Commons:Deletion requests/Josef Pröll

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

• Add {{subst:delete-subst|REASON (mandatory)}} on the page
• Notify the uploader with {{subst:idw|Josef Pröll}}--~~~~
• On the log, add :
  {{Commons:Deletion requests/Josef Pröll}}

Josef Pröll

An un-commented gallery consisting of two pictures which are already shown in same appropriate category looks all-too-much like spam. Although I'm one of the authors of the pictures, please delete ASAP. WeHaWoe 17:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC) --WeHaWoe 17:47, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Beloved seemingly francophone wikipedian,

1. it strongly infringes WP policies to remove a deletion request from an article, as you did here:
   http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Josef_Pr%C3%B6ll&diff=11524577&oldid=11495188
2. It is even worse to declare such changes, as you did, as "minor changes".
3. The subpage you created and seemingly want to "protect", has nothing but redundant information to the category and its picture descriptions.
4. I note that at 15:43 local time (13:43Z), the gallery "article" is still unused in any WP projects:
   http://tools.wikimedia.de/~daniel/WikiSense/CheckUsage.php?w=_100000&i=Josef_Pr%C3%B6ll
5. The comment you recently added to the gallery page would be more appropriate to the "Category" page, anyways.
6. eod from my part (j'en ai mard. Fais n'importe-quoi si personne ne t'empêche). WeHaWoe 13:27, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete per nom. While we're at it, perhaps delete User:Kelson as well, since this appears to be a vandalism-only account. -- Korax1214 19:02, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Upgrade to Speedy. I reckon my suggestion that User:Kelson be blocked from editing as well is a good one. Reasons:

• • He keeps removing the deletion tag, apparently having difficulty understanding the "Do not remove this tag until the deletion request is closed".
  • In his last removal, he gave the spurious reason that we "are not allowed to ask" for content to be deleted -- which is news to me, if so then why is there a deletion process in the first place?

To my mind, Kelson has no understanding of Wikimedia Commons, what it is, what it's for or how it works, and at this rate never will, so enough already. -- Korax1214 00:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

As long as I do not get any good justification : that means based on a rule elaborated by the community, I will not accept the suppression of this gallery. Currently, this gallery, is the best way to browse images of Josef Pröll. I would appreciate that people invest more time to upload/improve pictures than leading this outdated galery vs. category conflict. Thanks for your comprehension. Kelson 09:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

@Kelson: en:RTFM. WeHaWoe 21:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry... you are not at school, that's not an acceptable answer... give a link the corresponding policy. Kelson 09:18, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Added later, and for definite eod: I for myself am well aware that I'm not at school ;) -- I thought I was talking to a kid and did my best to assimilate and adapt my speech and thinking ;) -- therefore, in case you're an elderly person, as myself is (or even older), I'll put it this way: Please be as kind as to care about the rules of this place. They can be looked up 24/7. And now, dear K's, (both of them) let's stop this silly&time-consuming conversation. It is just waist of energy. WeHaWoe 11:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Kelson has attempted to sabotage the deletion process again, hence Upgrade done -- "this gallery is subject to an existing deletion debate, which the owner has repeatedly sabotaged by removing the delete tag, under the delusion that he has special privileges including immunity from the deletion process (see gallery's revision history). Enough is enough." And maybe it's about time all of Kelson's other "contributions" came under scrutiny as well, since from the above and other comments, he clearly doesn't understand Wikimeda Commons and never will. -- Korax1214 06:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I've just added a reply to Kelson's user page, in the (forlorn?) hope that he might actually make a good Wikimedian; I hope I've managed to stick to the points at hand, and not sink to personal attack (I was sorely tempted). -- Korax1214 07:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Oops, of course I meant his talk page. -- Korax1214 07:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I maybe do not clearly understand, but you are definitely not able to give the concrete rule on which your deletion request is based on... and you have to do it. Kelson 09:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Wishful thinking again. I clearly stated the very concrete reason on which my speedy was based, namely that you keep sabotaging the deletion process instead of trying to seek favourable closure (keep) the official way. -- Korax1214 10:37, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Your reason is not based on a policy~, at least you are not able to give it : that's all. Kelson 11:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

• For anyone passing. I did delete this as it was tagged as speedy. However on reflection I decided I was wrong & restored it. However I have also protected it as Kelson appears to think it is ok to remove deletion tags while the debate is in progress. I have warned them against such actions in the future --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

•  Comment. I don't understand the motive of this request. How exactly can this gallery be considered as spam? This gallery doesn't have any added value compared to the category, but as long as the gallery/template issue isn't closed, this is no reason to delete it. As it is, I would incline towards a speedy keep. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 11:47, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

---

Speedy keep. Galleries holding the same content as a category are extremely common on Commons. This is no ground to request deletion.

Comment on behaviour:

• WeHaWoe, your suggestion that this gallery is spam could be read as offensive ; your subsequent bossy attitude towards Kelson does nothing to alleviate the problem.
• Kelson, you are not allowed to remove deletion request tags, as is clearly specified on them. Your command of English is sufficient for you to understand this.
• Korax1214, statements like "perhaps delete User:Kelson as well, since this appears to be a vandalism-only account" are utterly unacceptable in any case. Kelson is a serous contributor on several Wikipedia projects, as can clearly be seen on his personal page.

Rama 12:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Apologies =

I recognize my error (deletion of the banner) and I apology for that. Kelson 12:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

On request: once more, same stuff:

The gallery is pretty useless=100%redundant to the content of that less-than-poorly equipped category (3 pics in Category, 2 in Gallery, no description in Cat until I did, and 2 of 3 pics are mine).

Infringing was that deletion requests were removed (obviously more than once according to talk -- I did not care about or look up that more than once) by Kelson, thereby declaring his removal as "minor"

This gallery seems to be of no interest to anybody but Kelson at this given time (no links perceptible), and, meanwhile, user:Rama ;) Therefore I supposed kind-of "Link- and Namespamming". I'm not especíally keen on that kind of "stuff", but did rather stumble over, having contributed to the category and just seen redundant stuff in it. I will probably not contribute to any Category-vs.-Gallery discussions any more. Best, WeHaWoe 13:29, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

@Rama, mainly, and all others: keep it or delete it -- both will do pretty much the same. That's what I tried to express by my edit 11:39, 4. Jun. 2008 (&eod, from my part, REALLY). WeHaWoe 13:38, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Again, I might have to clarify: before I added my 2 pics, there was ONE pic in the category and of-course-same pic (guess by whom?) in that "One-pic-Gallery". I'd have called such "kiddy-like", and that was the point where I brought in my del.request. -- no: it was a speedy first. WeHaWoe 13:49, 4 June 2008 (UTC)