User talk:Killarnee

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
EN You can write in English with me
DE Du kannst mit mir auf Deutsch schreiben

Archive your talk page please..[edit]

Hi, is it possible to archive your talk page? It has reached the limits of what website can processed, hence the gibberish you see above. There is an archive bot, User:ArchiveBot that you can use. Robertsky (talk) 03:21, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No need to archive pages here, we have page history :)
And apart from the fact that the size limit of 2 MB is far from being reached, I would first and foremost say that one shouldn't fill my discussion page with all these delete notifications, it's also possible to inform someone about deletions without creating hundreds of new sections. Killarnee (talk) 05:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So you don't mind having the earlier warnings removed? It is currently not possible with the userscripts I have been using when I review individual images. I don't look at who's the uploader when going through the categories. I will however uncheck that deletion notification box if I see that it is your uploads. If you have recommendations to which userscripts or gadgets to use, I am open to them. Robertsky (talk) 07:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Warning, that sounds serious :-) There are loads of old pictures that I can hardly remember and with the tens of thousands of pictures I've uploaded, there aren't that many that have been deleted.
But no, all good. I think it's more that it's just technically not well solved.
By the way, you can select "Perform batch task" in the "General" section on the right side of any page and request multiple images to be deleted at once, so only one note will be sent for all selected files. Killarnee (talk) 12:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Outpost.jpg[edit]

File:Outpost.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 ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ eesti ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ 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 ∙ ไทย ∙ ပအိုဝ်ႏဘာႏသာႏ ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 조선말 ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ العربية ∙ پښتو ∙ فارسی ∙ ދިވެހިބަސް ∙ +/−

Wickey (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Removing review tag: why?[edit]

At File:Rainier Tower, 1970s (53061911548).jpg you removed without meaningful comment the tag that said the license had been reviewed. It's been reviewed again and restored, but could you explain what was going on here? It seems an odd thing to have done. - Jmabel ! talk 21:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Same thing at File:Political map of Seattle, 1910 (53362717124).jpg, and more problematically in this case, because after that passed review I uploaded a higher-resolution version, so the bot can't re-confirm what it already confirmed 11 weeks ago. - Jmabel ! talk 21:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sometimes FlickreviewR 2 reviews a file as false negative (size_not_found cc-by-2.0), I reset the review version of FlickreviewR 2 so that FlickreviewR 2 reviews the files again and then hopefully correctly. It's easier than manually checking the almost two thousand files that FlickreviewR 2 hasn't reviewed properly. I forgot the summary, but I only tried how to automate it on a few files anyway.
”after that passed review“ is not entirely correct, because if you look in the history you can see that the file had already been reviewed false negative as size_not_found cc-by-2.0, which was exactly the reason why I reset FlickreviewR 2's review.
Unfortunately, your files were among those that were again given false negative reviews in the second review. But if you look in compare selected revisions, you'll see that the only thing that's changed is the date of the last review from FlickreviewR 2.
I'm continuing to look for more suitable solutions on how we can accurately reduce the review backlog. Killarnee (talk) 23:11, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My apologies: I hadn't noticed that those reviews from months ago had been negative. - Jmabel ! talk 04:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Killarnee&oldid=843321642"