User:Anthere/box

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Why did you blank the election disendorsements page?

Hi, what did you expect would happen following your blanking of the disendorsements page? Did you think that everyone would immediately have nothing negative to say about anyone anymore?! --Rebroad 13:30, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I did not expect anything really special to happen. I mostly wanted to see what would be done, in particular if editors would proceed in the way of criticizing editors in such a disastrous way. In short, I did something that anyone could do, or could reverse, which was done.

However, I think that maintaining a list to only put criticism on people is just such a poor move it should just not exist. I think it is forgetting that most editors on Wikipedia are people giving hours of personal time in a common goal and in good faith.

In a community, there are enough reasons to be in disagreement, and enough reasons to get mad at each other, that setting a public list only to say "this person is just plain bad and plain wrong" is an extremely destructive idea in the long run. I absolutely do not support the idea.

Incidently, I find quite interesting that so unwikilove comments are left in this page, while my own comments were censored. I would suggest that the editor who censored me either restores part of my comments or that he apologizes to me.

In all cases, I never involve myself in english wikipedia policies. However, since I was asked to approve the current procedure for election of AC, I consider it is part of board activities to be involved in this case. And the procedure did not involve such a page.

It would be very seriously wrong to claim I prevent people to say negative comments about others. I made comments on the talk page on that topic. I have voiced myself enough criticism of some editors in 3 years not to claim voicing criticism is bad and should not be done :-)

Consequently, I have a constructive suggestion to make :-) Since on one hand some people want this page dedicated to criticism, and on the other hand, this page is not part of the procedure, what about keeping that page, but not as a subpage of the AC election ?

Image:Sunflowmural1.jpg

"
there
are

few
ants

here!
"

said
the hummingbird ,


darting ,


drinking in

sun-wrought

nectar

I must absolutely remember to plant a couple of sunflowers in the garden.... :-)

[edit] Vandal?

Think yourself lucky only to be called a vandal. He accused me of election fraud. However I don't think Xed is a troll in the usual sense of the word. I honestly dont think he knows what he is doing. He is the brightest of people and simple assumes that if anyone does anything that he disagrees with then it's perfectly acceptable for him to say the first thing that comes into his head. He never backs down, even when clearly in the wrong, so there is no point in trying to reason with him I'm afraid. Fortunately for the most part, eveyone just ignores him. Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 09:55, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hummm ?

This place is really populated by strange people ;-)
Okay... I will only put him on the ignore list then.
What is a bit problematic in such cases, is that if old participants know of these types of personalities, they can avoid or ignore those. But I believe a newbie could be pretty much discouraged in participating to Wikipedia by such a person.

You know what I find real tough Theresa ? Since I basically do not have any more time to participate to the english wikipedia, there are many many people I just do not know now. When I read the anti-endorsment page, I can guess that most participants to it are not amongst our best elements, but I am just not sure. Because in most cases, I do not know these people. Or if I do, it is only by earsay, not primary experience.

This is essentially the experience of a newbie. And the experience is tough, because when you navigate in policy discussion pages, you can find many of those often unpleasant personalities. And most of them are specifically involved in those pages. If you are a newbie, or just dropping by from time to time, you have no idea of the weight and quality of each person and general respect for it, and it makes it a rather uncomfortable experience.

I realise two things. First how much a web of trust might help, even though a web of trust might have bad consequences in excluding personalities which are important elements but often difficult to deal with. Second, that in dealing with Foundation issues, how lucky we are that basically all those involved are really good people. Even though we may not agree all the time, all involved do their best and they want to do the best.

Well, thanks for your comment :-)

[edit] Meetup

Your name is on the list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC for December 12. In case you forgot to check the page, the venue and time have been both been set. We are planning on meeting at the Moonstruck Diner at 1:30pm. Just wanted to let you know. -- – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)[[]] 23:09, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2
I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)


[edit] RFC pages on VfD

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:18, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to shift your comments to the new admin noticeboard... if you have any specific objections to this please let me know. - Ta bu shi da yu 22:31, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)


[edit] Unverified images

Hi! Thanks for uploading the following image:

I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License, {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks so much. [[User:Poccil|Peter O. (Talk, automation script)]] 04:02, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at User:Yann/Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

[edit] Image tagging

Hi Anthere! Thanks for uploading the following images:

I notice they currently don't have image copyright tags. Could you add one to each to let us know its copyright status?

You can use {{gfdl}}:

GFDL

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
Subject to disclaimers.

if you release it under the GNU Free Documentation License,

{{fairuse}}

Copyrighted

This work is copyrighted and unlicensed. It does not fall into one of the blanket fair use categories listed at Wikipedia:Fair use#Images or Wikipedia:Fair use#Audio_clips. However, it is believed that the use of this work:

  • To illustrate the object in question
  • Where no free equivalent is available or could be created that would adequately give the same information
  • On the English-language Wikipedia ([1]), hosted on servers in the United States by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation ([2]),

qualifies as fair use under United States copyright law. Any other uses of this image, on Wikipedia or elsewhere, may be copyright infringement. See Wikipedia:Fair use and Wikipedia:Copyrights.

To the uploader: Please add a detailed fair use rationale for each use, as described on Wikipedia:Image description page, as well as the source of the work and copyright information.

This tag should not be used. Instead, use either one of the more specific tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use or {{fairusein|article name}}.


if you claim fair use, and so on. Click here for a list of the various tags.

If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know at my talk page where you got the image from, and I'll tag it for you. Thanks so much. Denni☯ 04:23, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)

P.S. You can help tag other images at Wikipedia:Untagged_Images. Thanks again.

P.P.S. I hope all is well with you, and that you are enjoying your labors with Angela and Jimbo. :)

Looking here, I'd like to add that the following images need tags:

Any more tags would be a great help. Thanks! --[[User:Ricky81682|Ricky81682 (talk)]] 08:11, Dec 16, 2004 (UTC)

All my pictures are gfdl unless otherwise mentionned. You are welcome to run a bot on all of them to add a gfdl tag on them.

[edit] Salut Sweet & Fluffy!

Sacre bleu! Steve is back! And he's contributing like crazy to anti-bias changes to linguistics stuff.

In fact I just began doing the same to French language because it was apparently written by a frustrated American who failed his french course. Hope you like my changes

[edit] Vacations

I am on wikivacations till the 2nd of january 2005. SweetLittleFluffyThing

[edit] RFC

If you don't mind me asking, I'd appriciate your support at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mbecker. Thanks. — マイケル ₪ 04:40, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Main namespace cleanup

In an effort to clean up the main namespace, I've moved your old main namespace userpage to User:Anthere/old, as there's some edit history you might want to keep. Otherwise just delete it. --fvw* 12:29, 2004 Dec 31 (UTC)

[edit] Call for AMA election

AMA Member Advocate,

There's a poll currently in the AMA Homepage about making a new AMA Coordinator election. Please, cast your vote there (though it's not mandatory). Any comments you have about this, write it on the AMA Homepage talk page. Cheers, --Neigel von Teighen 18:43, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Call for Membership Meeting

Hi Anthere, how have you been. It's been a while since we have communicated. Here is the blurb I am posting on all AMA members pages. Hope you can participate:

As AMA Coordinator I am requesting that suggestions be placed on Wikipedia:AMA Membership Meeting plans for our first membership meeting, to be held in the near future, (hopefully before any election occurs.) Since we have never had any kind of "official" meeting we need to discuss how this will occur (i.e. Wiki pages or IRC channel), how it will be structured (i.e. meeting agenda) and if there will be any "chair" to supervise the meeting and meeting "secretary" to write up minutes or keep some kind of official record of what transpires. Thanks in advance for your input and your continued work as an advocate. — © Alex756 19:35, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Is this a typo?

Hi Anthere. I just read the article on Civility. It's got a link to your original article m:incivility and a comment saying that the original article was called "uncivility". Is this a typo I should fix? PaulHammond 16:52, 7 Jan 2005 (UTC)



[edit] Bee Image

Hi Anthere. You wanted a bee image? How about this one?

Enlarge

Pollinator 14:44, Jan 16, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] OFFICIAL AMA MEETING NOTICE

The first AMA Membership meeting will be held on Sunday January 23, 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 2 PM Eastern NA Time, 11 AM Pacific NA Time, and 8 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend. — © Alex756 19:42, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Logs of first AMA Membership meeting

You may view the log of the first meeting on the following two pages: Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-23-05) (first hour) and Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-23-05) Pt II (remainder of meeting). If you are interested in commenting on the agenda of the meeting please do so here:Wikipedia:AMA Meeting (suggested topics).

[edit] OFFICIAL SECOND MEETING NOTICE AND REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

"The second AMA Membership meeting will be held on Sunday January 30 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 2 PM Eastern NA Time, 11 AM Pacific NA Time, and 8 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend." The coordinator is requesting that members submit the following information for the upcoming coordinator’s report:
  • How many individuals did you help as an advocate
  • What is the maximum amount of time you put into a case
  • Do you feel your work as an advocate was successful?
  • How can the advocacy program of the AMA be improved?

Thank you. Please submit your responses here: Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator/January 2005 Survey

— © Alex756 23:01, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) (The Coordinator)

[edit] Using the Signpost to test rules

Anthere, I think that is a good suggestion regarding using the Signpost to discuss rules that may need to be changed. I will bring it up at the next meeting. It would be nice if you could come to a meeting, I don't know if the time is bad for you, Michael Snow can't make that time, but we haven't set another time yet for our third meeting so if you have any suggestions it would be great for you to attend (but if you can't I know you are busy with a lot of activities on Wikipedia). — © Alex756 23:35, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Anthere/PictAlgerie

Greetings. Did you take the photos listed at User:Anthere/PictAlgerie? How should I tag them? – Quadell (talk) (help) 23:18, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Foundation wiki

Hi Anthere. Did you see a message from me on the foundation wiki a few days ago about the next board meeting? It seems to have disappeared completely, both from your talk page and from my contributions list.

aie, no, I saw nothing :-(

Also, do you know if anything happened about Arno having no access to that wiki?

nothing either...

I'll be back on IRC tomorrow and it would be good to arrange a time/date for the next meeting then if possible. Angela. 02:21, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

agreed...
SweetLittleFluffyThing

[edit] Image Copyrights

Instead of getting lost in your talk page, this image copyright declaration should be in your user page, IMHO.

<big> <big><font color=red>All my pictures are gfdl unless otherwise mentionned. You are welcome to run a bot on all of them to add a gfdl tag on them. </big> </big>

In spite of your permission for anyone to edit your user page, I'm too timid to edit it. Sorry for wasting your time.

Oh, BTW I tagged some of them gfdl. -- Paddu 06:18, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You have uploaded these images with the description "Courtesy of Ginette":
Depending on their copyright and/or the permission we have, these images should be updated with an appropriate tag, e.g. Template:CopyrightedFreeUse, Template:CopyrightedFreeUseProvided, Template:PD, Template:Noncommercial, Template:NoncommercialProvided, Template:Copyrighted, Template:Fairuse, Template:PermissionAndFairUse, etc. -- Paddu 10:43, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You should not be so timid :-) Anyway, I am planning a big clean up in my page descriptions. So, I have this mentionned here, I know where they are and I'll do them. SweetLittleFluffyThing

[edit] OFFICIAL AMA MEETING NOTICE

[edit] OFFICIAL THIRD MEETING NOTICE AND REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

The second AMA IRC Membership meetingwas held on Sunday January 30, 2005 at 19:00 UTC on freenode.net IRC channel #AMA. Attending were Wally, Metasquares, Anthere, Sam Spade, and alex756 (coordinator). The log of the second meeting can be found here: Wikipedia:AMA IRC Meeting log (1-30-05).

"The third AMA Membership meeting will be held on Saturday February 12, 2005 at 17:00 UTC on freenode IRC channel #AMA. That is 12:00 Noon Eastern NA Time, 9 AM Pacific NA Time, and 6 PM Central European (Amsterdam/Stokholm/Warsaw/Venice) Time. All members are invited to attend.

[edit] Suggested Topics and Specific Proposals

MEMBERS PLEASE REVIEW
Suggestions for topics/proposals and agenda to be discussed at the next meeting are to be found at: Wikipedia:AMA Meeting (suggested topics). All members are requested to make proposals there and respond to proposals on the talk page there before the beginning of the next meeting so discussion can be held forthwith concerning such proposals. Thank you, your Coordinator.

The coordinator is requesting that members who have not done so already submit the following information for the upcoming coordinator’s report:

  • How many individuals did you help as an advocate
  • What is the maximum amount of time you put into a case
  • Do you feel your work as an advocate was successful?
  • How can the advocacy program of the AMA be improved?

Thank you. Please submit your responses here. — © Alex756 23:18, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Requests to view deleted articles

Can you please show me the wikitext of any significant content that was in List of civilian killed by US force in Fallujah? anthony 警告 18:48, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

sent by email :-)
I don't see it (in any of my email accounts, but specifically not in the account I have set in my preferences here, if that's the one you used). I've actually never received an email through the Wikipedia email system, but I hear that it works sometimes for some people. anthony 警告 04:12, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Adding some more articles to the list:

I've sent you an email, so hopefully you'll get it. anthony 警告 17:48, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Here we are :-) SweetLittleFluffyThing
  • Shawn Mikula anthony 警告 16:55, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sigh... well, if you received nothing, me neither. Can you try again at anthere AT wikimedia.org please ? SweetLittleFluffyThing 15:06, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost contributions

If you want to write an article, the process we've used so far is to create a draft on a subpage in your user namespace. It gets moved later when it's added to the next issue. If you could let me know what subject you plan to write about, that would be appreciated so that we don't duplicate our efforts. --Michael Snow 18:50, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Grant meeting

It is unlikely that I'll attend, as its at 8:00 am here, and my home DSL has been down all weekend. If I wake up tomorrow and it's been fixed (most unlikely, as the company hasn't ever fixed service issues for me on a Sunday in the past), I'll try to attend. Gentgeen 06:09, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Zanimum/Quarto

The cover's up albeit with a different image. -- user:zanimum

[edit] Your images are being deleted

You'd uploaded the following images with not much copyright info.

I can't assume they are GFDL since you've marked them as "courtesy of Ginette", who/whatver Ginette is. Note that all of them were tagged {{pui}} and Image:Cosmos tubulaire.jpg even got deleted. Image:Echinops.jpg got marked as GFDL by User:Quadell. Are the images GFDL or fair-use or copyvio or what? I feel these nice pictures shouldn't be lost unless that is required by the laws. -- Paddu 08:16, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

All my images are gfdl. As mentionned above.
I am extremely upset my image got deleted without the curtesy of asking me before hand. I think I will not come back here for a while. I am upset I lost my time. And mostly, this is not a way to manage people to delete their work without talking to them. I thank you very much for telling me Paddu. Thanks a lot. SweetLittleFluffyThing
This was extremely nice of you Alan. I did not think of mirrors... this is a great idea I will think of next time. Thanks a lot. ant

Hello Anthere. I'm Quadell, and I deleted Image:Cosmos tubulaire.jpg (which Alan Barrett graciously restored) because it had no licensing or source information and it was listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion for over a week with no objections. I should have contacted you first, however, and I apologize. I'm glad that the image has been restored, and that no permanent harm was done. I'll be more careful to contact the uploader in the future.

Thank you. SweetLittleFluffyThing

The only way to ensure that more of your lovely photographs are not deleted is to place image tags on them. If I run into any more of your photographs, I'll certainly tag them for you, but other people might not. As you can see, there have been several different people who have listed your untagged images as possible copyright violations or as images for deletion.

Yes, they asked the status and I answered.

Thanks for your understanding, and I hope I haven't hurt our working relationship here. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 20:29, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

In fairness, Anthere, you were advised on by Paddu at 10:43, 26 Jan 2005 that the images had no image tags. It is not exactly as if no-one had brought the matter to your attention. Even if you were not warned of their deletion, the more general problem was brought to your attention a month before the deletion took place. I'm upset that you identify the problem as being with the Untagged Images project, rather than more generally with the WP:IFD process. I have amended the rubric on that page to seek to remind users to contact uploaders before deletion. --Tagishsimon (talk)
I was asked the status, and I answered the status. When I am asked, I assume that when I answer, it is taken into account. Otherwise, why asking ??? I have no clear idea whether the problem is with the tagging process or the deletion process, it seems it is the deletion process. But tagging is also done on other projects and I do not think my images were deleted for having no tags, since I mentionned all were gfdl. Wikipedia is horribly slow, and I am very sorry, but I really am overworked and can not assume anymore being an editor on the english wikipedia. I can't assume checking votes for deletion on all projects I have been participating to in the past 3 years. I think this is the last time I upload images on the english wikipedia. If I have no time to watch for deletion of my contributions, it is best I do not contribute at all. I think (I have the weakness to think) that I give enough of my time everyday to wikipedia, that by default my work would be trusted to obey the project rules. More than 2 years ago, while trying to attract people on Wikipedia, I spent a lot of time on forum trying to convince people to join. There was this old lady who loved gardening, she had many pictures in her garden. I made several articles about these plants on fr:wiki, not really on en: but I uploaded her pictures with her blessing nevertheless. I thought it was good idea to thanks her with her little name on the image upload page. I hoped she would come, and unfortunately she never did. This is because I thanked her on the upload page that her pictures get deleted. SweetLittleFluffyThing 04:50, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I think this is the last time I upload images on the english wikipedia.. I'd hope as a good wikipedian that you'd be uploading only to the commons from now on ;) --Tagishsimon (talk)
I hope you do not doubt I am a good wikipedia... :-) my last upload (without much tags, nor sources, nor description yet, this community excepted that I first finish to upload the whole batch to do it all in a row) :-) Anthere
I know you to be one of the angels, Anthere. :) --Tagishsimon (talk)


Note that it is possible to look up all of your contributions in a certain namespace. Image is namespace 6, so this link will give your (Anthere's) last 50 contributions (minor contribs hided) in the image namespace. 500 per page would be a good start, but the server doesn't want to cooperate today ('MySQL server has gone away'). — mark ✎ 20:30, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


If the image has been there long enough to get into the upload dumps you can retrive it there, e.g. all the images which have been deleted since 2005-02-03 but existed before that time are in the 20050203_upload.tar dump avalible at http://download.wikimedia.org/archives/en/

[edit] User:NetBot

Thanks for noting its status. Can you please unblock the account? It was on indefinite block by RickK pending approval, and he would prefer that someone else unblock it. -- Netoholic @ 18:19, 2005 Mar 2 (UTC)

[edit] Looxix admin

Yo! Fluff! What up with Looxix becoming an en admin? I didn't see this go by on the radar screen, nor is there any explanation. Love, Cecropia | explains it all ® 23:33, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I explained it all on your talk page. Much apologies, but no worry, I made him sysop with one hand here and unsysoped him from the other hand on meta. Sorry. Ant

Thanks for the response. I was sure you had a good reason, but I just couldn't figure it. No problem. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 06:50, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I'm sorry I didn't tag those images GFDL

You'd said all images are GFDL unless mentioned otherwise. So some of these images had the info. "Courtesy of Ginette". Not knowing what Ginette is (googling gave a french site that I couldn't understand), I skipped marking them as GFDL. To the best of my knowledge I tagged the rest of your untagged images (as of the time when I last posted here) as GFDL. I should probably have tagged these Ginette images also as GFDL. That would have avoided the deletion. Sorry! -- Paddu 20:23, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I didn't know until now that deleted images, unlike deleted articles couldn't be undeleted. -- Paddu 20:37, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oops! Is this another similar bad news?

[4]. Couldn't find that image on googling. -- Paddu 14:49, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

.... Anthere

[edit] Anthere

You said:

And seriously consider making public apologies for deleting images without asking their author first, even though you know perfectly their author since you come on their own personal pages to remove the links to the iamges as well.

Anthere, in the past two weeks I have deleted over a thousand images. I have been long concerned about the number of untagged and unused images on Wikipedia, taking up space on the server, and often violating copyright law as well (there's no way to tell for sure if there's no source information). I tagged many thousands of images myself, and I started the image tagging project to encourage other users to tag tens of thousands more. I started the image sleuthing project to determine the copyright statuses of images that are difficult to determine – but it's slow work, since we can only work on about fifteen images at a time, and there's a backlog of tens of thousands. I started the Image recreation project, and nearly a hundred useful but copyrighted images have been recreated in GFDL form so far. I've worked hard on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images and Wikipedia:Copyright problems, clearing out months of backlog that no one else wanted to do. I've worked perhaps thirty hours a week, unpaid of course, working on images. I've only deleted images according to policy: those that were listed on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion for over a week, or Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images for over thirty days. I have never received a word of thanks from you or anyone else on the Wikimedia board for my efforts.

And yet, when I deleted two images that you had uploaded, I was chastised. Even though the images were not used on any articles in Wikipedia. Even though the only reason they existed on Wikipedia, apparently, was that you like them. Even though you had been asked multiple times by several different users to tag your images, but have so far declined, expecting someone else to "run a bot" and do your work for you. Even though the images themselves clearly indicated that you did not take the photos and presumably did not own the copyright, and there was no indication that the copyright holder approved of their use on Wikipedia.

If you want your images kept, please tag them. If you're unwilling to tag them, then don't expect others to care for your images more than you do. I am available for mediation if you think it appropriate.

But it is this focus on the negative – this tendency to chastise rather than thank – that gets good, hard-working people to leave Wikipedia.

– Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 13:06, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Continued drama

You said: "I do not deny your work. I just regret that you deny other people work." But I don't deny that other people work. Perhaps I don't understand your accusation.


You said: "A couple of these insect images, I hesitated selling them. Ie, making money with them. I did not. I stupidely gave them to Wikipedia. Because I liked them and believed in the project." That's wonderful that you care for the project. I do too, and I don't think it's stupid. By the way, you can still sell your images if you like; the GFDL does not prevent this.

Not really. Once they were on the net, they used it :-)

You said: "Actually, have you any idea of the time I spend daily doing work, sometimes very boring work, for *you*, so that to try that this project work ?" Yes I do. We both do this. We should be allies in this. Your hostility toward me is confusing.

You said: "I feel not ashamed to please ask that someone run a bot on them for me." You shouldn't feel ashamed for that. But it's one thing to take responsibility for your images, and ask people until someone says yes; it's another thing to simply put out a blanket request and assume that that's good enough, and that you're not responsible for your images anymore.

true. Though, in a sense, I am no more responsible of my images since they are now owned by Wikipedia.

You said: "Only the little bunch of images where I had the weakness to thank the original author were not mine. All the other images are mine, and you have no reason to doubt this." It isn't a weakness to thank the original author; it's a requirement. It's also required to get their permission to release the images under the terms of the GFDL. I believe you had taken the picture of the insects having sex, but I had no way of knowing this when I listed it as an "untagged orphan". If the image description page had said "I took this picture", I would have tagged it as GFDL. But there was no information. Images that are untagged, that have no source information, and that aren't used in articles are routinely listed on IFD. It's absolutely nothing personal, Anthere.

I believe there is absolutely no requirement to put on an image description "I took this picture" to be assumed to be the author. By default, we generally assume that we are the author. If that changed, we should update the uploading text to have uploaders mention they are the author. Right now, it is not the case. Secondly, when I uploaded all these images, I also agreed to do so under the gfdl. Not under no licence. So, by default,my images are in effect under gfdl. Similarly, if this was not the case, the uploading text asking us to engage we were uploading under gfdl should not have been there. No information in reality did not mean no author and no license. At that time at least, it meant we trusted people, the pictures were under gfdl and the uploaders were authors unless mentionned.

You said: "Where I a totally unknown editor, I might understand your unwillingness to trust an editor by default, by in my case, I think it is ludicrous to consider that by default I cheated." I didn't assume by default that you cheated. I didn't assume anything. Several people, including me, politely asked you tag your images. You declined. I see now, on the top of your talk page, is a helpful notice that all your images are released under the GFDL. That's great, but that notice wasn't there when I listed your images on ifd on February 3, over a month ago. I would never accuse you of cheating, Anthere. Also, I believe that the same rules should apply for all users. When I would run into images with no image tag, no information of where it came from or who the creator was, and not used in articles, I would list them on IfD. And I treated images the same, whether they came from an anonymous user or a Wikimedia board member. I don't think we should treat certain users special, or that different rules should apply to certain people. I think you would agree.

No, I added the tag to my talk page in december. See [5]. Only afterwards, someone told me it would be more visible on my user page. But by february the 3rd, there was already a note saying the pictures were all under gfdl if needed. If it was not to be used, it was no use asking me.

You said: "No. I will not tag my images. At this point, it is a matter of principle." Come on, Anthere. You're bigger than that. Violating Wikipedia policy as a matter of principle is something people like Cheesedreams do, not you. At this point, it's moot anyway. I now know, and all involved know, that all your images are released under the GFDL. Any that I encounter, I will tag GFDL.

Violating ? Look, I hope you will be logical on this. On one hand, you consider my images have no author and no tag. Right ? So, are likely to be copyright violations and should be deleted. *You* take the right to delete them for copyright violation. On the other hand, I try to claim I am the author and they are under gfdl, but they get deleted anyway. So EITHER they are with no author and no tag, and I am authorized to delete them just as much as you, OR they are under gfdl, and any of us deleting them would do a violation. But I see not why I would be in violation in deleting them, while you would have this right. Okay ?

You said: "There are people who are so busy paining editors by destroying their work and not apologizing, that it gets good, hard-working people to leave Wikimedia." All your images were restored, and I'm grateful. I already apologized to you[6], but I found your request for a more public apology to be condescending and distasteful.

Sorry then. You may not strictly understand the motivation of those who add pictures to Wikipedia. Whenever I go somewhere, I think of Wikipedia. I take my camera, and spent half of my day outside, trying to take the best pictures. Say I take a 100 in an afternoon. 90 I will put in trash. 10 I will uppload here, and possibly 1 will be used in the end, sometimes making the featured image here or on the german wikipedia for example. Contrary to text where our contributions are mixed with others, we stay the author of an image, and it is extremely difficult to see that a gift was just dump when it was giving in good faith. That afternoon, when I took the copulative insect, I also took some damsel which I am terribly proud of (they made the featured image on de). I cannot give up authorship of these images, and never will. I see their deletion as a direct attack to me, which I regret, but it is just simply a fact.
The problem I have with what you do is not with all the work you do with the tagging of course, it is mostly with the fact you do not check with people. But I should recognise that the only issue is that you do not realise how people may be happy with their image. When you doubt of their author, when you doubt the gift made by the author, when you criticize the fact they are not used in an article, these are each time a sort of a blow. Most of the work we do on wikipedia will not let any sign in the future. Who knows which articles we contributed to ? Who know which rules we helped to set ? No one but a couple of people will remember. These is why images are a bit different, they are not collaborative. They are sensible material. And it pains me to see gift just trashed, for no reason than a doubt which could be clarified in 10 seconds. This is what is causing me problem. And I see absolutely no sign that you understand that in the future, and no sign you will now try to tell people beforehand. I thought that after the Algeria and Ginette pictures, all was fixed. I did not realise a couple of insects were missing tags. I thought all these were done. And now I wonder which is the next image I will find missing.

Athere, will you please accept mediation with me? I can't believe we're destined to be antagonists here. We're both hard-working contributors, we've both uploaded our images here because we believe in the project, and we both work in good faith to improve the place. And you've given hints (forgive me if I'm wrong) that you have considered leaving Wikipedia over this. I've entertained such thoughts as well. And that's insane, for two good contributors to drive each other away over what might be a misunderstanding. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 19:49, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

Certainly do not leave wikipedia over this. That would be stupid. As for me, I am not leaving, I am taking a break. I just needed so badly you can not just begin to understand. Your image deletion is just a drop on top of an already overful glass. I tried already to explain my point of view, and my asking that you tell users before deleting (which you never did for the insect picture right ?), and I was clearly not successful. I do not think mediation will help you understand my point of view any better. As for your point of view, I understand it very well. You are perfectly correct I should have myself taggued all my images a long time ago. This is my mistake I did not, and I will try to assume in silence the future image deletion that are likely to occur for the ones left aside. At least, that might teach me collaborative work on images :-) Other than that, what to say but the fact I do not like so much the new english wikipedia where rules and automatisms have become more important than human editors, because as far as I can tell, human editors are still those giving content to the project. But that is all. Sorry for having upset you. For more of why I am on wikibreak, see [7]. Anthere 06:22, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Request

I put up a request for mediation here. User:BCorr has volunteered to mediate. I hope you'll agree. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 23:52, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

I know you have expressed doubts that mediation would be effective. I still would be very glad if you would accept mediation here. I still believe we can work this out amicably. Thanks, – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 20:24, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Resolution

Thank you for your understanding. Thanks for your apology for harshness; it means a lot to me. Your link [8] helps me to see what you're going through. I want you to know that I have a deep respect for you as a contributor, and that I am now working very hard to make sure I contact the uploader before deleting images. I have withdrawn my request for mediation, and I wish you only the best. Regards, – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 14:25, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] RfC cc

Bonjour, it would be great if you could certify or endorse this, but if you'd rather not, I understand entirely. In any case, FYI:

Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Calicocat

-- Viajero 13:34, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bring back quickpolls

I think it's time that quickpolls be re-evaluated as a solution to short term disputes between users. What say you? --Ryan! | Talk 05:20, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ten Key Values

Actually, the Ten Key Values are those of the US party; the other parties uses the Four Pillars. The 10KV are an expanded version of the FP and from what I can tell they are only used by the US party. -- LGagnon 18:06, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Porn Pictures" and Kids

Hello Anthere, I saw your message on my talk page. Now I'll be the 1st to confess I was overreacting on the Clitoris article (as a matter of fact I used to LOVE looking at playboy when I was in 'Nam, and still do once and while to this day) However, I personally think as a strong Christian that there's certain age when you should be exposed to those sort of things. As a matter of fact I discovered wikipedia because of my younger daughter Jen shown this site to me (she's under 18, and I don't want her to see picture like the one on Autofellatio). Now I understand you're French (I seen you're Bio page), you have very different cultural values than we Americans, however, in this country it's Illegal to show pornographic pictures to minors. Now I'm not making a legal threat (I’m no lawyer either but I was reading about it). However, if a parent sees that Autofellatio picture (or even the drawing possibly), your website my have some problems with the US Department of Justice. I'd love the idea of children's wikipedia, so long as it doesn't touch controversial topics such as Autofellatio. (Now I might be blocked for breaking the three-revert rule, for attempting the link the drawing). Thank you Anthere (or Florence which ever you prefer)--198 05:11, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Amendment: I am quiting wikipedia: Good Bye--198 07:41, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/n/t/User%7EAnthere_box_8970.html"