User talk:Edoderoo/Archive2015

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

File:Deborah-de-ridder-1336516076.jpg

[edit]
File:Deborah-de-ridder-1336516076.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 ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Linde 30 (talk) 00:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vanillevla.jpg

[edit]
File:Vanillevla.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 ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

🎂CAKE🎂 11:59, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See your talk page. You are most likely too strict, and hiding your account behind a 'new user name' doesn't make the discussion easier also. I don't feel like discussing with a user that is showing disrupting behaviour like that, my feeling is this is just an abusive point action. Edoderoo (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see that the main policy to asume good faith was lost when a user says "showing disrupting behaviour" and "abusive point action". Also you seem to have a trouble to not bite the newbies. The focus of this image is the package and the pritnt on it. The print is of a cow. That is a copyrightable artwork, albeit mass produced, but a derivative work never the less. Also, you might not like to speak to "new users" or "users who hide", but that does not change the fact that the image is violation policies and copyright laws. 🎂CAKE🎂 17:43, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, so you created a new user account, so you'll be a newbie, and no one is allowed to tell you what they think? I know about derivative works, but I've seen some of the 500+ nominations you've done, and in some you might/will be right, but for others there will be discussion. You stated on your userpage that you wanted to avoid that discussion, therefor you created this new user account, but I hope you understand we better first have a discussion, and when the conclusion is that we need to mass delete, we will mass delete, and not first nominating, hoping that there will be no discussion for many items. You speak about policies, but creating a new account and immediately nominating like this is just not how we work here, and as you are not a new user, you know that well enough. It seems that you are nominating also images where some small part is somehow copyrightable work, but this work is connected with things that are somehow copyrightable. Every picture with me on it, show my glasses too, that is copyrightable, but for sure not every picture of me can not be under ccbysa. There is some grey area, and by hiding your true identity, you avoid discussions, and you also want to take reponsibility on your own account. And when I let all good faith go, I can even be afraid that you are a sysop here, so you can delete your own nominated images next week. Your way of working is so absolutely wrong in all possible ways, that I'm afraid that there is no (more) room for discussion left. Edoderoo (talk) 19:38, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I have no-where said I wish to avoid a discussion about the images and DRs I'v created. I have said that since they may be controversion (for some reason) I do not want it to be connected to my main acocunt, and in all fairness there is no reasonable reason why it should. Feel free to start discussions on those that you do not agree with and I bet we can have a nice chat about them, but preempively saying that a bucnch are wrong without doing/saying something about them if just...spitting buzzwords trying to "make the other party look bad". Josve05a (talk) 20:15, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
^My real account. Josve05a (talk) 20:22, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I logged out to log in on enwp, happend on Commons as well without me realizing it...guess the cats out of the bag. That does however not change ... anything at all eith the images. Josve05a (talk) 20:26, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Don't play with fire, if you can't stand the heat. Should I be responsible for your stupidities, or you? Edoderoo (talk) 20:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really feel comfortable by being bossed around by you like this. So do whatever you like, but don't hide behind any sockpuppet to avoid discussions. If you want to avoid discussions, leave the subject... if you can't leave the subject, take it as a man. Wikimedia is not a social game, so don't play this kind of games on it. I learned in the mean time that you, on your personal account, had many discussion on this subject before, and if you now just want to hide from that, it is indeed a dirty game. To my feeling this is so close to sockpuppet abuse, I prefer that you immediately stop with this kind of hide-and-seek. Edoderoo (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You can prefer what you want. BUT saying stuff like take it as a man is degrading to females, meaning that everything/everyone that is not a male/man is less worthy. As an open homosexual I'm acctually offended by this. That does however (as I said) not change the fact that the images has been nominated, by someone, this time me using another account, due to an honest consern. Josve05a (talk) 20:29, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, sure, I can't tell my opinion, because you're homo, and you think I'm a womenhater. You're either on drugs, or your fantasies are too wild, but you're not a discussion partner, you're too stupid to talk to. End of discussion here. Edoderoo (talk) 20:40, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can even be afraid that you are a sysop here, so you can delete your own nominated images next week.

That's totally agains policy for any admin to delete his/her own nominated images. But i can assure you I am not. Josve05a (talk) 20:34, 23 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment "you're too stupid to talk to" <- that's over the board. Please be respectful to anyone, even if you disagree. BTW I think that the above DR is legitimate. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This (young) person has a very effective discussion technique: add never spoken meaning to what some one said, pick that up as very offensive, and try to make yourself pity full and therefor the "winner of the discussion". It was a nice try, but respect is someone should earn. This person has got still so much to learn, but instead he thought he could teach me some lessons. My mood was not perfect fit for that yesterday. Edoderoo (talk) 20:28, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Please be aware that personal attacks such as your comment above are completely unacceptable on Commons. We aim to create a pleasant environment for people of all cultures and persuasions. One can disagree without being disagreeable, and having a bad day does not excuse your comments. I hope we can all continue while remembering to be COM:MELLOW. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:11, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, usually I do not react like that, but this guy Josve05ab was putting me homophobic words in my mouth I never said, and that was not the first moment that evening that he had doubtful behavior. One can step on my toes by mistake, no problem, but the third time in a row, it's not by mistake anymore. It's either on purpose, or really stupid, and that's what I told him. But for some reason people only come here to complain to me that I should be nice to him, clearly not seeing that this Josve05ab on purpose hid behind his sockpuppet to make his point. For me, Wikimedia is also just a hobby, and for me it's unacceptable to be treated like a dog by people like him. Edoderoo (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

sparnaay

[edit]

Ik begrijp het niet, op beide foto's staat toch een sjabloon met link naar het OTRS ticket? Kan je mij in gewone woorden uitleggen wat er nu nog precies ontbreekt ipv. slablonen te plakken. Ik dacht dit werkelijk zorgvuldig te doen, dat wil ik nl. ook. Elly (talk) 11:15, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Je hebt gelijk, ik heb niet ver genoeg gekeken ... ik heb mijn bijdragen weer allemaal teruggedraaid, want de toestemming is inderdaad helemaal in orde! Edoderoo (talk) 11:18, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Ben-weyts-1426439822.jpg

[edit]
العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Ben-weyts-1426439822.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Leyo 22:44, 22 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Once in a hundred images from WikiPortret.nl I forget to enter the ticket# ... it was ticket 2015031510013068 by the way, added it to the image. Thanks for notifying. Edoderoo (talk) 09:47, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bvof 2015 0122 gc license tue.jpg

[edit]

Hi, you confirmed OTRS permission for this image but forgot to add the missing license. Can you have another look please.

The same applies to:

Thx. --JuTa 21:17, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Please ty to categorize Category:Eindhoven University of Technology. --JuTa 21:24, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:FredEmmer.jpg

[edit]
File:FredEmmer.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 ∙ Bahasa Melayu ∙ 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 ∙ +/−

Yann (talk) 11:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

schildje

[edit]

Hoi Edo, hoop dat je er geen bezwaar tegen hebt dat ik deze foto door een scherpere heb vervangen. Ik had hem geheel toevallig gemaakt afgelopen vrijdag. Groeten van Elly (talk) 18:55, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rijksmonument-Schildje-NL
Nee, natuurlijk niet ;-) Jouw camera was vast beter dan de telefoon die ik 3-4 jaar geleden heb gebruikt. Ik zag de foto's als langskomen op het lemma Woerden, heel mooi! Edoderoo (talk) 19:45, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
De nieuwe foto's op Woerden zijn gemaakt door Erik Zachte, we waren samen op foto expeditie. Elly (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File tagging File:Jelle de jong-1450215695.jpg

[edit]
العربية ∙ беларуская ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ español ∙ euskara ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ hrvatski ∙ magyar ∙ հայերեն ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ 한국어 ∙ lietuvių ∙ latviešu ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ मराठी ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ ไทย ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ اردو ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ +/−
Warning sign
This media may be deleted.
Thanks for uploading File:Jelle de jong-1450215695.jpg. This media is missing permission information. A source is given, but there is no proof that the author or copyright holder agreed to license the file under the given license. Please provide a link to an appropriate webpage with license information, or ask the author or copyright holder to send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). You may still be required to go through this procedure even if you are the author yourself; please see Commons:But it's my own work! for more details. After you emailed permission, you may replace the {{No permission since}} tag with {{subst:PP}} on file description page. Alternatively, you may click on "Challenge speedy deletion" below the tag if you wish to provide an argument why evidence of permission is not necessary in this case.

Please see this page for more information on how to confirm permission, or if you would like to understand why we ask for permission when uploading work that is not your own, or work which has been previously published (regardless of whether it is your own).

Warning: unless the permission information is given, the file may be deleted after seven days. Thank you.

Jarekt (talk) 21:38, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Edoderoo/Archive2015&oldid=243498768"