User talk:GPinkerton

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, GPinkerton!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 02:08, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

Helping out at Commons

Nice to see you around here! I am glad that you're working on improving categorization (which is often poor, but essential to easy navigation and finding files). One tool that helps is Help:Gadget-Cat-a-lot which makes it much easier and faster to move files around. Buidhe (talk) 17:32, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe, thanks for pointing that out, although I have yet to put it to use. Can I ask for your opinion on this issue? GPinkerton (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Commons does a lot of things in a way that doesn't immediately make much sense; one of these is the bias against overwriting. However, you can manually replace over at any wiki where you aren't blocked. Ideally one would be able to find or make a newer map of Kurdistan anyway. Buidhe (talk) 21:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

There's even semi-automated file replacement if you have a very good reason.[1] Buidhe (talk) 21:28, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Buidhe One can't replace historical images. It's certainly true that plenty of other maps exist, and certainly the uses of that particular map are more liberal than necessary, but I don't think that means we should be hosting an image with a fraudulent licence and misleading description. GPinkerton (talk) 21:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

It's not fraudulent licensing, CIA is an agency of the US federal government so anything they do is public domain and can be altered and reused in any way. Buidhe (talk) 21:52, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Buidhe Sure, but passing that file off as an unaltered work by the CIA is fraudulent, which is what the licence does quite aggressively. GPinkerton (talk) 21:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

Template nonsense

Thanks for tracking down the template nonsense. There should probably be a notification issued if your talk page exceeds that length. I've been on Commons for 15 years, and it was far from clear to me what the problem was, or how one could go about figuring out what the problem was. My first assumption was that templates involved in the deletion nomination process had been screwed up... AnonMoos (talk) 16:52, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

@AnonMoos: no problem: I've never seen that before; never realized until now why archiving was actually needed eventually. I don't know if that was a hidden category or something but I'd not seen it till now either. GPinkerton (talk) 20:00, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

P.S. I left a comment on "Flag of North West England.svg" on the Administrator's noticeboard, but not sure if you would see it in the middle of all that mess... AnonMoos (talk) 16:28, 4 July 2021 (UTC)

Overwriting maps

Please read Commons:Overwriting existing files. In particular:
Changes to a file that are likely to be contested should be uploaded to a separate filename. Upload wars (a form of edit war in which contributors repeatedly upload different versions of a file in an effort to have their version be the visible one) are always undesirable. As with other forms of edit warring, users who engage in upload wars may be blocked from editing. If another editor thinks that a change is not an improvement (even if the editor making the change thinks it minor), the change can be reverted. Once a change has been reverted, the new image should be uploaded under a new filename.
Thank you. Kaldari (talk) 18:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kaldari I couldn't agree more. GPinkerton (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Then I assume edits like your May 31 revert of File:Kurdish languages map.png won't happen again. Kaldari (talk) 19:18, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kaldari that isn't overwriting, it's returning the file to its original version. GPinkerton (talk) 19:19, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps you did not look at the full history of the file, which goes back multiple pages. By my account, you reverted to the second version of the file, not the first. Kaldari (talk) 19:26, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kaldari That's not the first version. GPinkerton (talk) 19:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I realize that Mahammad tt's version was not the first version, but neither was the version you reverted to. As far as I'm concerned, you were both edit warring rather than reverting to the original. Kaldari (talk) 19:46, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kaldari I reverted to the version of how the map originally was. GPinkerton (talk) 19:49, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm talking about the original version of the file, not the map. Regardless, I've blocked Mahammad tt and I hope you won't resort to edit warring in the future. If someone is improperly changing an image, please either discuss it on the talk page or contact an administrator. Thanks. Kaldari (talk) 19:57, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Kaldari I couldn't disagree less! GPinkerton (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Something similar has been afoot at File:Iran-Ethnicity-2004.PNG (purportedly based on the 2004 CIA map, but now with considerably different content, which I enquired about at File_talk:Iran-Ethnicity-2004.PNG. GPinkerton (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

File:Flag of the 2020 Belarusian protests.svg

Please let the people who delete files know that I disowned this file because as I do not want to be associated with the Lukashenko government. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: I see you already voted to delete at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the 2020 Belarusian protests.svg - is there something more you'd like me to do? GPinkerton (talk) 21:09, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@GPinkerton: If you seen anyone of the unused files by me, that is because I disowned them. If you delete them, let everyone know that I disowned them. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 21:45, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: I can't delete files, I can only nominate them for deletion. If you have uploaded files you no longer need or you would like to be deleted, you can also nominate them for deletion. In a way, you can't really disown them; by uploading them here, you waived your copyright (i.e. ownership) and the files are effectively no longer yours, as far as I understand it. GPinkerton (talk) 22:04, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Another fictitious flag

As saw your nomination. I agree those flags are useless and may lead the readers to confusion. File:Flag of Japanese Macedonia.svg is fictitious flag made as a satire made by one user, I think it should also be deleted. Veverve (talk) 06:31, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: I couldn't agree more! What possible purpose are these things for? You would be very welcome to nominate it for deletion yourself, which holds true for any such forbidden-by-policy doodles. GPinkerton (talk) 11:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

I have done the DR. Veverve (talk) 05:16, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Unsourced coats of arms

Hello GPinkerton. I would need your opinion on some unsourced CoAs.

• I nominated one which was kept, because it is "in use".
• Most images at Category:SVG coats of arms of the House of Gonzaga
• CoAs by User:Henrysalome and User:F l a n k e r do not have sources.

What do you think? do you believe they all should be removed? Veverve (talk) 11:33, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: I honestly don't know; the Gonzaga ones look plausible enough, but I don't know anything especially about Spanish heraldry and nothing at all about the Gonzagas. I will look into the other uploads. GPinkerton (talk) 11:58, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

fictional flags

There is an entire section devoted to fictional flags. Your proposal to delete those three images is unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheEarth1974 (talk • contribs) 16:05, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Make a group DR

Hello. Would you know a guide on how to nominate numerous images by one user? I would need one. Veverve (talk) 21:53, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: MediaWiki:Gadget-VisualFileChange.js GPinkerton (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. However, I do not know how to install it or use it. Could you help me with that? Veverve (talk) 22:07, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: Help:VisualFileChange.js GPinkerton (talk) 22:10, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Proposed flags

Hello, I couldn't care less of those flags, but probably you mentioned be just because I was the one that made a SVG version of it. I am not the most entitled to "defend" that image actually. -- Blackcat 10:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

@Blackcat: yes you'll have been notified because everyone that uploaded a file gets notified when a nomination is made. GPinkerton (talk) 13:11, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Wiki email

Hello! I got a notification that you sent me a wikipedia email but when I open my email I can't see anything - very strange. The part of your message that shows up in my notifications is:

"Hi Ichthyovenator, Regarding "The Imperial Families of Ancient Rome" (https://books.google.se/books?id=VEbCDwAAQBAJ): I h..."

I can see that it is regarding Craven's book but I can't see what the context is. Ichthyovenator (talk) 13:55, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Icthyovenator: original text: Regarding "The Imperial Families of Ancient Rome" (https://books.google.se/books?id=VEbCDwAAQBAJ): I have doubts as to its reliability. The author is not a specialist in the field (see his "Derby Then & Now"; https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Derby_Then_Now.html?id=uBYDywAACAAJ) and the publisher (founded 2012) seems questionable. The proprietor is advertises the business with posts on internet history forums: https://historum.com/threads/fonthill-media.99334/. There's also this conversation on Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/PubTips/comments/chsaxv/i_was_contacted_by_fonthill_media_to_write_a_book/), wherein someone claimed: "Imagine a cross between a genuine publishing house and a vanity press and you have an idea of what they are like. You won't make much money with them but you can call yourself an "author" because they'll distribute your books." I fear it's little different to the execrable works churned out by Pen & Sword. I think claims only found in that book should be treated with extreme caution. GPinkerton (talk) 13:57, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@GPinkerton: Thank you for notifying me. That is unfortunate and disappointing. I will try and go through my recent work today and eliminate as much of the stuff sourced only to that book as possible. Ichthyovenator (talk) 14:00, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Icthyovenator: You may also want to look into the w:List of Trapezuntine emperors. The "Greek" name of Anna Anachoutlou leaves much to be desired! GPinkerton (talk) 14:46, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Actually, all the names on that list are missing their breathings. GPinkerton (talk) 14:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I got rid of the references to Craven from Julius Nepos, Regalianus, Ovida and Romulus Augustulus, those should be the worst offenders where the source was used most extensively. I don't know enough Greek to know what the correct renditions of those name should be so I'm afraid I would be of limited help in fixing any issues with the Trapezuntines. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:52, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ichthyovenator: See now the (recently rectified) Spanish equivalent: es:w:Anexo:Emperadores de Trebisonda (Greek numerals are not included in that instance); the English article has been translated into many languages, complete with bungled Greek. I will try and set this right. All pre-modern Greek words beginning with a vowel have a w:Smooth breathing or w:Rough breathing. "Αναcηοθτλοθ" is what one gets if one changes a Latin keyboard to Greek with software and presses the keys assuming their Greek equivalents will appear: "θ" is what one gets by pressing "U", but to get upsilon one needs to press "Y" ... and "cη" is what one tries to use when one doesn't know that chi exists and is obtained by pressing "X" – "η" is what one gets by pressing "H" intending to get a non-existent Greek equivalent of the "h" in "Anna Anachoutlou"! GPinkerton (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

I added the versions used in the Spanish list to the English list. The numerals shouldn't be used in the native-language-names anyway since the Byzantines never used them. Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ichthyovenator: I'm not sure that's true actually; there were certainly ancient Greek systems for numbering the Ptolemies long before the Byzantines ... GPinkerton (talk) 18:06, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Everything I've read suggests the Byzantines employed nicknames, patronymics and later last names to distinguish emperors (commented on by Foss (2005) for instance). If they had used regnal numbers we probably wouldn't have two emperors named Constantine III, or the last emperor being designated Constantine XI, leaving out at least five junior co-emperors (whom the Byzantines probably would have included in the numbering considering there constitutionally not really being a difference). Perhaps this has something to do with the holdover Roman sentiment of the empire technically being a republic? Ichthyovenator (talk) 18:14, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ichthyovenator: I made a quick search of the primary sources and there seems to be no obvious evidence that the Trapezuntines, at least, were ever numbered. I anticipate that if emperors ever were numbered, it would be those who had a close dynastic relationship and shared the same name, rather than continuous numbering from the beginning. GPinkerton (talk) 18:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, that's possible. "Constantine Palaiologos" is sufficient for Constantine XI since no other emperor had that name (and contemporary chroniclers just call him that), but "Andronikos Palaiologos" is more ambiguous since there were four of them. Ichthyovenator (talk) 11:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Acadian flags

Hello again. I have found File:Flag of Acadia XXè.svg and File:Flag of Acadia 1.svg. I have asked for a source for the latter, which I was not given.

I found nothing about those flags here. I found nothing on the "1" flag in the scenes of L'Acadie, l'Acadie?!? here or here (the "1" flag was previously used at fr:L'Acadie, l'Acadie?!?).

Would you happen to know more? Veverve (talk) 11:02, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

The person who asked for thos two flags to be made in 2012 did not give a source either. Veverve (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: I have no information beyond what you've shown me: it's clear from the "Atelier graphique" that the compositions were made de novo, but the request hints that textual sources, somewhere, might exist. The user asked for the image for developing w:fr:Drapeau de l'Acadie, and there the source given for the "sacred heart" and "Virgin Mary" variants is Biddicombe 1990, who writes:

"To accentuate this distinctive nature and to emphasize the flag's religious character, many Acadians also began to place religious emblems upon the tricolour's white stripe, particularly the sacred heart symbol and the image of the Virgin Mary. Moreover, the stripes of the flag were also given symbolic meanings which supposedly distinguished the flag from the banner of anti-clerical French republicanism. The blue-white-red combination was said to stand for special Acadian attributes like hope, innocence, and suffering, or humility, purity, and freedom, and when seen in an even more overtly religious sense, the stripes were interpreted as representing the Assumption, the Immaculate Virgin, and martyr-dom. One might assume, of course, that this conscious process of myth-making was a rather ineffective attempt to hide the obvious, and that the only effective means of "Acadianizing" the flag was for it to assume — over a period of time — a truly significant place in the hearts and minds of average Acadians."

There is no illustration, and while the images match the description, they have not been copied from a surviving image from the relevant period (early years of the 20th century). GPinkerton (talk) 15:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Biddicombe's description is way too vague do do anything with it. I believe both images should be nominated for deletion. Veverve (talk) 16:03, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: Possibly vague for a modern flag, but such images do at least roughly approximate an interpretation of the historical flags, and with heraldic blazons and pre-modern flags of which no authentic illustration survives we have much less to go on than this relatively precise description; it helps that we know exactly what the basic flag looks like. Still, its presence in articles where it could plausibly be useful has not been required. I haven't seen any evidence at all of the hammer and sickle variant having been historical. GPinkerton (talk) 17:18, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

If you want to nominate

Hello! Here is some flags you can nominate if you want, as they are fantasist.

• File:Flag of the Byzantine Empire.png
• File:Flag of the Eastern Roman Empire.png

(those two should be quickly restored, as I made a mistake)

• File:Byzantine empire flag or eatern roman empire.png
• File:Download.1.png

Veverve (talk) 03:41, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Maps

• 
  Guriezous
• 
  Cattette
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  1812
  KaterBegemot
• 
  1815
• 
  1848-49
• 
  1867
• 
  1871
• 
  1878

"Emanations of the giant Albion"

Pubs

• 
  The Albion, Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire
• 
  "The Albion Hotel", Broadstairs, Kent
• 
• 
  "The Royal Albion Hotel", Broadstairs, Kent
• 
  The Albion, Thetford, Norfolk
• 
• 
  The Albion, Conwy, Caernarfonshire
• 
  The Albion, Conwy, Caernarfonshire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Penarth, Glamorgan
• 
  ex-The Albion Inn, Llanrwst, Denbighshire
• 
  The Albion, Gateshead, County Durham
• 
  The Albion, Gateshead, County Durham
• 
  The Albion Inn, Gateshead, County Durham
• 
  The Albion Inn, Brighton, Sussex
• 
  Royal Albion Hotel, Brighton, Sussex
• 
• 
• 
  The Albion, Hove Sussex
• 
  Old Albion, Hove, Sussex
• 
  The Albion, Great Yarmouth, Norfolk
• 
  The Albion, Cromer, Norfolk
• 
• 
  The Royal Albion, Maidstone, Kent
• 
  Albion Inn, Willington Quay, Northumberland
• 
  The Albion, South Norwood, Surrey
• 
• 
  The Albion Inn, Boughton Monchelsea, Kent
• 
  The Albion Inn, Loughborough, Leicestershire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Skipton, Yorkshire
• 
• 
• 
  The Albion, Clifford, Yorkshire
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
  The Albion, Bradford, Yorkshire
• 
  Albion Inn, Leeds, Yorkshire
• 
• 
• 
  ex-The Albion, Leeds, Yorkshire
• 
• 
  Albion Inn, Littletown, Yorkshire
• 
  The Albion, Kingston-upon-Hull, Yorkshire
• 
• 
• 
  Albion Inn, Wakefield, Yorkshire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Clayton, Yorkshire (West Riding)
• 
• 
• 
  The Albion, Bridlington, Yorkshire
• 
  The Albion, Sheffield, Yorkshire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Grimsby, Lincolnshire
• 
  The Albion, East Molesey, Surrey
• 
• 
  The Albion, Kingston upon Thames, Surrey
• 
  The Albion, Rotherhithe, Surrey
• 
• 
  Albion Hotel, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire
• 
  The Albion, Winchester, Hampshire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Hyde, Cheshire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Dukinfield, Cheshire
• 
  Albion Inn, Chester, Cheshire
• 
• 
• 
  The Albion, Clayton-le-Moors, Lancashire
• 
  The Albion, Bolton, Lancashire
• 
  The Albion, Hyndburn, Lancashire
• 
  The Albion, Warrington, Lancashire
• 
  The Albion, Widnes, Lancashire
• 
• 
  The Albion, Bootle, Lancashire
• 
  The Albion, Wem, Shropshire
• 
  The Albion, Broseley, Shropshire
• 
  The Albion, Islington, Middlesex
• 
  The Albion, Acton, Middlesex
• 
  ex-The Albion, Stoke Newington, Middlesex
• 
  The Albion, Goldsmiths Row, Hackney, Middlesex
• 
• 
  The Albion, Lauriston Road, Hackney, Middlesex
• 
  The Albion, Blackfriars, London
• 
  The Albion, Ampthill, Bedfordshire
• 
  The Albion Inn, Verwood, Dorset
• 
  The Albion, Woolwich, Kent
• 
  The Albion, Arnside, Westmorland

HM Ships

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Misc.

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

https://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O147687/hm-ship-albion-in-dock-watercolour-pacuano-em/

Question

Hello, mr GPinkerton. you made this map, [2] why would you want to delete the map [3]? why do you say it's wrong? Does your map include larger areas? Thanks. Danial2703kurdistan (talk) 12:44, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

@Danial2703kurdistan: I did not make that map. The map was made in the 1940s and is of historical importance. File:Kurdish-inhabited areas of the Middle East and the Soviet Union in 1986.jpg was made in 1986 and is of historical importance. File:Great_Kurdistan.jpg is a modern fake forged from the 1986 map, is of no historical relevance, has no educational use and is therefore out of COM:SCOPE; see COM:EV, which states that files must be "providing knowledge; instructional or informative". Somebody's modern fake from the internet is not useful or educational to anyone. GPinkerton (talk) 12:51, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Categorizing DRs

Hi GPinkerton,

Thank you for categorizing DRs into Category:Fictitious symbol related deletion requests. I hope that this will help people interested in these discussions (on either side) participate in them without having to go through the hassle of individually seeking them out. As a reminder, when you categorize DRs, you must put the category in <noinclude> tags, like so: <noinclude>[[Category:Fictitious symbol related deletion requests]]<noinclude/>. This is because DRs are transcluded on log pages, and failing to use the <noinclude> tags will cause the entire log page to be categorized into the category for the DR. See, for example, that Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2021/06/24 is erroneously categorized into Category:Fictitious symbol related deletion requests because of this.

Regards,  Mysterymanblue  21:05, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

This means that, unfortunately, HotCat cannot be used for categorizing DRs.  Mysterymanblue  21:06, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Attitude

I'm sure you see yourself as performing a valuable service for Commons, but you might want to learn a little bit more about "How to Win Friends and Influence People" (to quote Dale Carnegie) or reflect on the proverb "It's easier to catch flies with honey than with vinegar"... AnonMoos (talk) 08:01, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

P.S. I'm not sure whether it violates policy, but it could be considered borderline unethical that you didn't leave a notice on my user talkpage about a thread you started on "Commons:Administrators' noticeboard" on a matter that I was directly involved in... AnonMoos (talk) 08:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

What matter? 08:16, 29 October 2021 (UTC)GPinkerton (talk)

The thread you started titled "User-generated fantasy flags and Yann's claim of" etc. AnonMoos (talk) 08:35, 29 October 2021 (UTC)

Ireland Maps

@GPinkerton: Hi there, I don’t know if you got my message in the graphic labs but we are going to have to chance the text on the post Brexit Ireland map from “(European Union)” to (EU member state) as it’s causing issues with the term when using the image on the Irish border article. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 08:26, 2 November 2021 (UTC))

@MOTORAL1987: How is it a problem? What issue is it causing? "EU member state" is unnecessary verbiage, what's wrong with "European Union" all of a sudden? GPinkerton (talk) 08:30, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

@GPinkerton: They think it’s creates the mistaken impression that the European Union is a country in its own right and as a result it’s misleading and removed the image yesterday off the Irish border article page as a result. I am sorry to be pernickety about it it’s just just how others are seeing it although I personally think it’s just fine what about as a compromise remove the (EU) bracket on the Republic of Ireland altogether the EU flag can support itself can’t it?. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 10:08, 2 November 2021 (UTC))

@MOTORAL1987: this is my original point: maps should have labels or flags, not both. If it's going to have labels and flags, then the labels need to correspond with the flags. The European flag is ambiguous on its own; as a Council of Europe symbol it's an official flag in Britain as much as in Ireland. I don't understand why the current lay-out is a problem; one could just as well object that the map makes Northern Ireland look like a country in its own right; it's written the same way as the Irish state's name. GPinkerton (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, I will leave this issue for you to decide. I consider the matter closed. However I do have another favour for you which I will detail to you in a new section. (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 09:31, 3 November 2021 (UTC))

British Hong Kong Map

I don’t suppose you could create a map of British Hong Kong prior to the handover in 1997, can this map include the boundaries, labels of all the towns and city’s in the former colony as well as geographical features such as the new territories Hong Kong Island that sort of thing with a flag of British Hong Kong (the 1959-97 flag) in the bottom right hand corner (not in the map like Ireland) with a label to say “British Hong Kong” (MOTORAL1987 (talk) 09:34, 3 November 2021 (UTC))

@MOTORAL1987: Sorry I don't have the time it would take, and probably not the skills either. GPinkerton (talk) 09:35, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked

You have been blocked from editing Commons. The reason for the block is available in the block log as is the name of the administrator who blocked you. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may add {{Unblock}} below this message explaining clearly why you should be unblocked. For more information, see Appealing a block.

Do something else for a month, and come if/when you are disposed to act in a civil and peaceful manner. Regards, --Yann (talk) 13:56, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Yann's abusive behaviour

Unblock request declined This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion. Request reason: "User:Yann's inappropriate and undiscussed block is a clear example of Yann's continued admin abuse and harassment against me. Clearly Yann's unexplained block of me is a continuation of Yann's animus against me for calling out their earlier abuses. I had earlier reported Yann's abuses to ANU: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 95#User-generated fantasy flags and Yann's claim of "no valid reason for deletion" and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 87#Deleted fantasy flags restored by Yann. After that, Yann even started a retaliatory ANU thread, a move which was criticized by others. Now it appears that Yann, never happy for having their misbehaviour exposed to the world, has decided to take revenge by blocking me without any rhyme or reason. I don't think this sort of personal vendetta should be allowed to be pursued by admins; I don't see why Commons should allow Yann groundlessly to apply a block for a month simply because Yann has decided to punish me for exposing him. Indeed, it will be noted that Yann appears to have blocked me to deflect direct criticism [4] of Yann's behaviour by yet another user [5]. GPinkerton (talk) 14:30, 19 November 2021 (UTC)" Decline reason: "COM:BP requires an understanding of the issue and a credible commitment to discontinue. Neither are on offer here. Note that if you make additional bad faith or disparaging remarks about another editors during the remainder of this block, your talk page access will be removed. If you do so after the block has expired, you will be blocked indefinitely. Indeed per Yann, "End of the party". Эlcobbola talk 15:32, 19 November 2021 (UTC)" Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.

(Block log) (unblock) (Change local status for a global block) (contribs)

@Elcobbola: What is the issue? Yann has not provided any rationale for their unilateral actions. GPinkerton (talk) 16:17, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

In GPinkerton's defense, I fail to see, looking at the block log reason and the the discussion it leads to, why GPinkerton was blocked. Therefore, I have trouble understanding how an an understanding of the issue could be easily reached (is the reason edit warring?). Veverve (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

COM:BP certainly states: "Provide a reason for the block. The rationale should preferably use links to relevant policies to help the blocked user understand why they have been blocked. Where appropriate, diffs or permanent links documenting the reason for the block are also helpful", none of which is in evidence here. GPinkerton (talk) 20:34, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Unblock request declined This blocked user asked to be unblocked, but one or more administrators has reviewed and declined this request. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked. Other administrators can also review this block, but should not override the decision without discussion. Request reason: "This block is unexplained, unjustified, and is a violation of the blocking policy, which states unambiguously (emphasis original): "Provide a reason for the block. The rationale should preferably use links to relevant policies to help the blocked user understand why they have been blocked. Where appropriate, diffs or permanent links documenting the reason for the block are also helpful". The block was also imposed without any warning or prior explanation, whereas the blocking policy demands that warning be given except in certain defined cases, none of which applies here: "For blocks based on disruptive behaviour, such as vandalism, repeated copyright violations and manual promotional activities, ensure that the user has been appropriately warned, preferably using a block warning template. No warning is necessary when blocking open proxies and users with inappropriate usernames. Accounts and IP addresses used solely for severely disruptive purposes such as automated spamming, serious vandalism or harassment may also be blocked without prior warning". Since the block is both unexplained and unwarranted, and as recommended by the blocking policy (contrary to the claims made in the refusal of the unblock request above) this unblock request is "An explanation of why the block is not appropriate based on this and other relevant policies". This being true, the unjustified block should be overturned. GPinkerton (talk) 21:25, 19 November 2021 (UTC)" Decline reason: "I consider myself totally impartial, because I did not participate in your discussion with (actually shit-throwing towards) Orijentolog. This is really disgusting. Block for that is correct. You seriously harassed Orijentolog and so no previous warning was needed before your block. People in Commons should be nice with each other. The other projects are other projects and if somebody is blocked somewhere, then it is not very important in Commons. Do not bring problems from other projects into Commons! Taivo (talk) 12:14, 30 November 2021 (UTC)" Administrators: This template should be removed when the block has expired.

(Block log) (unblock) (Change local status for a global block) (contribs)

•  Oppose unblock and suggest to revoke the talkpage access too. The grossly uncivil and aggressive behaviour by GPinkerton on COM:ANU and elsewhere in the last days definitely made a further block overdue. Regards --A.Savin 04:40, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Unlike my statements at ANU, the claim that there exists "grossly uncivil and aggressive behaviour by GPinkerton on COM:ANU and elsewhere" is an unsubstantiated slur. GPinkerton (talk) 05:12, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

No-one has claimed that anything I have said is untrue; that being the case, why am I blocked? GPinkerton (talk) 05:41, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Fictitious flags - some background

Hello. I found some background information on the debate about the fictitious flags:

• User:Antemister/Fictional flag issue
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of Nazi France (fictional).svg
• Commons_talk:Deletion_policy/Archive_1#Policy_concerning_fictitious_flags

Also, if I remember correctly, there was a massive deletion of fictitious nazi-inspired flags recently on WCommons, but I cannot find any information on it. I hope those information can help yuo one day. Veverve (talk) 19:48, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

@Veverve: They probably belong in Category:Fictitious symbol related deletion requests. GPinkerton (talk) 04:22, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back, honestly. As you probably noticed, during last month two files that we had dispute about were untouched. I could ask admins (all were against you) to remove disputable cats or restore templates, but I did not. I could also ask colleagues from Wikiproject Iran to check and intervene, but again, I did not. Why? Out of respect, to your previous work here. I 100% support your strictness about fictional flags, and maps, agreeing all should be deleted (despite "in use" rule). That's the reason why I pinged you a month ago. And I remember that it was you who recognized sock puppeteers who engaged in reverting my edits. Regarding that what happened a month ago, perhaps you misunderstood something, perhaps you had bad day(s), but frankly I don't care. I tend to remember only good things. So I wish you happy holidays and truly hope that you'll be that good ol' pre-Nov-2020 GPinkerton once again. --Orijentolog (talk) 22:13, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Ethnic Caucasia-en.png and others maps

Hi, Pinkerton ! OK, I will do it (making myself derivative maps), because historic facts cited by scholar sources aren't my "own preferences". You seem to think I'm a silly person ; I was't considered as such when I taught at the Institute of Byzantine Studies at the Sorbonne University, and the Larousse editions take my remarks into account without taking them for unfounded personal opinions. --Claude Zygiel (talk) 16:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

@Claude Zygiel: Good; altering other peoples' files and especially altering scans of maps and newspapers from 100 years ago according to your own preferences is clearly unacceptable and misleading, as anyone connected with academia well knows. You may want to spend more time translating your remarks into English; much of what you write is not comprehensible easily, or sometimes not at all. One tip: one can't use "since" as a translation of "d'après"; you should use "according to" or a more suitable idiom. GPinkerton (talk) 19:56, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

OK, thanks for this advice, I will use "according with" when I will create a derivative version, not "according to my own preferences" but according to the scholar sources cited. Concerning some universitary works, I don't know if the French geographers, historians or scientists are not very credible because they don't speak English perfectly, or if WP invents its own rules which make inconsistent/incoherent those of classical geography, as they are taught in the French universities (as an enclave/exclave is a landlocked territory [6]). Well, the world is changing: so I will adapt to it. --Claude Zygiel (talk) 10:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

@Claude Zygiel: you're still not making sense: nothing in the link you supplied supports your claim that an enclave must be landlocked. The Larousse, which you speak highly of, describes the Gambia as an enclave within Senegal, and no-one can claim the Gambia is landlocked! Whatever they might teach in French universities, they're teaching the wrong thing if they treat an enclave as synonymous with a landlocked territory. Enclave is a borrowing from French, and there is nothing whatsoever to connect the term with the term "landlocked" (except for the semantic link between "lock" and clavus/clé.) GPinkerton (talk) 13:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Désolé, cher @GPinkerton: , si mon anglais est déficient. Sans doute landlocked ne doit pas être le mot juste. Ce que je sais des enclaves est qu'elles sont entourées par un autre territoire de tous côtés, sinon ce ne sont pas des enclaves. C'est comme une île, entourée d'eau de tous côtés, sinon ce n'est pas une île, mais une presqu'île. Pour ce qui est de [7], je pense avoir trouvé la solution en changeant les couleurs, regardez et dites-moi SVP ce que vous en pensez. Merci. --Claude Zygiel (talk) 20:10, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

Seafloor

Guardafui channel and km seafloor

Hi GPinkerton, I was wondering whether you'd be able to create an image like the following image into an SVG file? Thanks Rcbbtjjhj (talk) 15:01, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

RFC for adminship on kuwiki

Hi, would you be interested in joining the conversation at w:ku:Wîkîpediya:Rêveber/Balyozxane? Thank you! Balyozxane (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

File:The motorcade carrying the Queen's coffin across the Queensferry Bridge in Scotland.jpg

File:The motorcade carrying the Queen's coffin across the Queensferry Bridge in Scotland.jpg has been marked as a possible copyright violation. Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. Traditional copyright law does not grant these freedoms, and unless noted otherwise, everything you find on the web is copyrighted and not permitted here. For details on what is acceptable, please read Commons:Licensing. You may also find Commons:Copyright rules useful, or you can ask questions about Commons policies at the Commons:Help desk. If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that. The file you added has been deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you believe that the deletion was not in accordance with policy, you may request undeletion. (It is not necessary to request undeletion if using VRT; the file will be automatically restored at the conclusion of the process.) This file is a copyright violation for the following reason: Reuters photo, clearly Flickrwashed: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/gallery/2022/sep/11/the-queens-coffin-in-scotland-and-the-kings-proclamations-in-pictures Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

User who nominated the file for deletion (Nominator) : Adeletron 3030.

I'm a computer program; please don't ask me questions but ask the user who nominated your file(s) for deletion or at our Help Desk. //Deletion Notification Bot 2 (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about the double tap. This is the same as the photo that was uploaded to Flickr. The Flickr account is a mix of personal and web photos, but I think anything outside of Canada is copyvio. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 20:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Adeletron 3030: Yes that's definitely the same shot. Poor regulation at Flickr! GPinkerton (talk) 20:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Fake map

Hi @GPinkerton!

Claude Zygiel made a fake map, first he tried to overwrite the original one, then he separately uploaded. Then he many times put to several Wiki articles (even to more Wikipedia, English, French, Russian, etc), I removed them, then he always put the falsified maps back on Wikipedia which is against Wiki rule: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_research

So I decided to ask the removal ot the fake fantasy map from the Commons: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Europe 1097-corrected.jpg#File:Europe 1097-corrected.jpg

I see you also recognized this behavior many times

File:Europe mediterranean 1097.jpg

User talk:Claude Zygiel#Manipulating historical maps

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Europe_and_the_Mediterranean_Lands_by_Religions_about_1097_(William_R._Shepherd).jpg&action=history

File:Map of the ethnic groups living in the Soviet Union.jpg

File:AustriaHungaryWWI.gif

File:Moldova-CIA WFB Map.png OrionNimrod (talk) 11:42, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I have replied there. Please keep your comments concise. Long comments obfuscate the matter. The issue is not whether or not this or that province belongs to one state or another at one time or another, the real problem is the manipulation of historical maps and the passing off of the user's own maps as if they were older than they are. I do not know why the user does not dedicate himself to creating new maps, but if he is determined to create fake maps using old ones, I would support administrator action against him. GPinkerton (talk) 12:06, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

I had the same conversation with him here, this is not an old map, but he made a "time machine" falsification, he forced put many times countries which did not exist in 850 just 500 years later: File talk:Balkans850.png OrionNimrod (talk) 12:51, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

Reversions of Austria-Hungary maps

Hello GPinkerton. I notice you have reverted several maps of the subdivisions of Austria-Hungary originally created by Ludó (e.g. Empire d'Autriche 1914 Styrie.png) back to their original 2018 versions, which are full of inaccuracies and anachronistic borders (many of which are quite obvious to anyone familiar with the subject matter), using Commons:Overwriting existing files as your justification. It is my understanding that that rule does not apply here, with "uncontroversial corrections to diagrams, maps, or charts, if a more accurate version is available" specifically listed as a correct/justified use of file replacement. Do you believe the changes to be controversial? If so, could you please elaborate. If you would like more information/detail about the specific changes please see File talk:Empire d'Autriche 1914 Bucovine.png § Modifications of 27 May 2023.

If you simply believe that no file should be altered (but instead uploaded as a separate file) then I believe you are mistaken. If you believe that this falls under "Changes that reflect different data (e.g. updating a map)", it is my interpretation that this means changing the subject matter or content of the map (e.g. the time period or what is depicted, not simply correcting errors; notice that the term used is updating not simply changing). In either case, it would be useful if you could notify the uploader(s) of such reversions so they know that they have to re-upload. In this case the reverted files should also be removed from the Wikipedia articles they are used in and the files marked as inaccurate, as otherwise you are covertly introducing misinformation to those articles.

Alphathon /ˈæɫfə.θɒn/ ^(talk) 18:44, 6 October 2023 (UTC)