User talk:Supreme-allied-editor

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Supreme-allied-editor!
Afrikaans | Alemannisch | asturianu | azərbaycanca | Bahasa Banjar | català | čeština | Cymraeg | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | Esperanto | euskara | estremeñu | français | Frysk | galego | hrvatski | Bahasa Indonesia | interlingua | Interlingue | íslenska | italiano | Kiswahili | Kurdî | Latina | lietuvių | magyar | Bahasa Melayu | Mirandés | Nederlands | norsk bokmål | occitan | Plattdüütsch | polski | português | português do Brasil | română | rumantsch | Scots | shqip | sicilianu | slovenčina | slovenščina | Basa Sunda | suomi | svenska | Tagalog | Türkçe | vèneto | Tiếng Việt | Zazaki | Ελληνικά | беларуская | беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ | български | Ирон | македонски | нохчийн | русский | српски / srpski | тоҷикӣ | українська | ქართული | Հայերեն | नेपाली | भोजपुरी | मराठी | हिन्दी | অসমীয়া | বাংলা | தமிழ் | മലയാളം | සිංහල | ไทย | ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး  | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 中文 | 中文（台灣）‎ | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | 粵語 | עברית | اردو | العربية | تۆرکجه | سنڌي | فارسی | +/−
First steps tutorial

Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content).

You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki.

Getting help

More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks
  • Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities.
  • You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads.
  • Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~.
  • To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg.
  • You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account.
  • There are several tools to upload files.
  • Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful.
Made a mistake?
  • Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it.
  • Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 15:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright status: File:ROK asks Ritch extend as Olympic coach.pdf[edit]

Copyright status: File:ROK asks Ritch extend as Olympic coach.pdf

bahasa melayu ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ deutsch ∙ english ∙ español ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ português ∙ polski ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ suomi ∙ svenska ∙ türkçe ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ עברית ∙ العربيَّة ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:ROK asks Ritch extend as Olympic coach.pdf. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.

If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.)

If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there.

Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

Yours sincerely EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Ritch-Biden-Zagreb1993.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Ritch-Biden-Zagreb1993.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

JuTa 09:05, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a personally taken and owned photograph. It is not derivative.

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Blix-Ritch 1995.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Blix-Ritch 1995.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

JuTa 09:33, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a personally taken and owned photograph.

Source of derivative work is not properly indicated: File:Coach Ritch & future Korean legend Shin Dong-pa 1970.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ slovenščina ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ беларуская‎ ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ русский ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This file may be deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Coach Ritch & future Korean legend Shin Dong-pa 1970.jpg, is a derivative work, containing an "image within an image". Examples of such works would include a photograph of a sculpture, a scan of a magazine cover, or a map that has been altered from the original. In each of these cases, the rights of the creator of the original must be considered, as well as those of the creator of the derivative work.

While the description page states who made this derivative work, it currently doesn't specify who created the original work, so the overall copyright status is unclear. If you did not create the original work depicted in this image, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright.

Please edit the file description and add the missing information, or the file may be deleted. If you created the original content yourself, enter this information as the source. If someone else created the content, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

JuTa 09:41, 11 October 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:

And also:

Yours sincerely, JuTa 19:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove deletion requests[edit]

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

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

JuTa 22:30, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted content[edit]

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ български ∙ বাংলা ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ हिन्दी ∙ magyar ∙ Bahasa Indonesia ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文 ∙ 繁體中文 ∙ +/−

Hello Supreme-allied-editor, the following content you uploaded violates one or more of our policies and therefore has been or will soon be deleted:

File:John Logan House 2.jpg

The Wikimedia Commons (this website) only hosts media files with a realistic educational purpose and that can be used for any purpose, including:
  • use in any work, regardless of content
  • creation of derivative works
  • commercial use
  • free distribution

See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons, and Commons:Image casebook for some specific examples. Some other Wikimedia projects have different licensing policies. For example, the English Wikipedia allows fair use of sounds and photographs. This is not the case on Wikimedia Commons; "fair use" materials are not acceptable here.

Please make sure that you only upload educational content you have created yourself, those which are out of copyright, or those for which you have the required permission for the work to be used in all the ways described above. Please note that derivative works of copyrighted material are also considered copyrighted. Again, please read through Commons:Licensing, which is quite crucial, to understanding how Wikimedia Commons works. Thanks for your contribution, and please do leave me a message if you have further questions.

And also:

Yours sincerely, Эlcobbola talk 19:26, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:Amb John Ritch.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:Amb John Ritch.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:Amb John Ritch.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image is a work of a United States Department of State employee, taken or made as part of that person's official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain per 17 U.S.C. § 101 and § 105 and the Department Copyright Information.

You appear not to have actually read the notice ("You should [...] provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain." (underline added)) United States federal government works are indeed public domain, but you must provide evidence of such a claim. Merely stating "U.S. Government" is as meaningless as writing "library." You must provide information (a source substantiating the assertion) that allows us to verify the claim. Please read the notice, and COM:L, critically. If you continue to remove valid templates you will be blocked from editing. Эlcobbola talk 00:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violations[edit]

Afrikaans | azərbaycanca | català | čeština | dansk | Deutsch | Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ | English | español | français | galego | hrvatski | magyar | italiano | Nederlands | norsk | norsk bokmål | polski | português | português do Brasil | sicilianu | Simple English | suomi | svenska | Türkçe | Tiếng Việt | Ελληνικά | български | македонски | русский | српски / srpski | українська | հայերեն | मराठी | हिन्दी | বাংলা | മലയാളം | ไทย | မြန်မာဘာသာ | 한국어 | 日本語 | 粵語 | 中文（简体）‎ | 中文（繁體）‎ | עברית |العربية | فارسی | +/−

Hello Supreme-allied-editor.

You have uploaded one or more files that are copyright violations. You have done so despite requests from editors not to do so, and despite their instructions. See Commons:Licensing for the copyright policy on Wikimedia Commons. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter useful.

This is your last warning. The next time you upload a file that violates copyright, you will be blocked. Please leave me a message if you have further questions.

Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File source is not properly indicated: File:John Ritch coaching KoreanStar ShinDong-pa 1970.jpg[edit]

العربية ∙ asturianu ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk nynorsk ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 简体中文‎ ∙ 繁體中文‎ ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media was probably deleted.
A file that you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, File:John Ritch coaching KoreanStar ShinDong-pa 1970.jpg, was missing information about where it comes from or who created it, which is needed to verify its copyright status. The file probably has been deleted. If you've got all required information, request undeletion providing this information and the link to the concerned file ([[:File:John Ritch coaching KoreanStar ShinDong-pa 1970.jpg]]).

If you created the content yourself, enter {{Own}} as the source. If you did not add a licensing template, you must add one. You may use, for example, {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} or {{Cc-zero}} to release certain rights to your work.

If someone else created the content, or if it is based on someone else's work, the source should be the address to the web page where you found it, the name and ISBN of the book you scanned it from, or similar. You should also name the author, provide verifiable information to show that the content is in the public domain or has been published under a free license by its author, and add an appropriate template identifying the public domain or licensing status, if you have not already done so. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

Please add the required information for this and other files you have uploaded before adding more files. If you need assistance, please ask at the help desk. Thank you!

Эlcobbola talk 00:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


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: "I humbly admit that I have done things wrong out of ignorance. However, I am quite confident that I have infringed on no one’s legitimate copyright. My study efforts in response to the block lead me to believe as follows: that most (with 2 exceptions) of my violations involve photos taken by US Government employees involved in doing Government business, and were therefore public from inception; and I have now gone to considerable effort to document that fact. It’s challenging to do this because these photos were taken 25-50 years ago. But I have done all that is humanly possible to prepare to place these accurately and properly on Wiki Commons, and I would like the opportunity to try."
Decline reason: "Per Elcobbola: COM:BP requires an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Neither are on offer here, especially as none of these issues have been addressed (the block is, of course, for socking.). You request to be unblocked is declined. Thank you for your understanding.--Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 17:36, 16 December 2020 (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） ∙ +/−

  •  Oppose - This is such disingenuous piffle that one struggles with where to begin. This is also {{Checkuserblock}}, and can only be lifted by a CU, but CU access is not required to observe the sockpuppetry; only two examples:
Example one:
Example two:
No reasonable person, whether new or not ("I have done things wrong out of ignorance") would have acted in such a manner (multiple sockpuppets; deliberate license laundering; blatant lies about authorship and licensing; etc.) Verily, the necessity of making truthful statements requires no special knowledge or experience whatsoever. COM:BP requires an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Neither are on offer here, especially as none of these issues have been addressed (the block is, of course, for socking.) Even the statements about copyright issues ("I am quite confident that I have infringed on no one’s legitimate copyright") are nonsense: File:John Logan House.jpg is stolen from Facebook, File:ROK asks Ritch extend as Olympic coach.pdf is a scan of a newspaper; File:Coach Ritch & future Korean legend Shin Dong-pa 1970.jpg (and others) was your work, then "historyontv1's" work, and then a "government work" as you concocted statuses (indeed with no evidence whatsoever) to attempt to make it stick. Эlcobbola talk 16:45, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|You are being too harsh. — First, you accuse me of “stealing” the Logan House photo from the John Logan House entry on Facebook that I myself created; those photos were produced by my architect at my expense and I believe ownership is mine. Certainly no theft was involved. — Regarding the clipping from 50 years ago, I was acting in the apparently mistaken belief that this was open source info that could be posted; certainly no deceit was involved. That was just an inappropriate place to put a clipping. - Re the Korean basketball pic, there are some situations that are inherently ambiguous and subject to alternate interpretations (as distinct from “alternate facts”). This photo is a good example. It was taken on a personal camera by a friend of Ritch who was also the photographer of the Community Relations Office at 8th Army headquarters in Seoul. The photo negative belonged to Ritch but the photo was also distributed to the Korean government and Korean press to publicize the US Army’s “loan” of Captain Ritch to Korea’s national sports program. I am CLEARLY not a copyright expert, but it seems to me that this situation is subject to different reasonable interpretations, as are many others, including Blix-Ritch and Biden-Ritch, involving photos taken by government employees. - Re the official photo of Ritch, I ask that you appreciate the degree of incompetence I have brought to this (as opposed to dishonesty) when I couldn’t even manage to succeed in posting an official US Government portrait! - Re the puppetry, a term I’m not previously familiar with, I’m afraid that my situation was worsened by a friend who offered to “solve” my problem using Flickr.

As I’m endeavoring to post things properly, I ask you to reconsider your block.

  1. Blocks are preventative, not punitive. Verily, the block is not punishing ("harsh"), but preventing someone who has demonstrated an inability either to understand or to respect our polices from continuing the disruption of inappropriate uploads. Indeed, this is why our criteria, which have twice been pointed out to you ([1][2]), are an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. It is thus utterly bizarre that you ask to be unblocked, again, while simultaneously asserting, explicitly and implicitly, that you remain entirely unaware of the issues and that you desire to continue to edit in an area where your "[ignorance] causes significant errors for others to clean up" ("I ask that you appreciate the degree of incompetence I have brought to this.")
  2. As an example of the general copyright concern (you, again, have been blocked for sockpuppetry): for File:John Logan House.jpg, you claim "those photos were produced by my architect at my expense and I believe ownership is mine." That is not how copyright works. Architects are independent contractors who retain intellectual property (copyright)--which is not the same as physical property (photographs, blueprints, etc.)--unless explicitly transferred by a formal written agreement. We do not expect you to come here knowing this; we, however, do expect someone who is "CLEARLY not a copyright expert" to make a reasonable effort to inform themselves instead of simply acting on mere "belief" untethered to any genuine basis--especially after they've noticed the image has been deleted (i.e., what any reasonable person would understand to mean the "belief" problematic.) This is not a project compatible with truthiness. We require "information sufficient for others to verify the license status even when not required by the license itself or by copyright laws." If you don't have a verifiable source that substantiates a claimed license, you cannot upload the image regardless of whatever it's copyright status may in truth be. By way of analogy: one may, in truth, live at 123 Main Street; but, without verifiable documentation, their mere say-so at the DMV will not get them a driver's license.
  3. On the subject of truth, and indeed the block: the "friend" excuse is well-known to us, not credible, and not generally tried when a checkuser is involved. Isn't it serendipitous, for example, that a) the "friend" who offered to "solve [a] problem" that arose in November 2020 was created months earlier in July 2020 and, in fact, within 30 minutes of your account attaching to the Commons; b) the "friend" has an identical machine; c) the "friend" has an identical IP address; and d) the "Flickr friend" has also edited your article of interest on not one, not two, but three separate days? Эlcobbola talk 20:34, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock|I have pled incompetence not as a strong defense but only to argue against your insistence on my being dishonest. I am trying to overcome my incompetence, and have certainly not infringed on anyone’s copyright — even if I have not deployed all the verifiable information that might be appropriate. — On Logan House, for example, about which you accused me of theft, I do have my architect’s permission to use the photos. But it’s not clear to me how I would post that. — on the others, I believe there is a strong case I can present for public since inception. - You seem to think me not credible because my friend was, on the day of his flickr activity, on my wifi system. I have no reason to deny that; I have acknowledged my mistake in accepting his belief that he could solve my problem via flickr. I should have discouraged his “help”. Mistake on my part. But I think your investigative skills, if fully deployed, would reveal that he has his own laptop, lives elsewhere, and that most of his activities on flickr and wiki have been performed from his home/office many miles away. I wasn’t inventing his existence. — If we can distinguish between punitive and preventive, is there any way I can “clear” items with you to ensure that they are satisfactorily presented?

Whether a liar or grossly incompetent is, relative to disruption to the Commons, a distinction without a difference. Even if I do think it both. That you continue to say "[I] have certainly not infringed on anyone’s copyright" after all the information above is remarkable and exactly why the block is appropriate and necessary. (Copyright violation, by the way, is distinct from copyright infringement--the former, the issue, is shorthand for a violation of our polices regarding copyright. This is yet another failure to read and to think critically, and does not bode well for someone seeking to be allowed to edit related to intellectual properties.) For the fourth time: we require an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Эlcobbola talk 21:53, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Supreme-allied-editor&oldid=519253167"