User talk:Fry1989/Archive2

Red ensign on commons

I think you can't so easy move the file to another destination. In the German wikipedia for instance, around 300 links did not more work due to this. [1]. So I had to re-upload the file. --Florentyna (talk) 14:40, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Files are renamed very frequently on Commons, the breaks are a problem but they are corrected by CommonsDelinker. The temporary nuissance of the breaks in files is not a reason to stop the practice of file renaming. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:13, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Miguillen is causing problems again

I would certainly. Without any support, I don't see why he should impose images simply because they confirm to some drawing style agreed upon on the Spanish Wikipedia. Furthermore, it seems even his Spanish Wikipedia doesn't agree with him, as it turns out Heralder (and I, for some reason) are featured on the Spanish Heraldry portal (link). And even if he does find a consensus, he still still doesn't seem to be able to rationally argue why Heralder's designs are wrong. Yeah, I recall that incident with him, but I've was quite rash myself as well back then. Adelbrecht (talk) 22:12, 20 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo Security Force logos

Hello Fry1989, can you upload the military rank insignias and new emblems vector of the ksf cause i've already uploaded them here as a rar file where you can download it: http://www.sendspace.com/file/cby77w Thanks, AceDouble (talk) 13:23, 01 March 2013 (UTC).[reply]

I have no idea what to do with .RARs Fry1989 ^eh? 00:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Stemma della sede vacante

Ciao! Per favore, non continuare a reinserire lo stemma in svg. Oltre ad essere più pesante di quello in jpg è visivamente molto più brutto, è graficamente piatto ed è pure fatto male. Grazie e buon lavoro!--79.16.192.121 (talk) 00:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

YOur file is up for deletion on Commons because there is an SVG equivalent. Do not replace the SVG with your file while it is under a deletion request. Fry1989 ^eh? 00:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The new image is created following the original one to replace this ugly image. Why do you want to delete the new one? --Krepideia § in fructus labore 01:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really tired of people calling File:Ombrellino-keys.svg "ugly". Two users have called File:Sede vacante.jpg "ugly" as well, it's all in the eye of the beholder. As for File:Sede vacante.svg, it is very different, and it needs a discussion for such a drastic change. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The new coat of arms is the right one, it is drawn following the original picture of the Holy See (look here and also here, please). In it.wiki, we asked for a new coat of arms because we did not like the previous one. We don't want to delete the old one, we don't want just to use it. --Krepideia § in fructus labore 02:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever then. Fry1989 ^eh? 02:26, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand why two different pictures couldn't stay both in Commons... --Krepideia § in fructus labore 02:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When we have an SVG of an image, and someone later uploads an inferior format such as a GIF, JPEG or PNG, we usually delete it because it's unnecessary, unless they are very very different. In this case they aren't. Also File:Sede vacante.jpg is very poor, it's fuzzy and the colours bleed into each other. That is why it is nominated for deletion. Fry1989 ^eh? 04:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Navy Cadets ensign

Hello, Good work on the ensign. The badge positioned on the fly is the ANC's main badge (image avaliable on the ANC wiki page its self. Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 02:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, are you absolutely certain it's the ANC's badge? I have not been able to find a photo but FOTW suggests a quite different badge using a trident and a naval crown and a banner. In any case, File:RAN cadets crest.gif is not in SVG format so I would not be able to put it on the flag :( Fry1989 ^eh? 19:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am. The flag that used the current badge (as you've linked) is the flag of the Australian Navy Cadets and was introduced in 2001. The flag that uses the trident was used from 1972 until 2001. The former ensign (from 1907-1972) is already on the ANC page. Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 23:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On Tuesday night I can take a photo of both if you like. Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 23:47, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, so it's actually both badges at different times. That certainly clears up the confusion between the image and the description on FOTW. A photo would be wonderful, but without an SVG of the badge I'm still limited. I'll try and make a graphic lab request soon and see if anybody can do an SVG, but it's beyond my abilities sadly. Thanks mate :) Fry1989 ^eh? 00:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I forgot to send you the pictures. What's your email address, I can email them to you. Nford24 (Want to have a chat?) 05:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Check your inbox :) Fry1989 ^eh? 16:11, 4 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicle Flag of the Australian PM

At the moment, I am pretty disgusted with you for pulling the flag image from those sites. I HAVE PERSONALLY SEEN THIS FLAG. When the Australian PM visited NZ in 1983, I was in the Royal New Zealand Air force Honor Guard. Before the arrival of the PM's plane, I noticed the flag fluttering from the vehicle that was going to take the Australian PM from the airport. I asked the driver about the flag, to which I was told that the Prime Minister uses this version of the Australian National Flag on his vehicle. He even held it out for me so that I could see the embroidered State Arms. So, by your pulling the flag, you're calling me an out-and-out liar. NOT IMPRESSED!!!!! Expatkiwi ^eh? 22:12, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK then. First of all, you have a real nasty attitude going on here and I don't like it. Second, you provided no source on the file page, or in any of your edit summaries, and you should surely know that "I've seen it" doesn't meet the definition of a trusted source. Third, I never called you a liar or anything else, I simply said "needs a source". Fourth, I tried to find a source myself before removing it, I could not find any pics or websites describing the flag. If I hadn't removed it, someone else would have. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My attitude is because I have had a lot pulled from Wikipedia by folk such as you. Actions like this call my integrity into question and that hits a nerve. In any case, if you want to see a photo of the flag, it's here: [2] Expatkiwi ^eh? 12:50, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are taking this WAY too personal. Content gets pulled here all the time, usually because it is unsourced. If you work here, you have to know that Wikipedia relies on sources, and you didn't provide one. It's not an insult or an attack on you, or calling you a liar or anything else. It happens to all of us. Now from what I've seen on your link and some personal research, it doesn't seem to still be in use. You can add it back, but you're going to have to explain this to the readers. Fry1989 ^eh? 15:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The flag seems to be used on-and-off, based on what others have said. Barraclough's book on flags references the flag as well. So - and I will apologize for taking things too much to heart - how should this flag be presented: As a "variant" vehicle flag, or "disused"? Expatkiwi ^eh? 16:20, 10 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Semi-official", "former", or "used by Menzies", something like that is what I would do. Fry1989 ^eh? 15:33, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The NZ Ministry of Transport flag

I've contacted the New Zealand Heraldic Society in order to request a graphic of the old MOT arms. This way, the graphic you drew of the MOT flag can be completed. Call it a penance of sorts for my being nasty to you earlier.Expatkiwi ^eh? 16:30, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It would be awesome to have the coat of arms, if they're willing to provide one. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:50, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A temporary image of your flag with arms added has been uploaded by myself. I figured it would serve until a better depiction of the arms is available. Expatkiwi ^eh? 22:55, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

User User:ESkog is trying to delete off the revised image. --User:Expatkiwi (talk) 20:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's not really much I can do besides oppose the deletion. We might be better off to upload it to Commons, the coat of arms surely fall under PD-NZ. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:16, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With that graphic, could you use it to update your pic and use that one? --User:Expatkiwi (talk) 20:10, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no skills converting complex graphics to SVG, so I would not be able to do so for my SVG of the flag. The only options I can see are 1: Make your PNG more notable by adding it to the infobox and writing a paragraph about it, 2: uploading it to Commons under PD-NZ, or 3: putting in a graphic lab request for an SVG of the coat of arms. The last option however doesn't have much promise due to the complexity, I only know of three users who have the ability to do it properly, two have their own interests and the other has a very very long waiting list. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:35, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of New Zealand flags

User Werieth unilaterally removed the added flags without putting the deletion up for discussion. I've put them back up. --User:Expatkiwi (talk) 20:30, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And I have reverted you, further violations to the Non-free content policy may result in you being blocked. Werieth (talk) 20:40, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unilaterally removing an image without first doing a deletion discussion is well out of order, as far as I'm concerned. So are bad-faith threats. Expatkiwi, don't worry about the customs service ensign, I will have an SVG of that on Commons soon enough. I'll consider uploading the MOT flag as well if I can find a license. The Fire Service one however will be tricky. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:34, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The NZ Fire Service will more than likely grant permission if you ask them. Expatkiwi ^tutaiwera 19:00, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Irish road sign

Hi! I've seen you've renamed Irish road sign due to the fact that Ireland is fully metric...but in the official website with Irish road signs they still have imperial numbers...do you have another official Rule of the road of Ireland? Thank you! --Gigillo83 (talk) 08:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2010 Traffic Signs Manual, Chapter 5-6. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:57, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Australian Law Enforcement Flags

I wanted to let you know I've added the flags of the Australian Federal and State Police Services to Wikipedia (and displayed them on List of Australian Flags. Could you check this page - and the flag submissions - to see whether its all kosher? Expatkiwi ^{Flags Rock!} 18:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Queensland and Victoria both have an SVG that I made some time ago. I'll make an SVG of South Australia soon. The others all look fine to me. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:09, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The one for Western Australia was a rush job. If you can do a better one, go right ahead. FOTW didn't have a pic of it and I had to draw it off a photo. Expatkiwi ^{Ave Vexillology!} 19:11, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I won't be able to do Western Australia's, or any of the other states except South Australia because it's the only one with the badge in SVG. I do actually have photos of all the flags in my Photobucket if you're interested in taking a look: AFP, Victoria, Tasmania, Northern Territory, Queensland, South Australia, New South Wales and Western Australia. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:30, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I just hate to see the work I did zapped because I didn't dot every T and cross every I...Expatkiwi ^{Ave Vexillology!} 19:53, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Werieth pulled these flags as well. I've had an absolute belly-full of this person. I've issued a formal complaint to Wikipedia. Expatkiwi ^{Ave Vexillology!} 14:35, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File talk:Samesex marriage in USA.svg#Shade of blue used to show marriage

Fry1989, I'm here to respond to a concern that was raised to me.

With respect to the subject conversation, thank you for the restraint you have exercised in trying to maintain a level head in compliance with the behavioral restrictions imposed on you at User:Fry1989/Unblock conditions. I just want to caution you that the conversation has approached a more personal tone on all sides, although as far as I can tell this tone was not first introduced by you. It is difficult to refrain from getting personal when others are doing it, but please do try to keep up the effort. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:05, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not getting personal, I'm simply calling out lies. I was told I didn't address an issue when I did in my first reply, and I was given an answer to my question which doesn't actually answer it at all. My question isn't a popularity contest, it's a valid question on standardization and anybody can see that. Why should people be allowed to oppose something that makes perfect sense because I made an initial mistake in my proposal or because they "don't like it"? Fry1989 ^eh? 16:21, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fry, Don't let the conduct of others get to you. Just focus on content and valid arguments and ignore the rest. I agree with Amatulic that you've exercised restraint, which is great, but don't start, even here, using words like "lies". As for the content itself, if you can't obtain a consensus for your change on the talk page, there are other methods for seeking input from other editors.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:46, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have only filed one DRN before, and while I got the outcome I was seeking it is alot of work and has certain requirements before it's even accepted for wider discussion. I'm not sure I have the requirements for one yet. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:01, 6 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Editing without consensus

[3] [4]. Hello. I noticed you went ahead and edited the map even though you did not have any consensus. I have reverted your edits. Please start an RfC or DRN first instead of just making edits you know are controversial and do not have consensus support. Thanks Thegreyanomaly (talk) 17:04, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody cares except for you, and you didn't even notice for over a week. It's an accepted change now. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:22, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hii

I just seen your upload i think it was not so complex to copyrighted Perumalism Chat 19:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Normally I would agree, but it has been deleted a few times on Commons, so it's safer just to keep it here. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:33, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ok Perumalism Chat 15:49, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Royal Magazine" cover? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Royal_Magazine.jpg

Hello,

Just a quick question I hope you'll be kind enough to answer: do you happen to know the date of that particular issue of "The Royal Magazine"?75.18.183.197 (talk) 16:18, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I do not know. I'd guess somewhere during the 1920s or 30s personally. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply; I may have solved the mystery (or not).

Consumed by curiosity, I've since discovered that the text in red at the top of the cover ("Women Who Wear Trousers and Men Who Wear Petticoats") jibes with this bookseller's (http://www.sangraal-books.com/bk19.htm) entry for The Royal Magazine of June, 1899 (entry 8035 near the bottom).

I've amended the caption of the picture to reflect the above. Er, is that all right?75.18.183.197 (talk) 14:54, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objection. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:48, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Photographer Sandra Kimball here

Hello Fry1989,

This is photographer Sandra Kimball. I am actually with John right now as we had another model shoot today. I noticed a few of the photos I added are nominated for deletion. I noticed something about Permission. Maybe I made a mistake on my part during the upload of the files of John. I assure you I am the photographer of those images of John and I do not want them deleted as we both worked very hard during the shoots. Did I assign the wrong license? Please let me know here so there are no problems in the near future when I add a few more images of John from today's model session. I think it is great that you are top of things and we will be able to clear this up. I completely understand. Making sure the photos are from me is also very important to me as well. Keep up the good work and I look forward to hearing back from you to resolve this confusion asap.

Sandrakimball (talk) 23:16, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If you are the photographer or part of the photography agency responsible for the photos of John Quilan which I nominated for deletion on Commons, you may first object to the deletion on their nomination page(s), and then go through the OTRS permissions process which will verify that. Then they may stay on Commons. If you are unsure of how to proceed, there are users who can assist you in the process. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:02, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you I will do that as I am the photographer. There is no agency associated with the photos I take of John, the images are between me and him only. I am the sole creator of all the images nominated for deletion. I appreciate very much you telling me what to do so they will stay on Commons. Means a lot as we both work hard on our model shoots. Sandrakimball (talk) 12:10, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to let you know I emailed the information you instructed me to send. Emailed to: permissions-commons@wikimedia.org

I sent this email from my personal email on file with them. I look forward to hearing back from you and clearing up this bit of confusion. Thank You Sandrakimball (talk) 19:22, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The volunteers at OTRS will review the information you sent and will assist. Fry1989 ^eh? 20:24, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That is wonderful. Thank you Sandrakimball (talk) 00:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ukrainan road signs

Hi Fry! I've noticed that in last summer you've made Ukrainan road signs...but they're in .gif format and not in .svg format as usual...why you've mae this choice? Thank you! --Gigillo83 (talk) 22:26, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi mate! Sadly I'm very limited in my SVG skills, I can draw basic shapes and I can borrow more complicated images like cars or trucks from other SVG signs if they're similar enough, but I can't draw them on my own. Most of the signs would be too hard for me to draw. Luckily the Ukrainian Government had all the signs available in the GIF format and they were free of charge. When it was New Zealand or the United States or Quebec they were all available in SVG from government sources so I just had to upload them, but most countries don't bother with the SVG format or charge you money to buy the signs, so you either have to draw them in SVG yourself or upload them in GIF/JPEG/PNG. Fry1989 ^eh? 22:38, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia LGBT

I see that you contribute a lot to LGBT-related content. I am not sure if you are familiar with (or even interested in) Wikimedia user groups or thematic organizations, but I thought I would direct you to Wikimedia LGBT at Meta-Wiki. This is a proposed organization that would promote the development of content on Wikimedia projects which is of interest to LGBT communities. I just thought I would point you in that direction to take a look when you have a few moments. If you are interested in participating, feel free to indicate your support. Otherwise, keep up the great work here at Wikipedia! --Another Believer _(Talk) 22:31, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, I'll definitely take a look. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Abkhazia

Hey there! I created this account just for me to leave this message, since I always edit articles using my IP. Using an advanced vectorizer program, I converted the official flag found at abkhaziagov.org to SVG, but I have no idea on how to upload that picture. If you can update it, please, do it using the SVG you'll find at https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3k8XWfIn01FSi1zTlFtVGN1SW8/edit?usp=sharing Thanks for reading. I admire your work =)--Artur.q (talk) 16:39, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will update the file for you. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:54, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian naval ensign

By all means, take it to DR if you wish. I would love the opportunity to publicly address you're phantom "consensus" between you and User:Zoupan I guess(?), since no one else seems to really care either way. What I know exists in the form of reliable sources: [5], [6], [7], which is actually what really matters on Wikipedia, not your personal feelings and beliefs. Sorry for sounding snarky but you (an experienced editor) should know this by now. Buttons (talk) 03:11, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My response. Buttons (talk) 00:43, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why?

Why do you keep pushing an incorrect image of the Dutch CoA? You don't even know the Dutch heraldic rules! Just to summarice what's wrong with Sodacans image:

Claws in front of the escutions: that's now allowed
Wrong colour of the cloak behind the shield
Tinctures are not always the same in one CoA.

Now give me some very good reasons why we shoul place a wrong CoA, as you gave the reason Sodacans is "superior" even though both are vector images. Dqfn13 (talk) 09:08, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have to give you ANY reasons with that attitude. Sodacan's file is a very good work and it matches the blazon perfectly, they are a heraldic expert too. You are basically removing it because you "don't like it". That's hardly a valid reason. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:38, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, to read you accuse me of vandalism. The CoA is incorrect with the claws in front of the escution. I'm also sorry you don't read my reasons and you don't want to discuss with me. Dqfn13 (talk) 17:18, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to discuss, you have no sources to back your claims, your disagreement with Sodacon's files is purely a cosmetic issue, you don't like them. Please see Wikipedia:I just don't like it. Because you keep replacing the files I will be forced to seek an intervention. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:33, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've given you reasons, Henk Boelens and one other Dutch editor have backed me up on Commons... you're just ignoring us because you don't care for Dutch heraldic rules as long as the files look nice... Dqfn13 (talk) 18:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have given claims, you haven't given sources. I am reporting you for edit warring without sources and proper discussion. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:46, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What violation? So you're reporting me even though I haven't done anything after your warning? Dqfn13 (talk) 18:55, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Coat of arms of Mauritius

Hi, i want your help, i want to know why and where should a consensus be reached and who will decide of the choice. Thanks. Kingroyos (talk) 18:19, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that you are changing the image for the wrong reasons. You are calling it "fake" when it isn't fake, I and Anonmoos have both been trying to explain to you that it is just a different rendition. The best place to discuss the issue is Talk:Coat of arms of Mauritius, but unless you have a very good reason for changing the images, you may not find a lot of support. What I would suggest is that you take time to read Commons:COA and understand that just because a coat of arms has different shapes that doesn't make it "wrong" or "fake". I understand your desire to have our image as accurate of a replication as possible, but this isn't the right way of doing it. Fry1989 ^eh? 18:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, yes the reason is to have a COA as accurate as possible and also because it much more beautiful. How should i do it in the right way? Kingroyos (talk) 18:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Answer me please.Kingroyos (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want a consensus you need to discuss the matter on the article talk page and gain support. Fry1989 ^eh? 04:55, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Canadian Air Force ensign

To clarify, the dear colleague, please strange manipulations file on Wikimedia Commons.

1. 00:02, 3 April 2014‎ CommonsDelinker: "Royal_Canadian_Air_Force_ensign.svg". The file is deleted from Commons party Ronhjones. Reason: Fair use is not allowed on Commons. ([8])

2. [9]

It's the same file? I have not found any history of removal and restoration.

With respect. — Андрей Бондарь (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello friend. Yes it is the same file, it was deleted because a user claimed it was copyrighted but this is not true. I made an un-deletion request and it was restored. Thank you for uploading File:Royal Canadian Air Force Ensign.PNG while the SVG file was missing. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:36, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undoing my contribution an Comparison of European road signs

Why undoing the Luxembourg column of road signs? I was working on it! (OK, I'd have put the ″Work in progress″ template). Could you please undo your undoing... Thanks --GilPe (talk) 14:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, but I felt we should wait until all the signs from Luzembourg are ready. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:06, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop Changing Coat of Arms

Please stop attempting to change the Australian Coat of Arms image on the Australia page. The one being used is the official version as approved in 1912 and is the familiar version as used by the government.

See the official 1912 Coat of Arms here: http://www.itsanhonour.gov.au/coat-arms/

The alternative version is indeed cartoonish (which is not reason enough to say it shouldn't be used) but aside from it not being as good looking perhaps, the true argument for not using it is that it is not the official version that is used by the govt as the full colour coat of arms and has adorned our passports, citizenship certificates, etc etc.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 02:39, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is any such consensus not to use an image, you have no right to tell me not to replace one with another. No such consensus exists. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:36, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus. I am merely stating that you are attempting to replace the picture of the official coat of arms as adopted in 1912 and used on official documents and displayed on Australian government websites as the official coat of arms with an image that is different to the official likeness of the coat of arms as passed in 1912 and is not used in any government documentation. Why would you use the latter? It's a no brainer.--Saruman-the-white (talk) 04:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Here the only thing you vandalizing is not attempting to change flags without any criteria and despite being informed about the error persists. Stop mounted movies and remember that when a change is made and someone disagrees must be discussed before persist and contribute to the debate objective reasons. Although I think the rules are not made for you know neither the philosophy of the project. No one is harassing you because well it was quiet until he has given you to get back to business as usual and I only have limited myself to defend cases as the flag - map of Navarra who see it as a sabotage, changes in official versions of coats of autonomous communities of Spain for other versions or uses of your bot on Wikipedia in Spanish without authorization or bot flag . Think about, think about the reader and compliance and that nobody will reproach . Do not understand how you can expect a sneak flags that simulates a colored coat for absolutely unreal anyway relief. Also as flag maps is not much to ask that of Navarra follow the same criteria as the rest. Regards.--Miguillen (talk) 19:10, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In secret I never do anything. Only use an account and not to assume you mean with harassment in other projects if harassment think otherwise you account is harassing you just have to ask for a checkuser since then I've only handled one since I registered 8 years ago and whether I edited as IP when you have forgotten me check something rare and I have not done me wrong. Nor have I started any war. Believe it or not I have my ethics and above all work for other people to have good information and good resources not available to satisfy my personal selfishness.

The first thing I would like to reach a reasonable agreement for the two would be to me among other things to make your time on more constructive things. Regards.--Miguillen (talk) 20:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Can you help me let File:Hong Kong Flag (3-5).png from .png to .svg ?thank you.--DannyChan (talk) 13:53, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will convert it to SVG for you later today. Fry1989 ^eh? 16:34, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so much :) DannyChan (talk) 16:34, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bask at Basque

You ought to join WP:WikiProject Basque. Sign up at WP:WikiProject Basque/Members. – S. Rich (talk) 17:32, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help 2

I have a request. Can you help me change File:木棉花旗.jpeg (flag of kapok) to SVG ? The flag used by the movement for an independent Cantonia (a.k.a. "Cantonian sovereigntists"),Source &author are "Republic of Cantonia Provisional Government". Thank you so much.DannyChan (talk) 16:53, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but that image is beyond my abilities. You may make a Graphic Lab request however and they may be able to assist. Fry1989 ^eh? 21:58, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

i see. btw thank you sooooooo much.DannyChan (talk) 11:18, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SVG coat of arms

Hi. Can you create SVG coat of arms like this one? I have heard that you are good in this work. Keivan.f^Talk 12:42, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That depends on what you would like me to create. The image on the right is far too complex for my abilities. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:06, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So do you know anyone who can create this kind of coat of arms? (except the creator of this image, Sodacan). Keivan.f^Talk 19:53, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Keivan.f: You might try commons:user:odder.. he has an account here, but lives over on Commons. Revent^talk 07:10, 3 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Suvadive

Sir, the Suvadive republic flag is a historical flag. It should be treated with respect and not put upside-down http://www.haveeru.com.mv/feature/53483. Please help to make the new image of the right flag.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.183.86.224 (talk) 04:03, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison of European road signs

I mean this undoing of my change: [10]

I don't want to make an edition war, so I ask. Was everything apart from that reference to the neighbouring column (I don't have a picture, so I found it might be easier for the reader just to compare them) OK? The only thing I can do is just give an external link to an example. When the link is there, somebody will probably make a nice vector image of the sign after some time. Kpc21 TALK 18:57, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not think we should include links to photos of missing files. I will add back some of your other changes though. Fry1989 ^eh? 03:01, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to accuse editors of sockpuppetry, please provide evidence of your claim and open an approriate SPI. Thank you. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk)I

@Kudpung:, I have, yesterday. Fry1989 ^eh? 01:56, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OUR MAORI FLAG - TINO RANGATIRATANGA FLAG HAS BEEN WRONGLY DESIGNED BY YOU

Kia ora you've blocked talking & you've created our flag wrongly!!! It's our national day tomorrow & I'd like for a correct version to be on here. Go and compare your version to the authentic version again & you'll see it's incorrect!! Jonathan Teriini (talk) 21:51, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

IT'S NOT YOUR CULTURE, IT'S NOT YOUR FLAG, IT'S NOT A PERSONAL BRANDING EXERCISE FOR YOU

YOU'VE BLOCKED TALK BUT REQUEST TALK! You appear to be acting disingenuous & hiding behind procedure. You've made the file 100% red which it isn't. You've got the Koru wrongly designed also. Which should be clear if you look at OUR flag properly. Here is the proper flag: Correct Design Thank you if you were making a genuine effort but it's a bit rough and there's no need to resort to reporting. Is Flags of the World your brand? Jonathan Teriini (talk) 23:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mississippi

Sup, Fry-Fry! I noticed you changed the infobox on the Mississippi article, replacing the coat of arms with the 1818-2014 seal. However, this seal is outdated and no longer in use. It was replaced by a new seal in 2014, one that has not been uploaded to the Commons, I might add (if you or somebody else could make an SVG of the new 2014 seal and upload it, that'd be great). So, I have changed it to the coat of arms instead, because having the 1818-2014 seal in the infobox suggests that it is legally current, when it is not, thus being misleading, going against the MoS. That, and the coat of arms is pretty good-looking heraldically. Best regards, Illegitimate Barrister 17:01, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Illegitimate Barrister: since the standard for all 50 states is to show the seal, wouldn't having one do the coat of arms also go against MoS? Fry1989 ^eh? 15:30, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, considering that the seal is outdated, I wouldn't think so. The coat of arms is a sufficient compromise in my opinion. After all, the Canada page lacks a seal on its infobox. Illegitimate Barrister 16:19, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article for Canada misses the national coat of arms only because of the NFCC rules, that's a more complicated problem. For Mississippi, I would recommend uploading the seal as soon as possible. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. However, there is no SVG of it and the PNG that exists, the copyright is unclear on (the 1818-2014 seal is definitely P.D. though, due to age). I'm sure it's P.D., but the copyright paranoid deletionists over at the Commons will probably jump all over it as soon as possible. For the record, a raster version can be found here. If you want to upload that, then please be my guest. To reiterate, I am of the mind that it is better to use a current coat of arms than an outdated and obsolete seal. Best regards, Illegitimate Barrister 19:31, 29 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comparison_of_European_road_signs

I have restored my corrections again as they are correct

Belgian traffic sign B15: official page of Belgian road Authority gives this sign and mentions the sign can be adjusted (in Dutch): http://www.wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/250-art67

No entry sign in Ireland: http://www.dttas.ie/sites/default/files/publications/roads/english/traffic-signs-manual-2010/traffic-signs-manual-2010-chapter-5-regulatory-signs.pdf p17

Priority on Right in Ireland: http://www.rotr.ie/rules-of-the-road-eng.pdf: P122 If you are at a junction where the roads are of equal importance, the traffic on your right has right of way. You must let that traffic pass before moving on.

This the most recent revision (2013) the rule is still in effect.

If you have references to prove me wrong, pleas provide them in respone. If not please stop changing my corrections only based on your assumptions

Assumptions??? I've been maintaining this article for years and I know what I'm talking about. In the case of Belgium, we should not put wrong signs in the box with a note below it saying "oh, the sign can be changed". If you want to upload the Belgian sign with a side-road on one side only, do so, but don't use File:Belgian road sign B15.svg when it is for a crossroads on both sides. In the case of Ireland, regarding the Priority to that Right rule, that was removed with the issuing of the 2013 TSM and 4-way intersections are now discouraged in favour of priority same as in the UK. For the No Entry sign, I am fully aware that the European design is the new standard on the books, but I have also watching the situation closely and so far can not find any examples of it having been put up. You say you live in Ireland, so surely you know that the road councils rarely follow the official guidelines. The version with the arrow is still the standard on Irish roads at this time. Fry1989 ^eh? 17:50, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tea and Sympathy

I read most of Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive262#Admin_removing_content and saw your comment, "An admin unilaterally decides that Commons files are "not acceptable", I ask for clarification on why, and when I describe the response I receive as either indirect or cloudy, I get accused of personal attacks, and I also get accused of abusing someone for stating the fact that we do have normal channels and processes for matters like this, instead of unilateral decisions. Yes, I'm the terrible one, I'm the abusive one. What a waste of time trying to find a resolution with those not interested, and then to be mocked for 'not coming to the right page' when I don't know anywhere else I could have brought this to."

I have gone through very similar things. Nikkimaria has been nice to me, but she hasn't been any help at all. When I tried asking her why she reverted my good-faith edits on an Article Talk page, I went into great detail about every change I made, and I asked her opinion on several of those matters. What I got from her is "This should be on the User Talk page". Well, I had tried opening a discussion with her on her User Talk page, but she didn't respond on the topic at either place. Basically, she's done nothing but refer me to essays, more essays, a guideline page, and then some essays.

I also presented her with some pretty hard-core evidence of a certain User repeatedly violating WP:CIVIL, and asked why she didn't try disciplining him. Her response boiled down to "What good would that do?" So I'm thinking she was made an admin on the basis of her ability to cite policies, guidelines, and essays.

Talking to another admin only resulted in ME being put under the microscope, not the flagrantly-abusive User I was complaining about.

All I can say is "Welcome to the NEW Wikipedia!" But be of good cheer: You can always LEAVE! If you ask me, the lunatics are running the asylum, so I may be doing that very thing myself. Ben Culture (talk) 17:16, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll never leave, that would mean they win, though I understand why some made that decision. I thank you for your sympathy. Fry1989 ^eh? 19:36, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]