Hunc usorem obstruxi quia mutationes multas sine explicatione facit. Mutationes sunt interdum utiles, interdum inutiles. Oportet igitur imprimis rationem mutationum explicare. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 10:54, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

I blocked this account because it is making multiple changes without explanation. Some of the changes (I think) are good, some bad. The first requirement is to explain the reason for them. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 11:32, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

I can not understand the lock. I have only included new photos that have arisen in the context of a Wikipedia project]. --Olaf Kosinsky (disputatio) 12:25, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
There's no vandalism at all. Former images were replaced by better ones created by the project mentioned before. If you disagree with one or the other replacement, why didn't you seek discussion before blocking the user? That's an inappropriate behaviour for an administrator. Please revise your decision accordingly. Cheers, —DerHexer (Disp.) 12:35, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
To DerHexer: I made no suggestion of vandalism.
To Olaf Kosinsky: It is appropriate on Wikipedia to explain one's edits. You have made more than 50 edits and have never given any explanation. Yes, I noticed that the images were produced by a German Wikipedia project. In adding the images produced by this project, you have in nearly every case deleted other images. You explanation needs to say (for example) that the image you are substituting is better, or more suitable to an encyclopedia article, than the one you are deleting -- and you need to consider whether this is really true in each case. Your summary doesn't have to be in Latin: German, English, etc., are fine.
I would like you to reply to this point. I blocked you: I can of course unblock you, and any other admin can do so too. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:17, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
I do it in German: Zum ersten habe ich keine Bilder gelöscht sondern nur ausgetauscht. In jedem Fall sind die neuen Bilder qualitativ besser und aktueller. Alle Bilder werden mit Einverständnis des Abgeordneten erstellt und bearbeitet. Ich beantrage daher die Entsperrung meines Account. Ich werde zukünftig die Änderungen jeweils begründen. --Olaf Kosinsky (disputatio) 13:36, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
I'll do it in English :) Thank you for your reply, Olaf. I am happy to unblock you and I will do so now. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:39, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the unlock --Olaf Kosinsky (disputatio) 14:31, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
Blocks should not be used to educate users but to stop vandalism. If you don't understand edits which seem obvious to others (including me), please discuss them first and block only when necessary. Anyway, a blank summary should never be a reason to block a user without further notice. Please reconsider this action. Cheers, —DerHexer (Disp.) 10:33, 25 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
I have already unblocked Olaf Kosinsky, DerHexer, and he is already at work again. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:47, 25 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

Choice of imagesRecensere

... or maybe just working. This one's good

I hope you won't be hurt that we block quickly: we also unblock quickly. It is better like that on a small Wikipedia, because many users visit and make changes without explanation. They don't respond to comments on talk pages but they do respond to blocks. But this generalisation is not intended to include you.

I admire the work that you and others have done on that project. Some of the images are very good indeed. I make this point because I write some political biographies here: if one has room only for one image, a posed portrait with a fixed smile may not be the ideal choice. It is good for a CV, not always so good for an encyclopaedia. An image that shows the person interacting (giving a speech, taking part in a discussion, even marching ...) can be better.

That's what I think, but Usor:Schulz-Hameln (who has written nearly all of our political biographies of German people) may quite possibly disagree with me! Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:56, 24 Septembris 2014 (UTC)

Both pictures are important because politicians are firstly human beings with biographies which should be demonstrated by a portrait picture, and secondly working at some place that should be shown by a picture accordingly. If an article is long enough to show both pictures, adding both would be the best choice ofc, but if there's only room for one image, the best should be shown imo. And I don't think that a person looking at a desk is better in a way of representing the human being than a one looking at you. Cheers, —DerHexer (Disp.) 10:41, 25 Septembris 2014 (UTC)
My example was not intended 100% seriously, DerHexer. I simply took a picture from Olaf's recent gallery which I happened to like. As it happens, this Maltese politician had a Wiki biography only in Polish, and it was not illustrated. Because I looked at Olaf's gallery, I have now added a variant of this illustration to the Polish wiki, and also added a biography in Latin and used the illustration again. For the present, I believe, this (with variants) is the only available Commons image of this person, so I am grateful to Olaf for making it, and I hope you both think I have made good use of his work :) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 15:43, 25 Septembris 2014 (UTC)