Jump to content

User talk:StephenTS42

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by StephenTS42 (talk | contribs) at 07:26, 26 July 2017 (→‎Non-free image use: replaced dead link). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Infobox images

Hi, the reason for altering your edits was that the page had been flagged as needing attention by being automatically entered in Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. The text you quoted is for images that are not in infoboxes. The relevant section is:


See also: Wikipedia:Image use policy § Displayed image size When adding an image to an infobox, thumbnails should NOT be used. Infobox templates should implement the InfoboxImage module to help with formatting of images so simply supplying the file name will work. For example, to use File:Image_PlaceHolder.png, you can simply use image = Image_PlaceHolder.png. Captions should be specified with the caption parameter. Every infobox is different and the documentation for the infobox in question should be consulted for the proper parameters to match the image and caption. If InfoboxImage is not yet fully implemented in the infobox you are using, the same alt=, upright=, title=, etc., parameters may be called using Extended image syntax, calling frameless, not thumb.

I've changed the seal image as you wanted it but that means the page is now reentered in the Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images as you can see in the hidden categories section at the bottom of the page, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 08:40, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Atlantic306: Much thanks. I will work on a solution to that dilemma in my sandbox.——→StephenTS42 (talk) 10:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Another editor has adjusted it, the images all look good, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 14:50, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306:Thank you for pointing me out to the image use policy. I think I have solved the dilemma, but as usual I am open to suggestions, especially yours because yours were so well.→→StephenTS42 (talk) 22:53, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Atlantic306:By the way, and just let you know...the text you quoted about the use of thumbnail images in infoboxes can be found in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes, not in Wikipedia:Image use policy. Nonetheless, I respected and followed your advice anyway. Thanks again!——→StephenTS42 (talk) 18:24, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, will correct the link I use Atlantic306 (talk) 18:30, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

After this edit, I'm requesting that you don't edit my talk page expect for ANI/AN3 notices. This means no warnings, or inappropriate messages. —JJBers 10:22, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JJBers: In light of your insolence, I see no reason to grant you any favors. Regardless of those circumstances, warnings are never inappropriate, they are acts of courtesy incumbent upon all editors in Wikipedia to issue other editors that cross the lines of respect. Request denied!——→StephenTS42 (talk) 11:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Calling me a savage is wildly offensive, you would've been indef'd on the spot if I came back to find it. Hopefully, you regret it. —JJBers 14:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Are you serious. This is less of a warning and more-of weekly spam. —JJBers 14:34, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@JJBers:No one called you a savage! GET OFF MY CASE!!! ——→StephenTS42 (talk) 15:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you not see the irony of posting "this edit war must stop!" while making an edit to revert someone furthering the edit war?! Remember, it takes at least two to edit war so you can easily stop the war too. only (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen, you're on rather thin ice here, and you're certainly not doing yourself any favours in light of the current ANI thread regarding your conduct. It doesn't matter who started this, or who got "the last word", I suggest that you leave well enough alone for now. Edit something else for a while? Primefac (talk) 15:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) I've been following this ever since it started and it's doing no-one good to point fingers and call out another editer which has been done throughout it all. I'm not saying anyone is wrong I'm just suggesting that we all take a breather, calm down, and discuss this peacefully. Dinah In Wonderland 15:33, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

July 2017

Stop icon with clock
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring and violating the three-revert rule. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.  Favonian (talk) 16:14, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Extension of TBAN

I have closed the ANI case regarding your recent conduct at the Westport page, and have extended your TBAN to all pages relating to Connecticut, broadly construed, for a period of six months. If you have any further questions or clarifications, please let me know either here or on my talk page. Primefac (talk) 16:36, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Primefac: Thank you for extending my TBAN and expanding it to all Connecticut articles. As I recollect, the original TBAN was for 6 months which would have ended sometime in December and now that you have extended it for another 6 months wouldn't that add up to a one year ban ending sometime in June 2018? Also, how long will his majesty's block be?——→StephenTS42 (talk) 22:15, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, I reset the clock, so it's six months from today (22 Jan '18). Primefac (talk) 22:25, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image use

Hi StephenTS42. The licensing of each image you see on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every image file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status and these file are commonly referred to as "non-free images". Non-free image use is highly restricted and each use of such an an image must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. One of these restrictions is WP:NFCC#9, which says that non-free content can only be used in the article namespace. For this reason and as explained in WP:UP#Non-free files, non-free content cannot be used in User:StephenTS42/sandbox. Perhaps you did not notice the edit sums I left the previous times I removed such images from your sandbox; therefore, I'm posting this here to provide more explanation. Please try to be more careful and check the licensing of any file you want to add to your user sandbox and refrain adding any more that are non-free. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask as WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again StevenTS42. Just for reference, File:Uconn logo1.png is not non-free content; it's licensed as public domain and is from Wikipedia Commons. Images from Commons are generally OK for user pages since Commons only accepts freely licensed or public domain images. This does not mean, of course, that every image currently on Commons has been uploaded under a correct license, but most should be OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:02, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Marchjuly: I don't follow you. The image has no reference to it being listed as being non-free content and it is currently being used or linked to more than 100 pages in Wikipedia! That image is described as being the author's own work in Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. That means the author recreated an image that should be trademarked. What I placed in my sandbox is listed in Category:School user templates which does contain the image in question. You may have mistaken University of Connecticut Seal.svg which is listed as non-free content for which is not. I had been experimenting with the above template in my sandbox. I may have used the seal image when I became distracted by another user's edit war. In any event the seal image was never intended to be used. Now, may I please have your blessing to use Template:User UConn as a user box on my userpage? Thank you!——→StephenTS42 (talk) 20:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Marchjuly's initial post was about you using the West Haven seal in your sandbox. Later, you removed the UConn template from your user page saying it was a non free image. Marchjuly noticed that and then left you a note basically saying you didn't have to remove the UConn template. It's always been okay for you to have that template on your page. No one suggested you had to take it down. only (talk) 20:35, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Only: Excuse me, but Marchjuly's comment above does not mention West Haven's seal nor its removal. Yes, he also removed the West Haven seal from my sandbox. I was not addressing that. Aren't sandboxes places where editors can construct edits to be placed elsewhere so as not to tie up an article and to avoid editing conflicts? In other words what I place in my sandbox is temporary:not intended to remain. His comment clearly was about UConn logo1.png. I would also like to point the TBAN quagmire I now face should I try to remove that infoxbox from my sandbox, or to even discuss it. Thank you and have a nice day!——→StephenTS42 (talk) 20:59, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
His first post was about the West Haven seal in your sandbox. His second post was about the UConn logo on your user page. only (talk) 21:49, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again StephenTS42. My first post had to do with non-free content use in general, but my second post had to do with File:University of Connecticut Seal.svg and File:Uconn logo1.png. If you click on those files, you'll see that the former has been uploaded locally to Wikipedia under a non-free license and thus is subject to Wikipedia's non-free content policy, while the latter has been uploaded to Commons as public domain and thus is not subject to said policy. I was just trying to let you know that you can use the "C" in your userbox if you want, but should have been clearer in doing so.
A user sandbox is a place where editor's can try out different things, but sandboxes are still subject to most of Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines as explained in WP:UP#OWN. Relevant Wikipedia policies wouldn't allow BLP violations or copyright violations to remain in a user sandbox, even temporarily, just because its a sandbox. So, if you're working on an improvement to an article in your sandbox and your improvement involves non-free content, just hide or link said content until after you add your changes to the article to avoid any issues with WP:NFCC#9. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:17, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Only and Marchjuly:Thank you for your gracious comments! I am grateful for your patience with me. I hope you will accept my apology. Nonetheless I do not buy your explanations. Let's look at the record, shall we? (I want to assure you that I had no intention of using any image unauthorized by wikipedia. It was merely an experiment. You are right about my use of UConn' seal being wrong but not so with UConn logo1.png!) To start: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StephenTS42&diff=783201324&oldid=780259440 Yes, it was wrong to use that image and for that I apologize. Then it was removed by Marchjuly: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StephenTS42&diff=783242995&oldid=783201324 which I am not contesting but stating as fact. Secondly: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StephenTS42/sandbox&diff=783227113&oldid=783117490 the image was also removed from my sandbox which I am also not contesting. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StephenTS42/sandbox&diff=783242781&oldid=783227113 (A warning would have sufficed) Next: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:StephenTS42/sandbox&diff=791642929&oldid=791622964 I had placed that city's seal into my sandbox for the purpose of editing the infobox-- never intending to let it remain. So, Marchjuly's first post was not about that city's seal... being that his edit removed, or edited out UConn's seal on that date; not that city's seal. The second post was not about UConn's seal as he had already edited it out. Yet he had removed the "C" image I wanted to use and belonged with Template:User UConn previously. Now the both of you are twisting the facts to your advantage. I have admitted to my bad, why can't you?——→StephenTS42 (talk) 01:40, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@StephenTS42. If you check the edit history of your user page you will see that I have only made one edit to it to remove the non-free seal; the "C" was actually removed by this edit you made when you removed the userbox {{User UConn}}. I only removed non-free images from your sandbox and user page. As for a warning, please read WP:UP#Non-free files for reference. I almost always leave an edit sum explaining why I removed a file from a page and these almost always contain links to the relveant policy or guideline page explaining why the file was removed. Assuming you read the edit sums, I'm not sure why you feel that the files were inappropriately removed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:12, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

When Primefac closed the ANI thread, he mentioned blocks may need to be considered for personal attacks if they occur. With that in mind, you should not be sarcastically (or not sarcastically...) referring to someone as "his magesty" especially under the guise of the edit being a "copyedit." Even calling him "the antagonist" shouldn't be happening. Stop commenting on other users like that. only (talk) 17:29, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Only: It was no guise, it was a reconsideration. Nonetheless, you are right. Try to remember that I am a human being: flaws and all. Trying to do the right thing should not involve emotional reactions, mine included. Try to imagine attempting to improve an article in Wikipedia while almost every edit is reverted by only one other user. That can only be taken one way. No consensus, no discussion, just reverting with paltry edit summaries instead. If my edits are wrong why only one other editor reverts them. Shouldn't that be considered as hounding? Why should contributing to Wikipedia be under such hostile conditions? What have I ever done to JJBers to deserve such abuse? The focus on what should or shouldn't be happening misses the point. Thank you for your advice, though. I'll do my best from now on to hold my horses.——→StephenTS42 (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You say he reverts you without consensus but you also revert him right back without consensus. See WP:BRD. You need to open discussion as well. Hopefully the expanded topic ban will prevent further issues. only (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Only: Thank you for your response. I have tried to reason with whoever and to no avail! It appears the editor in question spends more time trying to ban other editors... evidenced by his or hers number of ANI discussions... rather than constructively editing anything else. I may be wrong, and I hope I am, but whoever appears to be interested in nothing else but banning any editor that disagrees with his or her opinion. ——→StephenTS42 (talk) 01:18, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Drop the stick, please. It's over, it's done, and you're the only one still going on about the situation. Move on, edit some articles, maybe even have some tea. Life's too short to be complaining about things you can't change. Primefac (talk) 01:24, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Primefac: As I have already stated: "I'll do my best from now on to hold my horses". That may sound a little old fashioned but it is intended to mean the same as "dropping the stick". If life is too short to complain about things I cannot change, then what you have done to change me contradicts that advice. What ever happened to Sticks and Stones?——→StephenTS42 (talk) 01:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StephenTS42&oldid=792392106"