User talk:Storkk

Please leave any messages in a new section below, signed with "~~~~"

Understanding of WP Commons rules

Hello Storkk, I just understood the precise "undirect" problem of copyright here. Some of my drawings and paintings are inspired by movie scenes (e.g. for Dewaere). But the one I draw in 2010 was a complete original one and are no copyvio relevant :

  • [[1]] File:Dewaere.png

As such as the fac simile of is "signature" in 1968

  • [[2]] File:DewaereSignature1968.jpg

Please note also that the photos I took myself are originals :

  • [[3]] File:DewaereMaisonParis.jpg
  • [[4]] File:CarlinaBiarritz1.jpg

To be valid and proper to conform to the WP rules, I'd like to know if I have to remake brand new drawings or paintings of the same subjects not directly inspired by any existing photo or movie scene, then, will they be OK ?

Thank's again for your kind support.

Best regards

Martino75 (talk) 10:15, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Storkk,

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia, and thank you for your comments. Regarding the "panoramic" picture: I rather like the mosaic effect (and prefer it over the result of panoramic merging programs), but if you really think it needs to be improved then please feel free to ask me for the originals (I think I may still have them somewhere).

Anyway: Thanks for your kind message!

All the best from London, alex bainbridge (alexjtb at gmail)

Alexjtb (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for the correction!Bluestarfish88 (talk) 18:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:52, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 15:54, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on m:WM:RFH

Replied. :-) Thanks for reporting it, even if it is not the correct venue. It is definitely appreciated. πr2 (t • c) 16:59, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit

Not really sure why that reversion took place. Will need to keep an eye on whether my account was hacked. Serendipodous 08:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images I uploaded

Hello. Thank you for copying the File:Unstained Echinostoma egg.jpg image I uploaded to Wikimedia Commons! I may be uploading another image and I'll make sure to see if I can upload that one to Wikimedia Commons too. Thanks again! Isabellelouise19 (talk) 12:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AC Martin Images

Hi, Storkk —

Permission to use all files taken from the AC Martin website and attributed to AC Martin has been given to me by the company's design principal, David C. Martin, himself. The company owns the images and requested that they be uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. (Please see notes left on individual image talk pages.)

Please let me know if you have any questions or if Wiki law requires me to do something else in order to publish these images.

Thanks,

Miohcal Flork — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miohcal Flork (talk • contribs) 11:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Miohcal Flork:, it would be great if we could keep the images. Per the message I most recently left you on your commons talk page, I have converted them to a commons:COM:DR. This will give you time to follow the steps at commons:COM:OTRS to verify that the copyright holder has indeed licensed the images in the manner specified, and we can keep the images. Thanks! The steps needed are laid out in the section titled "If you are not the copyright holder". Please note that OTRS has a backlog - it is possible that the files will get deleted, but if the steps are correctly followed, they will be undeleted by an OTRS volunteer when the emails are reviewed. Storkk (talk) 12:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files Slated for Deletion

Hi, Storkk —

When I presented the free licensing options to David C. Martin of A.C. Martin, he decided that he was uncomfortable applying those terms to the company's photos. As I do not know how to delete them myself, are you able to remove the following files for me?

File:AC Martin - Henry Madden Library.jpg

File:AC Martin - Wilshire Grand.jpg

File:AC Martin - Madera County Courthouse.jpg

File:AC Martin - Fish Interfaith Center.jpg

Please let me know. Thanks!

Miohcal — Preceding unsigned comment added by Miohcal Flork (talk • contribs) 12:35, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Miohcal, I'm not an administrator here or on commons. Only administrators can delete files, but I expect when an administrator closes the DR, they will be deleted. This normally happens within a week for uncontroversial cases, so I expect this to happen soon. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 08:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

Move to Commons Barnstar
Moving files from En.Wikipedia to Commons is a tedious task. For your hard work in moving quality images to Commons and for your long term dedication to the project, I hereby award you this Move to Commons Barnstar. Thanks for your work and keep it up! Cheers, TLSuda (talk) 20:12, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image of Larry E. Haines

Sorry, I no longer have that image on my computer. It was taken during a ceremony at the state house in Annapolis, Maryland. I think he was in attendance as the Governor of Maryland gave an address. I did take the picture myself. «Marylandstater» «reply» 17:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:JSTOR access

Hello, WP:The Wikipedia Library has record of you being approved for access to JSTOR through the TWL partnership described at WP:JSTOR . You should have recieved a Wikipedia email User:The Interior or User:Ocaasi sent several weeks ago with instructions for access, including a link to a form collecting information relevant to that access. Please find that email, and follow those instructions. If you were not approved, did not recieve the email, or are having some other concern or question, please respond to this message at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved. Thanks much, Sadads (talk) 21:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC) Note: You are recieving this message from an semi-automatically generated list. If you think you were incorrectly contacted, make sure to note that at Wikipedia talk:JSTOR/Approved.[reply]

Fredricka Whitfield

The teaser link For the Wiki page has her married to John Glenn, the astronaut. That is incorrect. No idea how to annotate, so please forgive my lack of proper Wiki formatting. ---- Judy Chamberlain — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.164.205.175 (talk) 04:53, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kent Hovind

Kent E. Hovind is not a tax evader. False info, you are probably paid by the government fucking clown.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Youngsavage425 (talk • contribs) 13:23, 18 June 2015‎

I would like to see this government fucking clown. He evidently owes me backpay. Storkk (talk) 12:32, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

I apologize. I did not know that you could not do that after contesting. I will wait till the review is over. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rohit r m (talk • contribs) 14:17, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Library needs you!

We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!

With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:

  • Account coordinators: help distribute free research access
  • Partner coordinators: seek new donations from partners
  • Communications coordinators: share updates in blogs, social media, newsletters and notices
  • Technical coordinators: advise on building tools to support the library's work
  • Outreach coordinators: connect to university libraries, archives, and other GLAMs
  • Research coordinators: run reference services



Send on behalf of The Wikipedia Library using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File deleted enquiry?

Hi Storkk

I received message regarding a photographic file I posted for Andrew Korda which has been deleted RQ1X0712.jpg

When I posted the photo I first asked the photographer for permission and they agreed and sent it to me - and said they had updated the meta data to reflect that it was the property of Andrew Korda

I'm not sure if they did this correctly

I would really appreciate if you could let me know what I can do to satisfy the wikipedia requirements for this to be re-posted

Many thanks for your help

Jonno lips Jonathan lipworth (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jonathan lipworth (talk) 02:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jonathan lipworth. Someone has re-uploaded the photo using the username Sally Tsoutas. Ms. Tsoutas should read and follow the steps on commons:COM:OTRS to confirm that this is indeed her, and that she releases the photo under the license stated. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 07:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kattankudy City.jpg

Hi, have you got any updates from the author of the above file giving a valid permission? If not, I am going to nominate for deletion.--obi2canibetalk contr 14:08, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Obi2canibe. There has been no response. I was going to wait another couple days (the request for clarification was only sent out on 22 September) before nominating it myself, but I have no objections to you doing so. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 10:15, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maksim Behar rename

Greetings, and thank you for opening the requested move discussion at Talk:Maksim Behar. I feel like the OTRS evidence, coupled with some other published sources, make this such a slam dunk that the move isn't controversial. Do you agree, or do you feel like the move needs to go through discussion? Please advise, because I'm prepared to boldly move the article. —C.Fred (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi C.Fred. I am inclined to agree for the most part, however my reasoning was that a record of consensus would help prevent future moves. I think a little patience now may help prevent future difficulties, but I don't feel strongly about it. Storkk (talk) 09:14, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You have a point about showing consensus. I've already pinged the editor who made the prior move, so he can't say he wasn't aware. —C.Fred (talk) 15:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi C.Fred. I know you have made your opinion clear above the requested move, however if you'd like to reiterate in the Requested Move section, where it can't be missed by the closing admin, that might be a good idea. Storkk (talk) 10:31, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REFUND#File:Appayya Swami Aigali.jpg

It seems a waste of time for the OTRS guy to have to rely on someone else to view and undelete the image. Any interest in turning Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Storkk into a blue link? Nyttend (talk) 02:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyttend - apologies, I was traveling the last few days. I am slightly wary that this pattern may be a stumbling point, but I'm flattered and would gratefully accept if that turned blue. There is a lot of file related work that needs to be done. Storkk (talk) 10:46, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hugh L. Carey, Sylvia Dwyer, and Vincent Vita, Feb 1962.jpg

Hi, I restored File:Hugh L. Carey, Sylvia Dwyer, and Vincent Vita, Feb 1962.jpg, but I still need you to put on the correct OTRS received template. An edit filter blocks admins from me from applying the template. I know how to bypass that, but the chain of trust is shorter if you do it yourself! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:26, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Graeme Bartlett - there is still a back and forth on OTRS, and the permission should still be marked as "received" but not confirmed. Unfortunately, in the latest iteration it now seems less likely to be free. I would like to leave the "OTRS received" until there is a reply to a question I sent today or the end of the week (when I'll nominate it for deletion), unless you feel it is more urgent. Storkk (talk) 10:34, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, there is no urgency, so you can AGF and wait for the outcome. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:19, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS ticket

Re your ANI post, I'm not planning on responding to it (above my paygrade), but you may want to unlock the ticket so that someone else can take care of it. cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 13:13, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SpacemanSpiff: done... thought I had done so earlier. Thanks for the heads up. Storkk (talk) 13:30, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:04, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Laura Branigan live in Massachusetts

Hi, you listed File:Laura Branigan live in Massachusetts.jpg for deletion. As the uploader of the photo and who sought after the copyright holder of it, can you please explain to me what has happened? I am not clear on what has changed since it being granted an OTRS ticket. — Dell9300 (talk) 14:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dell9300: I am not sure I can be clearer than Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2016_February_8#File:Laura_Branigan_live_in_Massachusetts.jpg. The Ticket submitter is unsure whether they were the photographer, and therefore we cannot be sure they are the copyright holder. Storkk (talk) 15:01, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But I don't understand how it was accepted months back then just recently isn't acceptable? More confusing to me is I spoke to who I believe took the photo and guided them through the process of getting the photo approved on Wikipedia. I told them they would have to give their consent for use on Wikipedia, relinquishing their copyright. They agreed, and on a personal note they told me what it was like seeing her live etc. That's what makes this strange. What makes you say they are unsure they took the photo? I don't have an OTRS log-in to look at the ticket you see. — Dell9300 (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what you mean by having it approved "months back". As far as I can see this is ticket 2015102910026961, where I was the first responder. I did accept it erroneously on February 5, but realised I probably made a mistake on February 7. I cannot divulge the contents of the ticket much further than I have already due to some strict privacy rules we have, but if you'd like an independent set of eyeballs, please take this up at WP:OTRSN. I'm out of town for the next couple days, so apologies I can't answer further for a little while. Storkk (talk) 17:13, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Kozhin images

I am asking for your help here Storkk as there is a computer problem that makes it difficult for me to edit on commons. I cannot sign or use certain symbols. I see that you have had experience with this sort of thing before. The above page has a number of images on it whose author is given as User:SLKozhin on commons. If SLKozhin is the same person as Simon Kozhin then it looks unlikely that he could be the author. One image would have been taken two years before he was born
[5]
others show Kohsin in frame so it looks unlikely that he took them, for example

[6] and [7]

The talk page shows a number of previous copyvios. SovalValtos (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated them for deletion. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 11:23, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. The advantages of collaboration. SovalValtos (talk) 12:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
IMO same applies to uploads by Slkozhin. They look very similar. No OTRS either. Your comments? Ankry (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, and nominated for deletion. Storkk (talk) 10:12, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mohommed Ali Shah page image

Please could you help again? An image thumb|Mohommed Ali Shah lead the parade used on the above I think may be a possible copyvio. It purportedly shows a parade in 2008. The metadata [[8]] says it was digitized in 2015. Other data does not add up for a photo seemingly taken in bright sun; 1/25sec, f/1.8, ISO 800. IMO the quality of the image does not correspond to the pixel size. Is it possibly a photo of a print? Did the uploader understand fully about copyright? Yours SovalValtos (talk) 09:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe it is likely a copyright violation, please nominate it yourself. If you enable C:Help:QuickDelete in your preferences, you don't need to input any symbols: just click "Nominate for Deletion" on the file page. You raise potentially valid points, but I don't have the time at the moment to investigate further. Storkk (talk) 07:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. I have tried to do what you have suggested, I hope it turns out right. I have been hoping for a local meet-up where as well as helping others who are at an earlier stage of learning than myself, I could get help in various areas where I need help myself. SovalValtos (talk) 11:34, 24 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EV Nautilus.jpg

What are you looking for regarding EV Nautilus.jpg? Do you need the OTRS copyright email to originate with the Ocean Exploration Trust staff? Rbcwa (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rbcwa: The issue is that we simply have passive assent rather than any language indicating they have read and understood the license, or even that they are the copyright holders. Ideally it would also come directly from them, yes. See c:COM:CONSENT for the type of language that avoids ambiguity. Storkk (talk) 12:56, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

100th Army Band KY State Senate.jpg

Benjamin.garnett (talk) 17:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC) Question regarding the requested picture added to the 100th Army Band wiki page. The history shows that display permission was restored, but the picture still lists as deleted.[reply]

@Benjamin.garnett: please see Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2015_September_28#File:100th_Army_Band_KY_State_Senate.jpg. Essentially, the file was restored pending clarification, a reply to which was never received, so the file was deleted again. Storkk (talk) 09:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

File:Uwadi.jpg

I deleted this because you marked it as "OTRS received". For procedural reasons, though, I should have asked if there was any further OTRS process going on for this file. Can you please check if there is still conversation going back and forth? In that case I would undelete. De728631 (talk) 14:50, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@De728631: There was not: as is the case most of the time, a follow-up email from us to the customer has not been answered. I think the default stance should be delete after a reasonable window unless the agent has "reset the clock" in some way... there is no good way of keeping track of languishing tickets and the vast majority of them will need to be deleted, so no real need to inquire regarding specific files. Storkk (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You will specify me how me talk?

Where Wikipedia is written that I can not say that the other party is lying? I believe that user Jameslwoodward and Kumkum or deliberately lying or wrong. It's my opinion. What does it violate? Gl dili (talk) 16:49, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You must endeavor to assume good faith on Commons, and your behavior was hostile and disruptive to its collegial atmosphere. See the third sentence in C:COM:BP. You were told multiple times to stop your accusations of lying, and that failing to stop would lead to a block. You continued; it did. Storkk (talk) 17:12, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note also that if you are planning on discussing or contesting your Commons block, I would advise you to keep all discussion about it on your Commons talk page, which you can still edit, so that the discussion is centralized. Storkk (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Accusing someone of lying is very offensive. Actual lying -- deliberately writing something that is not true -- is very rare on WMF projects. There is not much point in actually lying here, because everything can easily be checked. It is always safer, and almost always more correct, to say that you think something is wrong. . . Jim - Jameslwoodward (talk to me • contribs) 19:04, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Gl dili, calling someone a liar violates policy WP:NPA. Plus, you have no reason to assume they are lying. If you told me that XXXXX is the most beautiful town in Romania, I could say that you are mistaken, but would offend you if I called you a liar. So, please assume and say that you think someone is mistaken, just like you would if you were sitting with a person over coffee talking about Romanian towns. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:45, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Storkk. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FRom Satan Manson

Why did you block me on wikimedia commons my pictures were legal under the license of the filmweb.s.A and Telaugas S.A please unlock me


Satan Manson — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 12:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You were warned not to upload copyright violations, and you ignored those warnings and continued to re-upload the same files. Perhaps you thought in good faith that the film posters of old Jean Claude Van Damme films were legally licensed under a Creative Commons license. If so, could you please point to that license? Note that only the copyright holder can legally license material. Storkk (talk) 12:41, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok i wanna write licence but please unlock me — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 13:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is a Commons-related discussion, and you still have the privilege of editing your Commons Talk page, please use that page, rather than this page. You can give evidence there, but you will need to show that filmweb.s.A or Telaugas S.A is the copyright holder (a priori quite unlikely) and also that they freely license the film posters (extremely unlikely, but not impossible). That would be sufficient to restore the uploads. If you wish to be unblocked, you will need to explain why you ignored warnings and just blindly continued uploading after your were requested to stop. You may request an unblock on commons by using {{unblock}} on your Commons user talk page. Storkk (talk) 14:04, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Please unlock me
I hale licence i will show you but you must unloCK me please
Satan Manson
Please follow my instructions immediately above. I will not unblock you based on a baseless request on my English Wikipedia talk page. Storkk (talk) 14:38, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 This is the licence of Filmweb.S.A my photos is from that page this is licence (is in polish but I translate to english)


Filmweb .S.A Company allows our users and users of our website www.filmweb.pl to share and copy our pictures on the legal license of Filmweblicency under the project "the user is important to us" 

                                                     Jan Nowak
                                                  Filmweb's directorial and computer director.


My Photoshos are legal please unlock me

Satan Manson — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 15:37, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is a Commons-related discussion, and you still have the privilege of editing your Commons Talk page, please use that page, not this page. Storkk (talk) 15:44, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FRom Satan Manson

Ok but please unlock me — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs)

No, you do not need to be unblocked to write on your user talk page, and you have not demonstrated you should be unblocked. Storkk (talk) 15:47, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE UNLOCK ME I HAVE LEGAL PHOTOS AND I WILL USE THE LICENCE what you give me — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 15:51, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What are you fucking talk to me I GIVE YOU LEGAL LICENCE of Filmweb please unlock me this photos are legal i promise i will never agaun send unilegal photos PlEASE UNLOCK ME

Since this is unrelated to English wikipedia, and since you can still edit your Commons talk page, and since I have already told you what you need to do to be unblocked ("You may request an unblock on commons by using {{unblock}} on your Commons user talk page."), and since you're now just shouting and swearing, I will not respond to you any further on this page. Good day, sir. Storkk (talk) 15:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FRom Satan Manson

Please unblock me — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 15:57, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

from SATAN MANSON

iF you don't unblock me i will ki11 you english man IM THE ANTICHRIST


SATAN MANSON

SATAN MANSON

UNBLOCK ME !!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SatanManson (talk • contribs) 21:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scientific publication on the Primary School Project

Good evening.

The Wikipedia Primary School project is now over. One of the outcomes of this project is a scientific article, co-authored by Heather Ford, Florence Devouard, Martha Pucciarelli, Luca Botturi and Iolanda Pensa. You (your username actually) happens to be mentionned in the article. This message is hereby to inform you of that fact. I would like to invite you to have a look at the article, a draft of which is available here. In case you have any issue or question, please get in touch with me :) In any cases, I would like to ask you to confirm that you have read this message !

I will further inform you when the article is published.

All my best. Anthere (talk) 20:19, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Storkk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Dr. Oetker Logo.gif

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Dr. Oetker Logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Milton Shapp.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Milton Shapp.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tiny Rebel

Hi, I noticed you put a label on this page saying 'This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments'. I'm wondering how you deduced that? I have no angle - other than I like beer :-) Pwimageglow (talk) 18:43, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Pwimageglow:. If you are curious about tags on a page, generally the first place to look is on the corresponding talk page. In this case, please see Talk:Tiny_Rebel, where you will find a box with the corresponding information. Let me know if you have any other questions. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 08:06, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blood Order

Hello Storkk!

I'm sorry to bother you, I see you contributed to the Blood Order article. I am having some difficulty with an editor who know claims that the Blood Order and the Golden Party Badge are "trivial" awards and are not to be linked to in other articles. As you contributed to the Blood Order article, I'm hoping you don't consider it a trivial award? My problem is that I don't see what is wrong with linking to a stand-alone article, like the Blood Order, in another article, such as the Ernst Röhm article, which I've been adding content to. I don't see what function a stand-alone article serves if you are not allowed to provide a link to it in another article? I also don't see how it is now, based on one editor's say-so, a "trivial" award? I have asked him why I can't link to a stand-alone article but have received no reply, other than it is now menial and not permitted to be linked. This has happened to me on many occasions, with many awards and decorations. I have asked for a list of so-called "trivial" awards so I know not to link to them again, have my added content deleted and wait for the inevitable aggressive warning (see my talk page). Again, no such list has been made available by this editor, so what do I do? Just add links to stand-alone articles and hope for the best or just stop adding links to stand-alone articles? The thing is, I have added many awards and decorations to many articles, but they still stand, so I'm at a loss as to why it's ok to provide links in some articles but not the ones that the editor in question is monitoring. I'm not asking you to take sides or anything like that, what I would greatly appreciate is your input on the Ernst Röhm talk page. If you feel stand-alone articles are not to be linked, fair enough. If you think it's ok, it would be helpful for the consensus of editors ruling on this. If you also don't view the Blood Order or the Golden Party Badge or any others as "trivial", which I'm thinking you don't as you took the time to add to the article, it would be greatly appreciated if you could say so. I just don't see the problem with linking to stand-alone articles. If they're not link-worthy, what function do they serve?

Thank you for your time

Troy Troy von Tempest (talk) 00:54, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Troy von Tempest: I have no opinion one way or another on the subject of the content dispute, so won't weigh in on the discussion. I'd suggest it's often wise to take a step back during content disputes to avoid them getting heated. Based purely on edit summaries, BMK's main objection seems to be that per WP:BRD during discussion the article should technically be in the reverted state. Meh. Instructions for what you can do if you believe the process is being subverted are at WP:Dispute resolution. Try not to take things personally, since it won't help, even if the other party appears to insist on trying to antagonize you and mis-characterize things. Storkk (talk) 09:51, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Storkk. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merchandise Giveaway Nomination - Successful

Hey Storkk,

Lasy year you were successfully nominated to receive a free t-shirt from the Wikimedia Foundation through our Merchandise Giveaway program (https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways). Congratulations and thank you for your hard work!

Please email us at merchandise@wikimedia.org and we will send you full details on how to accept your free shirt.

Thanks! SHust (WMF) (talk) 00:28, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:WCT Master RGB Registered.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:WCT Master RGB Registered.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Capuchin Costa Rica.jpg

Howdy. Your widely-used photo of a white-faced capuchin on Commons [9] is labeled as Cebus capucinus, which is the Colombian white-faced capuchin. However, you note that the photo was taken in Costa Rica, where that species does not occur; it would be Cebus imitator, the Panamanian white-faced capuchin. Since the image is currently being used in the latter article (where an editor just amended the caption, which now clashes with image information), would you mind amending the image description? Cheers! --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:48, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, Elmidae! I've updated the description on Commons - do you think what I wrote is accurate? A secondary concern would now be to move the whole commons category c:category:Cebus capucinus in Costa Rica... I'll start a discussion on Commons and notify you once I've done so. Storkk (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
c:Commons:Categories for discussion/2020/04/Category:Cebus capucinus in Costa Rica is now open for discussion. Storkk (talk) 15:17, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Commented there. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 16:08, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Today's Wikipedian 10 years ago

Awesome
Ten years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:17, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Gerda! Wow, time flies. Storkk (talk) 09:24, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Wishing Storkk a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee!   Chris Troutman (talk) 17:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Chris troutman: Many thanks. Wishing you a great day! Storkk (talk) 12:30, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day!

Happy Birthday!