User talk:Kai3952/Archive 4

Edit Summary

When editing a page on Commons there is a small field labeled "Edit Summary" or "Summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:

Edit summary: 

 

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

Filling in the Edit Summary field greatly helps your fellow contributors in understanding what you changed, so please always fill in the Edit Summary field. If you are adding a section, please do not just keep the previous section's name in the Edit Summary field - please fill in your new section's name instead. Thank you. This is in reference to these 20 edits.   — Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me} 16:06, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Clouds and blue sky

Re this revert: I can't not see the blue sky in this image. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

File:2015-02-27 中正紀念堂.jpg

The photo is now uncategorized. Can you add a category to the photo? --Mjrmtg (talk) 21:35, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for adding a category. --Mjrmtg (talk) 21:37, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

@Mjrmtg: I don't know what are you doing here.--Kai3952 (talk) 21:40, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

I responded on your talk page. See: diff/369451891--Kai3952 (talk) 13:54, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

About the recent rollback

Sorry, not sure what happened. I was patrolling your contributions using m:RTRC. I must have clicked the rollback button by accident. Thanks for categorizing those files! By the way, why are not you applying for autopatrol? You make large number of contributions everyday. It is hard for us patrollers to distinguish bad edits from good edits such as yours. Masum Reza^📞 09:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

File:Simone Perele Bra close-up.jpg

File:Simone Perele Bra close-up.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!

- Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:18, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 week

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 week for the following reason: You have been blocked due to trolling - Your recent actions are clearly not benefiting Wikimedia Commons. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

-- ~riley (talk) 09:07, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Since 30 November 2019, you have made 133 edits to discussion-only namespaces or noticeboards about the autopatroller right, your refusal to work, etc. You have not contributed to the file namespace, or otherwise postively contributed to the benefit of this project. In that time, the following inidividuals have tried to assist you or otherwise have commented on your situation:

Admins:

• King of Hearts
• JuTa
• ~riley
• Jmabel
• Rama
• Zhuyifei1999
• Majora

Users:

• Masumrezarock100
• Roy17
• Alexis Jazz
• 大诺史
• Ricky81682

Wikimedia Commons cannot afford to invest more time into helping you. You have cross-posted for help across multiple talk pages, noticeboards and emails and have had countless people offer to help you - you have annoyed people to the point they refuse to talk to you. Your most recent edit on my talk page Special:Diff/380079970 where you said @Alexis Jazz: No, the real problem is not I am autopatrolled now, but you! I will not resume work until the problem is solved.--Kai3952 (talk) 08:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC) shows that you WP:DONTGETIT. You are refusing to work, as you have for over two weeks. That is your right as a user, however, you are impeding the work of other user's by the hours we have spent trying to work with you. I refuse to allow you to continue to impede the work of others and continue this drama. Additionally, I will not continue to allow you to blame Alexis Jazz, as you did in your original work refusal and as you have most recently done on my talk page (quoted above). I highly recommend you take this week to consider your actions. ~riley (talk) 09:33, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

@~riley: Because Alexis Jazz said: "I will every once in a while complete whatever task you are working on."--Kai3952 (talk) 10:09, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

I was blocked after I became an autopatroller? Oh, I see. The purpose of you asking me to accept the autopatroller right is to block me.--Kai3952 (talk) 10:22, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

The only problem is you never got back to work.. Me completing your work was conditional on you not being autopatrolled. But you are autopatrolled now, so the condition is no longer true. So I won't complete your work anymore. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

The most important thing is that we are respecting everyone's time. Your time, administrator's time and patroller's time. The lengthy discussions that have been ongoing, instead of working on content that benefits others, have not been respecting that time. I am happy to re-assign autopatroller if everyone can get back to work. Thank you Kai. :) ~riley (A) (talk) 23:49, 4 December 2019 (UTC) We have previously talked about drama, and as quoted, the expectation is that you would respect the community's time and get back to work. You did not get back to work and are essentially wasting the community's time. ~riley (talk) 16:55, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Really? You noted in the block log that my recent actions are clearly not benefiting Wikimedia Commons. Do you mean to tell me that I violated this rule: interest in gaining as many "user rights" or "awards" as possible?--Kai3952 (talk) 04:42, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

zh:Topic:Vcewfhn1wmpmykit is extremely clear on everything that you did wrong and what should have been done instead. Your choices have been given, and one of which has been chosen. So no, I don't care what you misinterpret our words to be, nor your feelings , considering that you failed to do the same for us in return. Good bye and no I don't intend to see you again. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 05:20, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

So am I blocked permanently? Why?--Kai3952 (talk) 06:32, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

'cause you didn't get back to work. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 07:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm thinking about how to get back to work.--Kai3952 (talk) 08:06, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Have you considered Nike's slogan? (after the block expires, if it doesn't get extended) - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 08:19, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't want to say the wrong thing to make things worse.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:22, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

Riley, you forgot YFdyh000 at [1]. @Zhuyifei1999: from that link, some of it translates to "I can’t rest assured, nor can I believe what the administrator said, after all, there are no rules that can restrain Alexis Jazz from robbing me of what I do. I also know the person Alexis Jazz. He didn't lie to me just once. During November 20-22, he was a lie before he became an inspector. So, I don’t accept automatic inspections and he is staring at me." (這種事不可能因為封禁一星期就會解決，因為我需要靠溝通讓我明白，沒讓我明白，就會像這一次事件一樣，11月20日一直到現在沒解決。既然 Alexis Jazz 都把後果說出來了，我沒辦法放心，更不可能相信管理員說的話，畢竟沒有什麼規則可以約束 Alexis Jazz 這個人不去搶我做的事。我也知道 Alexis Jazz 這個人，他騙我也不是只騙一次，在11月20～22日期間，他還沒當上巡查員就已經在騙人。所以說，我不接受自動巡查被他給盯上，是我倒霉，否則我過去三年不是過得好好的？)

What does it mean when Kai says I was a lie? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 14:23, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

'他还没当上巡查员就已经在骗人' approximate word-by-word translation: 他 he, 还没 not yet, 当上 become, 巡查员 patroller, 就 have, 已经, already, 在 doing, 骗人 lie. The meaning should be obvious now. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 15:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons for 1 week. The reason for the block is for harassment, continuing to be dramatic and wasting the valuable time of the community's editors. If you cannot drop it as you have been asked to do time and time again, you will be blocked indefinitely. (block log). If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.

-- ~riley (talk) 02:14, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

@~riley: Why?--Kai3952 (talk) 02:32, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Reasoning is clearly stated above. ~riley (talk) 02:46, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

I use "[[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]]" and not "{{re|Alexis Jazz}}"; so I didn't ping him. I don't know why he say I ping him. Because I speak to Masumrezarock100. I fail to see where I'm "harassing" Alexis Jazz on COM:RFP. I am sorry if I harassed him. Actually, Alexis Jazz has nothing to do with my drama. Because I have an explanation for my statement: "I made ~985 edits on 27 December 2019". This is what Minorax said; so I did not intend to threaten Alexis Jazz. He clarified here that I misunderstood him. I intend to end the discussion there, and then go to User talk:Minorax and talk about autopatrol. So you can rest assured that I won't harass Alexis Jazz anymore. For what it's worth, I'm sorry that I messed up.

You say "you will be blocked indefinitely" - it feels more like an "intimidation". I know you are an administrator, but you still shouldn't intimidated me. There are many ways to stop me. I urgently wanted to be able to communicate reasonably with me. Because my work has been primarily devoted to editing instead of drama/harassment.

Finally I want to tell you about my thoughts, I will tried to achieve what Masumrezarock100 said: "forget your dark past and move on". If you block me indefinitely, then I expect someone to believe my sincerity. Because I have promised Minorax that I will resume work.--Kai3952 (talk) 05:06, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

You have made many statements but you have failed to follow through on them. You were previously blocked, and warned, for similar behavior. We talked about this type of behavior. You talk about reasonable communication, yet several users do not want to interact or be pinged by you because you are not reasonable to communicate with. You continued discussion on a twice closed request for rights as not done and even after being told "This discussion is OVER", you continue. It does not matter how devoted you are to editing if you are behaving this way. My statement is by no means intimidation, it is a final warning to change your behavior or be blocked for an indefinite period of time. ~riley (talk) 05:34, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

1. I told you that I did not ping Alexis Jazz. How do you want me to prove it?
2. I don't know what "many statements" means, but I know that my statement is you talk about this type of behavior. Minorax told me: "You made ~985 edits on 27/12, imagine the time taken for the user to patrol your edits", but I thought what he meant was that my edits caused difficulties for patrollers to patrol, or, the autopatrol is not working as intended. And then I got to thinking about I stop editing until resolved; that's why I have failed to follow through on my promise.
3. I don't know if it's a "warning". Actually, you did not close the discussion; rather you blocked my account. If you think that this discussion is over, then you should do like this.

Regarding the above three questions, I hope you can help me instead of blocking my account everytime.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:02, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

1. When you use "[[User:Alexis Jazz|Alexis Jazz]]" it works as a ping. If you want to link my username without sending a ping, use {{noping|Alexis Jazz}}.

3. Discussions on COM:RFR are closed with  Done or  Not done or similar, rarely if ever with {{Atop}}. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 06:57, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

I didn't mean to, honest. I'm really sorry. I contribute to Wikimedia Commons for three years, but I don't know much about how it works. Because I have been dedicated to editing all files in relation to Taiwan. I feel sad when I see that ~riley misunderstood what I mean by "editing", this indicates what he means: Kai3952's contribution over the past three years is wrong. Would someone kindly tell me clearly? If it is my misunderstanding or my mistakes...I have no idea what he wants me to change, so how am I going to even try?--Kai3952 (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Request reason: "I have self-reflected in my days of blocking account asking myself where I went wrong. I discovered that a big part of this problem is due to the fact that I have an own "unique" way of understanding, and it's directly related to my personality (which included emotions and values) and my social ability (especially in interpersonal interactions). Actually the problem can be solved if I am willing to change myself. Harassment: per Tigerzeng's reply, the notification will be sent when you link to [[User:Username]] and sign you comment with ~~~~. I never knew before that users were pinged by me, because the previous design does not trigger the mention alert that is used on wikimedia (see: Suaveness's reply). Now I understand the root cause of my problem, I also realize what I am doing wrong, and know how to avoid it. Whatever the reason, I have broken my promise to Alexis Jazz. I truly apologize for my negligence. I will continue to keep my word (which means that I'll never connect to with Alexis Jazz) and also never to mention this name "Alexis Jazz" so that I don't cause the same mistake again. And it's important never to lose sight of that. Intimidation: If the community thinks that the statement "I stop all work" is an intimidation (although it was not my original intention to intimidate the community), I apologize for my negligence and I will never do it again in this form as well. Actually, the primary purpose of that statement is to inform people that I am not active, rather than as a tool for drama or intimidation. There are many reasons why I am not active, maybe it's a health factor, go travel for a long period of time, busy in real life, etc. Drama and Intimidation: Maybe I shouldn't wrote "I stop all work", but I did. If I really want to leave Wikimedia Commons, I would write "left Wikimedia Commons" or "no longer active"; however, in the case of I don't working but rather to drama, the statement "I stop all work" is a way for me to punish myself for my mistakes. I'm sorry if you misunderstood me due to my bad English. The reason I punish myself this way is that I put very strict daily requirements on myself to work on certain tasks. However, I suspect the problem may come from my wrong values, because as mentioned below at +, the problem will go away if I accept my mistakes and learn from them. Today I am starting to accept the fact that I am indeed a person without competence, but I can't use my mistakes to escape my own problems (to stop losing myself). I know the world doesn't revolve around me. If I want to get back to Wikimedia Commons and return to work, I had to have the courage to change myself and and my situation. On the other hand, I realized that I was attaching my entire self-worth to one mistake on Wikimedia Commons (which means that my everything depend on how others perceive me), and paradoxically I should not just think of myself but others as well. Ironically, this will be a huge challenge for myself, as the other people either don't have this problem (like me). Drama: I apologize for my ignorance and have a lot of respect for what he do. I never worked as a patroller on any wiki, so I didn't knew that my categorizing work can easily cause cluttered the patrol list. One category collects more than 26,000 files for Solomon203 that is not convenient for us to edit. I assume subcategories would be useful for editors who look for specific files (as it can help we narrow our search files to avoid wasting our time) and helps to make future editing files more easier. However, I am not trying to pass the buck, I just want you to know what I think. If a patroller who is working the same task as me just to make my work easier, then I must have done something wrong that caused him to waste time. I contribute to Wikimedia Commons for three years, but I don't know much about how his work. Also, I analyze as to why it happened — my wrong way of thinking causes a bad situation to get worse, and would think this is his problem. My wrong way of thinking When Alexis Jazz finishes doing whatever task or action I am currently doing, there will be several problems: 1. It is very easy to cause editing conflicts when he start editing files. 2. I have to patrol each of his edits, but I am afraid that this task will take a lot more time and energy than I initially expected. For example, he made ~1560 edits on 29 November 2019, imagine the time taken for the user to patrol his edits. 3. I think that while we can speed up work for this task, it would be a waste of time for both of us. Either he does it or I do it because he can't put time on me to avoid waste of manpower. 4. I take my time to explain it clearly for him so he can understand why he can't do my work. However, this would waste time and does not help Wikimedia Commons. I think he should tell me what he knows about all of this, so that I would not continue to waste his time in this way. Actually, this is not the first time I have seen this happen. When I was adding the "Photographs by 林高志" category to 林高志's file, I realize そらみみ does the same task as me. I discussed this with him, and explained four reasons. Through my self-reflection, the root cause of the problem is that I did not take the initiative to understand how it works on Wikimedia Commons. I should learn by watching and asking questions to users that are extremely experience. I should learn how to take responsibility for myself. I therefore reversed my wrong way of thinking — I accept my mistakes and learn from them (+). I apologize for my ignorance when I indicated that I would not be willing to accept the autopatrol right. I know many users try to make me understand what "autopatrolled" means, but I still believe in what I think it's the user right. Unfortunately, either I seriously misunderstood the term "user right" itself, or I am clueless as to the real nature of all user rights. No one ever has refused the autopatrol right like I did. Because what I think of is...I don't want to be a person who pursues the honor to reward for myself (see: en:WP:HATC). I edit files, categories, templates in a nice manner just to become a selfless person in this way, so I supposed that no autopatrolled can still contribute well for Wikimedia Commons, myself forgot what the user right itself is for (see: en:WP:POWER). I apologize for the annoyance that this has caused to everyone. I often misunderstand what people say to me. To make things worse, I’m quite an emotional person, so I easily tend to take things personally and become moody or irritable when I encounter something that I don't want to happened. As long as I learn to control my emotions well enough to communicate clearly with people. I apologize for all users who were misunderstood by me in the past which included そらみみ, 雅婕, 瑞丽江的河水, 廣九直通車, Alexis Jazz, Jmabel, Minorax (大诺史), Masumrezarock100, Rama. I make all problems and reasons clear for my mistake which I explained so clearly. That was probably the worst mistake I've ever made. Since I do have too many problems, I have to choose which ones should be solved first. I know that this is my final chance to use the account "Kai3952" before being blocked indefinitely. I apologize for my mistake and I will try my best to avoid repeating the same mistake again.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)" Unblock reason: "User demonstrates they have a deep understanding of the multiple issues in play and promises to work with other appropriately while recognizing this is their final chance. ~riley (talk) 23:47, 4 January 2020 (UTC)" This template should be archived normally.

(Block log) (unblock) (Change local status for a global block) (contribs)

First of all, let me thank you for writing all of that down. While a block can be upsetting, it also opens up the possibility to learn more from it. When users are blocked, they should think about why they are blocked and how to improve themselves to not to make mistakes again which lead them to the block. You did exactly the same and I am deeply touched by seeing your improvement. One more thing to note though, you wrote "I know that this is my final chance to use the account "Kai3952" before being blocked indefinitely". If you had evaded your block by creating sockpuppets, you and the other accounts would have been blocked on sight when you get caught. The block was imposed not only on your account but also on you. But that's not going to happen, because you didn't do it and instead took your time to think about your block and how to improve yourself. I fully  Support your unblock. Continue to improve Commons with your contributions. Best wishes to you, Masum Reza^📞 10:54, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: I am fully aware that you requested not be pinged by Kai but I guess you would accept a ping from me. :) I wanted to hear your thoughts on this. I think Kai is a good faith contributor. Perhaps you would want to change your decision. Masum Reza^📞 11:07, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Masumrezarock100: Yes, you can ping me. I have nothing to add though. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:53, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

 Comment diffs provided by Kai should be the diffs on zh.wiki (Tigerzeng's reply and Suaveness's reply). Minorax^talk _{(formerly 大诺史)} 13:08, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm grateful you are here to give me a gentle reminder "the block was imposed not only on your account but also on you." I have made many sockpuppets before I come here (which means before March 2017 that I have been active on the Chinese Wikipedia), so I have no choice but to emphasize the account "Kai3952". But don't worry because I have promised an admin of zh.wikipedia (Chinese Wikipedia) that I will never intend to create sockpuppets, or to evade the block in other ways.--Kai3952 (talk) 13:19, 4 January 2020 (UTC)