User:Coat of Many Colours/Stefan
- Stefan2 has refactored my Talk page following a contribution I made to his ANI (as Stefan4) here:
- "See my Wikipedia Talk page (top) regarding this user in his Wikipedia incarnation as Stefan2 where I express my frustration and a sense of stalking and harassment to the point I became nervous and lost confidence. For an on topic example of a Commons file of mine he tagged for deletion see Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Mary_Ebbets_Hunt_-_Chilkat_blanket.jpg. This was a file I was proud of and mention on my Talk page here. In the early hours of 18 February 2014, editing late after what had begun as some late evening relaxed editing of Wikipedia trying to find a Fair Use image of the work of Janine Antoni which was being impeded by Stefan2, I was suddenly templated as well for the Chilkat blanket image I had uploaded weeks before. The ground for deletion was absurd - that it was a "sculpture". I felt violated and retired to bed defeated, but couldn't really sleep and got up early the next morning to note on my Talk page my frustrations and my intention to retire from editing for a while."
- It does strike me as telling that he regards a simple statement of fact, that I felt harassed and stalked, as a personal attack. I really do hope now that I have heard the last from him. I just don't think this obsessive attention from you is very appropriate, Stefan. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 14:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
- When I opened this account I had several objectives in mind. One was to improve the quality of Wikipedia's coverage of art exhibitions, both historical and contemporary, another to improve its coverage of women artists and finally I wanted to improve its coverage of contemporary art in general.
- From the start I knew that copyright issues would arise in connection with illustrating my edits. I made a conscientious effort to educate myself of the issues. These issues are complex, not least because the interpretation of copyright law shifts according to advances in technology.
- What transpired was that right from the beginning obstacles were put in my way by editors who take upon themselves the policing of copyright in Wikipedia. A user Sfan00 IMG flagged for deletion a whole series of pre-1923 local uploads of works still in artists' copyright as possibly URAA breaches. This turned out to be entirely specious, simply flat-out wrong. But what was actually comical was that when I turned to the Teahouse, support group for newbies, an adviser there with no absolutely no avowed expertise in copyright issues whatsoever, whom I rather strongly suspected of knowing less about copyright than I did, took it upon himself to defend the deletions on the grounds that there was no evidence the works had been "published" pre-1923. My reasonable replies, on which I spent significant time, were simply rejected. When I actually presented an impeccable provenance and exhibition history for one of the works prepared by the National Gallery of London, he airily dismissed that as not proof of "publication". In the end it transpired he had no idea what constitutes "publication" and that in any case the issue had been debated and settled before in favour of my position. It's no accident that the invitation to the Teaparty no longer graces this page.
- Following this another user Stefan2 began to flag my files for deletion. He objected to a local upload of a detail from a contemporary painting because the detail was not directly addressed critically in the text. I provided the necessary text and his deletion request immediately bombed on the strength of it. Undeterred he continued to tag my files, searching back through my three month account for examples, amongst others tagging for deletion an image I had uploaded to Commons of a textile (accepted 2D works in Commons) on the grounds it was a "sculpture" (thus a 3D work where the photographer had rights).
- I had no idea who these individuals were (individual? both acknowledge running parallel accounts). I retired from editing.
- I propose to resume editing gradually as my confidence returns. I ask that my edits be accepted as in good faith. If there are issues regarding them they should be brought to my Talk page and debated. Mere templating is not sufficient and it's not acceptable that an editor tags a file for deletion merely on a personal view of what should be guidance. In the case of Sfan00 IMG and Stefan2, both have made significant errors in their judgements and calls, wasting not only my time but others as well, while the second (?) individual has unquestionably sought to harass me to the point I wondered whether my personal safety was indeed not at risk. No one likes to be the object of obsessive anonymous interest in that way. From those editors in particular I request a more supportive and constructive interaction. I am no longer a 'newbie', should never have been dealt with in the way I was when I was such, and I believe I am adequately knowledgeable about Wikipedia copyright guidance to request that issues be brought here in the first place for discussion before templating or tagging for deletion.
- Thank you. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 08:30, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
- (his immediate marking for deletion new uploads [1] [2] even when they address in good faith his (questionable) issues, and now the sudden marking for deletion at Commons files I uploaded weeks ago [3] [4], in the first place I simply feel vulnerable. When attention becomes as obsessive as this, one starts to feel uncomfortable. He is stalking and harassing me, and I simply don't want to continue editing when receiving that kind of attention from someone or something I know nothing about. So I'm going to stop editing for a good long while until (if and when) such time I feel more confident. If you simply can't do what you want to do, what's the point? Coat of Many Colours (talk) 04:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
- Done here for a while (indeed considering retiring - see below). I should be devoting myself full time to other work at the moment and Wikipedia is unfortunately a grievous distraction. Pity. Back in a few weeks hopefully. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 11:35, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
- Art + Feminism Wikipedia Edit-A-Thon and see also In The Frame - The Art Newspaper. With you all in spirit. Still very busy here with an unexpected commission (things arithmetical rather than artistic - no competition I'm afraid). The problem I've been tasked with is exceptionally demanding on computer time. Might be Easter before I can resume normal service. But I am committed to my projects here and I shall be back. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 12:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find myself unexpectedly busy at the beginning of the New Year and won't be able to do quite as much of the Mary Cassatt project I had set myself for a while. I hope to get the ongoing article starts on the theatre scenes, Little Girl in a Blue Armchair [done], and the Durand-Ruel exhibition of prints mostly complete before the end of January, at least by mid-February, but the two Washington retrospective exhibitions I had planned will have to proceed at a more leisurely pace. Wikipedia is more time consuming than I thought, the editorial style being harder to emulate than I had imagined. Coat of Many Colours (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)
- I agree, Stefan[24] should be shown the door, at LEAST for a time, and have argued for sanctions before. Interestingly, the link you provide, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems#Stefan4_and_questionable_deletion_nominations does not work, AND it doesn't come up normally in the archives. It looks like it was moved. Found evidence and found the discussion here. I don't know why the search tool fails to find it - even if I just search for "and_questionable_deletion_nominations".
Stefan2 actively refuses to follow proper procedure: https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3APossibly_unfree_files%2F2013_December_26&diff=588144297&oldid=588130686
He routinely and unapologetically flouted the rules regarding file deletion. He was lying low (avoiding scrutiny?) last I checked, but that was months ago. --{{U|Elvey}} (t•c) 03:27, 6 June 2014 (UTC)