User talk:Adamant1

---

May 2023

Hello, I'm Fumikas Sagisavas. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Data:Ncei.noaa.gov/weather have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Please stop adding disruptive threads to deletion requests! Fumikas Sagisavas (talk) 06:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Fumikas Sagisavas: I don't see any edit in that discussion that was reverted. Let alone a "disruptive thread." So you can point out exactly what your talking about. Otherwise I'm going to have to suggest you stop leaving spurious messages on people's talk pages. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 14:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Fumikas Sagisavas: --Adamant1 (talk) 14:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Warning

Hi, This is regarding this thread, but there were other similar issues before. You really need to change the way you interact with other contributors, and take into account critics by AFBorchert and others. Thanks, Yann (talk) 07:45, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: I think I laid out why I started the ANU complaint pretty clearly and I don't see any actual criticism of anything I said there, and no Andy Dingley personal attack that I'm a net negative to the project doesn't qualify. So can you be more specific? Otherwise, it's kind of hard change the way I interact with people when the feedback about how I'm acting is just vague handwaving about personal grievances by people who are clearly just axe grinding. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC)

Postal stamp related deletion requests

It seems you have started nominating files related to Latvian stamps for deletion. I assume you will do the same for some other countries. Could you please add these requests to suitable categories, similar to Category:Latvian FOP cases/pending‎, as there may be a need to review these deletions if we get further information (or use them as a reference regarding later uploaded files). I would suggest specific categories, but I am not familiar with the relevant category tree. –LPfi (talk) 08:16, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@LPfi: Sure. I've actually been nominating images of stamps for deletion for a while now and it never came up. So I'm not really sure what categories exists for then or if there even are any, but I'll look into it when I have the time. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:24, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Nothing to do with Latvia, but what about the German stamps that have been marked as not being PD since at least 2012. If you want to consider doing something significant concerning stamps then possibly consider those found in Category:German stamps review and Category:Deutsche Bundespost stamps but also read Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review. In all I now see close to 9,000 stamps that might get deleted, down from about 10,000 some years ago. There may well be more in Category:Area stamps of Germany. However care needs to be taken as some licences may not be accurate as stated. There are also a few discussions on this topic to be found elsewhere. Ww2censor (talk) 10:44, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I also found this m:Wikilegal/Copyright of Images in German Postage Stamps and its talk page m:Talk:Wikilegal/Copyright of Images in German Postage Stamps which seem relevant. Ww2censor (talk) 10:53, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I've been slowly going through them. Unfortunately you can't just nominate something for deletion based purely on the URAA and I don't want to anyway because it's super convoluted and there's only administrator who seems to know it works. So I kind of got burned out on the whole thing. I'll probably get back to it eventually though. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:48, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

@LPfi: Am I remember wrong or did you create categories for deletion requests having to do with stamps of Finland when the guideline was changed? --Adamant1 (talk) 16:20, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think I did. I might have tried but not found how to get them neatly into the category hierarchy. I don't find any suitable close parent categories. –LPfi (talk) 17:23, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:Western Publishing & Novelty Co. 836. (88456) – The Mary Pickford Douglas Fairbanks Residence, Beverly Hills, California. front.tif

Copyright status: File:Western Publishing & Novelty Co. 836. (88456) – The Mary Pickford Douglas Fairbanks Residence, Beverly Hills, California. front.tif

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:Western Publishing & Novelty Co. 836. (88456) – The Mary Pickford Douglas Fairbanks Residence, Beverly Hills, California. front.tif. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear. If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you.

And also:

• File:Western Publishing & Novelty Co. 836. (88456) – The Mary Pickford Douglas Fairbanks Residence, Beverly Hills, California. back.tif

This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 15:06, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Category:Logos_of_companies_by_name

Logos of companies by name has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion 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. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 13:05, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Deleting categories

Why don't you move the categories instead of creating new categories and deleting the previous name? The page history is lost that way, not that it's the end of the world but principially you should use the move function. Jonteemil (talk) 08:33, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: I assume your comment was for me. If so, I don't think I've deleted any categories related to deletion discussions. So can you be more specific about what exactly your referring to? Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 12:59, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

@Adamant1: It seems you created Cat:Foo and tagged Cat:Bar for deletion instead of moving Cat:Foo to Cat:Bar which would have been the correct procedure. FYI Cat:Foo/bar were general examples. Jonteemil (talk) 16:41, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: I don't remember doing that. Let alone as it would have related to categories for deletion requests. It's fine to use general examples, but I can't really help you or do something differently if I don't even what your talking about to begin with. There aren't "correct procedure" for deleting categories anyway. Moving categories instead of just deleting them isn't a requirement. Not that I don't personally mind doing it, but usually the categories I nominate for deletion either have a very small or non-exiting history to begin with and I'm not going to bother moving a category that only has a single edit. Sorry. As a side to that I'd appreciate it if you started a new discussion thread next time instead of turning an old discussion into a side conversation about something that (apparently) has nothing to do with it. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:47, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

I didn't notice this discussion was from May, sorry for reusing that. I can't show anymore than general since the categories in question have been deleted. I would say that there is a correct procedure and that's the move procedure, no matter how many or few edits the incorrectly named category has, but that's my personal opinion. Jonteemil (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

OK. If moving categories instead of deleting them was the "correct" procedure there wouldn't be things like Template:Bad name. We will have to agree to disagree though. I'm fine moving a category that actually has an edit history, but I don't think there's a need to in cases where they were just created and/or only have a few edits. I can't really have an opinion about it beyond that without actual examples though. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:10, 4 August 2023 (UTC)