User talk:Historyday01
 First steps tutorialOur 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 helpMore 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
 Made a mistake?
|
-- 23:20, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
This message was added automatically by Nikbot, if you need some help about it please read the text above again and follow the links in it, if you still need help ask at the 
→ Commons:Help desk in any language you like to use. --Nikbot 23:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Beancosplay2019.jpg
[edit]
Copyright status: File:Beancosplay2019.jpg
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Beancosplay2019.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 20:05, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
 | File:DxI-GbiVAAAGRg.jpg is considered to fulfill the criteria for speedy deletion and has been marked on its page. The following reason has been specified:
If you believe the content does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, you may replace the speedy deletion tag with a regular deletion request (if the content has not been deleted) or request undeletion (if the content has already been deleted). |
Ytoyoda (talk) 02:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Seriously? Come on now. The author literally said the file is free to use and under a creative commons license. This is why uploading files like that is so infuriating. --Historyday01 (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
- But the license doesn't allow modifications or commercial use, and that making it insufficiently free to use on Commons. I understand your frustrations, but the point of Commons is to host files without restrictions on use or derivative works. Ytoyoda (talk) 04:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Copyright status: File:Beancosplay2019.jpg
[edit]Copyright status: File:Beancosplay2019.jpg
|
|
| This media may be deleted. |
Thanks for uploading File:Beancosplay2019.jpg. I notice that the file page either doesn't contain enough information about the license or it contains contradictory information about the license, so the copyright status is unclear.
If you created this file yourself, then you must provide a valid copyright tag. For example, you can tag it with {{self|GFDL|cc-by-sa-all}} to release it under the multi-license GFDL plus Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike All-version license or you can tag it with {{PD-self}} to release it into the public domain. (See Commons:Copyright tags for the full list of license tags that you can use.) If you did not create the file yourself or if it is a derivative of another work that is possibly subject to copyright protection, then you must specify where you found it (e.g. usually a link to the web page where you got it), you must provide proof that it has a license that is acceptable for Commons (e.g. usually a link to the terms of use for content from that page), and you must add an appropriate license tag. If you did not create the file yourself and the specific source and license information is not available on the web, you must obtain permission through the VRT system and follow the procedure described there. Note that any unsourced or improperly licensed files will be deleted one week after they have been marked as lacking proper information, as described in criteria for deletion. If you have uploaded other files, please confirm that you have provided the proper information for those files, too. If you have any questions about licenses please ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright or see our help pages. Thank you. |
This action was performed automatically by AntiCompositeBot (talk) (FAQ) 05:05, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
An unfree Flickr license was found on File:Beancosplay2019.jpg
[edit]
), No derivative works (
), or All Rights Reserved (
), which isn't compatible with Wikimedia Commons, per the licensing policy. The file has been deleted. Commons:Flickr files/Appeal for license change has information about sending the Flickr user an appeal asking for the license to be changed. Only Flickr images tagged as 
(CC BY), 
(CC BY-SA), 
(CC0) and 
(PDM) are allowed on Wikimedia Commons. If the Flickr user has changed the license of the Flickr image, feel free to ask an administrator to restore the file, or start an undeletion request.Elisfkc (talk) 02:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Ok, I mean, it was deleted from Wikipedia too, so I'm not going to contest this. --Historyday01 (talk) 05:16, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Jellyfish
[edit]Hello! I'm writing here because I doesn't find a other way to contact you! I consider this addition to be complete original research, since none of this is a direct confirmation in the plot or on the part of the authors, but simply interpretations of the characters bonds or the text that can be understood ambiguously. Also, the screenwriter himself wrote on his Twitter that whether a show is yuri or not depends on the viewer. The fact that the creators and the story itself consider the characters to be very important to each other is not enough for such bold conclusions about their sexuality without any direct confirmation. Especially based on vague out-of-context quotes or apparently harmless things like someone calling them “like a married couple.” As for the famous cheek kiss, it was not explicitly romantic, essentially just being used as a throwaway way to add fanservice and draw people into the show, which was never further developed in the series. Also, the phrase about "complex emotions" was also taken out of context" because Mei experienced complex emotions after seeing how different the real Kano was from the idol image she created. VA even discusses this separately in the podcast dedicated to her debut episode. Sorry again, That I’m writing here, I just don’t have any other way to contact you at the moment. Solaire the knight (talk) 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Solaire, thanks for your message. I think there is enough to justify possibly adding it to the page. I do not believe my possible addition to be original research. Again, I can't add anything at present to the page, so its on hold until this inane block ends. Then I'll reassess those entries at this point and decide whether I believe they should be included or not. Historyday01 (talk) 17:56, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I’m also blocked, so, as expected, I simply don’t have the right to ask for anything or insist on anything. Therefore, if my request will be successful, I suggest waiting for your block to end and discussing the issue again on the discussion page. I think this will be the most honest for both of us. Solaire the knight (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Right. I hope your block gets resolved! I will say despite the fact I wrote those entries, I am presently leaning against inclusion at the present time (I guess I had been hoping that it would be more confirmed in the series finale than it was... so it falls into the "yuri subtext" category) and have been loosely following the discourse around it. I've been counting down the days until my block ends (it will be sometime in July). I may add some of the related episode reviews (cited within those entries) to the "reception" section to the "Jellyfish Can't Swim in the Night" page once my access is restored. I think people can post on my talk page and I can respond to it, but that's it... Historyday01 (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, judging by the noticeable drop in ratings after the finale, many were disappointed that this did not receive any development. Well, as I said above, the authors themselves put this in the “yuri or not, depends on your discretion.” And while I find it questionable to put this on the list, I don't see a problem with the description that some reviewers read the show as queer in the acceptance section of an article about the show itself. The main thing is a neutral description. The only thing is, I wouldn't rely on episode reviews since that's just an interpretation of the show, but it's easier for us to leave that until the end of your and I hope mine block, because someone really might decide that we are bypassing the block in this way. Solaire the knight (talk) 20:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Right. I hope your block gets resolved! I will say despite the fact I wrote those entries, I am presently leaning against inclusion at the present time (I guess I had been hoping that it would be more confirmed in the series finale than it was... so it falls into the "yuri subtext" category) and have been loosely following the discourse around it. I've been counting down the days until my block ends (it will be sometime in July). I may add some of the related episode reviews (cited within those entries) to the "reception" section to the "Jellyfish Can't Swim in the Night" page once my access is restored. I think people can post on my talk page and I can respond to it, but that's it... Historyday01 (talk) 19:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I’m also blocked, so, as expected, I simply don’t have the right to ask for anything or insist on anything. Therefore, if my request will be successful, I suggest waiting for your block to end and discussing the issue again on the discussion page. I think this will be the most honest for both of us. Solaire the knight (talk) 19:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Request
[edit]Hello again, I'm still too busy in real life, so I wanted to ask if you could wait for me on this if I'm not unblocked until your block is lifted? At the very least, I suggest a compromise without speculation, with a brief description of the characters' intimacy and a quote from the author that whether their relationship is romantic or not is up to the reader. If the authors themselves choose a compromise path, then why should we argue? Solaire the knight (talk) 11:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, I'm fine waiting with you on this. My block is set to expire pretty soon. Historyday01 (talk) 12:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! I'm fully aware of my situation, so that's all I can ask for. I'm glad to hear that your block is ending soon too. I also wanted to point out that while I was planning on rewatching the final in the future, I'm inclined to support your addition of Kiui as non-binary/genderfluid since it seems like her vituber character is seen as part of her identity. But anyway, I wish you a good weekend, I hope we can work on this together if I get unblocked! Solaire the knight (talk) 13:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Eh, I submitted a request, but it is still active. But I appreciate you agreeing to wait for me anyway. By the way, I noticed that you recently checked the consistency of the sources in these lists. This user recently started adding anime characters based on a questionable pop culture fan resource where it looks like anyone can add content for moderators. The only thing is that most of the characters user added at the moment are openly stated as gay and do not require sources at all. The user was already warned for this a couple of years ago, but for some reason he started doing it again. Solaire the knight (talk) 04:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm. I'll keep a watch out for that. Thanks for the heads up. Its unfortunate because LezWatch has a great database but... they NEVER provide sources for any of their entries. It's almost as infuriating as that Insider database of LGBTQ+ characters, which NEVER provides sources! At least they published some related articles which ARE reliable sources, but since the database never cites any sources, it is basically worthless as a source. Historyday01 (talk) 12:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your reaction! Fortunately, so far the user has only added characters whose sexuality is either explicit or directly stated in the story itself (in Koizumi's case, it's even mentioned in the show's synopsis). So it can work without secondary sources as stated in the show itself. So I hope this doesn't go further than just footnote questions. Solaire the knight (talk) 14:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm. I'll keep a watch out for that. Thanks for the heads up. Its unfortunate because LezWatch has a great database but... they NEVER provide sources for any of their entries. It's almost as infuriating as that Insider database of LGBTQ+ characters, which NEVER provides sources! At least they published some related articles which ARE reliable sources, but since the database never cites any sources, it is basically worthless as a source. Historyday01 (talk) 12:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)