Commons:Administrators/Requests/PierreSelim

 Support = 16;  Oppose = 1;  Neutral = 1 - 89% Result. Successful. 99of9 (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

PierreSelim

Vote

PierreSelim (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 19:36, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I've finally decided to request adminship on Commons after being encouraged to do so by several users. I'm active on Commons since May 2011, I'm autopatrolled and filemover right now. As I'm giving a certain amount of work to the current admins in the DR, I think it's fair to help them with the DRs (obviously not the ones I started).

I would mainly use the tools to delete obvious copyvio instead of only tagging them, and help with the DR backlog. To do so I think I have a good understanding of free licences and the licensing policy (especially the lack of COM:FOP in France), however it doesn't mean I know everything about licenses. In doubt I'd rather ask to someone who knows better. --PierreSelim (talk) 19:36, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Votes

•  Support Sounds good. Enough experience etc. Trijnstel (talk) 20:40, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support, No worries, -- Cirt (talk) 22:59, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support --Katarighe (Talk) 23:12, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Sure. PierreSelim is an experienced, trusted and dedicated Commonist, who definitely could use the extra buttons. (In fact I had been thinking of nominating him for adminiship for a long time.) Jean-Fred (talk) 23:47, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Yann (talk) 01:56, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Dedicated and trustful :) Léna (talk) 07:33, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Trusted user. No worries. -- RE rillke questions? 12:05, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Oppose  Neutral Sloppy: People who nominate files like this and this one shouldn't be Commons admins. Multichill (talk) 18:21, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

  True, thoses two files shouldn't have been listed. Do you take into account the fact I sorted the files in the DR after your remark and provided a gallery so people can overlook fastly the DR? (last question: do you still think this DR is sloppy ? if yes please indicate what I can do to improve it.) --PierreSelim (talk) 19:25, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

  Willing to learn and improve, I can't oppose that. Changed to neutral. Multichill (talk) 13:17, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

•  Oppose agree with preceding user --  Docu  at 18:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support. I don't think admins need to be perfect and being able to acknowledge mistakes constructively is a good sign. Looks like a good candidate. WJBscribe (talk) 00:44, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
• Support - Everyone makes mistakes. Overall, this user has many good quality contributions, and that outweighs a couple of bad ones in my mind. Ajraddatz (talk) 01:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support. We can't have enough work willing Admins. Marcus Cyron (talk) 16:43, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support Knows how to add a RfA with a useful summary, nice, helpful and willing to improve if necessary. Could not find reasons why not. Thank you for your help! --Saibo (Δ) 18:40, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support. Sound and reliable. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:48, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support I don't see anything wrong that would make me oppose. Techman224^Talk 21:11, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support--Morning Sunshine (talk) 05:44, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support thanks for helping out --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:40, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
•  Support. I'm satisfied. Seems like he'll be a good addition to the team. —Quintucket (talk) 12:55, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments

• You have a babel on your user page with the following text: "This user learnt to know the dark side of the FoP". What does it mean? Thanks. - A.Savin 20:23, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• It's a joke user box made by JeanFred who is active in Category:France FOP cases. It means we know COM:FOP and we are interested in sorting the files that can stays on commons or not (even if for some people it's not cool to start a deletion request). I hope I was clear. PierreSelim (talk) 20:33, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• OK. Then, imagine the photographs concerned by this DR are taken in France. How would you decide in this issue? - A.Savin 21:11, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

If it was in France:

• File:Varshavskaya (Moscow Metro).jpg the subject is an artwork, we'd have to check whether it's public domain or not (date of death of the artist is needed).
• File:Varshavskaya station.JPG and File:Varshavskaya3.jpg not sure of what is supposed to be copyrighted here, the column doesn't seems to meet the threshold of originality for me.
• File:Varshavskaya1.jpg less obvious one for me, arguably COM:DM however it could have been croped. In the end I'd keep it (even if i'm not totally convinced) except if someone has a good argument to delete it.
• File:Varshavskaya4.jpg the artwork is hardly shown it's a COM:DM cases.

Of course this answer is written without taking into account argument provided by others during the DR: someone can raise a strong argument for keep or delete that should be taken into account. PierreSelim (talk) 22:34, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the detailed analysis, and good luck. - A.Savin 22:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

• What would your comments/vote be if the following two files were put up for DR with the reason "Derivative work" --99of9 (talk) 04:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• File:One_Euro_-_white_bg.jpg
• File:Occupy_Toulouse_2011-11-11_03.JPG

• Ok this one is tricky, so I read again COM:Currency, I thought my upload was good based on France case: case law states that copyright exists, but is paralysed by the ‘allocation to the general interest et character of public service’ of currency, and I was comforted by the fact there was quite many pictures in the categories. However if we read the section dedicated to Euro carefuly, it says the common side (the one we are interested in) is copyrighted and can be reproduced under limitatives restrictions (which are not free). See this Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2 DR.
• Probably {{Vd}} sadly, the text is copyrighted and I won't ever find the author for a COM:OTRS ticket.

In the end, I'd probably will do like for this one for both of the picture. PierreSelim (talk) 06:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

For me "provided they are not detrimental to the image of the euro" is clearly a non-copyright restriction or even no additional restriction. It is a symbol for Europe, a bit like a national anthem, and I am sure it is even prohibited in the United States of America to denigrate such a symbol. Even cc-by-sa requires that if you re-use, you don't do it in a manner that suggests that the author endorse you or your use of the work (limitation of use) and German copyright law permits authors to prohibit disfigurement(§14, Moral rights of authors that aren't covered if you grant the option to use under cc-licenses) of their works and I am sure this is also included in copyright laws or related laws in other countries. -- RE rillke questions? 12:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• Ok, so if you're deleting the sign close-up (correct IMO), how about this one: File:Occupy Toulouse 2011-11-11 02.JPG? Any way to save it? --99of9 (talk) 12:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I think It is possible to save it under COM:DM. The text is accessory (it's the term used in court cases in France) on this picture, the subject is the protest not the text on that sign whereas the sign was the subject of the previous picture we talked about. PierreSelim (talk) 15:38, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• Please enable Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary in Special:Preferences. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

 Done (and testing if it works) --PierreSelim (talk) 16:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

• When dealing with FOP deletion issues, would you delete them on sight, or nominate them at deletion requests? And if the latter, would you close the DRs you opened, were consensus not clear? —Quintucket (talk) 17:55, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

• FOP issues can't be decided on sight (IMO), it has to be done by a deletion request because several questions need answers such as the threshold of originality or whether it is a De minimis or not. As a policy I would not close a DR I have opened (same kind of policy on wikipedia I don't close DR when I have given my opinion), I'd rather work on others DR (the backlog is big enought for that I think). --PierreSelim (talk) 12:24, 7 February 2012 (UTC)