Authors should decide their own license preferences
I, Infrogmation, hereby "opt out" of the involuntary "license migration". Notes: The vast majority of my uploads I would happily agree to add cc-by-sa-3.0 to the listed license option (if that license is not one of the listed options already) IF I am ASKED. I do NOT consent to any change license of any of my copyrighted works that I have not personally authorized. I have NOT authorized any party other than myself to change licensing of any of my works without my explicit permission. See here on my talk page for discussion.
This was my stand more than 2 years ago. It has not changed. Months of work and thousands of edits have been required of me for this simple assertion of my basic authorship rights. I consider Wikimedia a noble project, but think Wikimedia should be deeply ashamed of the way they have treated and continue to treat contributors who have been kind enough to share their own media under free licenses. Infrogmation (talk)
- I do so agree with you. This license policy of the commons project prevents me from uploading more photos because I do not like my pictures changed by other people and not even knowing about it. --Manuela (talk) 06:38, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Older disussion has been moved to User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 1, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 2, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 3, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 4, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 5, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 6, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 7, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 8, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 9, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 10, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 11, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 12, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 13, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 14, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 15, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 16, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 17, User talk:Infrogmation/Archive 18.
Please add new discussion to bottom of page.
How we will see unregistered users
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. /Johan (WMF)
18:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|The Civility Barnstar|
|A barnstar for your booster-bee! PtrQs (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2022 (UTC)|
Hi, Infrogmation, Do you know of any photographs of the Free Church of the Annunciation that are in the public domain? This church is located at 4505 South Claiborne Avenue in New Orleans. Thanks! Nolabob (talk) 14:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- Not off hand. Wow, it's in a part of town I sometimes pass through, so I'm startled to see I apparently haven't photographed it. I'll try to remedy that soon. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Nolabob: I was able to stop by and take some pix of the exterior. (I can't always promise such prompt service, but it worked out today.) Category:Free Church of the Annunciation, New Orleans. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 00:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
You deleted "Top secret.png" which has been in use on Dutch wiktionary for over 5 years. It is really difficult to discuss the arguments for deletion or find suitable replacements when the picture itself is no longer visible. If a picture is in use on a project it seems proper procedure to follow the normal request for deletion process. Would you be so kind as to undo the removal of this picture so we can have a look at it again? --MarcoSwart (talk) 13:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
- Proper procedure was followed. Deleted per Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Top_secret.png, listed for almost 2 months with no objection to deletion. Per linked listing at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Top secret.jpg, the images was apparently on Commons under false license claim. See Commons:Undeletion requests if you think the deletion was in error and have an argument why it should be restored. Thanks for your attention. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 16:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi Infrogmation - I have a somewhat disruptive editor who keeps over writing this file with a completely different one. (likely copyright image pulled from either Boeing or indianpolitics.co) - Note this editor has multipy copywrite violations ..Any options you can recommend would be great appreciated -Cheers FOX 52 (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)