User talk:Vacant0

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

Bahasa Indonesia  dansk  italiano  sicilianu  Deutsch  euskara  magyar  čeština  português do Brasil  română  español  português  English  français  Nederlands  polski  galego  Simple English  slovenščina  suomi  svenska  Tiếng Việt  Türkçe  беларуская  беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎  македонски  русский  српски / srpski  українська  ქართული  հայերեն  বাংলা  മലയാളം  ไทย  မြန်မာဘာသာ  한국어  日本語  中文(简体)‎  中文(繁體)‎  العربية  فارسی  +/−

This is Vacant0’s talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Vacant0.

Nominations[edit]

Hello. Whats happenning, are you well? Why exactly are you nominating my sourced files for fast deletion along with Google sourced lowest grade of lacked uploads? ThecentreCZ (talk) 13:37, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because you haven't provided any sources to those flags that would confirm whether they actually exist and are used by those parties. All you've done is put their logos on some coloured background. If these flags actually exist, you should add the source where it belongs. For example, the logos that you've used all have this already. Vacant0 (talk) 14:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
They exist, thats why are they uploaded on Commons. These simple files are sourced from the logos, which have their sources and are within license of simple geometric shape logos. These were coded by me to SVG vector code. Any more sources are not needed, any concerns with the flag you can propose within discussion in Wikipedia where used. Are you familiar with the page or are you new user? Why are you nominating exactly these files you've marked, even without any explanation whatsoever? There is about 1000 flags with same license on Wikipedia Commons and even more with even lesser amount of author description. Are you going to nominate for deletion all those 1000+ files? Thank you. ThecentreCZ (talk) 14:33, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sources are absolutely needed to confirm the existence of those flags. Otherwise, I could put the logo on some other background, add the flag to Wikipedia, and call it the official flag without providing any sources. Considering that you've said that these flags exist, will you be willing to add the sources then? Vacant0 (talk) 14:40, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, these flags are created as adapted logos officially used by the parties. You can upload what you want, if it have licence needed. You can't call anything official on Wikipedia, where questioned information has had to be sourced. This is not Wikipedia, this is Wikimedia Commons. Are you going to nominate for deletion 1000+ flags uploaded here now? ThecentreCZ (talk) 14:56, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Make up your mind. Do these flags exist and are they used by those parties? You've said that these flags exist but then that they're "created as adapted logos officially used by the parties". If you're creating fictional flags, why are you adding them to Wikipedia if those flags are not official/not used by those parties? Vacant0 (talk) 15:13, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, these are officially used flags of the parties. Adapted logos are their licence as they are characterized as simple shaped. But you marked exactly those files for deletion. If you have any concern of any file, you can ask for the status of the flag for example on English Wikipedia where it is supposed to be done. Please answer the question, are you going to nominate for deletion these 1000+ flags now? ThecentreCZ (talk) 15:21, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
"Yes, these are officially used flags of the parties". Will you then add the sources that would confirm their existence and that they are officially used by those parties? I'm really asking you a simple question. If you already know that these flags are official, you could put the sources where they belong and we will end this discussion. There might be 1000+ various flags or some other uploads that should be deleted, though that is not what I am currently looking to do. If these flags are fictional though, I'll certainly start a discussion to remove them from Wikipedia articles, like how they were removed from Dutch articles (though the issue with sourcing was not the main problem with the flags, but was/is indeed a problem). Vacant0 (talk) 15:36, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, you nominated my files for deletion, sources of origins of the principal shapes are already there. Images like these are completely normal. No, any of those uploads shouldn't be deleted. Lots of them were here on Commons even for more than 7 years and were reviewed as fine by administrators plenty of times. You can add whatever additional information you want to them, thats base of the Wikimedia Commons. You definitely won't nominate random files for deletion by tagging them by no source template without any explanation, which is a case for files with no information at all. Why did you nominate exactly my 4 files and not any made by other users, for example like these flags with even less information here?
File:Flag of Ordem Nova.svg
Bandera del PRT.svg
File:All India Trinamool Congress flag.svg
File:Flag of the Justice Party (Turkey).svg
File:BJP Flag.svg
File:Flagoftip.svg
File:Flag of the National Socialist Movement of Denmark (alternative).svg
File:Bandera del Partido Conservador Colombiano.svg
File:Bandera - Cambio Democrático (Panamá).svg
File:Bandera del Partido Revolucionario Febrerista.svg
File:UDC Nicaragua.svg
File:Generation Identitaire flag (yellow background).svg
File:Generation Identitaire flag (black background).svg
File:Flag of Amplitud.png
File:Флаг ЛДПСС.png
File:Socialist Reich Party flag.png
File:Dj ump-bandera.PNG
and hunders of other fine files. ThecentreCZ (talk) 16:50, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I did not nominate your uploads for deletion but added a tag so that you could add the sources that would confirm the existence of those flags. They will be only deleted if the tag remains there for a week. And the reason why I nominated your uploads, and not some others, is because you added them to articles that were on my watchlist on Wikipedia. You really are trying to sway this discussion towards the uploads of some other users, which do have issues, but I currently do not care as we are discussing about your uploads. If you do not want to provide sources so that others could verify the existence of the flags, then there is no point of continuing this discussion any longer as you are refusing to do a very simple thing. Vacant0 (talk) 17:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I do not see this as very simple thing as it is not in accordance with rules of Commmons. Thats even worse, that you added some deletion tag nobody uses as it seems you are not even familiar with practice on Commons. Ordinary nomination discussion deletion tag used normally is limited up to few months not a week. As I see you are not removing files you described as unadequate, I ask you to remove all deletion tags you've added on my files and then find what you wanted. Thank you. ThecentreCZ (talk) 20:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I won't be removing anything as you are refusing to add sources where they belong. I wasn't able to find them myself, though, I'll start a discussion so that others could say whether these flags are simply fictional or are actually used by those parties. You'll be pinged. Vacant0 (talk) 11:57, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thats not what I asked you for. It is obvious that you targeted exactly my files without any reason for deletion, without any discussion before it whatsoever. Why you are not requesting deletion of all files I've listed here?
If you won't be removing Commons tags which are not even used here for adequate nominations for sourced files at all, right now nominate for deletion also your uploaded file here, without no sourcing you are pleading for in this case.
Nominate it for deletion with same tags right now, or I will:
File:Narodni Front Flag.svg File:Narodni Front Flag.svg
and also others.
I'll be waiting, thank you. ThecentreCZ (talk) 14:39, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's ironic isn't it? You are accusing me of not being familiar with practices on Commons, while you don't even know which tags are used for which types of uploads. There is a big difference, so I'll explain it to you. The upload that you've put there is mine and I cannot use the same tags as it was uploaded back in 2020 and it is in my ownership. The flags that you've uploaded are not in your ownership, except if you've been hired by those parties to create those "flags" and logos, so you're not the author and because of that you need a source to prove that the flag is factual and that it exists. There is also an another distinction. You've added them to their Wikipedia articles while my upload has never been used. I'm not going to repeat things over and over because if you don't get what I'm saying, that is your problem. I have only came across the uploads because you've added them to articles that were on my Wikipedia watchlist. The {{subst:nsd}} is totally fine as your uploads are new and do not have a source attached to the flags. As you're the uploader, you are supposed to know the sources behind those flags, if they are real of course, and remain cooperative by adding them where they belong. If you somehow don't know, ask someone else to find the sources. Instead of complaining here on my talk page and then trying to sway the discussion towards some "1000+ flags" that I haven't even asked for, you could've done what I just have said. You are wasting your time by continuing this discussion and I certainly, from now on, won't respond to you here if you continue ignoring the question that I've asked you at the beginning: do you have sources that prove the existence of the flags that you've uploaded? Vacant0 (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've said to nominate it with same tag! Not proper deletion request which is used normally by normal users. That means template (No source since) which you used to my sourced files. So I'll show you how it is done. Thats very good that you are removing your own files like some toxic autist serb. I've also asked you to add tags to all files I've listed here and you are still not doing it. If you have some articles on your English Wikipedia watchlist that doesn't mean you have authority to remove sourced files on Wikimedia Commons. Thank you. ThecentreCZ (talk) 15:51, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@ThecentreCZ and Vacant0: It is important that we distinguish official (or semi-official) flags used by actual organizations from things like banners of which a single instance exists, outright fictional flags, or (what a good number of these appear like they may be) taking a legitimate logo and simply presenting it as a "flag". While I don't endorse either of your tone here, User:Vacant0 has a valid point: you have provided little or no evidence that any of these are actually used as flags. There may be some evidence in the wall of argument above, or elsewhere; I don't have the patience to try to find it. Can you link even a few examples of photos showing some of the questioned items being genuinely used as a flag by the organization in question (or places where they appear as flags on the web page of said organization)? If so, then we can have a reasonable discussion. If not, then I think the only question is whether these should be labeled with {{Fictional flag}} or deleted. - ~~

File:SNS billboard, Danica Grujičić.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!

A1Cafel (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]