User talk:FDMS4/archive/2015/III

User:Lev. Anthony/Karsten Petersen credit

Hi,
Thank you very much for your message. I'd neevr used this type of temlate before, so i'm not very familiar with the cretaion and use of these types of templates. Could you please make the necessary corrections?
Thank you in advance for your answer. Good day. --Lev. Anthony (talk) 23:17, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Lev. Anthony:  Done – see the result in English and French. Responding to the OTRS eMail now. Thank you for your contributions to Commons!    FDMS  4    23:29, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Lev. Anthony: Oh, sorry, I was looking at an eMail from 2009. If the permission eMail has been sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org or permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org we haven't received it.    FDMS  4    23:34, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help.
Could you please delete this page? (it's the page for language).
For the mail OTRS, i've just asked to the owner of the photos to send it, i hope he will send it soon (probably tomorrow). If you unterstand french, could you please eventually check the mail of René Beauchamp to avoid a new deletion of the files?
Thank you in advance and thank you again for your help. Good day. --Lev. Anthony (talk) 23:42, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Lev. Anthony: Using {{LangSwitch}}, both Template:Lang-User Lev. Anthony/Karsten Petersen and User:Lev. Anthony/Crédit Karsten Petersen are no longer needed (the content of the latter has been copied into User:Lev. Anthony/Karsten Petersen credit) and an administrator will delete them soon. I can confirm that there are two eMails from René Beauchamp awaiting processing, but I'm afraid that my French skills are insufficient for responding to them myself …    FDMS  4    23:59, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi,
Thank you to have check the mails of René Beauchamp. Isn't a problem if you couldn't confirm it, it was only to be sure the mails were received.
Good day. --Lev. Anthony (talk) 11:34, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Frust von NeuNutzerInnen?

Hast mal überlegt WIEVIEL Frust NeuNutzerInnen sowieso zu ertragen haben, wenn sie sich einbringen wollen???
Dass erstklassige Leute lieber drauf scheißen, sich hier einzubringen, statt sich mit pubertären Querelen zu "befassen", halte ich für bekannt.
faraafochd:
Wann, beispielsweise, hat Burkhart Kroeber, DE-Übersetzer von U. Eco, letztmals in wiki editiert??? &lg, [w.] 20:56, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für dein erwachsenes und konstruktives Feedback.    FDMS  4    21:49, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Threshold of originality and Category:Copyright law

You recently removed Category:Copyright law from Commons:Threshold of originality. It's been in the page for awhile and at first glance, it seems like the category belongs there. I'm racking my brain trying to think of a reason for its removal but I can't.

You are a lot more active at Commons than I am, so I assume I can learn something from you. What was the reason why this category doesn't belong on this page, and more importantly (if it's not obvious from the first answer) how can I and other editors reading this discussion thread apply that knowledge to other project pages whose categories need removal for similar reasons? Davidwr (talk) 16:55, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

@Davidwr: I had two reasons: Separating actual content from meta content and the fact that all pages in Category:Commons licensing help – which is a mess – are related to copyright law. I might make the latter category a subcategory of Copyright.    FDMS  4    21:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Template:Source

Can you tidy this up a little?

Would suggest a further {{Created}} so that the metadta issue with infosplit can be resolved by it's depreciation. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 10:18, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

JFTR for TPS: I responded on IRC (a long time ago).    FDMS  4    23:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks

I fixed the wash house in Plou plus a church in Madrid. Sometimes it's just that the word is unknown, sometimes it's trickier. For instance, a Spanish (or French) wash house is (or better, was) used to clean clothes, not for people to take a bath. English wash houses, as far as I've read, were used to take baths, not to wash up your clothes.
Another question is that many people that are good photographers are not proficient in English at all. So having categories in their language helps them a lot. They also tend to open categories in their own languages. As they don't speak English, complaining to them doesn't go far.
Well, I'm going back to my wash houses. Thaks a lot! B25es (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Interaction ban between yourself and @Josve05a

Dear FDMS4,
I'm writing to you to let you know that a 12-month interaction ban has been placed on you in relation to @Josve05a.

Please be advised that this interaction ban applies to all manners of communication between yourself and Josve05a, including messages and discussions on any and all Wikimedia wikis, in particular Commons, as well as IRC channels, social media, and other means of electronic and non-electronic communication.

This decision has been made jointly by the Commons oversight team and the Wikimedia Foundation, and can be appealed after 6 months from now on by sending an e-mail to the Commons oversighters' mailing list or by contacting the Wikimedia Foundation Community Advocacy team.

Please note that violations of the interaction ban might result in further action being taken pursuant to applicable Wikimedia policies.

On behalf of the Wikimedia Commons oversight team, odder (talk) 21:33, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

This is to confirm, as we did by email, that the CA team supports this and has worked closely with the local Oversight team. As part of that we will help to enforce this as necessary especially off of commons. As always, however, we do not anticipate that will be necessary. Jalexander--WMF 21:40, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Now that I'm aware of the reason for this ban, I'm hereby retracting my previous statement. In my opinion, this ban is not the result of misinterpretation or even abuse of power, but simply very bad judgement. I was interaction-banned for these text messages sent in February.

On 2015-02-12, I discussed in IRC PMs with the other user the idea of using his mobile phone to wake him up. I understood his response as approval and decided to use Skype to send a text message to the number he published. Neither the responses he sent to my mobile phone nor any of his IRC PMs indicated that he was feeling uncomfortable about the situation, and since the last time I spoke with him on IRC was in May I can only speculate why he claims to do so now.

I was told by CA that they don't believe that I was acting in bad faith or would have used the phone number being told not to. The ban was imposed anyway, even though I never received a warning and it clearly isn't preventative either. If sending a text message to a user who published his phone number is forbidden without his explicit formal consent, the correct procedure would have been to tell me not to do that again or face sanctions.

The WMF is not evil and I'm not asking anyone to boycott their projects. However, I for my part do not think I should contribute to projects on which I'm treated unfairly. A 12-month interaction ban is not a friendly instruction, but harsh punishment. On a positive note, this doesn't come at a bad time since my UAS degree programme starting this fall will certainly benefit from my undivided attention. I look forward to returning when all of this is forgotten and would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the wonderful two years I had in the Wikimedia movement.

   FDMS  4    07:10, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Questions regarding the interaction ban

@Odder: and @Jalexander-WMF: I am not here to criticize the ban but I do have a couple of questions regarding how the ban works. We never had a situation like this before so I can think of a few scenario's which are in the gray area.

• 1) If FDMS4 or Josve edits a file uploaded by one another using an automated tool like cat a lot, visual editor etc. Would this be a violation of the ban?

• 2) If FDMS4 or Josve edits a file uploaded by one another doing a minor edit by hand, is this a violation of the ban?

• 3) If FDMS4 or Josve nominates a file for deletion uploaded by one or another as part of a batch deletion, would this be a violation of the ban?

• 4) Same scenario for a regular DR and/or speedy deletion request?

• 5) Are they allowed to participate in the same discussion as long as they don't respond to each other directly both onwiki as via IRC?

• 6) What about enforcing the ban? I see a violation of the ban at IRC (fictive scenario of course), should I contact the WMF or the oversighters, would you prefer it if one of the parties get kicked if this happens? Same scenario at Commons. If they interact, what would you like administrators to do? Only contacting the WMF an/or the oversighters or blocking one of the accounts? Natuur12 (talk) 12:37, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Also shouldn't be reciprocal? I see nothing about this on Josve's page? Regards, Yann (talk) 14:57, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

• See my comment here. A formal notice on that user's talk too is good if admins need to enforce it. Hope Odder will fix it soon. Jee 15:09, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@natuur12: Thanks for the questions, and apologies for such a belated response. Firstly, let me clarify that I am now speaking on behalf of myself; not on behalf of the oversight team (as I did above), and particularly not on behalf of the Wikimedia Foundation.

As far as I am concerned, all those scenarios are quite hypothetical and unlikely to happen; however, the purpose of the interaction ban is to prevent direct communication between the two users, so if either of them edits a file uploaded by the other one by accident (or on purpose to change categories, etc.), or merely participate in the same discussion, this should, in general, not be a problem. However, should any of those situations occur, we will review them as necessary, with utmost care.

To my knowledge, no blocks have been considered in relation to this situation, and I would urge any administrator reading this to make sure that this isn't escalated any further by blocking any of the involved users. If you notice a situation that might appear to be a violation of the ban, please kindly inform either the Wikimedia Foundation or the oversight team by e-mail (given above).

Finally said, let me say that I fully realize that this is a situation unlike any other. I know some of you feel very passionately about what might appear to be some sort of precedent or, as a wise man said, institutional overspill. So let me say that all comments on this are warmly welcome (@Steinsplitter, @revi), but perhaps not on this talk page. @Jee was kind enough to start a new thread on my talk page, so either that page or a noticeboard of some sorts would probably be better.

And answering @Yann: No, the interaction ban is not reciprocal, although I am sure that @Josve05a will try his hardest not to needlessly inflame the situation. odder (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I would merely suggest that the idea here is to avoid friction between our good faith users. Sometimes users rub each other the wrong way. I'd think of it this way. -- とある白い猫 ^ちぃ？ 17:45, 15 August 2015 (UTC)