User talk:TylerKutschbach/2021 Archive

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Map shapes[edit]

Hey, could you please stop reverting shape changes on maps? The new shapes are standardized, public domain, and significantly better (more accurate). Thanks! Elli (talk) 04:52, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, please don't try to rename files like to a name like File:Minnesota Senate Election Results 2020.svg - that is a bad naming convention compared to what I'm doing, which is File:2020 United States Senate election in Minnesota results map by county.svg. For example

  • This could be talking about the state senate
  • This could be a bar chart, or any other way of depicting results
  • This doesn't indicate that the results are by county
  • This is out of line with w:WP:NCELECT.

Thanks. Elli (talk) 23:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t like these new shapes they’re making for Minnesota and West Virginia, they don’t look good at all to me and the older versions look much cleaner and better. TylerKutschbach (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More detailed shapes are better. I don't see how you could prefer the old shapes which are uglier and not at all standardized. Elli (talk) 01:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Though they may look "clean and better" to you, many of the county maps barely resemble what they actually look like. The older maps sacrifice accuracy for simplicity, while the new maps are conversions of shapefiles acquired directly from the U.S. Census Bureau and are compact in terms of image and file size. --MisterElection2001 (talk) 01:58, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another big problem with the new maps are they will not even load, elli blamed wiki commons for the problem however even when I viewed it on wikipedia it still didn't appear. On the election articles, the files still do not load and you can only see the image title, this creates problems because it looks bad and people can not actually see the county maps. I would ask a admin to look at the problem because the maps need to atleast load on the articles and be viewable and yes I also agree with keeping consistency with all the other maps, they're are way too many state county maps to change that many different contributors have been working on for years and it is better just to leave them the way they are. Putitonamap98 (talk) 15:20, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Putitonamap98: again, this is not an issue with the shapes, it's an issue with Commons. The shapes are not the issue. Additionally, we are fully prepared to standardize all the shapes. Yes, it's thousands of maps, but this process can be semi-automated. Better to do it now than never. Elli (talk) 01:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler, again, I am asking you to stop your undiscussed reverts. The project relies on collaboration, not on reverting anything you dislike. Elli (talk) 01:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What is one thing that you don’t like about the images I’m reverting back? Those maps were how they were used for other maps. TylerKutschbach (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The shapes are not standardized. They are inaccurate - look at Virginia's independent cities. They are less detailed. The new shapes are standardized across states, generated directly from US census data, etc. Elli (talk) 16:52, 15 April 2021 (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.

Elli (talk) 06:26, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit war[edit]

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ русский ∙ 日本語 ∙ +/−

You currently appear to be participating in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, and once it is known that there is a disagreement should discuss the issues on the relevant talk page rather than repeatedly undoing other users’ contributions. If necessary you can ask for more input at Commons:Dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to ask for temporary page protection. If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing – even if you are right about the content issue.

--AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think those images that me and Elli keep reverting need a page protection. I’m just sick of reverting them back to the way I want them to be. TylerKutschbach (talk) 03:33, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@TylerKutschbach: you should discuss instead of reverting. You refuse to discuss this in depth, on the merits of either version - and instead simply revert again and again. Elli (talk) 03:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@TylerKutschbach: While there is an argument both for and against the adoption of these new election maps, I am frustrated by this mindless back and forth. Wikipedia is about consensus. Things are not always the way that "I want them to be" either, but I do not own this site, and neither do you. I agree with @Elli: that if you do not like these new maps (and there are certainly reasons to object), please provide some justification and engage in a productive dialogue with us. Svenskbygderna (talk) 17:10, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked[edit]

You have been blocked from editing Commons for 1 week; manipulating DR[1] after previous warnings. The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. 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.

--Túrelio (talk) 07:09, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New Jersey Presidential Maps[edit]

I noticed that you changed the map. I appreciate that you made the edits in good faith. I noticed that these lines are used on other pages. However the lines are incorrect. If you look up New Jersey County lines. You can see that the old lines are correct. The lines should be used on the senate and governor pages. Pentock (talk) 22:15, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you made edits on other presidential pages. I looked at New York in particular. The county lines that you put in place are geographically incorrect. Can you explain why made the edits. Don’t just say, “I fixed the lines.” I would hate to have to take further action considering that you previously have been blocked for vandalism. Pentock (talk) 23:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed the lines because some of the lines on the counties looked too zigzaggy and I wanted them to look more cleaner. TylerKutschbach (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That you’re opinion whether or not the county lines look cleaner. I will grant you that some of the lines were zigzaggy. But you said that they were “too zigzaggy”. That is again your opinion. In my opinion the old lines were better. So we have two different opinions on the matter. So how do we resolve it. We look at the facts.

It is a facts that the old lines were more detailed and geographically correct. Therefore the old lines should be used.

I know that a similar dispute happened with the United States Minnesota Senate Map. And we both know how that went. You used the same arguments and editors and administrators did not find your arguments compelling. So will you please stop your acts of vandalism? Pentock (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

re. ND presidential map 1912[edit]

I have noticed my edits have been reverted and considering it would seem like edit warring if it continued to go on I'd like to explain why I've made those edits here so as to clear it up. Concerning the extremely pale counties in my version, those were won with only 20% according to wikipedia's record of the results. If for some reason you had some concern about my edit, however, I'd like to hear it, though I may not get back to you in very fast time (I rarely log in/edit on this site). Thank you in advance, and for now I will leave your edit in place. Duonaut (talk) 00:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted my original one back because there’s no color code for counties under 20%. They have a color code under 40%. TylerKutschbach (talk) 14:02, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see, there was one on Wikipedia but not here. Don't know of any other 20% maps so I'll leave it be unless I figure something out. Thanks. Duonaut (talk) 00:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source for counties results[edit]

Hi @TylerKutschbach - Just wanted to ask you that what source do you use for shading counties in various American presidential election maps, Particularly for Arkansas. I recently expanded the article en:United States presidential elections in Arkansas, which is now a Featured list candidate. It would be a great help if you could let me know. Thanks! --Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can find sources for 1976 to 2020 elections, but I'm particularly concerned about older election of 19th century. --Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There are svg files from 1872 to 2020 that show the county shadings for each election TylerKutschbach (talk) 21:18, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, there are, but I am concerned with the source from where the counties are shaded. Probably, this website is used. Please confirm. Thanks! --Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:45, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion requests/File:Kansas 1912.png[edit]

What's wrong with you? Please read our deletion policy, you can not request the same deletion three times without new arguments! Please explain your "The map is too small" since it isn't. If you do this further, you risk your third blocking. --Ras67 (talk) 16:42, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of categories[edit]

Please stop removing all categories from files. You've been told before that this is vandalism. I count at least eight instances in just the last week.--Ibagli (talk) 13:08, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here too! The normal behavior is cooperation not vandalism. --Ras67 (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ibagli: I’ve been removing the categories from that Texas map because I made a new file of that same map with better quality on it File:Texas Presidential Election Results 1956.svg TylerKutschbach (talk) 16:12, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please stop removing categories like this.
  1. We don't generally delete superseded files. (We can talk about this, but it ain't going to happen right now.)
  2. If you think a file should be deleted, then there's a COM:DR process for that. After that, there won't be any categories on them. But in the meantime, the categories stay.
Andy Dingley (talk) 19:22, 29 July 2021 (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#user:TylerKutschbach_continuing_to_remove_all_categories_from_files. You have continued to remove categories from files without any good reason.

--Ibagli (Talk) 05:30, 29 July 2021 (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#TylerKutschbach disruptively editing, edit warring, refusing to listen to other editors despite numerous warnings. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

Elli (talk) 02:59, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a duration of 1 year[edit]
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 1 year for the following reason: vandalism: see COM:ANU.

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.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

A.Savin 21:24, 26 August 2021 (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 know I’ve caused a lot of trouble with the maps but I was just trying to make the maps look better and update the results.) TylerKutschbach (talk) 17:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)"[reply]
Decline reason: "COM:BP asks an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Neither are on offer here. Эlcobbola talk 18:09, 27 August 2021 (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） ∙ +/−


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: "(Me removing the categories for some maps was wrong and I will stop removing the categories for the maps.) TylerKutschbach (talk) 01:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)"[reply]
Decline reason: "As before, COM:BP asks an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. "I do now understand that what I did was wrong" is a mere acknowledgement and does not indicate understanding. In what way was what you did wrong? What policy was breached? Why did you ignore warnings and continue anyway? These are not rhetorical questions. Especially with your history of untruthful block appeals, this request is not adeqaute. Эlcobbola talk 16:25, 11 October 2021 (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） ∙ +/−

@A.Savin: I do now understand that what I did was wrong TylerKutschbach (talk) 19:16, 10 October 2021 (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 want to be unblocked because I want to edit again and be more careful of what I edit for real this time.) TylerKutschbach (talk) 22:09, 11 October 2021 (UTC)"[reply]
Decline reason: "The unblock request does not explain, that you actually understand, why you are blocked. Reason of your block is not carelessness. As 3 your unblock requests were all declined, I reblock you without talkpage access. Taivo (talk) 10:03, 12 October 2021 (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） ∙ +/−

  • Not an admin, but I oppose an unblock at this point. Tyler was incredibly hard to work with and generally non-collaborative, and their unblock requests don't show at all that they would not continue being like that. Elli (talk) 23:57, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not an admin but thank you for blocking Tyler. I think you did a wonderful thing. Don’t unblock them when they’re just going to cause more disruptive edits. Tyler was blocked before and was warned time and time again not to do this. After being blocked for edit warring maps on one page, they decided to just keep doing it on another. Pentock (talk) 17:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, that's enough grave dancing. Move along please. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:04, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TylerKutschbach/2021_Archive&oldid=687351182"