Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Antonio da Trento - The Tiburtine sibyl and the Emperor Augustus.jpg
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2010 at 10:18:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Info created by Antonio da Trento (c.1508-c.1550) after a design by Francesco Parmigianino (1503-1540) - uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)- Info A version of this was nominated about a year ago; however, this is a completely new restoration.
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:18, 29 March 2010 (UTC)- Support Steven Walling 21:28, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
- Support per lack of issues. –Juliancolton | Talk 03:14, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
Question and what about Il Parmeggiano ? --Jebulon (talk) 23:35, 30 March 2010 (UTC)
- He was mentioned on the image description page, but I've added in a note here as well. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- Withdraw Due to incidents on en-wiki, I feel ashamed I have ever worked on Wikipedia, and that I ever agreed to return after the first bit of harassment by en-wiki's arbitration committee. It's clear that that is never going to change, that even having been forced to admit, publicly, to major ethical lapses in their first bit of harassment only made them more upset at me. I feel the entire Wikipedia system is corrupt, because those in power have decided they are gods. I cannot continue. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:27, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
- Why exactly should we give a crap about en-wiki incidents here? This image may still be usefull for the remaining zillion Wikimedia projects. I oppose a withdraw! ;-) --Dschwen (talk) 22:45, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
You want to know why?
I'll tell you why. Here's what the Arbcom on en-wiki has done in just the last month or so. You can figure out the context yourself.
1. Rlevse oversights links to the offline copy of the log about Durova, which was my main bit of evidence against Durova. This greatly escalates the case, forcing me to take it to Arbcom, because that's the only way I can have the log considered, since Rlevse is determined to abuse her tools to protect Duurova. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA
1a. I mail the Oversight committee about this. I get a message saing it was awaiting moderation, then nothing. I send it again, I'm told it's being discussed, but they forgot to tell me. I send two or three messages after this, asking if I'll be informed of the result. None are ever replied to.
2. During the case, Durova is allowed to go over the word limit, but if I do, I get a warning. I allow my text to be redacted once, because I was so upset over the Faysall's talking about how Durova should apologise, at which point I will immediately work with her on a project, treating two years of her using me as a scapegoat as something I should go back to, so the Arbcom doesn't have to bother. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA 2a. When I briefly go over again during the course of a major, three horu revision fo my statement, I get some weird edit conflicts along the way. I don't know why, so I just save over them, so I can get my thoughts together. IT turns out some clerk was constantly reverting to a reduced form of the FIRST EDIT I MADE, even as I was still trying to get my words together. In the meantime, Durova's wordcount stood at about 576, and no redaction happened to hers. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA 2b. I find out about this when done, and go to deal with it. I tell the clerk it will take a short time to work on it, and point out the problem with Durova. I complain about the uneven treatment, so he blocks me. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA 2c. The clerk then spends 2 hours being an utter dick, holding the block over my head, while poking me with a stick. He only unblocks if I promise to leave his highly misleading redaction alone. 2d. Durova's statement remained over the word count during this time. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA
3. Durova outright lies, claiming, based on me giving permission for her to post a specific log which backed an outrageous claim she made - and was never able to back - that she can post any logs she wants, because her Skype is saved as one log. She actually quotes from e-mails. The Arbcom are unconcerned with her behaviour, or that this new statement of hers is around 1500 words. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA
4. The fact that she lied about having permission, was unable to back an accusation which she had made on ANI before, claiming she had the log at that time, does not concern Arbcom. They decide that, despite me having been driven off Wikipedia for 5 months by her actions, and her not having a lick of evidence against me, that they should ignore her behaviour. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA?
5. Durova is allowed to make constant references to the situation which set off the case at en:Talk:The Raven, even make snide comments about logs containing my objection to her orientation. All this questioning was being done by other people. They are fine with this. But, when something I made on commons - which they explicitly excluded from their judgement - having seen what she was doing on en-wiki at en:Talk:The Raven gets put up as an FP candidate on en-wiki, and I politely ask that it not be used, because I had had to make do with some non-FP quality work, they block me for the maximum duration. OBVIOUS FAVOURITISM TO DUROVA
After Durova spent two years harassing me, they have decided to show blatant and obvious favouritism to her, while poking fun of me. And this while knowing I was in a vulnerable state for various reasons, had just returned after five months away due to the harassment, and had only in the last week returned to participation. Then they pull the last stunt, and taunt me about it.
English Wikipedia's power structure is blatantly corrupt. And anything I do here supports those people over there. That's why you should care about en-wiki. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
- Uhm, first of all what you do here supports the readers of en.wp. Why punish them? Secondly why punish the remaining Wikimedia projects too? --Dschwen (talk) 03:46, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
