LiDD
Content blanking
edit
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kofi Lockhart-Adams, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. —LX (talk, contribs) 16:40, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
LiDD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
En el momento en el que una fotografía con marca de agua o un logotipo de autoría y metadatos indicando la misma es modificada para eliminar esa autoría y no aparece un pie de página donde diga el autor, ustedes están vulnerando los derechos de autor de cualquier fotografía. Algo que ustedes hacen en el artículo indicado https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kofi_Lockhart-Adams donde intencionadamente se modifica la fotografía precisamente para eliminar la marca de agua del autor de la misma, es más, se ha modificado, grabado en otro formato y sin metadatos originales de la autoría y con un nombre nuevo donde tampoco figura el autor. Si eso no es infringir los derechos de autor... es sencillamente, eliminar la autoría. Para colmo, cuando trato de denunciarlo o sustituirlo por un nuevo archivo, ustedes bloquean mi acceso a los archivos originales, sustituyen de nuevo la fotografía por una fotografía sin rastro de autoría (ni marca de agua, ni metadatos, ni nombre, ni pie de página con el autor) y me acusan de vandalismo por denunciar el abuso que están haciendo. Me engañan con unas condiciones para que yo ceda el uso de la fotografía y cuando ese uso se hace sin cumplir esas condiciones, optan por bloquearme y callar las denuncias del hecho, limitándose a informarme que la cesión no se puede revocar. No sé como funcionan las cosas en su país, ni me importa, pero en mi país (ese que les concedió el Premio Princesa de Asturias) los acuerdos se han de cumplir y los derechos de autor se respetan, si se ceden con unas condiciones, esas condiciones han de respetarse o de lo contrario tengo todo el derecho del mundo a revocar mi consentimiento por haber sido engañada y vulnerado ustedes mis derechos. Lidimentos~~Lidimentos~~
Decline reason:
I assume this is about File:Kofi Lockhart-Adams.png, a cropped version of File:Kofi lockhart-adams by Lidimentos.jpg. You will notice that the file page for the former image still lists you as the author. When you uploaded the original image, you irrevocably gave everybody permission to re-use and modify it, provided you are credited as the author (and you are) and that the modified version is released under a comparable license (and it is). Removing the watermark from the image is an entirely appropriate modification complying with the license under which you released the original. Even if that weren't so, that issue should be discussed on the Wikimedia Commons (where people fluent in Spanish are more likely to be found than here); your conduct on the English Wikipedia has been disruptive, and I see no indication that the disruption wouldn't resume if you were unblocked. Huon (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
LiDD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Ok. So it's just a question of language because "vandalism" is when you don't respect a thing or destroy. I mean, a thing is "cropped" but if you destroy the watermark, the filename, and delete metadata... those things are vandalism over a image, you delete or destroy any trace of the author in the file itself... that's is vandalism... because when a person is looking the picture in the article or save the image... then that person has an image without trace or infor of the author... so it's a breach in conditions. I uploaded the image in wikipedia so Wikipedia is also responsible of that vulnerability of my copyright. ~~Lidimentos~~
Decline reason:
You are blocked for edit warring; you'll need to address that in any unblock request. --jpgordon𝄢𝄆 𝄐𝄇 22:54, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
.
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Kofi Lockhart-Adams, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Kofi Lockhart-Adams was changed by Lidimentos (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.910506 on 2016-11-26T21:15:40+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:15, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.