User talk:JuTa

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Category:Beiguan

Look at here: [1]. I don't see why there is any reason to delete it. You can read about that in zh-tw:北關 (宜蘭縣). As you see, "Beiguan" and "Beiguan Tidal Park" are different concepts and should not be confused with each other.--Kai3952 (talk) 09:44, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was an empty and at that time uncategorized category, which is now not any more the case. --JuTa 21:11, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think so. I'm worried that many Taiwanese are confused by both Beiguan and Beiguan Tidal Park. In fact, the true "Beiguan" situated at the narrowest place between the mountain and the coast; but they often mistakenly thought that it was the Beiguan Tidal Park.--Kai3952 (talk) 17:32, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You dont think that the cat was empty ancategorized at the time I deleted it? Believe me, it was. The cat makes sense as long it it categorized and has some images sorted to it, which is now the case. Thx for that. --JuTa 17:37, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not saying that this means that the cat was not empty ancategorized at the time. I certainly understand that the cat makes sense as long it categorized, but the problem is not here. Just as I said before, many Taiwanese are confused by both Beiguan and Beiguan Tidal Park. If we want to avoid that the cat is empty from happening again in the future, and this is where the problem sets in. Do you understand what I said?--Kai3952 (talk) 08:51, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, I see. The only thing I could recommend then is to make some commemts (best in english and korean) that the 2 cats should not be confused from each other and what the difference is. regards. --JuTa 08:55, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at my wits' end with this problem. As far as I know, they(the users from Taiwan) will take the initiative to modify the category for these files. So that's why I think Category:Beiguan were become empty. Do you have any better way to avoid it?--Kai3952 (talk) 13:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, sorry. --JuTa 16:04, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Libro las 101 recetas más saludables para vivir y sonreír.jpg" and "Showcoking ecoreus 28 novembre 2016.jpg"

Hello JuTa, I saw that you'd deleted the images: "File:Libro las 101 recetas más saludables para vivir y sonreír.jpg" and "File:Showcoking ecoreus 28 novembre 2016.jpg", but the athor of the photos sent the authorization of them several times, and the photos have been deleted a couple of times because they say there is no authorization, I can't understand why. ¿Could you check it please? Thank you very much. --Aidalova (talk) 08:43, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aidalova, Please ask on Commons:OTRS noticeboard for this case. Perhaps the copyright owner never sent it, perhaps the rellease was not valid, perhaps OTRS stuff missed it. regards. --JuTa 08:52, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of users from Category:Users suspected of abusing Wikipedia Zero

Hi, could you explain why you are removing users from Category:Users suspected of abusing Wikipedia Zero? These users exist, although many have specifically avoided visiting Commons in an attempt to slip under the radar. —Dispenser (talk) 19:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, they don't exist on commons (see i.e. the red remark on top of User:Salva Amadri). They are/were listed on Commons:Database reports/Ownerless pages in the user space. I try to clean up this backlog from time to time and I plan to continue to do so, as I cant see a real advantage to categorize non-existing users. regards. --JuTa 15:25, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Steinsplitter: Can you join centralauth_p.globaluser ON gu_name = REPLACE(page_title, "_", " ") instead of the user table? All accounts are merged in SUL, so there sound be no problems. Dispenser (talk) 17:23, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Done, Changed to gu_name. Query is running but slow, so it may take a while to update. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:50, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dispenser: It is not working, but i have no time to look deeper into it right now. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:53, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: Contains global acc's which are globally hidden... Thus it is no longer working as expected (those are in LEFT JOIN NULL). --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:57, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Correct license

can you check my new two images and see if its correct license? Saadkhan12345 (talk) 18:38, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Which images? Please name them. --JuTa 16:21, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep it!

This is a very important photo, Please keep it, Thank You! --223.140.155.50 06:44, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See [2] --223.140.155.50 07:13, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

How is the problem on this file File:Población de Porto Alegre.PNG? You sent me a msg on my profile. The picture is an derivate work from this File:População de Porto Alegre.PNG that is also on the same license.

Thank you!

--Loco085 msg 12:13, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:JuTa&oldid=262738168"