User talk:Friendliness12345

Non-free rationale for File:Tr 19680301 metrication logo.webp

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Tr 19680301 metrication logo.webp. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:The metric shop Retail industry metrication booklet – 1974.webp

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:The metric shop Retail industry metrication booklet – 1974.webp. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F6 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:13, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Post Office metrication poster – 1975.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Post Office metrication poster – 1975.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 01:14, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tr 19680301 metrication logo.webp

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tr 19680301 metrication logo.webp. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:42, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

This [1] is a failure to WP:AGF. I strongly recommend that you strike it. Note, also, that I did not take a side on your dispute. I said it will need an RfC, and it will. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Metrication in the United Kingdom shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:39, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edsum is another failure to AGF: [2]. Suggest you self revert. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:42, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sirfurboy i know you conclude with @Defacto across several Wikipedia articles which are unrealted. I will be reporting you both now. It appears you conclude everytime there is a dispute. Friendliness12345 (talk) 14:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

further this has been sent for a notice of dispute for arbitration. I now have enough evidence. Thank you. Friendliness12345 (talk) 14:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have not notified me of any such move. Please beware of the WP:BOOMERANGs. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:02, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sirfurboy firstly this talk the lead photo is on the dispute notice board, please let the independent arbitrator make their ruling. On the merits.

Secondly you are well aware you @Sirfurboy come to Defacto aid when there is a dispute this is not the first time, and not the first article.

The evidence is easy to see from your and Defacfo history. I will not report you at the time, please stop this practice as I don't want either of you band. Friendliness12345 (talk) 15:18, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect and you are doubling down rather than withdrawing your public bad faith accusations. I strongly advise you to withdraw them. Please carefully read WP:AGF. I have been quite patient here. If you think I have been acting inappropriately, you will want to take this to WP:ANI. You say you have the evidence. I have warned you about boomerangs, but won't stop you. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:20, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sirfurboy, I have the evidence I am happy to present it. I will not be withdrawing. I stand by my comments. Friendliness12345 (talk) 15:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please remember to notify me when you take this to ANI. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 15:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]