User talk:Bkuhn

Wrong orientation on your picture

Hi Bradley, i just wanted to say the metadata on your picture [1] is wrong, it says it is oriented 90° counterclockwise while it isn't. -- Thvdburgt (talk) 18:00, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing it -- bkuhn 15:43, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Johan-2006-05-15.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Johan-2006-05-15.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:56, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly, I finally got a chance to take care of this. I had in fact properly gotten permission under CC BY-SA from the photographer way back in 2008 — long before Wikipedia hat OTRS and the like for handling permission collection. Thus, at the time of upload, I had no ability to provide the licensing information I'd received. Anyway, I've now reuploaded the image and opened OTRS ticket 2020092710018261 about the permissions. -- bkuhn 20:59, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:53, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Bkuhn. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Bkuhn. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at People of Praise. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:35, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sharing this boilerplate text with me, although unfortunately, this boilerplate text does not really describe this situation accurately since there was active discussion on the relevant talk page, which I carefully participated in before making any changes. Also, various edits were made by multiple people to better present the information. In the end, and some changes were kept and one was removed, and the source I added was also kept. This did not rise to an edit war as defined here., as there was not even two full reverts, let alone three. 04:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)

Well, I just saw you readding content that had been removed. These messages are more alerts than threats. See Wikipedia:Edit warring for more information. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:33, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

RfC on Coral Thiell / People of Praise

I created an RfC on the "People of Praise" article relative to the Coral Thiell situation. Novellasyes (talk) 20:30, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I saw that you added a sentence. ("None of these options are particularly good.") Because of where you put that, I'm worried that others won't see it. Would you mind copying-and-pasting it either into Talk:People of Praise#Survey or Talk:People of Praise#Discussion? Then other people who are sifting-and-winnowing their thoughts on this will be more guaranteed to see your perspective. I would do that myself (the copy-and-paste) but I don't think we're supposed to do things like that with people's talk page edits. Novellasyes (talk) 13:35, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Johan Kobborg on 2006-05-15 by ZxDaveM.jpg listed for discussion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Johan Kobborg on 2006-05-15 by ZxDaveM.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Dylsss^{(talk contribs)} 21:06, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]