound fair?

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) "Hi, Consensus works everywhere - No admin gets to come along and super!vote close (unless it's plain and obvious which is not the case here) Also Please don't use rollback on me[1] as my edits are not vandalism,

You're more than welcome to relist the discussion to achieve a consensus but I strongly object to your super!vote closure, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:45, 8 October 2019 (UTC) "

What consensus? In the two DRs on this subject, you are the only person looking for deletion. User:Kolforn and I both thought they should be kept. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No -- the DR was open for ten days and collected only two comments -- both on the other side from you. We've got a huge backlog and this sort of thing just wastes admin time. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:58, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since User:Yann and I often disagree on subjective issues, I think it is fair to ask him to mediate this one -- I'll accept whatever he decides. Meanwhile, don't revert the DR again or I will block you for vandalism. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:04, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't like "having your time wasted" as you put it then don't participate in DRs.

Reverting a disputed DR isn't vandalism - Admins are not gods and not are superior here.

The DR can be relisted for another week as I have done now. –Davey2010^Talk 21:23, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Jameslwoodward) - I've gone ahead and relisted it for a week - Like I said !votes or no !votes I will accept whatever closure happens however I do not accept it now especially so early,

I'm also going to state for the record if you block me then that will be the end of my Commons volunteering here - IE you would've lost a valued editor all because of a silly DR,

I don't see the harm in relisting for a week especially when we both disagree with each other here - Relisting seems the most logical and sensible approach,

Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:30, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the extend that you reverted once again, I have rollbacked your two last edits, and I blocked you. This DR is listed from enough time, you can not revert until the closure make you happy. FWIW I myself have noticed the DR and I have not deleted the files because I found the rationale not sufficiant, Jim was bolder than me, and closed it as "kept". End of discussion. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see CONSENSUS doesn't exist here, I can revert what I like especially when it's a bullshit close such as this one,

No it's not the end of discussion not by a long mile. –Davey2010^Talk 21:49, 8 October 2019 (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: "Block was bullshit, Shan't revert the DR closure which is what got me blocked in the first place, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 23:06, 8 October 2019 (UTC)"[reply]

Decline reason: "@Jameslwoodward: 's closure was valid and in accordance with Commons:Deletion_policy#Closure. Admins are trusted members of the Commons community and a component of that trust is the ability to exercise judgement and discretion when closing a subjective DR. Whether or not the files are in scope, edit warring to revert a valid closure is not acceptable. This is something I suspect you know full well, given that a) you were warned in the instant case, b) you have been previously blocked on the Commons for edit warring, and c) you have been blocked for edit warring as far back as 2012 (and repeatedly) on a sister project. Indeed, it should not be news to you that, instead of disruptively reverting--whether labeled edit warring or vandalism--you ought to have availed yourself of the mediator Jim sought or of one of several community noticeboards available. That notwithstanding, COM:BP requires an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue, neither of which you have offered. As it was apparently not obvious to you: calling the block "bullshit" and calling @Christian Ferrer: a "cunt," especially with a history of blocks for incivility, is not going to be a successful strategy. To the extent you imply a lack of genuine intent or ability to change your approach, you might appreciate that you have not been blocked indefinitely. Эlcobbola _talk 00:17, 9 October 2019 (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） ∙ +/−

Jameslwoodward - Am I entitled to renominate the files at a later date (in a few months or something) or would the DR constantly be closed as Keep regardless of the rationale?, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 23:10, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why, Davey, why did you do this? (also, suggestion: "Block was bullshit" doesn't help your case)

You must know that it is common for DRs not to receive any comments. In general, requests can be closed by an administrator after seven days. If you really want votes/opinions, ping some people. There is no rule against publicly "canvassing" for a DR, because it's strictly not a vote. If a DR is closed as delete and you think that's bonkers, you have to go to COM:UDR. If a DR is closed as kept and you think that's nuts, well.. Unless you have some new arguments (like found proof for copyvio) or you are convinced the closing admin made an honest mistake (like keeping a file with FoP issues because they confuse the country with one that has FoP), leave it. Can you imagine someone who doesn't like a file re-nominating it every month with the same rationale in hopes that some day it'll be deleted? That gets old real fast. In a case like this, the best option would be to either ping people or start a discussion on COM:VP. Alternatively (as this was a mass DR), you could find the worst files and nominate them individually with more detailed rationales to explain why they are not useful. Linking alternatives can help. But keep in mind that those alternatives, even if they are higher in quality, could have undiscovered copyright issues. Category:Files from mynewsdesk.com for example, generally great quality, but the copyright status is often a bit foggy. If you delete a slightly out-of-focus image because there is a much better one from mynewsdesk, and later you delete the image from mynewsdesk, you'll have no image. And no image means sad panda. For what it's worth, I would have voted keep. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:22, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

User:Elcobbola, I disagree, The block was still bullshit so I'll guess I'll just have to sit this one out, I'm not going to say "Yes the block was fine and I agree with it" in order to be unblocked not happening, however after the BS comment I did state " Shan't revert the DR closure" (ie I understand what I did wrong and won't repeat it) ..... Given I've stated I'll not revert the closure it seems punitive to keep me blocked .... I don't need to agree with the block to be unblocked,

Hi Alexis Jazz, Many thanks for the tips - My assumption was that asking another admin would be pointless as 9/10 they always agree with each other atleast that's how I've seen it anyway, That being said I agree I should've asked someone instead of edit warring which as Elcobbola gloriously points out I've been blocked everywhere for lol,

Guess I'll see everyone in 2 weeks lol. –Davey2010^Talk 07:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from thanks to those above who dealt with this while I was sleeping, I have only one comment here. "My assumption was that asking another admin would be pointless as 9/10 they always agree with each other" is largely true. We usually agree with each other because we have a lot of experience on Commons and we have a pretty good idea about where consensus on an issue lies. With that in mind, I deliberately picked Yann, who is our most senior Admin and with whom I have a long history of disagreeing on subjective issues. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:26, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jameslwoodward: in this particular case, you could have also pinged one or more experienced users. A mediator doesn't need to have a mop. I'm not saying that's what you should have done (it doesn't really matter whether or not the mediator has a mop), I'm just saying that would have been an option. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That is indeed a very good point James- Admins do know a lot more than say me or non-admins....,

Anyway I do accept I shouldn't of undone the DR and edit warred over it so I apologise for that Jameslwoodward,

FWIW my last DR edit-warring block was in 2017 and even then I was unblocked 8 minutes later so it's not like it's a daily thing but still no excuse.

The block wasn't bs because lets be honest I was stopped from doing what I wasn't going to stop doing .... however the block length was bs .... 2 weeks is rather excessive for something I only repeated over 2 years ago ....,

Christian Ferrer - I apologise for calling you that word - I should've used something else so Ia apologise for that, As a friendly suggestion tho may I suggest that you don't immediately block someone the moment an admin posts on another admins page ? .... That just makes things 10x worse,

Anyway as I said I won't touch the DR nor will I renominate the files,

Also James, elcobbola and Christian - I apologise for edit warring and for my comments too, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 15:31, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see the block still going on even tho:

A) I've recognised my mistakes,

B) I've stated I won't touch the DR and

C) I've apologised for said mistakes,

If there was ever a pointless punitive block then this definitely is it!.

See you all in 2 weeks.... unless I'm mysteriously reblocked .... nothing surprises me on this place anymore. –Davey2010^Talk 15:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't make a new unblock request. (and I recommend you don't make one now) The main question is probably if your apology and promise are credible. I know what you mean when you say "Shan't revert the DR closure", but outsiders may see that more like a "my bad" statement. And apologizing in a credible way for calling someone a c-word is rather difficult, no matter how you put it. I still have trouble trying to figure why you did these things. Edit warring is pretty much never a good idea, even less so with an admin. Calling someone a c-word is not going to get you anywhere, ever. (unless you're the dominant party in some BDSM setting and the other person gets a kick out of you calling them that. this is unlikely to occur on Commons) Calling the block bullshit isn't going to help either. Even calling it "unjustified" will generally not work, but calling it bullshit is really unlikely to win anyone over. If lawyers were a thing on Commons, you should definitely get one. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Alexis Jazz, I don't believe in making unblock requests more than once as I firmly believe doing so is disruptive - I thought apologising and pinging would've achieved this lol

This isn't me having a go but why I would I immediately go back to reverting the DR closure ? .... Sure I don't agree with the closure but it's one of those things.... I would never ever go back to doing something that I was blocked for doing .... Admittedly I made that mistake at EN (AFD block) but inregards to EW blocks I've never resumed edit warring irrespective of whether I was correct or not (and I will admit those EW blocks only happened because I didn't actually understand the policy in that I thought 3RR was you have 3 reverts and that's it - learned that wasn't the case and haven't edit warred since)

Unfortunately at the time I disagreed with the closure and fought to not have it closed .... Certainly could've and should've done things differently but the damage has been done and alls I can do as a human is learn from my mistakes and do things differently if something like this happens again. –Davey2010^Talk 18:04, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Independent admin here - I don't have a history with Davey, to my knowledge. The block was necessary, I would have made it myself. That said, "vandalism" in the block summary is a stretch and disabling email does not seem warranted. Per Davey's above responses (at least the recent ones), I think there is appropriate recognition and apology to reduce the original block from 2 weeks to 1 week and allowing email if that is a communication tool he so chooses to use. I think this block has served it's purpose and letting the block stand for 3 more days to total 1 week is punitive enough. That said, as an independent admin, I have concerns about Davey's use of rollback and his previous uses over the last few months (using it instead of undo without providing an explanation on non-vandalism edits). I have revoked rollback and if Davey feels that he needs it (I have not seen a vandalism rollback in the last 3 months), he can re-apply for it at COM:RFR. ~riley (talk) 17:17, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@~riley: per COM:BLOCK, a block should never be punitive, so I'm a bit confused now. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:28, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Alexis Jazz: Good catch, Alexis. Punitive was in my head per Davey's last comment - I meant to say preventative. I think maintaining the two week block after all the discussion that has unfolded would have been punitive and cool down focused as opposed to preventative. ~riley (talk) 18:47, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ~riley, First off thank you for shortening the length - I would've preferred to have been unblocked as opposed to have it set at 3 extra days but I see the logic in it totalling a week so thank you for doing that,

However I'm lost on the rollback part - To my knowledge I've only used it on MB-One and that was because I had rollback used on me .... So other than that issue (which I did admit on ANU and apologised for) Could you please provide evidence of me misusing rollback ? Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 17:48, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Revoked due to the DR stuff I assume, fair enough. –Davey2010^Talk 18:05, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will keep this short and sweet as I do not like long discussions that take time away from editing the wiki. I know you have stricken the above, but I thought I would just give you a quick response to it. The goal with blocks and discussions of this nature is growth and improvement, please understand that me commenting on your previous rollbacks is intended to be performance management as opposed to destructive feedback. I think it your edit warring for the DR stuff has already been well discussed. That said, you were given a warning in September on COM:ANU that stated "it is unacceptable to use the rollback button in edit wars" - the administrator that gave this warning also went on to say "Please do not do it anymore, otherwise I reserve myself the possibility to remove your rollbacker flag without any further warnings". By using rollback again twice (excluding the one undo), in an edit war, you lost the right to hold this permission. By not having rollback, it also forces you to use undo and therefore provide an edit summary. Going through your use of rollback, there are countless times that you used rollback for non-vandalism edits (read Commons:Rollback#When_to_use_rollback) without providing your reasoning - for instance, Revision #368198208, Revision #360888539, Revision #360597981 (11 times on different edits of Vojtěch Dostál), and Revision #357642960. There is also some confusing times you used it, for instance, you rollbacked 13 edits by Tim_commons only to rollback your rollbacks? In the COM:ANU discussion, you said there is "no excuse to use it especially when it's not vandalism" - I am hoping by removing rollback that this will give you more time to slow down, think and provide a rationale while also holding you accountable. ~riley (talk) 19:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ~riley, Advice from ANU " it is unacceptable to use the rollback button in edit wars" yet I proceeded to use it a month later in an edit war, Really shot myself in the foot with that one!.

Ah it would seem I used it more than I realised and infact it seems I was actually heavily reliant on it - I used it on my cats I knew that but didn't realise I used it continuously everywhere else too - laziness really did get the better of me,

I can't fault you for revoking it I seemingly misued it more than I actually realised and like I said was heavily reliant on it (Bizarrely I'm the complete opposite at EN - Use edit summaries more than rollback!).

Thank you for kindly replying and for explaining the reasoning anyway, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:45, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Just wanted to take the time to say many thanks ~riley for shortening the block - I appreciate you doing that, You certainly didn't have too but you did and I greatly appreciate you doing that so thank you very much,
Also thank you Alexis Jazz for your helpful tips here - They too are greatly appreciated and I'll certainly take them on board moving forward.
Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:18, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.png[edit]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.png 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Mahir256 (talk) 04:00, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mahir256 Apologies for the previous reply I thought this was inregards to another file, Your DR is correct and is something I agree with entirely, Thanks for spotting and DR'ing this file accordingly. Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:35, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important message for file movers[edit]

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
To perform file name swaps.
When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:35, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

re.[edit]

Thank you for your comment. I promise that I will not going to replace the photo anymore. But in the case of File:Tomioka Hachiman-gu 201708.jpg, I did not replace the original one by another photo, I just edit the photo using the CropTool. Please reconfirm it. Sorry for disturbing.-AT (talk) 13:34, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AT, Apologies for the lare reply - Currently have work commitments so can't reply as instantly as I used too, No worries unfortunately what you was doing is heavly frowned upon and you could've easily been blocked for your changes,

Inre Croptool - Generally speaking when cropping images no matter how small I always upload as new a file - Technically you can crop other peoples work but there's a grey line on that so your safest option would be to just upload as a completely new file, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 00:45, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays 2020![edit]

* Happy Holidays 2020, Davey2010! *

Merry Christmas! Happy New Year!

Joyeux Noël! Bonne année!

Frohes Weihnachten! Frohes Neues Jahr!

Счастливого Рождества! С Новым годом!

¡Feliz Navidad y próspero año nuevo!

Щасливого Різдва! З Новим роком!

-- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:57, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-05-26 ILCE-6300 3510 DxO (29087559693).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 02:03, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Hello After this talk, this is the first time i log in to my account. Now i recognize that I was wrong. Thanks for your contribution. --05F2uIhfx0Rv (talk) 07:33, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi 05F2uIhfx0Rv, Happy editing :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 10:55, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-07-04 08-54-26 ILCE-6500 DSC01532 DxO (48337115637).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 08-54-26 ILCE-6500 DSC01532 DxO (48337115637).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-07-04 09-20-44 ILCE-6500 DSC01604 DxO (48337902877).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-20-44 ILCE-6500 DSC01604 DxO (48337902877).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:45, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-49 ILCE-6500 DSC01640 DxO (48339592906).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-49 ILCE-6500 DSC01640 DxO (48339592906).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-07-18 ILCE-6300 DSC03519 (28255970306).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:05, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 10-18-51 ILCE-6300 DSC03725 (28187487722).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-24-25 ILCE-6300 DSC03561 (27674818693).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-24-25 ILCE-6300 DSC03561 (27674818693).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:53, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-54-20 ILCE-6300 DSC03632 (28290892345).jpg

And also:

File:2016-07-08 09-54-27 ILCE-6300 DSC03633 (28009435080).jpg

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:56, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-17-39 ILCE-6300 DSC03530 (27674197434).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-17-39 ILCE-6300 DSC03530 (27674197434).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:58, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-53-29 ILCE-6300 DSC03630 (28009407570).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-53-29 ILCE-6300 DSC03630 (28009407570).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:01, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-20 ILCE-6300 DSC03615 (28186795102).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-20 ILCE-6300 DSC03615 (28186795102).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:47, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-18-02 ILCE-6300 DSC03535 (28290242195).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:41, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-05 ILCE-6500 DSC01639 DxO (48338797387).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-05 ILCE-6500 DSC01639 DxO (48338797387).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 01:28, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-07 15-41-51 ILCE-6300 DSC02893 (27671631313).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 01:56, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-38-02 ILCE-6300 DSC03594 (28290634565).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 02:05, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 10-06-44 ILCE-6300 DSC03660 (27675488683).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 05:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-51 ILCE-6300 DSC03616 (28212424051).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-51 ILCE-6300 DSC03616 (28212424051).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:14, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-55-59 ILCE-6300 DSC03639 (28256793616).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-55-59 ILCE-6300 DSC03639 (28256793616).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:26, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 10-07-58 ILCE-6300 DSC03666 (27674982164).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 10-07-58 ILCE-6300 DSC03666 (27674982164).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:29, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-40-34 ILCE-6300 DSC03602 (28186621552).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:41, 11 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-39-44 ILCE-6300 3601 DxO (29712104255).jpg

And also:

File:2016-07-08 09-39-44 ILCE-6300 DSC03601 (28186617702).jpg

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:39, 12 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-16-59 ILCE-6300 3525 DxO (29085847744).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 09:44, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-17-46 ILCE-6300 DSC03531 (28211876731).jpg

And also:

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 00:44, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016-07-08 09-36-56 ILCE-6300 DSC03592 (28009108160).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-36-56 ILCE-6300 DSC03592 (28009108160).jpg 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!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Yuraily Lic (talk) 00:55, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry.

If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues.

Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Afrikaans ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ bosanski ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ shqip ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ српски / srpski ∙ українська ∙ հայերեն ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ไทย ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Affected:

File:2016-07-08 09-55-32 ILCE-6300 DSC03637 (27675365213).jpg

And also:

File:2016-07-08 09-55-36 ILCE-6300 DSC03638 (28212551561).jpg

Yours sincerely, Yuraily Lic (talk) 01:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Blah blah blah Commons:Deletion requests/Davey's redirects - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:47, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I miss you[edit]

Dear Dave, The Photographer is me --Wilfredor (talk) 21:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Wilfredor, My very sincere apologies, I thought you were unfortunately a lost editor, I didn't realise you had renamed yourself so very sorry about that :(, I've self reverted and again my sincere apologies, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I would have done the same :) --Wilfredor (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

regarding the nomination for deletion[edit]

I'm a relatively new user here and thus have failed to understand the reason for the nomination. I have posted the picture I personally took and thought it was good enough to enter into this years Wikipedia competition. Please these things into consideration before any desicions are made. If anyone can contact me it would be deeply appreciated. Minaseget (talk) 21:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Minaseget, Images uploaded here realistically need to have some scope to them or they must be of value in some way, Unfortunately the image was blurry to be of any use to anyone,

As stated in the nomination I realise it was apart of Category:Images from Wiki Loves Africa 2020 in Ethiopia however for me that was not enough to keep it,

You're more than welcome to ask Gbawden however given he deleted I obviously assume he agrees with my nomination, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 21:39, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Davey2010/Archive 2019

HAPPY NEW YEAR EVERYONE[edit]

Mistake[edit]

Rename request for File:Therme (28899133011).jpg[edit]

ANU board[edit]

Request & Invitation for Wiki Loves Love 2019 Jury[edit]

File:ESC HONEY.svg[edit]

File:Tribute, Westminster Bridge (34309489793).jpg[edit]

The VicuñaUploader[edit]

Limit stuff[edit]

So sorry[edit]

Another point of view[edit]

Some baklava for you![edit]

Thanks again![edit]

Buses in Oxford[edit]

File:Monochrom Eignblunzn (2003), documentation.jpg[edit]

File:Davey2010 - DSCN6598 33.jpg[edit]

Back[edit]

Bus categories[edit]

Sock/Not sock[edit]

File:C.E.O.jpg[edit]

Talk page watchers[edit]

Vandalism[edit]

A barnstar for you![edit]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.svg[edit]

wp rfa[edit]

renaming of files[edit]

COM:AN/U[edit]

DYK[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

RFA Support[edit]

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Astra1999[edit]

unblock request[edit]

Thanks[edit]

File:AirAsia NewLogo.png[edit]

Important message for file movers[edit]

re.[edit]

Happy holidays 2020![edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Thanks[edit]

File:2019-07-04 08-54-26 ILCE-6500 DSC01532 DxO (48337115637).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-20-44 ILCE-6500 DSC01604 DxO (48337902877).jpg[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-49 ILCE-6500 DSC01640 DxO (48339592906).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-24-25 ILCE-6300 DSC03561 (27674818693).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-17-39 ILCE-6300 DSC03530 (27674197434).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-53-29 ILCE-6300 DSC03630 (28009407570).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-20 ILCE-6300 DSC03615 (28186795102).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

File:2019-07-04 09-35-05 ILCE-6500 DSC01639 DxO (48338797387).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-42-51 ILCE-6300 DSC03616 (28212424051).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-55-59 ILCE-6300 DSC03639 (28256793616).jpg[edit]

File:2016-07-08 10-07-58 ILCE-6300 DSC03666 (27674982164).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

File:2016-07-08 09-36-56 ILCE-6300 DSC03592 (28009108160).jpg[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

Notification about possible deletion[edit]

I miss you[edit]

regarding the nomination for deletion[edit]

Navigation menu

Search