User talk:Tony1

The Signpost: 20 September 2010 edit

News, reports and features from the English Wikipedia's weekly journal about Wikipedia and Wikimedia

From the editor: New ways to read and share the Signpost

News and notes: Dutch National Archives donation, French photo raid, brief notes

In the news: Rush Limbaugh falls for Wikipedia hoax, Public Policy Initiative, Nature cites Wikipedia

WikiProject report: All Aboard WikiProject Trains

Features and admins: The best of the week

Dispatches: Tools, part 2: Internal links and page histories

Arbitration report: Discretionary sanctions clarification and more

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 23:25, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Tip: Categorizing images edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago20 comments1 person in discussion

Afrikaans ∙ العربية ∙ беларуская (тарашкевіца) ∙ বাংলা ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form) ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ English ∙ Esperanto ∙ español ∙ فارسی ∙ suomi ∙ français ∙ galego ∙ עברית ∙ magyar ∙ íslenska ∙ italiano ∙ 日本語 ∙ ქართული ∙ 한국어 ∙ македонски ∙ മലയാളം ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ português do Brasil ∙ română ∙ русский ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenčina ∙ slovenščina ∙ српски / srpski ∙ svenska ∙ Türkçe ∙ українська ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ +/−

Hello, Tony1!

Tip: Add categories to your files

Thanks a lot for contributing to the Wikimedia Commons! Here's a tip to make your uploads more useful: Why not add some categories to describe them? This will help more people to find and use them.

Here's how:

1) If you're using the UploadWizard, you can add categories to each file when you describe it. Just click "more options" for the file and add the categories which make sense:

2) You can also pick the file from your list of uploads, edit the file description page, and manually add the category code at the end of the page.

[[Category:Category name]]

For example, if you are uploading a diagram showing the orbits of comets, you add the following code:

[[Category:Astronomical diagrams]]

[[Category:Comets]]

This will make the diagram show up in the categories "Astronomical diagrams" and "Comets".

When picking categories, try to choose a specific category ("Astronomical diagrams") over a generic one ("Illustrations").

Thanks again for your uploads! More information about categorization can be found in Commons:Categories, and don't hesitate to leave a note on the help desk.

CategorizationBot (talk) 10:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image:Admins Jan 2010 to Jan 2011.gif was uncategorized on 10 February 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 10:59, 11 February 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:Auto vs non-auto kept vs deleted.png was uncategorized on 12 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 11:44, 13 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:RfC on terminating DYK altogether.gif was uncategorized on 25 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:RfC on DYK checklist.gif was uncategorized on 25 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:RfC replace DYKs with GAs.gif was uncategorized on 25 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:RfC on DYK archiving.gif was uncategorized on 25 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:Trialling one or two GAs a shift.gif was uncategorized on 25 July 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:En.WP ArbCom GUI 2011.png was uncategorized on 28 November 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 16:24, 29 November 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE numbers of voters and candidates.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2009 voter proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2008 voter and candidate proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2008 voter proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2009 voter and candiate proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2011 voter proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2010 voter and candidate proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2011 voter and candidate proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE 2011 no. of voters and candidates.gif was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE2010 voter proportions.png was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Image:ACE numbers.gif was uncategorized on 19 December 2011 CategorizationBot (talk) 13:24, 20 December 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Query file delete edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The uploader requested that I delete all the images in that set (the ones from the agreement signing). I didn't realize that one of them was in use. My apologies. My understanding is that the uploader, a WMF employee, had asked someone else to take the photos for him on his camera (since he had to be involved in some of the proceedings of the agreement), thus the copyright owner of the images was unclear. In order to avoid ~~trolling~~ objections from Saibo, he decided to just have them deleted rather than go through the drama. Kaldari (talk) 17:52, 17 October 2012 (UTC)Reply[reply]

about the Winning pic edit

Hey Tony, Pranav7 this side, sorry for the late reply as i wasn't notified of anything. You asked me to provide the details.I was going through the preferences in my Wikimedia account and it shows that my email id was authenticated on 1st September 2012 at 05:08 am. Still I haven't received any communication on the authenticated email address for the given contest. I have checked my spam folder to see if any such communication about the contest was made and routed by mistake, but there is no such mail from Wikimedia or any other related sites.

I hope this issue gets sorted out soon

Thankyou

Pranav Singh pranav7@gmail.com +91-9999226640

File:ACE numbers of voters and candidates.png edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

File:ACE numbers of voters and candidates.png 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 ∙ +/−

Rudko (talk) 16:32, 5 January 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Hello, I have reasons to believe that you know categories exist, so if you could use them that would be appreciated. Regards, Nemo 13:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have "Wikipedia Signpost" and "English Wikipedia statistics" categories and so on, autocompletion suggested them to me in few seconds. --Nemo 13:26, 5 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:En.WP monthly page views per internet user.jpg edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Could you add South Korea to the list? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 02:52, 8 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Your comment on Russavia's talk page edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Tony,
I would've thought you are experienced enough a Wikimedian not to post comments like that, specifically if there is no evidence to back up your accusations, at least on this project. I know that some admins tend to block people for such comments straight away, but out of respect for you and your contributions to Wikimedia (as a whole), I won't do that. Be warned, though: bringing conflicts from other projects into Commons is not particularly welcome. odder (talk) 03:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I repeat: Go fuck yourself. Tony1 (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have been blocked for a duration of a week edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of a week for the following reason: gross incivility.

If you wish to make useful contributions, you may do so after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{unblock|(enter your reason here) ~~~~}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. See also the block log. For more information, see Appealing a block.

العربية ∙ azərbaycanca ∙ català ∙ čeština ∙ dansk ∙ Deutsch ∙ Deutsch (Sie-Form)‎ ∙ English ∙ español ∙ Esperanto ∙ euskara ∙ français ∙ Gaeilge ∙ galego ∙ hrvatski ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ norsk bokmål ∙ norsk ∙ occitan ∙ Plattdüütsch ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ română ∙ sicilianu ∙ Simple English ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ Türkçe ∙ Zazaki ∙ Ελληνικά ∙ български ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ українська ∙ हिन्दी ∙ বাংলা ∙ ಕನ್ನಡ ∙ ತುಳು ∙ മലയാളം ∙ ไทย ∙ မြန်မာဘာသာ ∙ 한국어 ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体）‎ ∙ 中文（繁體）‎ ∙ עברית ∙ فارسی ∙ +/−

odder (talk) 09:36, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Go fuck yourselves, the three of you. Go on, block me for longer. Tony1 (talk) 14:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you insist. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:06, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Unskillful admin behaviour edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion

That is unskillful behaviour Mattbuck. I invite you to take some deep breaths and reconsider your unfortunate kneejerk response. A good administrator should have the ability to take a wider perspective and defuse situations instead of inflaming them. Ill-considered admin behaviour like this brings Commons into disrepute. --Epipelagic (talk) 21:41, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Mattbuck was involved on Tony1's en.wiki User Page in a highly insulting and condescending way. There is no way to consider him uninvolved in this incident. None of the admins involved in this were free of a conflict of interest here. But that happens quite often on Commons. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:45, 15 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

For anyone who hasn't been following the image censorship issues on Tony's regular talk page, first there was a deliberate deletion of several photos used in the Signpost piece that Tony most recently collaborated on, because they were used in the Signpost, then there was edit warring on the Signpost article itself, over hiding the deletions [1][2][3], along with some name-calling in the edit summaries. Finally, the "c-word" is dropped onto Tony's talk page, in a edit summary no less,[4], as well as the "f-bomb" [5][6][7], as well as appearing to publish the contents of a private email, again in the edit summaries. I should think Tony would be speechless, at the very least.

Is this what they do with the privacy policy over here on Commons? Ooh, and it has the "s-word". [image courtesy of User:Russavia's talk page].

I doubt whether even French security will appreciate these attempts to protect them with what could be construed as additional attempts at censorship and coverup.

--Neotarf (talk) 07:33, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tony is free to request an unblock just as with any other editor. The block has been shortened to 1 week, which I agree with, and which if I wasn't considered to be involved in this instance I would have shortened myself. But so long as he seems to think it is ok to abuse our email system to call editors a "gross cunt", and persists in telling others to "go fuck yourself", the project is frankly better off without him. russavia (talk) 07:39, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Did he really say that? In a private email? That you are publishing here? I don't know how Commons works, but I do know you can't do that on the en.wikipedia; it's prohibited by the privacy policy. And if you object to the language so much, why do you keep repeating it over and over, in edit summaries, no less?

--Neotarf (talk) 08:10, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There is a difference between saying something and calling someone the same in a perjorative manner. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More like inviting someone to perform something that is anatomically impossible. But it was said privately, in an email that Tony should have had every expectation of remaining private. Not publicly in order to embarrass or humiliate someone. It was not Tony who leaked the contents of the email and blasted it across several wikis.

--Neotarf (talk) 03:46, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Russavia, Commons does not allow people to go to another Wiki, insult them, degrade them, cuss them out, then block them on this one. You were involved. Mattbuck was involved. If anything, you two have disrupted across Wiki and I am tempted to take it up at Meta as proof that further action should be taken. You tried to start a war between multiple Wikis and then you were incredibly incivil and insulting. Why would you ever think such behavior is acceptable? Ottava Rima (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

COM:AN edit

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ italiano ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ português ∙ sicilianu ∙ slovenščina ∙ svenska ∙ Tagalog ∙ Tiếng Việt ∙ Türkçe ∙ македонски ∙ русский ∙ मराठी ∙ বাংলা ∙ മലയാളം ∙ 日本語 ∙ 中文（简体） ∙ 中文（繁體） ∙ العربية ∙ +/−

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

--Neotarf (talk) 07:01, 17 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sorry now to have dragged you into this, especially since they refused to restore your talk page access so you could participate. I had hoped that calmer heads would prevail -- Russavia and his friends can't be too happy about his latest block on the English wiki -- but they pretty much told me to go fuck myself. --Neotarf (talk) 05:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You have mail edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hopefully, this'll sort out the Signpost thing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:46, 29 March 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File tagging File:Michael Halliday at his 90th birthday symposium, 2015.jpg edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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） ∙ +/−

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Michael Halliday at his 90th birthday symposium, 2015.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.

ᴀlbanɢeller (talk) 13:38, 4 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Do you have a better version of File:Michael Halliday at his 90th birthday symposium, 2015.jpg? edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Deutsch ∙ English ∙ español ∙ français ∙ magyar ∙ Nederlands ∙ polski ∙ português ∙ svenska ∙ suomi ∙ македонски ∙ українська ∙ 日本語 ∙ עברית ∙ +/−

Thank you for your submission of File:Michael Halliday at his 90th birthday symposium, 2015.jpg. While all submissions are useful, do you think you might be able to supply a better quality version of the same, or similar, content? In many cases, the largest and highest resolution possible is the most useful version to have available. (MediaWiki has automatic resizing functionality, so there is no need for multiple versions of the same image at different sizes, users can select any size and the software will generate and cache the needed resolution on the fly.)

If you can supply the same exact image as File:Michael Halliday at his 90th birthday symposium, 2015.jpg at a larger resolution (or media at a higher bitrate, etc.), please just upload it over the original, users will get the new higher quality version with no further effort on your part. If on the other hand, the content is only similar, it is best to select a new image name, as there may be uses already where some aspect of the existing media was key to the usage. In the latter case, if you can provide a crosslink reference to the new image in the older one and vice versa, that will be extremely helpful.

Again, thank you very much for your contribution, it is appreciated.

--ᴀlbanɢeller (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Add topic