User talk:Steindy: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
m die Antwort
Line 91: Line 91:
→→→ Wird fortgesetzt. --[[User:Steindy|Steindy]] ([[User talk:Steindy#top|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
→→→ Wird fortgesetzt. --[[User:Steindy|Steindy]] ([[User talk:Steindy#top|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:Ganz persönliche Meinung von mir: Eine Sperre durch A.Savin ist wie ein Ritterschlag. Du hast alles richtig gemacht. --[[User:Ralf Roletschek|Ralf Roletschek]] 23:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
:Ganz persönliche Meinung von mir: Eine Sperre durch A.Savin ist wie ein Ritterschlag. Du hast alles richtig gemacht. --[[User:Ralf Roletschek|Ralf Roletschek]] 23:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

::Leider gibt es ein persönliches Missverständnis.
::Sie sind sehr besorgt über die hohe Anzahl von Ausfällen in kurzer Zeit. Ich habe Ihre Arbeit mehrmals überprüft, bevor ich sie bewertet habe. Und erst dann, als ich die Entscheidung traf, gab ich Noten. Es stellte sich daher eine kurze Zeit heraus.
::Ich habe viele Male persönliche Angriffe von Ihnen gelesen. Tatsächlich wurden jedes Mal, wenn Sie auf die Mängel anderer Werke hinwiesen, schlechte Kritiken über mich hinzugefügt.
::Besprechen Sie die Qualität der Arbeit, nicht die der Menschen, und niemand wird sich bei Ihnen beschweren.
::Ich entschuldige mich, wenn mein Deutsch nicht perfekt ist. MfG --[[User:George Chernilevsky|<font color="darkgreen">George Chernilevsky</font>]] <b><sup><small><span style="color:#90F">[[User talk:George Chernilevsky|talk]]</span></small></sup></b> 23:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Revision as of 23:57, 14 November 2019

Your QI candidates

Hello Steindy.
If you have source files of your QI candidates, then you can process them again without errors. And then upload over and re-nominate.
Very friendly, George -- George Chernilevsky talk 14:30, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello George Chernilevsky, thank you for your reference. Unfortunately, I have no interest in re-processing possibly corrupt files, because I can live without negative awards in my photos. I'm not really the type to shoot for awards, but try to make pictures that can be used in Wikipedia or other projects (newspapers, forums). In addition, I still have several thousand (!) Photos, also from past years, which I have not worked because of time constraints and not uploaded. What only surprises me is the energy some users use to disqualify the work of other users. In this sense, many thanks for your great and motivating reviews. Go on like that, this would help!!! I only can shake my head... --Steindy (talk) 16:26, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I have thus withdrawn my nominations, as I take note that I'm a crappy photographer and produce only pixel garbage. You and Podzemik can another user to provoke. We have really perfect admins here. --Steindy (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I thought your account had been hacked and was about to block it indefinitely. However, I find withdrawing support for images you've already indicated support for a tad childish, and I advise you reflect on whether that was really a good thing to do. Rodhullandemu (talk) 18:33, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Rodhullandemu! I had to take note that I have no idea about photography and only produce pixel waste. For me it is synonymous with no judgment on the work of other users. I drew the consequences from that. And when I am almost 70 years old, my time when I was childish was long gone. But ask your admin colleagues George Chernilevsky (some examples [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] etc.) and Podzemik (some examples [6], [7] etc. / since this discussion where he did not get right I have never again received a positive rating, but only more negative or no more) if they perhaps are childish, if they want to drive people out of here. In any case, they were successful. Anyway, I'm here just for fun and not to have stress and annoyance, and have drawn the consequences from it. --Steindy (talk) 19:37, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I saw you withdrew support of a lot of my noms of images taken by User:Daderot. I'm a bit confused because I've been nominating many images by Daderot successfully until very recently and now User:George Chernilevsky is rejecting almost all of my entries. I'm not implying George is not assessing fairly, just surprised to see so many rejections when before I was getting many images promoted. -Another Believer (talk) 20:40, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at User talk:Daderot, you'll see many images have been promoted, and those were all nominated by me. If any of you have feedback of what's different about my recent images, I'd like to know so I can try to avoid unsuccessful nominations. I certainly don't want to waste editors' time. @Podzemnik: Curious for your thoughts as well since you're active and familiar with the process. Thanks, all! -Another Believer (talk) 20:44, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Another Believer! Unfortunately, I can not give you an accurate answer. Obviously it seems that George Chernilevsky and Podzemnik are picking up certain other users and trying to disgust them. In any case, they have succeeded with me. Because both are sysops, it will be not use to report them because of their disruptive behavior on COM:AN/U. Regards --Steindy (talk) 21:14, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure I'm following what's happening, but I've asked for feedback at Commons_talk:Quality_images_candidates#Should_I_keep_nominating?. Mostly I'm just wanting to understand why my support votes are generally turning into rejections for images of (IMO) similar quality. -Another Believer (talk) 21:27, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I never rate authors in QI, just images. And at the age of 52, he is too old to play conspiracy theories. In fact, I am positive and friendly to each user. QI is a great free photo school where everyone can improve their skills if they can accept constructive criticism. Regards, -- George Chernilevsky talk 22:09, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course mister Chernilevsky. The earth is also a disc and Christmas comes together with Easter! You are the biggest innocent lamb of commons and have meant it only well.
I have never met a user with such negative energy as you. As a highly intelligent person, do you imagine that you gave 12 (!) Negatives to a single user within less than 20 minutes?
You have the last two positive reviews still forgotten. So that you do not have to do the effort I have deleted this myself [8], [9]. There could have been something else here too? Anyway, you can be proud of it, because nobody can do it for sure. And as a special insolence you then strike with sweet words on my discussion page. I can do without such a "great free photo school". As you can see in my photos, my abilities are very limited, which is why I came to QI with the consequences. I am always accessible to constructive criticism and I also like to help other users. With such bashing actions I have however the nose completely full.
Therefore I do not attach importance to further discussions with you. You have reached your destination and you have to act it with your own conscience, not with me. E.O.D. --Steindy (talk) 23:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer Well, I could dig up more diffs like [10] but let's not waste our time and be constructive. Basically, what we see here is a typical example of POINT behaviour and it's bringing intentional harm into the community. No worries Another Believer, tomorrow I'll go through all images where Steindy expresssed his support and then withdrew and I'll assess them again. To Steindy I'd suggest - in all honesty and genuity - to take a break from the project. Maybe go for a walk or something. To get things into perspective again. I know it can be a slap for ego to have images declined, but we need to stay objective and realistic about our own photos. It's in our common interest not to lower the bar for QI or FP just because some users can be noiser (or threaten more) than others. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:57, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

QI

Hallo! Ich verstehe, dass es manchmal schwer ist, Dinge nicht persönlich zu nehmen. Aber das Internet ist ein schrecklicher Ort und jemand hier hat immer Unrecht. Alles wird viel schlimmer, wenn wir am Ende lange Debatten und impulsive Aktionen haben. Versuche nicht, anderen etwas zu beweisen, ein weiser Mann wird Urteile fällen, die auf deiner Arbeit und nicht auf Worten basieren.

QI is a great tool. It helps not to get lost in all the noise. It helps to promote all the best. And your pics are usually the best. So i hope you will continue your work. Viele Grüße --Andrei (talk) 22:15, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo Andrei! Thank you for your approval. As it has been proven, my photos are crappy and have no business on QI. As long as there are such users with such negative energy here, I have nothing to look for here. No one can save me 12 negative reviews in less than 20 minutes. This is certainly a new record from the admin, mister Chernilevsky. I am sure that this will last forever, because a normal user would have been banned long ago. After I have to edit and upload several thousand photos from the last five years, I will continue to burden with my pixel garbage. Nice greetings --Steindy (talk) 00:19, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm heading for the age of 70 at a rate that I would prefer to be slower, but it's clear to me that you are over-reacting to some criticisms of your images by (as we say in English) "throwing your toys out of the pram". That is unacceptable on Commons as an analogy of en:WP:POINT. If you would like some time out to reflect how unfair it is to unfairly manage other users' expectations first by supporting their images, then by withdrawing that support not based on the merits of the images themselves, but by a perceived personal slight, then I for one am prepared to give you that time. I urge you to reconsider, and revert yourself after sleeping on it, which I am going to do now. I will review this tomorrow morning, but if I don't see a change of attitude, I'm afraid go you must. Rodhullandemu (talk) 01:21, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that's the highlight! Since an admin colleague of you shows a highly disruptive behavior and now you want to lock me? Well then have fun with it! --Steindy (talk) 01:30, 6 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important message for file movers

A community discussion has been closed where the consensus was to grant all file movers the suppressredirect user right. This will allow file movers to not leave behind a redirect when moving files and instead automatically have the original file name deleted. Policy never requires you to suppress the redirect, suppression of redirects is entirely optional.

Possible acceptable uses of this ability:

  • To move recently uploaded files with an obvious error in the file name where that error would not be a reasonable redirect. For example: moving "Sheep in a tree.jpg" to "Squirrel in a tree.jpg" when the image does in fact depict a squirrel.
  • To perform file name swaps.
  • When the original file name contains vandalism. (File renaming criterion #5)

Please note, this ability should be used only in certain circumstances and only if you are absolutely sure that it is not going to break the display of the file on any project. Redirects should never be suppressed if the file is in use on any project. When in doubt, leave a redirect. If you forget to suppress the redirect in case of file name vandalism or you are not fully certain if the original file name is actually vandalism, leave a redirect and tag the redirect for speedy deletion per G2.

The malicious or reckless breaking of file links via the suppressredirect user right is considered an abuse of the file mover right and is grounds for immediate revocation of that right. This message serves as both a notice that you have this right and as an official warning. Questions regarding this right should be directed to administrators. --Majora (talk) 21:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


COM:AN/U

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/User problems. This is in relation to an issue with which you may have been involved. 
De728631 (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Vielen Dank für Ihre Nachricht De728631. Vielen Dank auch für Ihr Anheizen auf COM:ANU. Diese nützt aber nichts, wenn man nicht anwesend ist. Ich bin eben nicht 24 Stunden am Tag und 7 Tage in der Woche online, weil ich auch noch etwas anderes zu tun habe. Eine Frechheit sondergleichen ist es jedenfalls, dass ich als Beschuldigter nicht einmal eine Stellungnahme dazu abgeben durfte, sondern im kurzen Weg gesperrt wurde. Es muss wohl so große Gefahr in Verzug gewesen sein, dass mir das Recht zum Vorfall etwas zu sagen entzogen wurde. Die Unsitten der deutschen Wikipedia haben sich offensichtlich auch hier durchgesetzt. Aber kar die Admins müssen auch hier zusammenhalten und wenn sich ein Admin über das Verhalten eines Benutzers beklagt, wird der Benutzer kurzerhand und ohne Diskussion gesperrt; Auf die Widerrede kann gerne verzichtet werden, da diese zwecklos ist. Und selbstverständlich braucht auch auf die Ursache des Konflikts, die klar beim meldenden George Chernilevsky gelegen hat, nicht eingegangen zu werden. Es ist mir absolut unverständlich, dass ein durchaus gebildeter Mensch derart negative Energien in einem kollaborativen Projekt entwickeln kann, im Gegenzug aber lediglich über ein Glaskinn verfügt und beleidigt ist.
Zur Sperrbegründung von A.Savin (aka Geisterbanker/S1/Savin 2005): Diese ist mehr als lächerlich, denn wo steht geschrieben, dass ich eine einmal erklärte Zustimmung nicht zurückziehen darf, wo es dafür sogar eine eigene Vorlage – {{unsupport}} – gibt. Aber wenn man A.Savin aus der deutschsprachigen Wikipedia kennt, verwundert auch das nicht mehr. Zur Person des Herrn A.Savin, der mir gegenüber voreingenommen ist, verweise ich zudem auf User talk:Steindy/Archiv 1#Offener Brief an Herrn Savin und User talk:Steindy/Archiv 1#Blocked one week (Anmerkung dazu: Bei User:Livioandronico2013 handelte es sich um einen Sockenpuppenspieler). Übriegns kann ich die dort genannten gegenständlichen eMails mit den Drohungen von A. Savin und dessen Auforderung "...Oder - noch besser - schleich dich einfach..." bei Bedarf gerne als Beleg vorlegen.
Nachdem mir also eine Stellungnahme verwehrt wurde, werde ich eben diese auf meiner Diskussionsseite veröffentlichen, damit sich jeder ein Bild von den Vorgängen hier machen kann. --Steindy (talk) 14:36, 14 November 2019 (UTC) 2. Absatz ergänzt --Steindy (talk) 14:46, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked for a duration of 7 days
You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 7 days for the following reason: Intimidation/harassment: playing games on COM:QIC including disruptive edits; see COM:ANU.

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 ∙ +/−

Zugehörige Meldung auf COM:ANU (Permalink [11])

Unacceptable behavior of User:Steindy.

I am an administrator who is involved in a conflict, so I ask that another administrator consider the situation.
The essence of the conflict: Steindy mistakenly considers himself offended when considering his QI nominations.
Unacceptable remarks from Steindy continue from November 5 to today (November 13).
Have a look to

Steindy also had conflicts on German Wikipedia, see here de:Benutzer Diskussion:Steindy
On Commons unacceptable messages were addressed to me, User:Podzemnik and User:Smial.
This negative behavior lasts 9 days, and i do not think that we should ignore this further. All my attempts to peacefully discuss the situation were unsuccessful. --George Chernilevsky talk 20:17, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment This appeared to me to be "throwing the toys out of the pram" and I did ask Steindy to consider whether withdrawing support already given, on spurious reasons, was fair to other contributors, but he seems to be persisting, erronously objecting to images on non-existent or irrelevant grounds. If he won't take advice, I suggest he takes a holiday, voluntarily or otherwise. Rodhullandemu (talk) 20:40, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately this is likely to strengthen his feeling that he is merely being hounded by evil admins. WP:IDHT comes to mind though. De728631 (talk) 21:10, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I support what George Chernilevsky said (thanks for bringing it up!). I also tried to solve the conflict peacefully but the user keeps behaving in a way that is bringing harm into our community. He's obviously targeting me in his actions which I don't mind but I can imagine that it is annoying to other users. I can provide a few more diffs that show unacceptable behavior of the user further: [12] [13]. Particularly edits like [14] [15] [16] [17] [18][19] are hard to deal with and take a long time to fix. I suggested to the user to take a break from the project which he didn't take - perhaps a forced brake would be beneficial for both him and the project. He'll be welcome to come back if he decides to contribute in a constructive way. Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 21:13, 13 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked 7 days; obviously disruptive editing on QIC (see for example difflinks 6+7 above). --A.Savin 00:52, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment I don't believe that a block will really change the behaviour of the user and I would have liked to have seen another attempt being made to try administrative persuasion. But I also know that there are always far too few administrators on commons, and that it is therefore hopeless to deal with such cases in a time-consuming and detailed manner. --Smial (talk) 09:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Well, I tried in my usual tactless way(:-), but it's clear he was on a "frolic of his own". Admins are just ordinary users with a few extra buttons, so I don't think he would have been impressed by anyone else having a go at him (as he would see it). Rodhullandemu (talk) 09:30, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Meine Stellungnahme dazu

  • Teil 1:

Die "friedlichen" Diskussionen von George Chernilevsky schauen so aus, dass er innerhalb von weniger als 20 Minuten nicht weniger als zwölf (!) meiner Nominierungen mit "decline" bewertete, darunter auch solche, für

die bereits von anderen Benutzern positive Voten abgegeben wurden.
Zu allem Überdruss tauchte er dann verhöhnend auf meiner Diskussionsseite auf, wo er meinte, dass ich die Fotos gerne nochmals bearbeiten und dann wieder nominieren dürfe, gezeichnet mit "Very friendly". Wenn dies very friendly ist, dann weiß ich nicht, was George Chernilevsky macht, wenn er unfreundlich ist. Diese zwölf declines in weniger als 20 Minuten sind ein Akt von disruptivem Verhalten, wie ich ihn auf QI und auch sonst noch nie gesehen habe, und der wohl auch nicht so bald wieder geschehen wird. Ich brauche wohl nicht erwähnen, dass ich von George Chernilevsky selbstverständlich noch nie eine positive Bewertung erhalten habe. Deutlicher kann man einem Benutzer (nicht einmal einem Anfänger!) nicht mitteilen, dass seine Arbeit scheiße ist und dass er offensichtlich nur Pixel Müll produziert. Wäre George Chernilevsky tatsächlich an einer positiven Atmosphäre interessiert gewesen, hätte er mich auf meiner Diskussionsseite betreffend dieser Fotos vor den declines anschreiben und darüber diskutieren können.
Gestern hat George Chernilevsky versucht, mich neuerlich zu diskreditieren, indem er bei zwei Photos, bei denen ich auf einen "dust spot" hiengewiesen hatte, schrieb "I do not see the indicated problem" und "Good quality and even awarded as FP. Many reviewers viewed this image. I do not see the indicated problem" (beides bei Photos von Podzemik). Dies soll offenbar zeigen, welcher Idiot ich bin, obwohl ich seit mittlerweile 44 Jahren semi-professionell fotografiere. Wenn ich ihm dann antworte "That you only see defects with me is already clear to me. You have to take a closer look at the photos and do not judge by the name", dann fühlt sich George Chernilevsky beleidigt und läuft hier her. Provokant ebenfalls, dass er bei dieser Nominierung von Podzemik meinte, mich ebenfalls als Idiot hinstellen zu müssen, als er schrieb "Good quality and even awarded as FP. Many reviewers viewed this image. I do not see the indicated problem." Merkwürdigerweise war trotz FP-voting dennoch ein dust spot am Foto [20].
Ich habe noch nie(!) vorsätzlich eine negative Bewertung abgegeben weil ich einen Benutzer nicht mag, sondern immer nach dem entschieden, was ich gesehen habe.
Ja und selbstverständlich gingen die Aktionen von George Chernilevsky auch heute weiter, als er sich ein Photo, das gar nicht ich sondern Andrew J.Kurbiko nominiert hatte, von mir ausgesucht hat, um dieses durch den Dreck zu ziehen. Ist es sein innerer Zwang oder gibt es andere Ursachen dafür.
Wer betreibt also ein Unacceptable behavior? Wer betreibt trotz gegenständlichen Konflikts weiterhin Provokationen? Wer betreibt also weiterhin harassments? Ich oder George Chernilevsky?
Der Gipfel der Frechheit bleibt aber der persönliche Angriff von von George Chernilevsky wenn er hier crosswiki auf meine Probleme in der deutschen Wikipedia verweist, ohne die dortigen Vorgänge zu kennen. Ich bereite dort gerade ein Administratoren-Problem wegen administrativem Mobbing (sechs Einträge in mein Sperrlog binnen elf Stunden) und Missbrauch der Administratoren-Rechte vor und werde diese auch dem Schiedsgericht vortragen. Obwohl es hier nichts verloren hat, mein Hinweis: Mehr dazu hier und hier.
→→→ Wird fortgesetzt. --Steindy (talk) 22:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ganz persönliche Meinung von mir: Eine Sperre durch A.Savin ist wie ein Ritterschlag. Du hast alles richtig gemacht. --Ralf Roletschek 23:16, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Leider gibt es ein persönliches Missverständnis.
Sie sind sehr besorgt über die hohe Anzahl von Ausfällen in kurzer Zeit. Ich habe Ihre Arbeit mehrmals überprüft, bevor ich sie bewertet habe. Und erst dann, als ich die Entscheidung traf, gab ich Noten. Es stellte sich daher eine kurze Zeit heraus.
Ich habe viele Male persönliche Angriffe von Ihnen gelesen. Tatsächlich wurden jedes Mal, wenn Sie auf die Mängel anderer Werke hinwiesen, schlechte Kritiken über mich hinzugefügt.
Besprechen Sie die Qualität der Arbeit, nicht die der Menschen, und niemand wird sich bei Ihnen beschweren.
Ich entschuldige mich, wenn mein Deutsch nicht perfekt ist. MfG --George Chernilevsky talk 23:57, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Steindy&oldid=375452358"