Stefan2

-- 13:42, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Have you noticed the discussion about you at Wikimedia Forum#Deletions by とある白い猫? It looks as if no one has notified you, at least not here. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:51, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

I was notified on IRC, but thank you for the notification. -- とある白い猫 ^chi? 19:04, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you edited the initial naming straw poll for the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll is now open and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 23:06, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Hi there,

You are receiving this message because you voiced your opinion at the Request for Comment on the Wikimedia Travel Guide.

The proposed naming poll opened a few days ago and you can vote for as many of the proposed names as you wish, if you are eligible. Please see Travel Guide/Naming Process for full details on voting eligibility and how the final name will be selected. Voting will last for 14 days, and will terminate on 16 October at 06:59:59 UTC.

Thanks, Thehelpfulone 22:09, 6 October 2012 (UTC)

Appreciated and speedy ones gone. Will look at the others later. Thanks :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 14:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

You're welcome! I was checking recent uploads on English Wikipedia and one of the files suggested that I should check this uploader on Meta too. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:26, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Moar thanks :) --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stephan,

I waqnt to asky u how can i fix the "Copyright problem with.." the file that i had upload.

I could not choose an apropiable licence at time to upload the files. --Jduranboger (talk) 21:54, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Who has taken the images? Did you take them yourself? If so, could you choose a licence now instead? --Stefan2 (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi Stefan2, whether you write Twitter for a link, or have the symbol, it is trademarked to Twitter. They have set up this page which indicates how to use logos and provides downloads. As long as the images are used properly, ie-links to Twitter, it is fine (which they are in this case). They're are "trademarked" templates and other special use templates on Commons but they don't exist here. How would you suggest I indicate these things? I was going to add some information and remove the deletion warning, but I wanted to chat with you first. heather walls (talk) 00:36, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

The trademark is a non-copyright restriction and thus a non-issue for Meta. The problem is that the logo is copyrighted and unlicensed. As Meta-Wiki doesn't have an EDP, only freely licensed files can be uploaded to Meta. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:56, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

What indicates that the bird is copyrighted? (I am seriously curious) the site I linked to does not, and it's a pretty basic bird-shape that wouldn't inherently mean copyright, would it? Not having an EDP does not equal "only freely licensed files can be uploaded to Meta." in fact that discussion is happening right now which of course you know because you are in it. Would you consider removing the deletion until consensus is found? heather walls (talk) 19:17, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

There is no evidence that the logo isn't copyrighted and it is a recent logo with complex artwork. The discussion at WM:RFD is only about files in a specific category, and the conclusion at Meta:Requests for deletion/Archives/2012#All fair use files and templates was that such files can't be kept as there is no policy allowing them. No EDP does indeed equal "only freely licensed files can be uploaded to Meta". Also, Template:Unfree logo automatically includes a speedy deletion template. --Stefan2 (talk) 06:53, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

I find these tags disturbing as it cuts the grain against how Wikimania bids and other planning work for Wikimedia events have operated for many years. I would request that you stop tagging or deleting files before a consensus was established at both Meta:Babel concerning local uploads for Wikimedia working documents, and Meta:Requests for deletion concerning Wikimania bid files. Deryck C. 15:29, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

At Meta:Requests for deletion/Archives/2012#All fair use files and templates, it was concluded that files can't be hosted here if they aren't freely licensed. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:45, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

I can only say I'm disappointed that neither the Wikimania community nor the WM chapters community have been notified about these discussions. I've posted a message on mail:wikimania-l [1] to invite contribution to the discussions. Deryck C. 15:58, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on change.org.

• Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer
• Letter on change.org

I'm notifying you because you participated in one of several relevant discussions. -Pete F (talk) 22:21, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Peteforsyth: I am well aware of what has happened to de:MediaWiki:Common.js. Thanks for telling me about this petition. Did you notify everyone in de:Spezial:Linkliste/Benutzer:BeverlyHillsCop/Vorlage:Superprotect? --Stefan2 (talk) 23:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. No, I have not notified anybody from German Wikipedia (except for those who participated in RFCs or discussions on enwp, Commons, Meta, MediaWikiWiki). If you have suggestions for how to approach that, I would be very interested to hear; I do not speak German, and have very little direct experience with the German Wikipedia community. -Pete F (talk) 00:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I do not speek German either, but since German Wikipedia is heavily affected, there are probably lots of people on that project who might wish to sign the petition.

Some places to look at:

• [2] (note the sudden increase of "thank you" messages after the user reinstated text on "Common.js")
• [3] (note the sudden increase of "thank you" messages after the user blocked Eloquence)
• de:Benutzer Diskussion:DaB.#The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar

You should probably try to find a German user who can send messages in German to involved people on that project. --Stefan2 (talk) 00:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Stefan2,

Along with more hundreds of others, you recently signed Letter to Wikimedia Foundation: Superprotect and Media Viewer, which I wrote.

Today, we have 562 signatures here on Meta, and another 61 on change.org, for a total of 623 signatures. Volunteers have fully translated it into 16 languages, and begun other translations. This far exceeds my most optimistic hopes about how many might sign the letter -- I would have been pleased to gain 200 siguatures -- but new signatures continue to come.

I believe this is a significant moment for Wikimedia and Wikipedia. Very rarely have I seen large numbers of people from multiple language and project communities speak with a unified voice. As I understand it, we are unified in a desire for the Wikimedia Foundation to respect -- in actions, in addition to words -- the will of the community who has built the Wikimedia projects for the benefit of all humanity. I strongly believe it is possible to innovate and improve our software tools, together with the Wikimedia Foundation. But substantial changes are necessary in order for us to work together smoothly and productively. I believe this letter identifies important actions that will strongly support those changes.

Have you been discussing these issues in your local community? If so, I think we would all appreciate an update (on the letter's talk page) about how those discussions have gone, and what people are saying. If not, please be bold and start a discussoin on your Village Pump, or in any other venue your project uses -- and then leave a summary of what kind of response you get on the letter's talk page.

Finally, what do you think is the right time, and the right way, to deliver this letter? We could set a date, or establish a threshold of signatures. I have some ideas, but am open to suggestions.

Thank you for your engagement on this issue, and please stay in touch. -Pete F (talk) 18:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I tried to copy some files to Commons with CommonsHelper but I get an error. I added links to Template:CC-by-sa-3.0 to make it easy to copy but it does not work. Have you copied files from meta to Commons recently? --MGA73 (talk) 17:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Jag vet inte varför Commons Helper inte fungerar. Eventuellt kan man inte ladda upp filer från alla projekt eftersom Commons Helper inte känner igen alla licensmallar. Försök med w:WP:FTCG istället. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:35, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Tak det vil jeg prøve. Men nu det er så besværligt, så venter jeg indtil nn.wikipedia, no.wikipedia, da.wikibooks og da.wikisource er klaret :-) --MGA73 (talk) 19:19, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi. I've started this thread. Maybe you're interested. Best regards. — M 16:43, 01 December 2014 (UTC)

This file was marked {{Proposed logo}} by you, however, Meta-Wiki doesn't allow fair use so that's an invalid license and may result your files, not only this one, be nominated for deletion, but you can just simply avoid that happened by free re-licensing it e.g. as CC BY(-SA). Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:35, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

• User:Liuxinyu970226, it says that the file was uploaded in 2002 by imported>(Automated conversion). It seems that the name of the uploader has been lost at some point, but I was not the one who uploaded the file.

Looking at the history of the file, it seems that I discovered in 2013 that there was no associated file information page for this file, so I created a file information page with tags saying that the source and licence were unknown. Looking at my contributions from that time, I see that I didn't notify any uploader, so presumably I wasn't able to identify the uploader. For the record, File:Yy wiki g01.png and File:Newlogo1.png were also tagged as missing source and licence at the same time. Later, other people added copyright tags to the three files. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:21, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

• Based on Logo suggestions/Leading candidates#10, the logo was created by User:Magnus Manske, so maybe he could license the logo. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

Hi, do you want to unsubscribe from tech news? You seem to be reverting all the edits of the message delivery system. Plutus ^{💬 🎃} — Fortune favors the curious 09:23, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

I check if there's anything interesting in the delivered message and then remove the message. That way, I keep track of what I have already read. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:28, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Ah, okay Plutus ^{💬 🎃} — Fortune favors the curious 22:40, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:00, 13 October 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:36, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:32, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

MediaWiki message delivery 19:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)