User talk:Useddenim/Archive 1

File:BSicon uKRZ+l.svg

Discussion is at User talk:Pic-Sou.

icons broken

Hi. You indicated here that the icon will be moved, but it isn't moved yet which leaves the page broken. I have therefore reverted this for now, please let me know here when it is indeed moved. It's better to first move and then quickly fix the embeddings (even better would be to leave a redirect from the old name as long as the link-fixing is not finished, as that wouldn't create broken pages). Thank you --Thogo (Disk.) 08:11, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Although it doesn't sound like a bad idea, there is the problem that a page move can be done in as short a time as three hours, or as long as three days. Also, by making the link changes first and then the page move, there are fewer (if any) unnecessary redirects created. (And, apparently, one is created for each language's Wiki, not just in Commons.) Useddenim (talk) 23:31, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Hm, true. Moving without automatic redirect and manually adding a redirect only on Commons wouldn't work? --Thogo (Disk.) 19:47, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Don't know, as I've never tried because I was unaware that it's possible to suppress the automatic redirect. Useddenim (talk) 20:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Also, it turns out that some wikis won't allow editing of others' user pages. (Gee, I wonder why?) Useddenim (talk) 20:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

rename

Just to let you know I added {{Rename}} to   (muKBFa), which had slipped through the crack or something. Circeus (talk) 13:29, 20 August 2011 (UTC)  Done

Autopatrol given

Hello. I just wanted to let you know that I have granted autopatrol rights to your account; the reason for this is that I believe you are sufficiently trustworthy and experienced to have your contributions automatically marked as "reviewed". This has no effect on your editing, it is simply intended to make it easier for users that are monitoring Recent changes or Recent uploads to find unproductive edits amidst the productive ones like yours. In addition, the Flickr upload feature and an increased number of batch-uploads in UploadWizard, uploading of freely licensed MP3 files, overwriting files uploaded by others and an increased limit for page renames per minute are now available to you. Thank you. Ben.MQ (talk) 11:33, 24 August 2011 (UTC)

names stuff

moved to Talk:BSicon/Renaming#names stuff

Diagonal interruptions

moved to Talk:BSicon/New icons and icon requests#Diagonal interruptions

Latest awful name

moved to Talk:BSicon/Renaming#Latest awful name

Duplicate names

moved to Talk:BSicon/Obsolete and deletions

Missing and wrong designs

moved to Talk:BSicon/Renaming#Missing and wrong designs

CommonsDelinker

Please do not schedule BSicons at CommonsDelinker, he can't handle those! a×p_de^Hello! 22:18, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

What's the work-around? Manually accept move requests? Useddenim (talk) 22:41, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Well, "manually" ... guess how I made 676 edits on jawiki ;-) a×p_de^Hello! 22:55, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Exact means exact

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/w/index.php?title=File:BSicon_exvKBFe-BHF.svg&action=history and refer to Commons:Deletion policy#Duplicates  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:02, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

File:BSicon uABZa.svg

Hi, please don't nominate redirects for speedy deletion before you replace all global usages. Jcb (talk) 16:08, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

• User talk:Yann: your page; you fix it;
• User:Erik Baas/BSicons/Dump: an everything list (redlinks are OK);
• User talk:Useddenim: Fixed;
• Talk:BSicon/Obsolete and deletions: Fixed. Useddenim (talk) 03:37, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

• I'm not Yann
• There's still a lot of global usage, see here
• One more repeat = block. Jcb (talk) 07:11, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The only remaining use is on User: pages, or do you want me to commit the faux pas of messing with others' Sandboxes? Useddenim (talk) 13:28, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I deleted the redirect. Jcb (talk) 16:15, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Excuse me, «One more repeat = block»? Is this for real? Obvious trolls and vandals get proverbial wrist slaps while <allrise>Useddenim</allrise> is “warned” in this bully-like manner for doing a routine icon-mantainance operation which the self-styled “voice of the wikipedia” failed to understand in the first place? (All those User pages are either abandoned sandbox tests or “catch all” tables and lists.) --Tuvalkin (talk) 00:25, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

No, at 07:11, 15 September 2011 it was in use in a lot of articles. I do understand the topic and the (now invisible for non-admins) page history of the redirect gave sufficient reason to tell more clear that this had to stop (after three speedy nominations). Jcb (talk) 07:12, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I confused Jcb's reversion with Yann's (possibly because he didn't notify me). And the only excuse I have for confusing Global Usage and What Links Here is working too late at night. Useddenim (talk) 12:00, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

You right about "global usage" vs. "what links here" — it is misleading. --Tuvalkin (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Um, only two delete requests, but Hey! the complete file history's gone now! so there's no way to prove who's wrong... Useddenim (talk) 12:33, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

There is a way, see here - Jcb (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Screenshot saved as a JPG? Sorry, Jcb, your madskillz do not pwn someone who creates SVGs in a text editor. --Tuvalkin (talk) 13:48, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Icons renaming

OK, excuse-me, I didn't know.

Sincerely --Pic-Sou (talk) 17:14, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Icons details

removed to Talk:BSicon#Icons details

Commons vs. en.WP

Although we discuss icon stuff here, I'd appreciate if you could ask about stuff that relates specifically to en: on my talk page there ^_^;; Circeus (talk) 19:20, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

which looks best?

moved to Talk:BSicon/Icon_geometry_and_SVG_code_neatness#which_looks_best.3F

{{PD-ineligible}} vs. {{PD-geometry}}

moved to Talk:BSicon/Icon_geometry_and_SVG_code_neatness#.7B.7BPD-ineligible.7D.7D_vs._.7B.7BPD-geometry.7D.7D

Hello, Useddenim. You have new messages at Darwinius's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Category:Brown circles

Hi Useddenim. OK. Best regards, --JMCC1 (talk) 00:53, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

tLUECKEq

moved to Talk:BSicon/New icons and icon requests#tLUECKEq

File:BSicon pHST.svg & File:BSicon epHST.svg

moved to BSicon/New icons and icon requests

File:BSicon_utRP2o.svg

Concerning this. Please bring your issues to the discussion page. -- Tuválkin ✉ 02:06, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

You're right

About this. -- Tuválkin ✉ 00:11, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

File:BSicon kSTRq+r.svg

---

There seems to be a problem regarding the description and/or licensing of this particular file. It has been found that you've added in the image's description only a Template that's not a license and although it provides useful information about the image, it's not a valid license. Could you please resolve this problem, adding the license in the image linked above? You can edit the description page and change the text. Uploading a new version of the file does not change the description of the file. This page may give you more hints on which license to choose. Thank you.

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 02:37, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

I've moved the file. As to your note "information copied in anticipation of file move", this should only be done when the file will be uploaded, and never when the file will be moved. A move is the procedure of renaming the entire page, with all its history, logs, etc. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

TRAIN -> BAHN

Hi. Why was it necessary to go into all language versions and change TRAIN on BAHN? People are used to it. This abbreviation is intuitive. --Туча (talk) 16:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

About two years ago a German editor decided to co-opt the name TRAIN as a redirect for BAHN. When the U.S. DoT rail transport icons were uploaded (the logical use for the name TRAIN) an administrator locked the page, so there is now the illogical situation of:

(BAHN)	(exBAHN)	international icon
(TRAIN)	(exTRAIN)	original DoT icon
(TRAIN2)	(exTRAIN2)	newer DoT icon
(TRAIN3)	(TRAIN!)	…!?

Once all of the non-American uses are changed, hopefully the naming will be rationalized. Useddenim (talk) 16:24, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

If it is a american locomotives, it can not simply be called TRAIN, because he is not an ordinary train, it is american! That is, it must be named ATRAIN (American train) or UTRAIN (Usa train). --Туча (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I have found diagrams that use both TRAIN and BAHN! Useddenim (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Logical abbreviation use is to use one that is not currently in use. I think it is more correct to take another name. For example U.S. DoT rail icons may be named File:BSicon_USDT.svg. In addition picture TRAIN3 is just not very good unlike TRAIN2 and when small size it look like bad. may be necessary it adjusted size to conform to similar icons, or do something else. --Туча (talk) 17:22, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

TRAIN3/exTRAIN is same height as TRAIN2/exTRAIN2. And whether or not you like the design, the original design has been widely used throughout North America for decades. (However, I will try to modify the image so that it will render better at small sizes.) Useddenim (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

BSicon_TRAIN.svg still used on hundreds of pages around the world, and there were thousands, and many will be created in the future, and it is unlikely to meaningfully with this fight. And when you uploaded the new version all they was modified. --Туча (talk) 18:04, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Do not you think that the last icon seems bigger any other and it is hard to understand? --Туча (talk) 19:00, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Michgrig proposes to reopen the discussion. --Туча (talk) 16:56, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Re: File:BSicon tENDEe-L.svg & File:BSicon tENDEe-R.svg

I have tried using BSicon_c.svg with your advice but it causes a slight shift to the right for all icons on its right hand side. I am thinking a way to solve this problem. If I can, I will add the icon BSicon_dtENDEe.svg and use it instead. Thanks for your advice.--Xeror (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Stations and stops interchange (BHF-X)

Could you please comment here? Thanks. YLSS (talk) 14:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Renaming "legende"

Hello! Can you please come and comment here? -- Tuválkin ✉ 09:52, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

File:BSicon WYEg+23.svg

Hi Useddenim,

you recently uploaded this file which is a duplicate of File:BSicon WYE23.svg. IMHO the old file looks better and bears the more reasonable name. May I delete the new one? a×p_de^Hello! 11:21, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess so, but you really didn't wait very long before acting, as I see it was replaced in a fraction over an hour... Useddenim (talk) 13:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

LUECKE ochre

Hi, I've renamed "LUECKE ochre" uploaded by you to  (LSTR ochre), since Tuvalkin & me have recently started migrating them (cf. this). Hope that's cool? YLSS (talk) 00:46, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem. (I should've picked up on that myself, but that's what happens when you're doing a quick cut'n'paste.) Useddenim (talk) 00:49, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Very good

This. -- Tuválkin ✉ 00:26, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

BSicon road transitions

Hello again. Check Category_talk:Icons_for_motorway_descriptions/generic#Straights, under "Transitions" and you can guess I don’t think the two icons you made,   (RP2a4) &   (RP4e2), are the way to go. Design differences don’t bother me much, but I cannot figure out the naming scheme you suggest from those two: What would   (RP2e4), f.i., look like, if not identical to   (RP4a2)? (Anyway, great work with the color gradient at  (WWECHSEL), which I totally stole for  (RD1yRP1) et c.!) -- Tuválkin ✉ 01:32, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

The naming was a carry-over from the doublings   (vRP2a4) et. al.), which came from   (vSTRa). I do see your point, though, but what does the "y" stand for in your namings? And as an aside, (IMHO) there's something about the dashing that makes  (RP2yRP4) look not nearly as smooth (sleek?) as   (RP2a4) even though the geometry of the road surface in nearly identical—only 2 pixels difference at 20px. How do you feel about deleting the latter and renaming the former? Useddenim (talk) 11:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

No problem with the exact geometry; I had these already done, offline, a while back, before I saw yours. The "Y" in the name suggests width change, just a placeholder for "becomes" oslt. The important matter is that a begin/end distinction is unnecessary, as it is already given by the order of the road type identifiers — not unlike  (RP2xRP4) v.s  (RP4xRP2). (Yes, this is different from the usual BSicon naming approach: I wanted to use these icons also as a laboratory for alternative naming conventions; besides, some of the needs of this set are specific and unlike the usual line icons’.) -- Tuválkin ✉ 18:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Upload of BSicon_uxKRZuy.svg

Hi, I wondered how you managed to upload  (uxKRZuy). When it is placed next to  (uKRZuy), the road looks different, so I downloaded BSicon_uxKRZuy, changed the colour of the water from light blue to blue, and attempted to upload it as a new version of BSicon_uKRZuy.svg. However, it says that it contains scripts which might be misinterpretted by a browser. Even if I tick "ignore warnings", it still refuses to upload it. Any thoughts? Bob1960evens (talk) 09:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

I don't know where the problem came from, as I use a simple text editor to create my svg files. I know that Inkscape and Adobe introduce a lot of bloated code when the create files, so that may be the source of the problem. In any event, they should be compatible now, as I took my version of BSicon_uxKRZuy.svg and changed the canal colour, then re-uploaded it over the original BSicon_uKRZuy.svg. Useddenim (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. That was exactly what I did. I downloaded your file, changed the colour with a text editor, and hit the problem when I tried to upload it. I'll try again with the green one. Bob1960evens (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Uploads

Hi Useddenim! Got a couple of questions:

• Shouldn't  (lhSTR) be rather  (lhLSTR)? Do I understand right that this is an overlay for elevated interruption? Amazing icon, if so ;)

Yup, you’re right.

• I guess you missed   (uxtENDEa) vs.  (utENDExa) &   (uxtENDEe) vs.  (utENDExe)... YLSS (talk) 17:31, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

Didn’t overlook them, just couldn’t decide which is the better name. (xa/xe seemed more correct to me, but the BSa# templates work better with ux/uex.) Useddenim (talk) 18:30, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I think such cases merit the status of "Exceptional permanent redirect" ... YLSS (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

•  (RP2w+1) +   (ÜWc2 grey) etc. - smart!  ;) YLSS (talk) 16:10, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Adding a box

Hi, re this edit: was the sole purpose to apply a background colour? If so, you don't need a table: there's a better way. There is already a ‎<div style="...">...‎</div>, so you merely need to add the appropriate property to that, i.e. instead of these:

<table bgcolor="#ccffcc"><tr><td bgcolor="#ccffcc"><div style="font-size:85%;">
...
</div></td></tr></table>

use these:

<div style="font-size:85%; background-color:#ccffcc;">
...
</div>

There's a slight visual change in that there is no green at the left and right of the enclosed tables, but that too is easily fixed, by adding padding:3px; to the same style="...". Here's the final effect (with the middle portion omitted for conciseness):

The prefix indicates the status of the infrastructure (partially in use, not used, disused, or not yet opened), and whether it is elevated or in tunnel:

Zero or more of these prefixes:

u	f	g	e	x	m
U-Bahn / underground	footpath	green	ehemals / erstwhile	ex	Mischbetrieb mit U-Bahn / mixed with metro
e.g. metro, light rail or canal	footpath or hiking trail	unwatered canal	closed, under construction, or planned station/stop/etc. Note that the BSe template requires e to come first.	closed, under construction, or planned track	indicates that the icon contains both heavy and light rail in the same pictogram (see below)

The standard order is

"u", "f", "g", "e", "x", "m" – all prefixes concerning the status of the track are first (for different BS-anleitung-templates),

"h"/"t" - prefixes concerning the elevation of the track are next (directly attached to BSicon-ID, and sometimes need to be used as a suffix as well).

"b"/"c"/"d"/"v" – prefixes concerning size of icon third,

root modifier last.

Hope I've been of assistance. --Redrose64 (talk; at English Wikipedia) 08:29, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Yes you have. That's what happens when you try to edit when you're tired. :) Useddenim (talk) 12:15, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Your decategorizing

Hi, with your change at BKV metro symbol.svg you removed not only part of the description, but you also uncategorized from Manually coded Valid SVG and SVG simplified logos. To recategorize the file, I'll undo your change.
With your degarbaging from February, you changed some of the transparent background into white. I continued your work, it is the easiest method to draw the graphic but it is not correct. So I'll redraw it with transparent background.
Do you have any objections or suggestions? sarang♥사랑 11:13, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your efforts and help, but I do have some observations:

• The file was marked both ✓ Valid  and  × Invalid ;
• The background should be white;
• Although smaller is better (from both a rendering and editing point of view), the code should not be compacted to the point that so much white-space has been removed that it is difficult to read.

Useddenim (talk) 23:30, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, may I explain:

• The file was marked "valid SVG", automatically by {{SimplSVG}}, with the link to browse the source code, and the proper categorizing.
• Additional its description contained the remark that a former version had been invalid, with the link to browse that version as well but without wrong categorizing.
• The first version was generated with all transparent background, but I do not know how it should be. At BKV hev symbol.svg I cared for the transparency, which led to larger and more complicated coding. If you think it is fine, I'll leave BKV metro symbol.svg as it is.
• You are right that too much removing may result in more difficulties to read the source code. In some examples of very simple graphics I try to show how lean SVG code can be. The other possibility, making the code very visible, is shown in Structured SVG. <The best way should be in between these two extremes... sarang♥사랑 05:33, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

File:AMTnewlogo simplified.svg

File:AMTnewlogo simplified.svg 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 may soon be deleted. If you have written permission from the copyright holder, please replace the copyvio tag with {{subst:OP}} and have them send us a free license release via COM:VRT. If you disagree that the file is a copyright violation for any other reason, please replace the copyvio tag with a regular deletion request. Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

 

Werieth (talk) 04:00, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

File:AMTnewlogo simplified.svg

File:AMTnewlogo simplified.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 04:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

hSTR#

mask → transparency Why? As far as I can see, this is the only file that you've reverted... And why such a strange masking at   (exhABZ+1)? I intended to re-upload  (uhSTR+4) (it has a faulty corner, apparently derived from Peterwhy's version of  (uSTR+4)), but should I restore the masking or not? P.S. I'm aware of this inconclusive discussion. YLSS (talk) 18:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

  (exhABZ+1) is easy to answer: When I created it (for it's single use) I wasn't aware of  (MASKm). Perhaps we need the full set of masks, for all the curves, and then all the hICONs can remain transparent. Useddenim (talk) 20:28, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

A possible solution... but quite a task, I suppose, especially since many projects (incl. ru.wp) use white background... For now, I hope you don't mind if I re-upload uhSTR+4 with masking? Solely for consistency with other elevated uw's. YLSS (talk) 20:48, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Go right ahead. I don't have any strong feelings one way or the other, and there's no overall consensus. Useddenim (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

gBRÜCKE

There was one:   (ugBRÜCKE). Nevertheless, your version has clean code. YLSS (talk) 14:15, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

I missed it ’cause I looked in Category:Icons for railway descriptions/set g/bridges instead of the root category. Useddenim (talk) 20:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Catalogues

Have I ever thanked you for making catalogues at en.wp auto-filling? Well, even if I did, I'm doing it once again. They indeed surpass categories in usefulness now. YLSS (talk) 22:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

No, I don’t think so, but thank you for the kudos. Useddenim (talk) 00:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

File:BSicon udSTR BlnU2.svg

File:BSicon udSTR BlnU2.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Stefan4 (talk) 18:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Hello, Useddenim. You have new messages at Stefan4's talk page. You may remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stefan4 (talk) 19:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Curve + shift

I hope you do not mind that I nominated File:BSicon utvSTRr-SPLe.svg & co. for deletion. After all, Vunz's versions are older, so we should preserve them, even if we ultimately rename them to something shifty. YLSS (talk) 08:00, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

It doesn’t matter if I did, as it was already deleted by the time I saw your message. :) Useddenim (talk) 18:28, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Ah, but the pangs of conscience!.. YLSS (talk) 19:09, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Welcome to answers

Hello! I se that some of my questions from last august is still unanswered, if you have time, I welcome you back to the discussions. Category_talk:Icons_for_motorway_descriptions/generic. --Civilspanaren (talk) 18:12, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

GO Logo

Hey. I reverted your change, I don't know what your aim was, but I reverted the version of File:GO Transit logo.svg you uploaded because it increased in size, and the transparency between the shapes was lost. I guess try again? Cheers. --Natural R_X 01:11, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Whaa? It’s 840 × 400 pixels, same as before, but only 595 Bytes, approximately 1/32nd the size of the 19 Kilobyte Inkscape version you uploaded. And it is supposed to be white—not transparent—between the green elements. (I guess you don’t remember the original Hawker cars and the GP40TCs.) So if you don’t mind reverting your undo… Useddenim (talk) 01:31, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Tunnels

Hello! If you have the time, I'd be happy if you could help with making some more tunnel-icons. The first icons I think about is RP4-turns, like   (tRP2lf)  (tRP2lg)  (tRP2rf)  (tRP2rg) and some corners for the uw-tunnel icons you made some weeks ago. --Civilspanaren (talk) 16:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

I’ll take care of it in the next 36 hours. Useddenim (talk) 17:00, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Useddenim (talk) 23:51, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Roads in tunnel

I dunno if you're aware of Category:BSicon/road/tunnel or not, but decided to notify you just in case... See also Talk:BSicon/Categorization#Category:BSicon/road/tunnel. YLSS (talk) 20:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

No I wasn’t. Should one be a redirect to the other? Useddenim (talk) 23:40, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

I suppose you should better consult Tuválkin (at that talk page). YLSS (talk) 06:22, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi! Well, I created Category:BSicon/road/tunnel to be the 1st of a general replacement of our whole category tree away from the misnamed Category:Icons for railway descriptions (and canals, et c.). I defend three main points:

1. Having Category:BSicon as the main root our cat tree.
2. Using shorter “breadcrumbs” — e.g. "stations" instead "stations and stops", "parallel" instead "parallel lines", et c.
3. Using understandable “breadcrumb” words — e.g. "90°" instead "uw", "shift½" instead "krw", et c.

That move should be done sooner or later. Sooner seems better… ;-) -- Tuválkin ✉ 20:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)

Jumping in from nowhere. Point 3, ain't the uw-turns "45°" not "90°"? --Civilspanaren (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Yes, 45 not 90, of course! -- Tuválkin ✉ 02:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

ArchiveBot

Hi, I noticed you have set up User:MiszaBot to archive your talk page. Unfortunately, the bot has stopped working, and given how its operator is inactive, it is unclear when/if this will fixed. For the time being, I have volunteered to operate a MiszaBot clone (running the exact same code). With that said, your input would be appreciated at Commons:Bots/Requests/ArchiveBot 1. Regards, FASTILY 07:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

File:BSicon vABZg+l.svg

Just FYI: there is also Category:Icons for railway descriptions/parallel railways/junction+crossing/double curve, and I have also separated Category:Icons for railway descriptions/parallel lines/curve/double/junction. The older title fitted BjørnN's naming pattern pretty well; but I'm not saying which one is better, I had addressed the issue myself at Talk:BSicon/Renaming/Archive 5#With crossing. YLSS (talk) 05:56, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

File:BSicon dhRP4q.svg

Maybe you intended   (dhRP4q)? Cf.  (dhRP2q). Also, the latter was uploaded before this discussion, so probably they all should be "hd" — unless Tuvalkin has other rules in mind for roads? YLSS (talk) 19:08, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

Current   (dhRP4h) should be   (dhRP4q), surely, it is not controversial in the least. I’m sure is a typo. -- Tuválkin ✉ 20:01, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

So...   (dhRP4q) or  (hdRP4q)? YLSS (talk) 21:00, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

  (dhRP4q). The h suffix was left over from   (dSKRZ-G4uh). Useddenim (talk) 03:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

lvACCn

Do you propose some alternative naming pattern with   (lvACC1) & co. or should they be  (lACCc1) etc., like  (lBHFc1)? Because that naming pattern was suggested by you... YLSS (talk) 10:36, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

 Fixed. Useddenim (talk) 12:23, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Also lvHSTc# → lHSTc#. Useddenim (talk) 12:32, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

lINTACC-M icons

Nice work in creating  (lINTACC-M) and  (lINTACC-Mq)! Quick question. Shouldn't the inside backgrounds be white like  (lINT-M) and  (lINT-Mq) (and all the other INT icons)? Or is there a specific reason the insides are transparent? Lost on Belmont (talk) 02:37, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The specific reason is that I forgot ’cause I was tired. (Will fix them tomorrow.) Useddenim (talk) 03:39, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

WASSER geometry

Just inquiring: where did you take that geometry from?  (WASSER) actually has a simpler one, and AFAIK the rest are derived from that one (at least I derived all parallel WASSERs from it). YLSS (talk) 14:24, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't honestly know. It was a version I had on my computer that I downloaded in March 2012. Useddenim (talk) 19:25, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

vÜWB

I hope you don't mind: COM:SPLIT#File:BSicon uvÜSTBl.svg → File:BSicon uvÜWBol+lr.svg, File:BSicon uvÜSTBr.svg → File:BSicon uvÜWBor+lr.svg. Although possibly we can find some better names, as discussed before. YLSS (talk) 19:08, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Not at all. In fact, as I was looking at these icons, I realized that they needed both an “l” and an “r” in the suffix because of the four lines. Now, can we put  (vÜSTBl),  (uvÜSTBl),  (vÜSTBr) &  (uvÜSTBr) up for deletion, as there are now topological equivalents? ( (uvÜSTB) and  (utvÜSTB) can go immediately as they are unused outside of the catalogue listing.) Useddenim (talk) 19:27, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't say that they we should delete them: they may be used with a slightly different implication that the tracks of bi-directional route separate and re-connect, while  (vÜWBol+lr) doesn't necessary imply this. Pretty much like  (utvJCTgol) &  (uvABZld). YLSS (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Mm... Was the switching of direction in  (vÜWBol+lr) intentional? YLSS (talk) 04:37, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Er, no. Just a minor brain fart on my part. Useddenim (talk) 18:38, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Diagrammatic London rail transit SVG map

As you know there is no diagrammatic (aka 'Beck' style) map of London rail transits on Commons yet. There was such SVG map but it appears to have been deleted under author's request. So I want to start a collaborated project of creating such map from scratch licensed under Creative Commons (3 or 4 are both fine). A seriously competitive good one. It will include Underground obviously, Overground, DLR and the upcoming Crossrail. It is possible to include National Rail too but I have the concern of the SVG rendering cap of 2048 px on Wikimedia so the map layout should be as compact as possible and never exceed that cap. Do you wanna join me? Or you have any idea in your mind already? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Sure. Of course, due to the actual physical layout of the lines, there will be some resemblance to the official maps that have been published. Do you think that there will be copyright issues? Transport for London is very protective of its intellectual property. Useddenim (talk) 12:24, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I understand that concern. To my knowledge, the only things we can't copy are the relative positions of the lines and the turning points of line joint. These are the prime elements that would constitute as derivative work of the original. The "sticker" station label is simple geometry so wouldn't be a problem. Same goes for the "barbell" or "capsule" interchange symbol, but for irregularly shaped IC symbol, we must make sure it is shaped differently than the official version. You can check or even base upon the SVG doc format of my Overground map which not yet receives any complaint from TfL, one could argue it's not yet popular to get any attention though. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

To make our map even more different than the TfL version, we may consider using 37° and 53° instead of the traditional 45° for diagonal lines. These 2 angles are from the 3:4:5 right triangle which makes calculation of rounded line joint much easier and station layout more flexible than 45°. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:41, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Back in 2000 I created a vector version of the UndergrounD diagram in the style of Beck’s 1957 map. See UndergrounD 1957_2000.jpg, UndergrounD 1957_2000.pdf, UndergrounD 1957_2000.fha or UndergrounD 1957_2000.eps. Would this make a good starting point? Useddenim (talk) 15:17, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Looks like the links don't work properly... Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 15:32, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

OOps! Forgot to escape out the spaces (%20) in the file names. Useddenim (talk) 16:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

I compared your map with TfL's and overall it's sufficiently different to avoid any trouble from TfL. Although it takes time, it's very straightforward to redo your map in plain SVG format. So we can start discussing how to refine our map. First, do you want to add or reserve space for accessibility symbol? I do know the ACC symbol for TfL maps has some political consideration to avoid unnecessary law suit from disabled communities. Obviously it's none of my concern but I wanna know your opinion on that. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 23:41, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Lose the ACC symbol–it just adds clutter and has nothing to do with the physical relationship of the lines. Is there any software that can convert Freehand, eps or pdf to svg? If so, it would save a lot of time. Useddenim (talk) 13:54, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Trust me, it would take more time to cleanup the SVG code than writing it from scratch. Because we still need to add Overground and Crossrail to the map, that can be lot of work to reposition the existing lines in your map. It is always better to have the XML layout that is readable to human brain than working on the codes that are randomly generated by software. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:09, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I'm now sketching the new map. Could you please point out in the official TfL map that where I should reserve some reasonable space for any likely extension plan? Thank you. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 02:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

See en:London Underground#Proposed improvements and expansions. Useddenim (talk) 02:21, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Your map doesn't include fare zones. Are most Londoners not bothered with calculating tube fare in your opinion? -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 10:22, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

It wasn’t included because TƒL didn’t add the zones until 2001. And AFAIK, it doesn’t make a difference (but does add further complication and clutter) because people are going to travel where they need or want to go.
When I took a look at your sketch, I couldn’t help but notice more than a passing similarity to this. Were you aware of it? Useddenim (talk) 03:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't know anything about london-tubemap.com, but it's quite interesting and I am tempted to steal the idea of placing the National Rail logo right inside the interchange ring instead of next to the station node or name tag. Either way I intend to stick to 37 and 53 degrees diagonal lines only instead of mixing any more gradient like london-tubemap.com did on the Central line. Also I won't bend the lines too much for adhering to their alignments in reality, although I understand the website did that for a good reason of better demonstrating unofficial OSIs like Paddington-Lancaster Gate. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 03:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

From the Crossrail official site, it's said that a new station and new pedestrian connection for H&C-Circle line will be built. Does that remove the necessity of OSI with other tube platforms? Otherwise I will use dash line to indicate OSI. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 04:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

My interpretation is that Crossrail will have a direct connection to (the unpaid area of) a new H&C station, which will in turn retain it’s fare-paid connection to the existing Circle/District station. Also, I don’t want you to think that I’m being aloof: I’m happy to provide general comments, but I just don’t think that you are far enough into the design stage that I should be making spefici edit suggestions yet. Useddenim (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Actually I have already begun working on the SVG file by preparing station nodes and name tags which will give me better motivation to begin aligning every needed elements of the map. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 22:05, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Here's the SVG file I'm working on. I would say it's about 40% complete by the time I leave this message. I don't upload to Wikimedia yet become I don't wanna waste its resource for generating PNG preview. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 11:07, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

An excellent start. Definitely recognizable as the London network, but with your own unique interpretation. However, I do have a few comments:

• Gloucester Road: I think should also have an interchange symbol Done
• South Kensington–Knightsbridge: standard radius (as Crossrail does between Paddington and Bond Street) Done
• Euston–King's Cross: NOR/VIC & MET/CIR/H&C are co-linnear (but shouldn't be)
• Finchley Road–Wembley Park: JUB/MET not co-linnear (but then how will you handle the West Hampstead interchange symbol?)
• Camden Town: the City to Edgware & Charing † to Barnet routings are not apparent
• Bond Street & Tottenham Ct Rd: INTs should be aligned to JUB/NOR lines, rather than perpendicular to CEN/Crossrail
• Paddington–Edgware Road: kink in CIR/DIS/H&C lines? I think should be straight (Sameboat: CIR/DIS straightened. CIR/H&C still shifts in order to distance from the other pair at Paddington.)
• Earl's Court: INT symbol encroaches on the curve (i.e. move it left 1/2 INT radius) Done

Useddenim (talk) 21:13, 10 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I think I will have some major rework to the interior ring because it's quite disproportionate to the eastern and western sectors. I don't think I will preserve the circular arc for the north-east section which makes Crossrail crooked at Farrington ridiculously.

• Finchley Road–Wembley Park: I don't quite understand this because the official and your versions literally do the same to that section. So what do you expect that to look like?
• Bond Street & Tottenham Ct Rd: I use the capsular INT for these 2 stations because I don't want to bend Crossrail just for avoiding Oxford Circus. Would that be solved If I place the capsules vertically or horizontally so they aren't perpendicular to either line?

-- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 00:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I regularly upload the SVG to Google Drive for backup and double-check on mobile device. If you're in the mood, you can also open it in your mobile device and refresh the SVG to check any revision. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

• After checking individual station articles I've realized that you mean interchange station with same/cross-platform interchange layout. TBH, the capsular INT icon is suggesting neither the platform layout nor track linearity. I use them just to make sure they cover all the lines which stop by the interchange. However, I did make some attempt to imply the layout at Euston (in the newest revision) which could be cluttering to someone. If the official version doesn't bother with that, neither do I. (The official version does imply that for Baker Street and Euston, but they're far too subtle for anyone without prior knowledge of the system.)
• Even though Finchley Road and Finchley Road & Frognal are officially OSI, I'm surprised that the official map makes no attempt to indicate that but instead displays them far far away from each other. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 13:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

File:BSicon fdSHI2+r.svg

I suppose you intended 250×500? Also, do you have any intention on moving the classic dXs? YLSS (talk) 20:08, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Yes; and, wasn’t planning on it. (I seem to recall that that was suggested a couple of years back, and there was some push-back at the time.) Useddenim (talk) 21:39, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

I assume you meant dX → dSHI2 (and dW → dSHI2g? Useddenim (talk) 21:57, 21 September 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, precisely. I satisfied myself with renaming some confusing names – such as vBS2 & dBS2 – but not the more common BS2, KRW, dX. But probably one day we should... YLSS (talk) 14:03, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

File:BSicon v3BRIDGE-.svg

I think it should be  (v3BRIDGEq-), no? Also, 50px?.. YLSS (talk) 13:51, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Your concerns

I saw from this comment, indicating you requested deletion of this image.

If you had used a {{Speedy}} deletion tag, shouldn't I have automatically received a "heads-up" on my talk page that you had left that speedy deletion request? So, do you have any idea why I didn't receive a heads-up of your concerns?

I saw your other comments on my contributions on User talk:Fastily. In the interests of collegiality I encourage you to address your concerns to the contributor who you have a concern with first.

Google cache contained a copy of the information template. Checking it I can see that, In this particular instance I did make a mistake, it was not an image from the 1940s, but an image from the 1980s of a restored 1940s bus. Over the last 9 years I have made a large number of uploads, maybe over ten thousand, and I would be surprised if there were no errors in the other 9,999 uploads I made. But I do not believe I am more prone to human fallibility than any other contributor.

You didn't say why you thought my uploads, from flickr, or elsewhere, should trigger a concern that my contributions could be of particular problem. As per my suggestion above, if you have general or specific concerns about someone else's uploads I suggest the first person you should try voicing that concern to is the uploader. Geo Swan (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

I don't have any idea why you didn't receive notification of the {{Speedy}} request.
And yes, I probably should have raised the point directly with you. Unfortunately, I've seen instances in the past where individuals have indiscriminately siphoned images into Commons, and didn't stop until they were blocked. Apologies for lumping you into that group: I didn't take a close look at your uploads while searching for other JBC images. Useddenim (talk) 01:41, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

• Thanks for the prompt reply.

Cheers Geo Swan (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

vAKRZ

In   (vAKRZ) &   (uvAKRZ), was it intentional that the stripes interlace? Or should the road be completely below the rail –   – like in  (SKRZ-G2) ? (Also, WRT the last one, I added the dashes – right?) YLSS (talk) 14:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

The interlacing was deliberate: after all, the tracks and the road surface are at the same level. WRT  (SKRZ-G2), I omitted the dashes on purpose, since passing is not allowed approaching a railway crossing (at least in North America). Useddenim (talk)15:51, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Hahah, that didn't even air to me ;) Yes, it's the same in Russia, but well, I don't think we need to accentuate that in the icons: first, there's the issue of scaling, and the part with restricted passing may well be contained within the shorts white stubs next to the rail track; and second,  (SKRZ-G2) if used alone (without  (RP2e) & similar) was not perceptible as such. Cool? YLSS (talk) 16:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Yah, we’re cool. Does the newer version look any better? Useddenim (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Pretty much the same. If I didn't know, I wouldn't notice any difference at 20px. YLSS (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

hSTRlf green et al.

I've noticed you've been uploading some "standard" curves and have been using the old naming scheme (lf, rg, etc) as opposed to the "modern" scheme (l, +r, etc). Was this intentional? Lost on  Belmont ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 21:11, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

I must’ve missed the memo that we’ve switched over. Feel free to move them. Useddenim (talk) 21:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Well, with "h" prefix, none has been renamed as yet... Only "d", "v", "D", "C", maybe some others. In standard "bahn" set it's impossible to proceed with "h" for now: there's  (hSTRl) & co. But for "other colours", maybe. YLSS (talk) 21:32, 15 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that’s it. I knew there was a reason to follow the old naming. 8·) Useddenim (talk) 00:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I think this brings up a bigger issue. The "D" and "C" sets only got the new naming scheme for "future" consistency. (And who doesn't want consistency across BSicons?) But if virtually everything else is staying old, then they aren't consistent and maybe they too should use the old scheme… Lost on  Belmont ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 16:46, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Nah, they’ll get there eventually. It’s just that I don’t think anyone wants to tackle the fix to  (STRlf),  (ABZrf), etc. (Unless someone want to write a ’bot request?) Useddenim (talk) 17:26, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

One happy day... YLSS (talk) 20:31, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Copyright status: File:BSicon exCONTl+4.svg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading File:BSicon exCONTl+4.svg. 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.

And also:

• File:BSicon exCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon extCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon tCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon uCONTl+4.svg
• File:BSicon uCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon uexCONTl+4.svg
• File:BSicon uexCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon uextCONTr+1.svg
• File:BSicon utCONTr+1.svg

No required license templates were detected at this file page. Please correct it, or if you have any questions please check my FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Yours sincerely, Jarekt (talk) 13:24, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

All fixed. Lost on  Belmont ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

k in blue

Leaving aside the question of switching to circular curves[1] (are you sure that would look OK? Can it be seen live anywhere?), why didn't you use the new naming system (proposed by yourself)? Although I've renamed only a couple icons to follow it, for new icons I use the new scheme... YLSS (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

en:Template:Pink_Line_(CTA); and I didn't realize that it had gone beyond “proposal” and had been adopted for k-curves. So I guess I’ll go ahead and rename the (blue) lot. Useddenim (talk) 19:08, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, that was a very good proposal... But a toilsome one. YLSS (talk) 22:30, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Ahh… there’s been bigger jobs we’ve tackled. Useddenim (talk) 03:32, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, of course... But I'd like to see the number of obsolete redirects go down below 400 at the least. Lately I've been getting doubts that it's even possible. No matter how many of them do I get rid of, new ones appear instead... YLSS (talk) 09:28, 6 April 2015 (UTC)

ABZ3+l+4

Umh... Was it you who tagged ABZ3+l+4 for deletion? It's still in use... Forgive me if it wasn't you, I just vaguely recall that it was some IP starting from 128... YLSS (talk) 09:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, that was me. I’ve always hated that name. Besides, there are only five pages that link to it, and Talk:BSicon/Renaming/ABZ is the only one with any relevance (where it seemed to be decided that the original  (ABZl+34) was the better name). Useddenim (talk) 10:25, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Erm... Did you forget about Special:GlobalUsage/BSicon_ABZ3+l+4.svg? YLSS (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Yes. Useddenim (talk) 15:09, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

File:BSicon uhkLSTR.svg

Moved to File talk:BSicon uhkLSTR.svg. 18:59, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

New names for BS_SL etc

This looks like a new project, and interesting — but in needs a === section title === and some intro text, right? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 23:33, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Um, yes. I got interrupted (for dinner) and thought I hit Preview; I guess it was Save instead. Useddenim (talk) 03:27, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Uploading to commons

Have you had any problems uploading to commons? For the past few days I haven't been able to update files (I get the spinning wheel of death). At first I thought it was just my computer, but then I noticed the most recent AlgaeGraphix list was virtually empty so I'm wondering if this isn't just me. Lost on  Belmont ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 16:09, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

No, but then, the last icons I uploaded were the  (tKRW+le) (tKRWra) pair back on August 15^th. (I hope I got the names correct.) BTW, have you seen DePiep’s latest? Useddenim (talk) 22:40, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Just uploaded  (tKRWla) without any problem. Useddenim (talk) 22:52, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Hmm. Seems my issue is with updating files. While I can add new ones, can't fix existing icons... Can you? (And, unfortunately, I have seen it.) Lost on  Belmont ^3200N_1000W  (talk) 22:12, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Duplicate TEE+ icons

Hi, just to bring to your attention (if you missed my post here) that   (BHF+KRZ),   (BHF+TEEr),   (BHF+TEEl) are duplicates of  (TBHF),  (TBHFl) and  (TBHFr). Are we going to delete either set? Or does it make sense to keep both?   ~] Newfiz ^Yo! 13:08, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

File:BSicon uhdTUNNELru.svg

File:BSicon uhdTUNNELru.svg has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Jc86035 (talk • contributions • uploads) 13:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Notification about possible deletion

Some contents have been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether they should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at their entry. If you created these pages, please note that the fact that they have been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with them, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Jc86035 (talk • contributions • uploads) 14:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Tuvalkin

You pinged me when you wrote I dunno. “I think … you are operating in a red mist of bad faith and hate.” sounds like a personal attack by Colin against Tuvalkin". I'm not going to respond there as it is clear Tuvalkin doesn't want me to (having reverted my edits) and is only now interested in insulting me. Your comment is ridiculous. But if you wish to make a complete fool of yourself, you are welcome to go to AN/U with it, and try your luck there. I suggest you stick to SVG rather than getting involved in murky Commons politics. -- Colin (talk) 06:57, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

It seems that Tuvalkin’s right about this guy’s persistent goading… Useddenim (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

You sure have an upside down view of the world, if you think that's "goading". -- Colin (talk) 16:41, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Could be right; upon reflection, it may simply be an insulting taunt. Useddenim (talk) 16:58, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a duration of 2 weeks

You have been blocked from editing Commons for a duration of 2 weeks for the following reason: Intimidation/harassment. 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.

• see [2], and the use of the "Useless" word. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Two-week block for a joke in talk page. Seriously? Even 3 days feel more than enough. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 01:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Request reason: " Tuvalkin gets an explanation and an (implied) warning, but I am immediately blocked without warning for two weeks for the precise same edit? (me vs. Tuvalkin) A two week block is disproportionate and punitive (and retaliatory, too if there's a link between Colin and Christian Ferrer. The alleged reason for the block is “Intimidation/harassment”; however, en:WP:Harassment starts out by saying that “Harassment is a pattern of repeated offensive behavior …” (my emphasis). One talk page posting is not “repeated ” by anyone’s definition. The policy continues, “In extreme cases … blocks may be employed without prior warnings” (but I fail to see how this is an “extreme” case: it certainly wasn’t a legal threat or threat of violence). Regardless, the threshold of behaviour is “purposefully and blatantly harass[ing] a fellow Wikipedian”. Yes, changing User: to Useless: was deliberate done to create a redlink: specifically in the hope that Colin would not be attracted and tempted to add additional unwanted comments. Expressing an opinion—especially one that is only disparaging or deprecatory, but not derogatory—should really only warrant a warning, or at the very most a block of a few days. Useddenim (talk) 03:34, 22 June 2016" Unblock reason: "Since Christian Ferrer unblocked the user, I'm closing this as done. — regards, Revi 11:57, 4 July 2016 (UTC)" This template should be archived normally.

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

•  Oppose The block is too long? then maybe the next time you will think about what you are doing. Colin was insulted and Tulkavin has been blocked 2 weeks, this logic follows a recent one-week block, because of what you done you. And you want a smaller block, don't you? You put a big mess, and for my part you assume now the consequences. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Blocking is not punishment. Usually only mild vandalism (3RR) would warrant block for weeks. Block for few days already sends a strong signal that bad manner of a single instance is not acceptable. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 05:14, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

• The block here is not punishment, but to make understand the user that some deliberate actions / editions have consequences. All I see here are only complaints about against the injustice of a so-called too long block, I see no guarantee that the lesson has been received, and no start of questioning from the blocked user. I start to wonder if the block is enough longer. And if the questioning occurs now I talked about it, then it's too late to be really considered as good faith. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 05:28, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

  I still challenge your judgment. A block this long on bad manner is only justifiable if the said user is a repeated offender. This is definitely not case here as this is the first time that Useddenim receives this block. The duration of block should be as minimum as possible unless he commits again. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 05:43, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Useddenim, I have no idea who you are or what provoked all this. Since 16th June you made two edits here and here in support/agreement with a user who had just written a highly offensive insult that was completely unprovoked and utterly without justification on this project. Then a week later you decided to make your own personal attack with a childish insult over the User prefix. This is is multiple times when your only interaction with me is to join with those who write hateful things, and then to write something insulting yourself. And your response is to argue about policy definitions, and claim oddly that insulting me might "hope that Colin would not be attracted and tempted to add additional unwanted comments". You were not merely expressing an opinion. Nobody is "useless". We are all human beings with value. If you think that is a valid thing to say about anybody, then please leave.

I agree with Christian that you haven't demonstrated that you understand why you were blocked or understand the importance of not doing anything like that again. Moaning only about block length is not a way to get it reduced. I was surprised at 2 weeks, when 1 seems more normal, but you aren't helping your case. Take a day or two off to think. I have absolutely no wish for you and I to be enemies. -- Colin (talk) 09:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

• I followed my colleague and I changed the block to 1 week. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

  @Christian Ferrer: I just read everything Useddenim wrote during this Gordian Knot of bilateral blamings but I can hardly find any Intimidation/harassment as stated in the blocking comment! Furthermore I can't find any reason in this edit or in the use of the "Useless" word. I insist on unblocking this user because there is no comprehensible reason for this block! a×p_de^Hello! 17:37, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Request reason: " After reviewing Commons:Blocking policy (which I couldn’t find earlier), I see that the official policy on Wikimedia Commons (their emphasis) is that “blocks are a last resort for behaviour that has the potential to damage Commons or disrupt its collegial atmosphere”, and that “blocking is designed to be a preventative measure and not a punitive one; "cool-down" blocks are not condoned.” The Instructions for administrators clearly states: “…blocks based on disruptive behaviour, such as vandalism, repeated copyright violations and manual promotional activities, [must] ensure that the user has been appropriately warned…” and continues “[Only] 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. The blocking administrator inappropriately applied this block, and so it should therefore be immediately removed without any further discusssion. Useddenim (talk) 23:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)" Unblock reason: "Since Christian Ferrer unblocked the user, I'm closing this as done. — regards, Revi 11:57, 4 July 2016 (UTC)" This template should be archived normally.

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

I'm sorry to see that Useddenim wishes to wikilawyer his way out of a block rather than to recognise what he did wrong and promise not to do it again. Given his recent pattern of behaviour, and this unrepentant attitude, I think maintaining the block is reasonable, as the likelyhood of further insults and support for those who make them, is high. Useddenim, use your timeout for what it is for... to reconsider your approach and look at your recent behaviour with fresh eyes. -- Colin (talk) 08:59, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

And I'm sorry to see that Colin can't resist continuing to post his opinions on my talk page. If Christian Ferrer had simply posted a warning, that would have been the end of things. If an apology had been asked for, I could have brought myself to do that, too. But some editors don’t seem to understand when to just leave things alone and walk away… Useddenim (talk) 10:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose an unblock. To call someone useless instead of user is equal to "to create a hostile environment for another user " is clearly harassment. I was kind enough to follow Colin reasoning and I decreased the block to one week. This block have been necessary to prevent the user to create a hostile environment for another user. I will not comment furthermore here regarding this topic. You claim to have not been warned, now you are, I warn you to be civil, polite and not to create a hostile environment for another user or you will be blocked again. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

A "warning" after the fact is not a warning. An administrator taking directions from the complainant is questionable, and refusing to discuss an issue is just plain wrong. Useddenim (talk) 11:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

You're wrong, this warning is not for the current story. This warning is clearly potential for the next time or you will be unpleasant. Regards, Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, it seems that Christian Ferrer is not a man of his word, as even though he claimed to have reduced the block to one week, it is still in place. Useddenim (talk) 17:34, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

•  Done you're unblocked, the week was counted from the change, but in reality you're right Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. Useddenim (talk) 17:46, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer: You should have marked the unblock templates to hide this done request from Category:Requests for unblock. I've done it now. — regards, Revi 11:57, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

This so-called "unblock" procedure is so hypocritical. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk · contri.) 12:01, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

It's just that he's unblocked and he is still listed as ongoing request for unblock. — regards, Revi 12:03, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

-revi, please see this. Jee 12:05, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Interesting. Please beware that we (admins) will not do any reviews on the expired/already-unblocked users, as it has no point. — regards, Revi 12:07, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

-revi, actually it was not expired; there was one more day to go as Christain mentioned in that edit note. :) Jee 12:11, 4 July 2016 (UTC)