Discussioni utente:DarwIn

Re:

Actually is even a worse practice to suppose other people are wrong by default ;) I didn't misunderstand anything, I simply meant to remove an image which has been badly changed since it was pretty clear it cannot be considered as a derivative work, furthermore there's no FOP in Mozambique so I'm not even sure I can re-upload the original version locally, ciao!--Vito (msg) 14:19, 17 dic 2013 (CET)

Nice, friendly project, where not even a welcome is due. Riiiiiiiiiiiight, you have not misunderstood anything, you simply removed a picture which is exactly as the previous one, except for the perspective correction and the pixelation of an irrelevant drawing, hardly detectable in the article itself if you don't know where it is. Molto bene... Fantástico! In ogni caso, avere una buona giornata. :) --Darwinius (msg) 14:46, 17 dic 2013 (CET)

The only "miserable" thing near here is you babelfished wannebe-sarcasm, I think you'd better take a deep breath and cool down. I'm sorry you're so overwrought about this but the FOP issue is pretty relevant, feel free to deny it but it will be relevant anyway. The pixelation is quite ridiculous both from an aesthetic and a logical point of view: no chance you can deem it as a derivative work from the small portrait on the sign but, anyway, you're claiming it's fine with FOP so why the portrait would be a problem? --Vito (msg) 15:10, 17 dic 2013 (CET)

Please see the relevant discussion here. Anyway, if you don't want the image there, then remove it, but you should at least provide some meaningful explanation in the edition summary, instead of blindly reverting. That is not an acceptable practice in any project I know. I'm done with this, so have a good day, and thanks for having the care to inform me in Commons about your first reply.--Darwinius (msg) 16:24, 17 dic 2013 (CET)