User talk:A.Savin

Broken "gallery" on Shabolovskaya
"Nice" reverting on Shabolovskaya metro station. You basically broke the gallery after i spent an hour fixing it.

... well, since you may be a PC user with no mobile, you have probably overlooked the issue i have been dealing with. So please pay attention next time who you're ... gutfaißing.

Which museum in Moscow?
Hi. Good pic of the Studebaker-Garford. Is this in the Museum of History of Moscow or some other place? Cheers Bjenks (talk) 02:42, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the interest, and yes, that is in the former Provision warehouses which belong to the Museum of History of Moscow. --S[1] 17:52, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

2010-09 Blocking in de:
Hello. I have been blocked in de: for "Unsinnige Bearbeitungen" after deleting interwiki. Since you blocked too my user page and my mail, I gess you do not want to hear anymore about me, however I want to tell you I was fighting several spammer interwiki bot. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, maybe you can tell now what you were thinking when you made edits like that or that one. I proved the french etc. links and they were OK. --S[1] 20:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "maybe you can tell now what you were thinking when you made edits like that or that one." (S1) I was removing undue interwiki (see below).
 * "I proved the french etc. links" (S1) What do you mean?
 * If you mean that you checked the links, then of course the fr: links are OK, that why I did not removed them. The other, which I removed, are (likely, because I'm not perfect) wrong.
 * About "that or that one" edit, de:Schnellfahrstrecke correspond to fr:Ligne à grande vitesse and en:High-speed railway line (currently a redirect, not to be interwiki linked), de:Hochgeschwindigkeitszug correspond to fr:Train à grande vitesse and en:High-speed train (currently a redirect, not to be interwiki linked). And de:Hochgeschwindigkeitsverkehr correspond to en:High-speed rail and fr:Grande vitesse ferroviaire.
 * Help:Interlanguage links curently say "'Various bots add and attempt to correct interlanguage links: if A links to B, B will be linked to A, and if A links to B and B to C, A will be linked to C. The downside is that an error in an interlanguage link in one Wikipedia propagates to other Wikipedias. Thus if a bot produces a wrong result one may have to search for the underlying error in another language version of Wikipedia. The activity of the bots also requires that interlanguage links are only put from an article to an article covering the same subject, not more and not less.'"
 * Since several month some bot are spamming fr:Ligne à grande vitesse and fr:Train à grande vitesse with wrong interwiki. It's hard to remove.
 * Sorry if I am confused, but English language is not my mother tongue. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

OK... I'll unblock you on DE but PLEASE post a comment on the talk page of an article where you will remove the links, otherwise everyone who watch the article will suppose vandaism. --S[1] 22:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'll try tomorow. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:47, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Please protect Wetten, dass..?
From the context of the above exchange I assume you're an admin. Could you please lock down the Wetten, dass..? article (to which you contributed)? Anonymous users (yeah, I know, I'm one too) are vandalizing the article and violating WP:BLP. I removed one of these edits but the article needs to be police by someone in authority. Thanks. 68.146.64.9 (talk) 00:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

"Improving" images
Don't you see that some of your pictures suffer from excessive, unrealistic color saturation? --Ghirla-трёп- 15:31, 20 September 2012 (UTC)


 * If you have better one, feel free to add. I replace images by those I made myself only in cases when the previous one is of notably lower quality. Besides, can't help you without a precise link which image shall be oversaturated. - A.Savin (talk) 15:46, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Тот же Воронцовский дворец хотя бы. File:Spb 06-2012 Palace Embankment various 14.jpg немного завален влево, или мне кажется? Но вообще конечно качество восхитительное. --Ghirla-трёп- 20:50, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

Architecture of cathedrals and great churches
Regarding the selection of pictures in that article, each and every one has been chosen out of hundreds of possibles in order to illustrate the relevant material, but also to fit into the gallery in which it appears, as well as possible. The leading group of pics does not need to illustrate Salisbury, St Basil's, Notre Dame etc. They could be four entirely different buildings. The reason for their selection is because they all represent buildings that are very well known regional diverse, and stylistically different. Basically, St Basil's doesn't have to appear in the intro at all. It isn't about finding the best image of St Basil's, but finding the one that is going to look best in that context. Your image is splendid, but in that gallery, its vertical format throws it out of proportion with everything else. Amandajm (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

POTD notification


Hi Savin,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Spb 06-2012 Chesme Church.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on January 3, 2014. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2014-01-03. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Savin,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:Vyborg 06-2012 Castle 06.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on March 11, 2014. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2014-03-11. Thank you for all of your contributions! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

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) 13:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Творчество Бориса Акунина
Доброго времени суток, уважаемый коллега!

Пишу вам по-русски, т.к вы указали, что хорошо им владеете)

В настоящее время я пытаюсь создавать страницы по творчеству Бориса Акунина в различных википедиях мира. Данные страницы не являются копией существующих страниц русской вики, я пишу исключительно оригинальный текст. Далее перевожу текст гуглем и размещаю в иностранной википедии. Хоть гугл и всемогущ, но "машинный" перевод - это, увы, "машинный" перевод. Необходима помощь человека, который хорошо знает русский и соответствующий иностранный язык. Например, болгарский коллега оказывает неоценимую помощь в болгарской википедии. Он окончательно переводит-редактирует созданные страницы.

Хочу обратиться к вам со следующей просьбой-предложением. Возможно ли наше сотрудничество в описанном выше формате? Увы, хоть и были у меня в школе "пятерки" по английскому языку, выучить его настолько, чтобы писать корректные страницы в англовики, я пока не могу(((. Просто очень бы хотелось, чтобы ВСЕ произведения Акунина были представлены в самой большой вики мира.

Заранее вам благодарен!

с уважением, Ulugbeck1 (talk) 06:48, 2 December 2015 (UTC)


 * К сожалению, мой английский не достаточен для качественного написания статей в википедии, а писать как попало я не хочу. --A.Savin (talk) 13:30, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Lead images on Western Railway
Dear Savin, while some of the images you have uploaded on Vile Parle, Grant Road etc are good, they have nothing which positively identifies them as taken at that particular station. Hence request you to undo your edits. Superfast1111 (talk) 07:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Hi, I think my photos are of much better quality (have Quality image status on Commons) and very well identify the stations. --A.Savin (talk) 08:11, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Königsberger Dom in Kaliningrad
Lieber A. Savin,

du findest offensichtlich, dein Bild dieser Kathedrale sei das allerbeste.

Ich finde das nicht. Man darf den "Sturz" der senkrechten Linien nur halb ausgleichen und muss außerdem die senkrechte Auflösung um etwa 10% vermindern (mit Umrechnung!).

Sonst wirkt die Darstellung unnatürlich, und das Gebäude erscheint dem Betrachter des Bildes höher als dem Betrachter vor Ort.

Hast du ein weniger gewaltsam entzerrtes Foto, das außerdem außer der Westfassade etwas mehr von der südlichen Längsseite zeigt?

Beste Grüße, Ulamm (talk) 17:15, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ich finde nicht mein Bild "das allerbeste", sondern besser als das was vorher im Artikel stand. --A.Savin (talk) 04:28, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Jetzt habe ich das passende Foto gefunden. Es ist auch von dir.Kaliningrad Kant Island -0.3° 2512x2016.jpg
 * Vielen Dank, --Ulamm (talk) 10:25, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * So auszuschneiden, dass die Qualität dabei nicht flöten geht, sind Sie offenbar nicht in der Lage... --A.Savin (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Ich habe das Foto um 0,3°gedreht, damit es möglichst waagerecht steht. Dadurch lässt die Schärfe unweigerlich ein wenig nach. Der größere Verlust an Schärfe entsteht aber durch das JPG-Format. Das sieht man, wenn man eine Grafik bearbeitet und die Bearbeitungsstufen als JPG abspeichert statt als TIFF oder PNG.
 * Den Ausschnitt habe ich so gewählt, dass die Kirche nicht irgendein Teil eins Panoramas ist, sonder man Deteils erkennen kann.
 * Was habe ich deiner/Ihrer Ansicht nach falsch gemacht?--Ulamm (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Habe bereits alles korrigiert, Sie brauchen sich nicht zu mühen. --A.Savin (talk) 15:27, 17 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Links hatte ich absichtlich etwas mehr Abstand zwischen Gebäude und Bildrand gelassen, weil da der Vorplatz ist und die Westfassade mit diesem Vorplatz in Beziehung steht. Sonst sehe ich grafisch keinen Unterschied.--Ulamm (talk) 16:42, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Block
So you block me at Commons because I edit too quickly? May I suggest you update the blocking policy to include this?

I've never heard of this user before, but they have certainly has gotten under the everyone's skin over there to say to the least.

Good day.--TrashCollector (talk) 18:00, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Sergei Anokhin (footballer)
Г-н Савин, если Вы намеренно продолжите вводить вики-сообщество в заблуждение, утверждая, что на фото футболист Анохин, а не Анохин-чиновник, то я вынужден буду обратиться с жалобой. Не говоря уж про совершенно бесцеремонную и незаконную мою блокировку на Commons.--RTY9099 (talk) 20:42, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * На фотографии изображён Сергей Анохин, какую бы функцию он ни исполнял в момент съёмки, так что ваш улучшайзинг я принимать отказываюсь, ну а жаловаться на меня вы, конечно, вольны, другое дело, что это приведёт к блокировке отнюдь не моей учётной записи, а вашей (за кукловодство и вандализм). --A.Savin (talk) 21:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
 * А-а, теперь вроде понятно. Сбил с толку меня тот факт, что и в категории Анохина-футболиста на всех фотках изображён "другой" Анохин. Это не моя "заслуга", а участника, который в своё время создал эту категорию и залил туда фотки, например, вот эту. Ясно же, что на ней и на моей -- одна и та же персона. Разумеется, на викискладе вы тем не менее не имеете никакого права удалять категорию без добавления другой подходящей категории, а также обходить блокировку с помощью виртуалов, так что разблокировать я вас не стану. --A.Savin (talk) 22:05, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

File:Volgograd Montage 2016.png
Hello A.Savin. Can you take a look at this file? The Motherland Calls is copyrighted isn't it? Thanks. Geoffroi (talk) 04:13, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I ask you because your name is in the author field for one of the other photos in the montage and I saw you're an administrator on Commons. Geoffroi (talk) 04:16, 3 May 2019 (UTC)


 * The picture is from the Volgograd Oblast administration's site. Although I have the opinion that all similar cases like Kremlin.ru, Gov.ru etc. have to mind FoP laws too, the consensus from previous Deletion requests seems to be, that government photos are OK no matter what they depict, because the authorities "know what they are doing" or so. I disagree, especially regarding the Russian authorities. You may try to open an RfD, I would support. Thanks --A.Savin (talk) 12:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
 * That consensus is wrong obviously and surprising to me, but I think a deletion nomination would end in keep (based on convenience, and the presence of many more of these "government approved FOP violation" images of course). I don't want to waste your time or mine. Thanks for the response and explanation. Geoffroi (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Metrovagonmach


A tag has been placed on Metrovagonmach requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section R3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a redirect from an implausible typo or misnomer, or other unlikely search term.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dromair2 (talk) 06:52, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

February 2020
Your recent editing history at Galle Lighthouse 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. stwalkerster (talk) 18:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Featured picture candidates/National Museum of Colombo
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Legal threats by A.Savin. Obi2canibe (talk) 19:39, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Pidurutalagala
Please refer to my comments on the article’s talk page explaining why I have reverted your recent edits. Dan arndt (talk) 02:40, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
Your recent editing history at Pidurutalagala 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. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for 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&mdash;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&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Dan arndt (talk) 02:52, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Trout
Hi. I've closed the ANI thread because, while the other editor was technically in breach of the rollback guidelines, they were also attempting to discuss the matter with you and stopped reverting. At several pages however, you reinstated your edits without gaining talk page consensus, and in this edit summary you imply that particular editors' views are not valid - not OK. I hereby award you with this very small fish, and ask that in future if you are reverted, you go directly to the talk page rather than reinstating. Cheers Girth Summit  (blether)  18:05, 8 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Why don't you ask Dan arndt as well, that if they don't like a picture by me they may wish to talk to me first, before starting an edit-war? Some users are more equal than others? --A.Savin (talk) 18:09, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , have you read WP:BRD? If you add a picture, that is a bold edit. If someone disagrees, they are welcome to revert it. At that point, you are expected to discuss if you wish to reinstate it. I don't appreciate your suggestion that I have been unfair in my approach; I seriously suggest you rein in that sort of attitude. Girth Summit  (blether)  18:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Dan arndt (talk) 02:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Paranoia Reply
Last time I checked paranoia isn't a mental condition, but rather a thought process which is believed to be heavily influenced by anxiety or fear. If you took that as being some form of personal attack then I apologise. Dan arndt (talk) 14:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I think you should accept the above and the withdrawal of the insinuation and try to move on from here. Deb (talk) 14:44, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I accept. But I'm sure that if this was me said to Dan_arndt to have paranoia, I would have been blocked immediately. All users are equal before the rules and guidelines, but some are more equal. I cannot expect fair treatment here. --A.Savin (talk) 16:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry that other people have piled in at ANI and made a peaceful solution difficult. But that's what tends to happen. If you don't mind, I will close that discussion now, as I don't think there is anything to be gained from prolonging it. Deb (talk) 19:12, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Complaint about your edits of Central Province, Sri Lanka


Please see this complaint about your edits at Central Province, Sri Lanka and my proposed closure. You were edit warring to force the inclusion of your own picture. You can avoid a block if you will promise to wait for talk page consensus before reverting the article again. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 19:10, 14 June 2020 (UTC)


 * And if I do nothing, you block me? OK go ahead. As if I didn't know that blocks on English wikipedia are punitive. --A.Savin (talk) 01:32, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * The idea is to stop the edit war about the choice of picture in the article. So it is preventive rather than punitive. If you have any other proposal to stop the war, I am listening. You did make four reverts after all, so this is more than theoretical. EdJohnston (talk) 02:47, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I did not revert anymore, there are three (!) users who are hounding me. --A.Savin (talk) 09:42, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If that's the best you can do, I will proceed with the block. I requested (above) that you 'promise to wait for talk page consensus before reverting the article again'. You could still agree to that. EdJohnston (talk) 17:43, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * As far as I understand, there is consensus decided by three editors, that my contributions are unwelcome. --A.Savin (talk) 19:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * So you will be leaving the current image in place? EdJohnston (talk) 22:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
 * - Perhaps not, looks like A.Savin is trying to drum up supporters: link. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Oh really, asking for 3rd opinion is meanwhile prohibited? By the way, agreed that my photo was better. Would it not be wise from the beginning, if there is a doubt wrt to a picture, to ping some Sri Lankan editors to the discussion?, what would you say (I'm sorry I have to waste your time again...) ? --A.Savin (talk) 12:13, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

I was not aware that this has escalated to this state. A.Savin have crossed the limit in 3RR, and I really hope they will cease the repetitive reverts and treat each case separately, by discussing each case at the respective article's talkpages, with clear before/after diffs or comparison. This has now become such a mess that anyone genuinely wanting to help would not know where to start.

That being said, I believe there is more to this. Before things got to this messy, I did notice a few things:
 * A.Savin's intention is genuine; they have put a serious effort in improving content via photos (not just photos in Sri Lanka)
 * A.Savin did mass-add their photos to a number of articles, but I did not take that as an issue as most are good replacements (some of my uploads were replaced as well)
 * A.Savin's photos were systematically reverted on multiple articles. I've noticed two. One was Ravana Falls, which was reverted for a reason I disagree (I've commented on it's talkpage on 13 May). The other was Gin Ganga, where the conflict was whether to use this original photo or this new photo (I'm surprised the former is currently used, but I have no time at the moment to look into that). There are of course a bunch of more articles which I didn't really look into.
 * One of the users behind the reverts have been involved in abusive mass reverts in the past, including at least one rather annoying one with me years ago (the images were kept). So I wont be surprised if A.Savin is now responding in frustration (but breaking 3RR is no excuse).

That's my two cents at this point, and I'm sorry I don't have much time to go deeper. I strongly suggest each case to be discussed separately (emphasis added) at the respective article talkpage. We have large swaths of texts now at each of the user's talkpages and at least two (?) threads on ANI. These could have easily been solved at the article talkpages on a case by case basis. And should a WP:3O be needed, we could have done so on a case by case basis as well. Hope this helps. Reh man  14:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Agreed. --A.Savin (talk) 14:41, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * User:Rehman, thanks for your post. I would like to get an agreement here that will ensure that User:A.Savin and User:Dan arndt don't continue to revert each other at multiple articles regarding images. I'll notify Dan arndt and see if he will share his thoughts. EdJohnston (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * and should agree too, as there were the same problems. Especially personal attacks such as this one, are not desired. --A.Savin (talk) 16:24, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Is there any problem to use better image in the light of encyclopedia? I have about 50 shots of Kandy lake as same as A.Savin's image, but I did not upload as there are nice pictures than mine. If any need, I can upload a panoramic image which covers entire area. BTW, A.Savin's image is good. Any objection? --Ant a nO 16:30, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
 * it appears that A.Savin has a continual pattern of ignoring WP:BRD, rather he continually reverts the page to ensure that his own images remain before entering into any discussion. If he agrees to abide by WP:BRD then I wouldn't have a problem with his editing behaviour. I can not however speak for other editors. He does however appear to be very dogmatic in his views, even to the extent of being belligerent - as can be seen by his constant badgering on my talkpage. Maybe it was my mistake in attempting to engage with him in discussions where there is a dispute on the respective article's talkpage. Noting that he has accused me of stalking him, which I repeatedly have denied (and can be demonstrated by my edit history) but then he tries to drag me into discussions on articles that I have not even participated in, such as here, hoping that I would bite and therefore justify his false accusations. Other examples include "Arguments over? Nothing to say? Indeed, best time to run to mama admins. --A.Savin (talk) 02:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)" - which is rich considering he has twice reported me on ANI. It would appear to me that he believes that there is some sort of conspiracy amongst editors and administrators against him - which is clearly not the case. It would appear that there is a history of similar behaviour elsewhere (see Wikicommons, where he is an Admin). In summary I am happy to acknowledge that some times my behaviour hasn't been exemplary, although I feel that I have been provoked, and I am prepared to move on however it seems that A.Savin is the one who can't let go. Dan arndt (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I think your suggestion makes perfect sense - a panoramic image covering the entire area would be preferable. Noting that this article Central Province, Sri Lanka is not actually about Kandy. Dan arndt (talk) 03:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Hi . In response to your request for my input here, I would like to say that Dan arndt's message from 02:58, 17 June also nicely sums up my experience with A.Savin. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 08:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Please specify, how am I "the one who can't let go". If you mean that I should stop replacing images on Wikipedia -- this is not discussable. I'm convinced to do a useful job and there is no guideline that prohibits it in general, so unless something special occurs (e.g. the Arbcom bans me from doing this), I will feel free to continue. The other thing is reverting. I'm happy to promise not to revert anymore, if same will be promised by the others -- note however that I cannot remember ever having been the first one to revert either Dan arndt or Obi or 1292simon. Maybe it helps to resolve current disputes at least. By the way, still didn't respond to me on Talk:Manora, Karachi. Thanks --A.Savin (talk) 13:17, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I mean you’re like a dog with a bone that wouldn’t give it up even if you were drowning. Dan arndt (talk) 13:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Surely a useful comment to resolve the mess? What about WP:CIVIL? --A.Savin (talk) 14:16, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am being civil - my comments are metaphorical not literal. Dan arndt (talk) 14:19, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Are you willing to respond to AntanO's rhetoric question above -- Is there any problem to use better image in the light of encyclopedia? If there is a rule that for photos which have been used in an article for five years or so, there is kind of a status-quo preservation and for their replacement you need approval by the article author (or by five sysops, by the Arbcom, by Dan arndt,... you name it). If yes, show me please. If no, I am free to replace wherever I deem necessary. I am not "drowning". My contribution is nearly always positively rated. --A.Savin (talk) 14:33, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, this matter might be solved if User:A.Savin would agree *not* to make any reverts in support of his own pictures. People disagreeing with him have not always behaved perfectly, but I imagine that their behavior would correct itself if A.Savin would agree to this compromise. If this deal were accepted, then A.Savin could add his own picture *one time* to any article, but would not restore it if removed by others. At that point it would be up to the talk page as to what picture should be kept in the article. EdJohnston (talk) 16:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you find it then normal, that the others are allowed to revert me w/o limitation? Do you find it a fair treatment? By the way, my discussion comments on Talk:Central Province, Sri Lanka and Talk:Manora, Karachi still have not been answered by and  respectively. --A.Savin (talk) 17:08, 17 June 2020 (UTC)


 * I fully support this suggestion as it follows WP:BRD. I am happy to sign up to this.--Obi2canibe (talk) 18:11, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * A.Savin, everyone is supposed to follow the talk page consensus anyway, but this just makes it explicit what you need to do, to stop the criticism of the apparent excessive promotion of your own photos. If you try this out for a month and believe that others are not taking it in the same spirit, you could then ask for assistance from admins. EdJohnston (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I am not here to promote own photos at any price, but to improve illustrations in articles. It's not even always the fact that photos I suggest are taken by me. In most cases they are, but yeah, this is my motivation to spend my time for articles; don't forget that I am just an unpaid volunteer (as the uttermost of us are) and cannot be obliged to do something, so in fact enthusiasm requires motivation -- for some users it is the promotion of their articles as featured and on the Main Page, for other maybe photos they invested much resources and effort in. Again, there is no rule that prohibits it in general. What you are suggesting is not an agreement, but an unconditional surrender. The three users here don't have a neutral opinion on my work (if ever they had). I never seen them work on evaluation of images (such as WP:FPC). They don't reply on my questions regarding disputed pictures on article talk pages. Maybe you find it okay, but I don't. I would be grateful for any neutral opinion and I'm willing to oblige myself to stop "promotion", if there is real unbiased consensus to do so. (Maybe Arbcom is the only way, still I don't know yet how to start a case.) The users "Dan arndt", "Obi2canibe" and "1292simon" should leave me alone. In the end, should any of my picture replacements really be a damage to article, surely someone else will notice it and revert and explain properly. I have been working here for years and by the beginning of the recent conflict some weeks ago, all picture suggestions have been stable. --A.Savin (talk) 20:27, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If you are insisting on the right to make endless reverts in support of your own photos, that is not likely to fly. All of us are expected to follow the WP:Edit warring policy, both those who contribute photos and everyone else. If someone agrees to follow policy, that is not an 'unconditional surrender' unless you have an unusual concept of your special role here. EdJohnston (talk) 20:34, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm happy to repeat it again and again: when replacing old photos by new, more professional ones, I don't violate any policies, but to the contrary I do constructive work. A user violates a policy, for example, if they are edit-warring, and for some of the articles affected it's true that I participated in -- but so did the users "Dan arndt", "Obi2canibe" and "1292simon". --A.Savin (talk) 20:41, 17 June 2020 (UTC)
 * I've just closed the report at WP:3RRN. I support the idea of putting A.Savin on 0RR for their own images. Number   5  7  10:47, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Picture of Lugano
Hi, I have received you message in my page about the this picture and I did not recognize it. After some enquires I can confirm that it's not Lugano but Paradiso, Ticino and specifically the picture has been taken from the entrance of the town hall looking at south. I corrected also the description. --Ilario (talk) 09:32, 25 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Great! Many thanks... --A.Savin (talk) 14:56, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do not revert to support your own photographs
Although your photographs may have more pixels, they are not necessarily the best representation of the object in question. Please do not revert the efforts of others. Thank you, Krok6kola (talk) 21:42, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Now that you have been blocked on Commons after my report, you are now harrassing me here. These images I had added, in fact, nearly always are better than the previous ones. They have been stable in articles for months now. There is no reason to revert my edits after months or years simply why you don't like it. If ever something should be reverted, than only after discussion and consensus. Not just because you don't like it. So your reverts are nothing but vindictive. What a childish behaviour. Regards --A.Savin (talk) 22:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * "Better" is in the eye of the beholder. In your view, "your" photographs are always better, even if they do not display the features needed in an article. A qualitatively "better" photograph is not necessarily best for a specific article. And please be civil. Thank you. Krok6kola (talk) 22:45, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Wrong. It is not true that "in my view, my photographs are always better". In fact, before replacing an image somewhere, I try to review the previous image too. If the previous image has something relevant that the alternative image has not, I don't remove it. If you would take time to review my previous contributions, you would -- maybe -- be surprised, but of course you won't, because your motivation is not to improve quality of wikipedia contents. Regards --A.Savin (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Again, I ask you to please be civil. Krok6kola (talk) 23:34, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It is you who is uncivil with your comments such as "Please do not revert the efforts of others", because my job is surely not to "sit and revert", but much more to review images in articles -- and yeah it costs lots of efforts. Regards --A.Savin (talk) 23:40, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hi A.Savin,

This is to let you know that File:Bogolyubovo asv2019-01 img06 Intercession Church.jpg, a featured picture you uploaded or nominated, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for October 27, 2021. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2021-10-27. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Replacing Images
Hi! Thank you for your image contributions for Turkish railroad pages! However, when you replace an image, please create a gallery section on the bottom and place the replaced image there. Thank you! --Central Data Bank (talk) 10:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi there, I always look what can I do about the layout. Sometimes I create a gallery below, sometimes the article is so small that a gallery or additional photos would not do it good, and sometimes a picture of same motif is just redundant. However feel free to add a gallery or additional image wherever you think it would fit. Regards --A.Savin (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Nicosia
Hi! I nominated your photo here: Featured picture candidates/Selimiye Mosque, Nicosia --Andrei (talk) 22:57, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2022 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hi A.Savin,

This is to let you know that File:PK Hyderabad asv2020-02 img24 Tomb of Mian Ghulam Kalhoro.jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 23, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-03-23. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! --Ahecht (TALK PAGE ) 15:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hi A.Savin,

This is to let you know that File:SL Galle_Fort_asv2020-01_img24.jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for April 3, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-04-03. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 22:13, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hi A.Savin,

This is to let you know that File:Nicosia 01-2017_img20_View_from_Shacolas_Tower.jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for April 21, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-04-21. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 09:52, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:28, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD
Hi A.Savin,

This is to let you know that File:TR Pamukkale_Laodicea_asv2020-02_img11.jpg, a featured picture you uploaded, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for December 4, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-12-04. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you! &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 11:59, 29 November 2023 (UTC)