Jump to content

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kurmanbek

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
 Support = 8;  Oppose = 6;  Neutral = 0 - 57% Result. Unsuccessful.
Note that one support voter has only nine edits on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Kurmanbek

Related requests:

Vote

Kurmanbek (talk · contributions (views) · deleted user contributions · deleted uploads · recent activity (talk · project · deletion requests) · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth)

Scheduled to end: 22:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I'm Kurmanbek. I have been contributing to Wikimedia projects, including Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons, for many years. I have Interface administrator, technician and patrol rights at Turkish Wikipedia. If it's on Wikimedia Commons, I own the file carrier and patrol rights. Now that I'm much more active on Wikimedia Commons, I want to be an administrator and help more. For example, I started my candidacy because I want to not only move files, but also make contributions such as deleting inappropriate files, merging history, correcting redirects. I would also like to point out that I always pay attention to the rules on Wikimedia Commons. Kind regards. Kurmanbek (talk) 22:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Votes

  •  Weak oppose Based on the issues identified in the comments section, I am inclined to oppose. But we should wait for the candidate to respond before casting a definitive vote. Brianjd (talk) 06:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Oppose The candidate has answered some questions. But for other questions, they have responded without actually answering. The candidate should be aware that an RfA is a chance for the community to scrutinise their contributions and their understanding of Commons policies. They should answer each question with a reasonable amount of detail. Brianjd (talk) 06:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I told you in detail about the laws in our country, why I open deletion requests for discussion, and more. You even commented on my Meta page even though it had nothing to do with it, which I consider unnecessary. Frankly, I was very curious why you asked so many related and irrelevant questions in a row... Moreover, the answer to your first question has already been given. Kurmanbek (talk) 07:15, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The answer to the first question shows a lack of understanding of the spirit of COM:SCOPE. Commons is just here as a neutral host of any file that at least one project finds useful (or which is generally considered educationally useful). Neither Commons nor the "home wiki" of a country-specific topic gets to dictate which image every project should use for that subject. It's a fine line, of course; sometimes I upload a new photo of a subject and consider it better than all the existing photos, and certainly I'm allowed to update it of my own accord on multiple wikis. But I always try to give an explanation why I am doing the replacement in the language of the wiki, and if I am unable to do so I will leave it alone for that wiki's editors to handle as they see fit. It is important to speak the language of each wiki so that you can provide a justification if challenged; each wiki has its own independent consensus process. In any case, I would not use COM:GR. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Of course, Commons is not a local place. However, why not update a station's photo to be better on all wikis? Is it a problem to have an updated photo? If that's the whole problem, I'll have another update. Honestly, I don't think there's anything to hinder the candidacy process. —-Kurmanbek (talk) 08:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You must understand that not everyone agrees on what is ‘better’. Maybe the other users on trwiki agree with you, but that is not a guarantee that other users on other projects will agree with you. If you cannot understand that, then that alone is a reason that you cannot be trusted as an admin. Brianjd (talk) 08:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I totally understand. In fact, sometimes users change the photo and put another photo in other languages ​​on this subject, and I do not oppose it in any way. Users can use whatever photos they want when writing in their own language, it's none of my business. I'm just trying to help. Other than that, I don't think you have anything else on your mind. —Kurmanbek (talk) 08:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per King of Hearts --Ameisenigel (talk) 08:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per above. Concerns with copyright and policy knowledge. -FASTILY 10:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What is the reason for your concern? I have been a contributor for many years and have not intentionally taken any action to infringe copyright. Kurmanbek (talk) 12:08, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also a glitch of updating photos with GR has passed. From now on, I will not edit this topic and this topic that you will edit will be closed. You don't have to worry about the first copyright mistakes that I unconsciously made. Unfortunately, I think that the questions are asked irrelevant according to the people. (for example the question about my Meta page)… -Kurmanbek (talk) 13:13, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The ‘question’ about your Meta page (Babel tags) was not a question at all; it was clearly labelled as a comment, and no one else has mentioned it since then. You are the one who keeps mentioning it, for some unknown reason. It is relevant; although this whole discussion has been in English so far, Commons does not require the use of English. It welcomes users of all languages, and correct Babel tags make it easier for them to communicate with each other.
You don’t seem to understand that admin tools are very powerful tools that must only be granted after the community has carefully checked that the candidate can be trusted, and therefore the community is expected to scrutinize all the candidate’s contributions and ask the candidate hard questions. Brianjd (talk) 01:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can rest assured that I will use the admin tools with confidence. I already have a lot of authority on the Turkish Wikipedia and have never committed serious violations. My violations here also belong to the times when I started to contribute. So, I can inform you that such a problem is not and will not be anymore. -Kurmanbek (talk) 12:45, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the number of administrators will do you any harm. Assuming you didn't write the same comment to the previous candidate, I think you wrote this just to downvote. -Kurmanbek (talk) 09:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming you didn't write the same comment to the previous candidate, I think you wrote this just to downvote. I don’t know why you had to comment on that; everyone, especially admins, should try to keep discussions civil and on-topic. Anyway, your assumption is wrong: Matlin added the same vote with the same comment to Cybularny’s nomination, a fact you could easily have verified.
By the way, Cybularny is a popular candidate with no other oppose votes. There is a good reason for that. If you want to be an admin, you might want to copy their behaviour. Brianjd (talk) 09:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again, I don't see any problem in my behavior. I haven't argued with anyone in years, and I would definitely prefer to meet in a civilized way by consensus. I don't think it's normal to have a series of negative votes just because I change photos with more GR. Because the fact that I have changed the photo is not for the purpose of corrupting or vandalizing the content. I just wanted all Wikipedia versions to have the most up-to-date and newer photos of related articles. Anyway, I won't update it with GR again, the user who wants it gets it from Commons and uses it. Other than this issue, I personally don't see any problems. Also, I edited the post, I may have overlooked it, sorry -Kurmanbek (talk) 10:51, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I deleted previous posts when I first came to Commons. Will bringing it back be enough for you? -Kurmanbek (talk) 09:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for creating archives! I striked my oppose vote. Taivo (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
 Support I know Kurmanbek from Turkish Wikipedia for 2 years. I like, appreciate and support his actions, edits and uploads in Commons! Good Luck! - Dr.Wiki54 (talk) 20:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hi Mr. Savin. First of all, I took the photos of Atatürk Cultural Center myself. Photos comply with the FOP law in Turkey. Secondly, I replaced it with a photo I took myself. Because I thought it would be better for the station name to appear. In fact, we examined the New York Subway station photos on the English Wikipedia, and we discussed this issue on the Turkish Wikipedia, and came to the opinion that this style is much better descriptive. Respects. —Kurmanbek (talk) 23:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Photos comply with the FOP law in Turkey. Please elaborate, with reference to COM:FOP Turkey.
The photo was replaced at en:Vezneciler (Istanbul Metro), tr:İstanbul metrosu istasyonları listesi and tr:Vezneciler (İstanbul metrosu). It was also replaced at fa:وزنچیلار (متروی استانبول) and wikivoyage:ru:Стамбул/Султанахмет-Старый город. I repeat the question above: Is COM:GR really the appropriate way to go in such cases? Brianjd (talk) 04:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Brianjd. as I said above, we have a Wikiproject: Transportation working group. Here we opened a discussion and discussed this topic so that the photos of the rail system stations in Istanbul would appear as a set and have a better perspective. As a result, we agreed to update the images in this way in consensus with the members of the working group. While we changed it in Turkish Wikipedia, we also changed it in other Wikipedia and Wikimedia projects. Because the photos we took are current photos. Unfortunately, before we established the working group, the number of photographs of the rail system stations in Istanbul was very few and the ones belonging to very old dates. In other words, we intend to show the user an updated and better photo. It certainly has no other purpose. Respects. Kurmanbek (talk) 06:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In many cases, projects do not agree on which photo is best. Usually, if a project decides that a particular photo is better, they can use that photo, but they don’t interfere with other projects. Also, Commons has a clear policy of not interfering with other projects (Commons:Project scope#File in use in another Wikimedia project: A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful …. Such a file is not liable to deletion simply because it may be of poor quality ….). Why is this case different? Brianjd (talk) 06:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changing the file does not mean it should be deleted. While we have a more up-to-date photo, we have updated it so that it can be used more up-to-date in other projects. We do not aim to change the photographs taken more professionally anyway. For example, I replaced Taksimİstasyonİçi.JPG with M2 Taksim station (1).jpg. Because many changes occurred at the station from 2009 to 2022. I don't think the photo taken in 2009 need be in the infobox. Kurmanbek (talk) 07:23, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This image is used at fa:تکسیم (متروی استانبول), he:הרכבת התחתית של איסטנבול, tr:Taksim Aktarma Merkezi, tr:M2 (İstanbul metrosu), tr:İstanbul metrosu istasyonları listesi and Taksim (Q113553574). None of those pages use the image in an infobox. Some of them use the image in a gallery. There is no need to replace the image there. Also, there is no need to replace the image on Wikidata. It is fine to include both images. Also see King of Heart’s comment on their vote. Brianjd (talk) 08:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course he can stay. However, I think that it would be healthier to have the current state of the place in the forefront as the featured visual. —-Kurmanbek (talk) 08:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, my opinion is, that replacing of this photo by this photo is not appropriate, as the former photo has at least the same quality and the wide-angle-like composition fits somewhat better as a general view for illustrating this metro station. Additionally, I don't think the station sign has to be visible at any price, and I also don't think that the photo in article has to be recent, unless there are really significant changes you can see in comparison of both views. Regarding your example, Taksimİstasyonİçi.JPG vs. M2 Taksim station (1).jpg, the newer picture is indeed better IMO -- however I still think that crosswiki replaces should be done manually, alone for the reason that with an automated replace you cannot check if the captions are still correct (for example GR only replaces the filename, but not "2009->2023").
And yes, per COM:FOP Turkey FoP is valid only for exterior views and unfortunately the laws make no distinction between various sorts of buildings, whether you have to pay entrance fees or just can go in anytime etc.pp... That means, for example, that many of the interior shots of the Istanbul Airport aren't OK to upload either, many users are not aware of this, but a sysop should be. Regards --A.Savin 08:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your constructive comments. If we talk about the station photographs, I think that the dimensions of the photograph stand out more in substance. In addition, it seems to have a nicer appearance if the colors are a little more pronounced. Yes, almost nobody in our country knows about this law except photographers and experts in the field of justice. For this reason, there is a need for administrators who can distinguish such photos on Commons. For this reason, I can say that I am a candidate. Kurmanbek (talk) 09:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question You have come across a photo of a modern statue by living artist permanently placed in a park in İzmir. What would be your response to it: tolerate it or launch a deletion request to it? Hint: per COM:FOP Turkey: "Works of fine arts permanently placed on public streets, avenues or squares may be reproduced by drawings, graphics, photographs and the like, distributed, shown by projection in public premises or broadcast by radio or similar means. For architectural works, this freedom is only valid for the exterior form." JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:34, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi JWilz12345, according to the FOP law in Turkey, works of art in public spaces can be placed on the Commons. There is no need to delete the photo as there is no harm in this. The laws in Turkey are never simple enough for the citizens to read and understand clearly. Let me tell you like this; For example, a work of art in a state museum for which no money is charged may also be in compliance with FOP laws. Because it is also a public space and everyone can enter as they wish. This issue needs to be discussed and clarified by the state. Kurmanbek (talk) 06:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kurmanbek: Thanks for your reply. However, looking at some of the successful deletions at Category:Turkish FOP cases/deleted, it may seem to counter your input regarding Turkish FOP. Accordingly, parks in Türkiye do not count as streets, avenues, or squares as indicated at Turkish laws that COM:FOP Turkey follows. Are you willing to have another discourse on Commons regarding Turkish FOP, or are you going to change your input on this? JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:27, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Logically, it is considered a public space, as no fee is charged. In addition, there is another clause in the law that says "Fine works of art may be exhibited in public places by their owners or by others with their consent, unless an express prohibitive record has been placed on them by the owner". Based on this, I think works exhibited anonymously in public spaces are eligible for FOP. Kurmanbek (talk) 10:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Kurmanbek: normally, copyright laws are applied as they are, and unless courts established some additional rules, the "what is not written in the law is forbidden" typically prevails. For example, U.S. has only FOP for buildings but no mention of this exception for other artistic works. Still cases like "Gaylord v. United States" emerged, even if US law does not provide "non-commercial" FOP for other works. As in the case of Turkish FOP, your logic may need to be tested in court first before being applied here, as the law as it was written excludes parks. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 19:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Looking through your recent contributions in the Commons namespace, I found Commons:Deletion requests/File:HKP logo.png. Do you believe that the logo is below the threshold of originality in both its source country (Turkey) and the US? If so, why? Brianjd (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Or do you still believe that the file must be deleted, just not speedily? Brianjd (talk) 05:42, 26 January 2023 (UTC) It’s the candidate’s own upload. Brianjd (talk) 05:58, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Greetings, I am not a party to the deletion of the logo. I just changed it from quick delete to discussion so that the deletion is open for discussion. So we will be discussing whether to delete it or not. If you ask my opinion, the logo can be included as {{PD-shape}} on Wikimedia Commons. Kurmanbek (talk) 06:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question I also found many cases where you converted your own speedy deletion (copyvio) nominations into deletion requests. Please describe when a speedy deletion should be used, and when a deletion request should be used. Brianjd (talk) 05:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Greetings, I'm converting delete requests because I wanted some of the files to be discussed and deleted, not quick deletion. Also, when I encountered such a problem before, they told me that I should open a deletion discussion instead of quick delete. --Kurmanbek (talk) 06:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Your talk page archives only go back to 2021, yet you were briefly blocked in 2017. Where is the information about what happened before 2021? Brianjd (talk) 06:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It starts in 2021 as I installed my archiver bot in 2021. I haven't had a chance to extract and add previous messages yet. It is already in the version history. Kurmanbek (talk) 06:55, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi again, you can see all archived notifies year by year. Kurmanbek (talk) 13:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Please fix your Babel tags, which currently say you are both en-3 and en-0. Brianjd (talk) 05:44, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for your attention. I think there is something wrong with that user box. I will remove it until it is resolved. Thanks again for reminding. Kurmanbek (talk) 06:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kurmanbek&oldid=729555969"