User talk:AntanO/Archive 2

Photo Challenge Bronze

	Photo Challenge – Third Place
	Congratulations! Your picture Incense stick.JPG won the 3rd place in the Photo Challenge Smoke, in November 2014. You can find the results of the challenge here.

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Island of Kandy lake.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 18:18, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandy clock tower, 1950.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support QI for me. --Halavar 11:12, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Garden Lizard (Calotes) head.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Excellent. --Frank Schulenburg 02:35, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge/2014 - December - Bad weather/Voting

You have voted incorrectly. You made two 1/3 votes. Please just one of 1/3, 2/3 or 3/3. Can you fix it please. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 21:17, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

 Done--Anton^Talk 02:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Renaming against policy

Please note that this file renaming you agreed on was badly justified (no errors in the file name I had selected, obvious or otherwise) and is against policy: Even if you defend that the new filename is better than the old one, COM:Renaming disallows replacing with a better name, and only allows error correction. The renaming request having come from the photographer is irrelevant — indeed he allowed this photo to be named "4tg1q9r7sq5v1-Eq-sOObafXk" in Fotopedia… -- Tuválkin ✉ 06:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Better he should have use critria 2. :) Jee 06:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Jkadavoor, "4volboj4krucoj" is not meaningless — it’s exactly what the photo shows. -- Tuválkin ✉ 08:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

So it was in Esperanto? Then you're right. Commons in multilingual; we should not change filenames to a different language. But I don't think Anton did it intentionally/consciously. Jee 10:19, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I didn’ think he did it intentionally/consciously, either. However he seems to be dead set to be brought to AN/U, instead of acknowledging the mistake and move on. Anyway, both you and AntanO, unpon not understanding the name, immediately assumed that I, as the uploader, had deliberately chosen a meaningless, random gobbledygook name (even having read in the o.p. that I found «no errors in the file name»), and didn’t even ask what was meant — that’s uncollegial and problematic in itself. -- Tuválkin ✉ 15:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

See your first comment here. You talked a lot about policies and guidelines; but din't give any clue that it was meaningful in Esperanto. We're humans; we prefer commonsense over mechanical rules which are more suitable for robots. All I see is some misunderstanding due to the over rule-based talks; nothing unfriendly. :) Jee 15:57, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I don’t need to justify the filename I originally chose — on the contrary, it is AntanO who should assume my good faith and, upon asked by Mykola Swarnyk, decline the renaming, on policy grounds. Or he could have checked with me first — that would be “being human” as you put it, while blindly and acritically dispatching a rename request is tantamount to robot-like work.

It should be added that this filename (and many of the same whimsical style) was chosen while uploading to Commons several hundred photos from Fotopedia’s sinking ship, where they were hosted mostly without any kind of context or metadata. I also note that while Mykola Swarnyk, the photographer, seems keen on renaming my uploads of his work, the actually necessary work of adding geolocation and date (something only the author can do) is lagging behind…

-- Tuválkin ✉ 17:07, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I don not see any policy issue here. How the old could be better name? (old name: 4volboj4krucoj New name: StNicholas Nizhyn) --Anton^Talk 07:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

An “old” name, per COM:Renaming, is inherently better than any new one, for the reasons aduced there (stability, mostly). The “old” name needs to be wrong for a renaming to be granted. You violated policy — the best thing to do now about this is just to try better next time. -- Tuválkin ✉ 08:40, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I think you have to read the policy again, especially Which files should not be renamed. Old file name, 4volboj4krucoj does not give any meaning, but new one does. --Anton^Talk 10:05, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You think I’m the one who needs to read the policy again? After you breached it? That’s so cute that maybe other people need to brought to the matter after all. Meanwhile, be so kind as to consider that the renaming you enabled goes against both #1 and #2 under Commons: File renaming § Which files should not be renamed? -- Tuválkin ✉ 15:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

You tried to accuse me again and again and attack Jeevan who assumes good faith. That's a friendly discussion and constructive too. I don't see 4volboj4krucoj as a constructive name and it is not my fault too. Just Google it and see the result. I rename it as per #2, Change from completely meaningless names into suitable names, according to what the image displays. If you are going to repeat the circular logic, I can't help you. --Anton^Talk 17:02, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

The matter is now in AN/U. Please, though note the following:

• Yes, I do acuse you of breaching § 1 and § 2 of the relevant policy.
• I’m not attacking anyone, nor good faith is being doubted by me.
• Discussion ceased to be friendly the moment you accuse the file name of my choice of being «meaningless».
• Any “constructive” aspect of this discussion needs to be re-routed to Commons talk:File renaming, where you are free to suggest changes in the policy: «§ 11. File names may be changed whenever I feel like.» Good luck with that.
• You renamed it under the original rationale, which was § 5 («Correct obvious errors in file names»); either way, neither § 2 nor § 5 fit the matter at hand.
• I guess it is indeed circular if I warn you breached policy and you refuse to acknowledge; I’m not going to withdraw my assessment just because you don’t agree. However, I’ll refrain from adding to the discussion if no new substance is added.

-- Tuválkin ✉ 17:52, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

I said I can't help you. Discuss where you reported. --Anton^Talk 18:03, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry guys for my intrusion in your friendly conversation, which, as it appears, I was the cause. Indeed, I was scrolling trough my uploads and proposed new names for the few files moved from Fotopedia. Yas, I felt like the name of the church picture was chosen just occasional, something like "abcd1efgh2", which now I see was not. And I feel I have to apologize to Tuválkin who rescued quite a number of good pictures from deletion. I did`nt know my renaming will cause this discussion. Actually, the file description is enough to identify the object, it doesn't have to be named in the file name. So, tell me now, do I have to correct names or better to leave them as they are? Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 04:47, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Mykola, I have no qualms with your renaming request — but Anton is a file mover and should not grant requests against policy, that’s what caused my complaint. I’m not asking for the renaming to be undone, just for file movers to pay better attention to COM:Renaming. -- Tuválkin ✉ 05:51, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

I have to admit, dear Tuválkin, you did amazingly good job, uploading these picture in the last moments to Commons and identifying hundreds of objects and places. Thanks! Mykola Swarnyk (talk) 05:58, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

And I had fun, too! -- Tuválkin ✉ 06:01, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

@Mykola Swarnyk: It's not your fault, but Tuvalkin who wanted to show off a simple matter into headline news and trying logical evident to towards me. That's why he repeats his circular logic again here. I take care the matter. Have a nice day! --Anton^Talk 06:29, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

COM:AN/U

---

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:AntanO_ignoring_COM:Renaming. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved.

The above discussion was notified at AN/U. It was closed by admin since they don't find any policy issue. The report can be seen at here.

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Cisticola juncidis (Zitting Cisticola).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support --Jacek Halicki (talk) 17:00, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:09, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Capsicum annuum, (Red bell pepper).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment The scope is not properly formatted. The binomial name should be in italics followed by the English vernacular name in parenthesis --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:19, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
   Info Thanks, Done. --AntanO 07:52, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment The genus name is not enough. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
   Info Updated --AntanO 09:06, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:34, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Momordica dioica (Spiny gourd).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 06:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Leptocoma zeylonica, Purple-rumped Sunbird (male).
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:09, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

• You should put this picture in gallery --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:10, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Zosterops palpebrosus, Oriental White-eye.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Comment No location in the caption text. No geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

•  Info Updated --AntanO 20:02, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:01, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Corvus splendens, House crow.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 CommentNo location in the caption text. No geocoding. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

•  Info Updated --AntanO 19:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Useful --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:20, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:02, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for identifying copyvios

Anton, thanks for identifying copyvios like these. We look forward to your help in identifying more such images uploaded through Wiki Loves Food contest under the categories Category:Wiki Loves Food and Category:Images from Wiki Loves Food 2015. If you can guide us how to do these checks, we can try to get more contributors involved in this cleanup work. Thanks.--Ravi (talk) 12:10, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Ravi, I will help in my free time. Quick way of identifying copyvios 1. improper file names, 2. small files 3. professional photography that not relevant to the user's previous work. I hope you have enabled "Search Google for this image" at Chrome browser that gives quick image search. --AntanO 19:12, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, Anton. We will try these.--Ravi (talk) 06:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

File:Sri Lankan parliamentary election, 2015 - polling divisions.svg

Hi, I've spotted at least four errors on this map - Mullaitivu was won by TNA. And you've got the three polling divisions in Polonnaruwa District back to front. It might be worthwhile checking all of the polling divisions.--Obi2canibe (talk) 10:37, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank, I will check and re-upload. --AntanO 10:57, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Kandy War Cemetery.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Uoaei1 16:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Cup of black tea.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good work, QI for me --Hubertl 08:49, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:23, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Demodara.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Ok for me, third opinion appreciated --Hubertl 06:46, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Curry (lotus roots).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:17, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:30, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Green gram.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --C T Johansson 08:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Red bell pepper.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --C T Johansson 08:49, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Asian palmyra (Borassus flabellifer).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Hubertl 15:35, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:33, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Borassus flabellifer, Asian palmyra palm.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

•  Comment - I have taken the liberty of adding wikilinks to the original description to comply with Criteria 4.2. Martinvl (talk) 20:15, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment Good image; it is advisable to add to the scope vernacular name in English: Asian palmyra palm. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 05:08, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Best in scope --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 10:42, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Incense stick.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --C messier 18:17, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Files from சு. மோகன் குமார்

Hi, You tagged some files from சு. மோகன் குமார் (talk · contribs) as copyvios, but they do not seem to be. Please do not create speedy deletion requests, unless it is an obvious copyvio (copies available on the Net, posters, screencaps, etc.). In addition, it is very unlikely to have copies of images by a Tamil user on a Russian website. Thanks, Yann (talk) 09:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

en:File:Bandaranaike International Airport logo.png

This is the logo of the Bandaranaike International Airport. Please convert this image to SVG. --Chamath456 12:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I can convert, but I think it could be copyvios. Am I right @Jkadavoor: ? --AntanO 10:04, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

It is a non-free media hosted in EN wiki under fair use. So can't be hosted in Commons (even if converted to SVG). Jee 12:12, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Purple osteospermum.JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. May be better as square format. --XRay 08:03, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:27, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Flame lily (Gloriosa superba).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:03, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:24, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Grey pansy (Junonia atlites).JPG, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --Zcebeci 07:28, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:25, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Image About File:Pushpika Sandamali Miss Sri Lanka 2011.jpg , File:Dr.Seetha.I.Wickremasinghe.jpg, File:B.J.C.Perera.jpg File:Ishanka_De_Alwis.jpg

ChanakaW (talk) 06:10, 10 June 2016 (UTC)I Really Sorry For That.I'm Not Doing these kind of things in the future.Because I really Love Wikipedia.I Promised to follow Wikipedia policies in the future.Many Thanks for Informing Me.

@ChanakaW: No problem. Once you learn the policy and procedures you would do your best. I did mistakes too. Cheers. --AntanO 06:15, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Public Domain Image

• File:ArasuCableTV.jpg ----------------------------> Public Domain Image

CommonsHelper

Have You managed to solve the issue with CommonsHelper. I have the same difficulty when working from the Russian Wikipedia. Thank you. --Gandvik (talk) 12:56, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Now, I don't see the issue. --AntanO 02:05, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Is my drawings allowed to upload??

Please tell me my drawings are allowed to upload in wiki commons are not. I have work here for so many day for that. If not allowed, Then I will stop my work. Your answer save my days. Thanks. - Jagadeeswarann

It's hard to tell yes or no unless I see the nature of image. Please aware of Derivative works and What Commons is not. If your image is not connect with issues like "What Commons is not", problematic "Derivative works" or issues like problem tags, then you may save your time. eg: File:India-Sri Lanka maritime boundary.svg - I worked on this image with correct "sources" and not breach "What Commons is not", problematic "Derivative works" or problem tags. Feel free to talk if you need further clarifications. --AntanO 06:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Brook Fields Mall @ Coimbatore.jpg - இது நான் எடுத்தப்படம். இது எப்படி Copyright violations என்று சொல்கிறீர்கள்...

நான் சொந்தமாக எடுத்து இணைக்கும் படங்களை ஏன் நீங்கள் நீக்குகிறீர்கள். அவை எந்த வகையில் Copyright violations ஆகிறது. புதிதாக யாரும் கட்டுரையோ படங்களையோ இணைக்கூடாது என்று நினைக்கிறீர்களா? எங்களுக்கு வேறு வேலை வெட்டி இல்லை என்றா நினைத்துக்கொண்டு இருக்கிறீர்கள்.... நீங்கள் அனுப்பிய இந்த செய்திக்கு என்ன பொருள். எதற்க்காக last warning. உடன் பதிலை சொல்லுங்கள் திரு. ஆலன்O.

"Hello Velu66. It has come to our attention that you have uploaded several 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. Continuing to upload copyright violations will result in your account being blocked. Please leave me a message if you have further questions." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Velu66 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

How to say when you upload copyvios images? Further details are at your talk page. BTW, you should express your explanation at relevant pages, not here. Thank you. --AntanO 13:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Quality Image Promotion

Your image has been reviewed and promoted Congratulations! Mussaenda philippica leaf.jpg, which was produced by you, was reviewed and has now been promoted to Quality Image status. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Quality images candidates. We also invite you to take part in the categorization of recently promoted quality images. Comments Good quality. --King of Hearts 04:10, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

--QICbot (talk) 05:43, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Valued Image Promotion

★ Your nomination has been reviewed and promoted ★
Congratulations! The image you nominated was reviewed and has now been promoted as a valued image. It is considered to be the most valued image on Commons within the scope:
Phoenix sylvestris fruit.
If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Valued images candidates.

review

 Support Useful. INeverCry (talk) 02:36, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose =>
promoted. Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 17:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)