Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 109

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

User:SapthaRishi78

SapthaRishi78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Continously uploads copyvio after final warning. -- Doclys👨‍⚕️👩‍⚕️ 🩺 • 💉 10:15, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:22, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

Knolagee

Knolagee (talk · contribs), spam only. Lemonaka (talk) 17:48, 18 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now, nothing after warnings. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
What Am I Supposed To Do In This Situation I Am New Wo Wiki & All Of This Tech Talk SonHow Can This Be Fixed Knolagee (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
What Does Spam Only Mean Knolagee (talk) 20:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Masdrdallah Knolagee (talk) 20:15, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
@Knolagee: Wikimedia Commons is a media repository for educational resources, not a social media. We only accept documents (images, sounds, videos, etc.) useful as providing educational information. We don't accept advertising and promoting materials. Please read COM:SCOPE. Yann (talk) 20:50, 19 November 2023 (UTC)
Please define The Promotional Language As Stated Knolagee (talk) 00:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Knolagee: please don't come in here as a relatively new arrival telling the administrators what to do. If you really don't understand the difference between what you were doing and what the site is about, I suggest you look around the site a bit. - Jmabel ! talk 01:25, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

User:John Junnor VIP

Probably multiple reasons to block this account, but his threat against User:Taivo in the description of File:The Mains of Balhaldie - Location of the war of Balhaldie.jpg (a file that I just nominated for deletion) should be enough for an indef-block all on its own. - Jmabel ! talk 02:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel You would have been justified in blocking them without bringing it here first.
✓ Done Blocked indef. They can appeal if they think its unjustified Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Gbawden: I didn't want to do it with that little visibility. - Jmabel ! talk 07:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Also: I'd really appreciate if we can get a quick consensus to delete Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Mains of Balhaldie - Location of the war of Balhaldie.jpg. I suppose I could just delete the nastiness in the description, but I'd rather see the whole file deleted. - 07:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted. DMacks (talk) 07:49, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
I deleted the userpage as blatant hoax. He claimed there: "He is the current top goal scorer in the Turkish Süper Lig, sitting on 65 goals in 21 games". Scoring more than thrice per every game is impossible. Per en:2022–23 Süper Lig top scorer of that season was Enner Valencia from Fenerbahçe, scoring 29 goals from 36 games. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jmabel Could you have posted here "I blocked X because they did Y"?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I suppose I could have, and I'll do that next time something similar arises. - Jmabel ! talk —Preceding undated comment was added at 21:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Thanks.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:04, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

User:重吉笑里

重吉笑里 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

重吉笑里 repeatedly uploaded copyright violations and does not stop even after being warned.--Krorokeroro (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. One week block. Next blocks can be longer. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Notem again

Notem (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) new copyvio - File:Española РФ.png after the one week block. Komarof (talk) 11:31, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done, blocked 1 month. --A.Savin 12:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

CHIEF MUNTA (talk · contribs)

CHIEF MUNTA (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Uploads self-advertisement spam and puts his files in unrelated categories Kelly The Angel (talk) 15:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 16:18, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Saka iran (talk · contribs)

This user was banned before for uploading more than a dozen copyvio files (Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 36#Saka iran (talk · contribs)) and now they are continuing to do the same. HeminKurdistan (talk) 10:13, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 3 months. Yann (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
@HeminKurdistan: They were blocked. See their block log. Note that we don't have a Commons:Banning policy.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:45, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Dasnusantara

Dasnusantara (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Hi, This user uploaded maps from several websites claiming they are made by the government of Indonesia. However I can't see the evidence, and I have some doubt seeing the history of copyright violations. Could someone check please? Knowledge of the local language may help. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Rahmanibnusaid

Rahmanibnusaid (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Uploading copyvios after final warning. – Pbrks (t • c) 21:35, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, copyvios deleted. Yann (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Shxahxh

108.58.166.134 13:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done No upload, or any other edit since April 2020. Yann (talk) 13:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Максим6660

Максим6660 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) won't stop uploading fake/fantasy diagrams. Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 13:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. User blocked and files deleted. --A.Savin 14:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

User:John hit65

Repeatedly uploading files and logos under copyrights, despite repeated warnings about a possible block, even by admins themselves. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 22:18, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. One week block, all uploads are deleted as copyvios. Taivo (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Alone GTO $$$

Alone GTO $$$ (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) New copyvios after several warnings. Komarof (talk) 18:37, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Final warning was issued 10:25, 5 November 2023 (UTC).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Jeff G., and what? See uploads and deletions after that warning: Special:Log/Alone_GTO_$$$. --Komarof (talk) 08:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked for a week. Copyvios already deleted. Yann (talk) 08:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
@Komarof: When reported uploaders remove evidence of their warnings from their user talk pages and I find such evidence anyway, I have started to report that evidence to save Admins and other users the trouble, as a public service.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:08, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Rahmanibnusaid again

Rahmanibnusaid (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Uploading copvios after final warning and previous block. – Pbrks (t • c) 22:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 1 week by Elcobbola. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:07, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done. I declined unblock request. Taivo (talk) 16:23, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

User:Jungan1104

Jungan1104 uploaded a number of copyrightable logos claiming to be licensed under CC license, but without any evidence of permission. Some were tagged Speedydelele by me and others, but he rolled back the tags several times to prevent them from being removed [1][2][3] and then vandalized my page[1]. What's more, in his reply, he portrayed himself as a victim and claimed he would create new account to get around any blocking of him [1].

In view of the above, his actions is contrary to the collaborative spirit and I felt it necessary to prevent him from uploading new files until he admitted his mistake. 0x0a (talk) 06:03, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm not discussing university logos or game screenshots, but what I'm concerned about is the image of the satellite Set Top Box (digital satellite receiver) product. Why did you delete the photo? Why did you add the Copyvio tag to the Satellite Set Top Box product image? Even though the image I shared is not bound by copyright, the image should not be deleted. I uploaded the file just to complement the Wikipedia article entitled "Digital Video Broadcasting". Jungan1104 (talk) 07:04, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 Comment I deleted the 2 files mentioned above, as obvious copyright violations. Yann (talk) 08:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jungan1104: Which filename is "the image of the satellite Set Top Box (digital satellite receiver) product"?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:46, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
Perangkat receiver parabola.jpg Jungan1104 (talk) 00:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Convenience link: File:Perangkat receiver parabola.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 01:18, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Certainly not PD or free-licensed by the holder of the copyright on the packaging. Might be allowed on a fair use basis (non-free use) in some article where it was relevant on a Wikipedia that allows that, but that's not Commons' issue. - Jmabel ! talk 01:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

User:SialkotOfficialspoll

Please see Special:CentralAuth/SialkotOfficialspoll which shows cross Wiki abuse and sockpuppetry. Add to this uploads of uncertain parentage stated to be "Own work" and this appears to be an editor in need of sanctions. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 16:03, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. I warned the user, uploads are nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 16:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

FotoSV

It is clear the user @FotoSV works for the presidency of El Salvador and uploads pictures used for promotion purposes (I would dare say propaganda). I'd appreciate other users' input here. Thanks! TanookiKoopa (talk) 13:55, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I don't see any issue here, as long as the images are truly under a free license, and that the descriptions are factual, i.e. File:R'Bonney Nola Gabriel y Nayib Bukele.jpg. Yann (talk) 14:36, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
@TanookiKoopa: Commons isn't enwiki, we don't require disclosure of paid content, nor is COM:NPOV a policy. As long as they are uploading useful images with no copyright issues, it's fine. —MATRIX! {user - talk? - useless contributions} 20:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Good to know. Thanks!
TanookiKoopa (talk) 20:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Craqdi under a pseudonym

Hello Team,

It has been funny for a while, but the user Style Here has been reverting my action on Commons, and is obviously the troll Craqdi, as the account has been created one hour ago, when I proposed the file File:Craqdi.jpg for deletion, and per the conversation on my talk page [1]. Could you please block her? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 14:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Is that abusive behavior okay with you? @CoffeeEngineer @CoffeeEngineer Style Here (talk) 14:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
No, Craqdi, that is why I asked for your blocking. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 14:40, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@Style Here: Hello Craqdi, Nice to hear from you. Don't you have trans rights to support with your Vox political party of yours, or putting out horrible "music", or focussing on your porn carreer? CoffeeEngineer This treatment is unjustifiable and you support violence, please leave me I'm not a craqdi Style Here (talk) 14:45, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 14:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 14:57, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Craqdi again

Hello, Craqdi is back : Blujman and Azealia Amanda Banks. Could we please block it Yann? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Craqdi rebelote

Hello, Craqdi is back again : Global-Cats : block Yann? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Already blocked. Yann (talk) 20:18, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@CoffeeEngineer: Thanks for the reports. This is global lock evasion by Puxunito, reportable via m:srg.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Yes it is. Thanks for shqring this link with me, I am saving all its aliases. This is a long term problem already. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
I opened https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Steward_requests/Global#Puxunito_again CoffeeEngineer (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@CoffeeEngineer: You're welcome. I liked this redirect the best because it was all lower case and short, but m:sg is even shorter.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:49, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Hello, I come from ca@wikimedia. It seems to me that this user has used offensive behavior and has already been blocked on Wikipedia in English and this is unacceptable. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:CoffeeEngineer apart from deleting the edits from your page Turrar (talk) 16:54, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
@Elcobbola: FYI.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

fake license / copyright violation

this file «File:Negarenikdel.jpg» which up-loaded three times by user:حسام محمودی under fake license and copyright violation again up-loaded. user also had received warning previously. [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent, files deleted. Yann (talk) 18:41, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Threats on my talk page

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Royal_Marsh?markasread=69630404&markasreadwiki=commonswiki#c-CoffeeEngineer-20231201012300-CoffeeEngineer-20231201012200 This user is slandering me and I believe he has a conflict of interest with another person. Royal Marsh (talk) 01:24, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@CoffeeEngineer: , this was entirely out of line. Yes, this was a sock account of a banned user: that doesn't mean you need to taunt or threaten them. Just go through the usual process and have the account blocked, as it ultimately was. - Jmabel ! talk 03:02, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Jmabel Like, she gave so much info. It is crazy that in this day and age she gives so much data to find her. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 03:04, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
@CoffeeEngineer: I'm not talking about the conduct of the now-blocked user. I'm talking about yours. The fact that someone's conduct here is bad does not entitle you to abuse them. We tolerate the occasional snide remark, but "You think you are smart by playing with us? I know a lot about you. This was too far. It is so easy to find you," is very close to a threat of physical harm. That is not OK. - Jmabel ! talk 04:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
And, believe me, it's not like I'm never tempted. - Jmabel ! talk 04:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Craqdi again

Royal Marsh is Craqdi, Could we block it plase? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:28, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

? you came in insulting my discussion for no reason Royal Marsh (talk) 01:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Craqdi, Enough reasons. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:37, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Well, I don't know what you're talking about, but come on, I'll let you know.The person who came in to fight was you.I do not know what he says Royal Marsh (talk) 01:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
and more watching its discussion page on wikipedia in English it was blocked twice Royal Marsh (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Umbug CoffeeEngineer (talk) 01:52, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
what do you mean? Royal Marsh (talk) 01:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I don't answer that Royal Marsh (talk) 01:57, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
@Elcobbola: FYI.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:44, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Tatiana Matlina

Tatiana Matlina (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  several misconducts right after one month incivility block expired: [2] [3] [4] Komarof (talk) 06:55, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I wouldn't call this "misconducts". This user can contest the deletion of her files, even if admins do not follow her. Yann (talk) 10:54, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
To contest the deletion doesn't equal to call opponents liars and abusers. Komarof (talk) 11:09, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
For her defense, in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Tatiana Matlina, I would say that, except for File:VERA Savina.jpg, there is no evidence of copyright violations. Copies mentioned elsewhere are not the sources of Commons files. @Tatiana Matlina: If the deleted files are really you own, could you please confirm the permission via COM:VRT, like it was done before? @Jameslwoodward, King of Hearts, and Taivo: Involved admins. Yann (talk) 11:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Edit conflict: Yann Re: no evidence of copyright violations. You've already changed your mind about File:VERA Savina.jpg, so please take a closer look at File:Viktar Markavets.jpg. --Komarof (talk) 11:19, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Where is the evidence? There is no copy of this outside Wikimedia. Yann (talk) 12:23, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Evidence of what? This is a derivative of the printed photo of person who died in 2013, uploaded as own work of 2016. Komarof (talk) 12:40, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
So what? This is not an evidence. Where is the proof that Tatiana Matlina didn't take the original picture? Please read wikt:evidence. Yann (talk) 12:48, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
Please read COM:EVID before forcing me to prove anything, especially to prove that she couldn't make a photo of the dead person. And the uploader had plenty of time to provide proofs, but only insults followed. Komarof (talk) 13:01, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
You are confusing several things. Sure in case of doubt, the proof is on the uploader. But if the uploader is a user in good standing, and I think she is, the proof is somewhat reversed. Tatiana Matlina made 21,683 edits on Commons, quite a lot more than you, so you need to get down from you high horse. Yann (talk) 21:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
I will highly appreciate it if you tell me how many edits is enough so you can start insulting your opponents with impunity. In the whole batch of her [considerable] contributions, it is easy to notice two cameras, more than 99% of her photos made with. If for some reason she decided to mix in a dozen someone else’s works made with a dozen different cameras among hundreds of her own ones, it’s not my problem, and it’s not a tragedy. It was enough just not to turn it into a scandal. Iuppiter iratus ergo nefas - if she were right, she would have had explanations instead of insults. Komarof (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

User:حسام محمودی

The user in question is continuing to upload copyvio files after two warnings. HeminKurdistan (talk) 10:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, file deleted. Yann (talk) 10:50, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Umarxon III

Umarxon III (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  New copyvios after two blocks, including the 3-month one. Some files are re-uploaded after deletion: [5] [6] [7]. Komarof (talk) 12:00, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. One year block (third block). Taivo (talk) 18:21, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

User:MauricioJVG

MauricioJVG (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  The user insists on uploading files with dubious license despite the warning. Taichi (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done lets see if a 2 week block gets the message across Gbawden (talk) 09:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Category:Graded roads

please, move such categories as I undestand, to Category:Gravel roads, because of d:Q5591881 Albedo (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

@Albedo: how is a Wikidata item a reason to change a category name, and how is this a user problem? In particular, what user is there a problem with? - Jmabel ! talk 05:24, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
@Jmabel: Evidently, Albedo is a user who had a problem "naming categories against project policy" and remains blocked from category namespace by Ahonc for continuation of that for a year through 15 December 2023. The original post gives me no reason to believe that the user's judgement has improved, as Category:Graded roads (if it existed) should be mutually exclusive with Category:Gravel roads because graded roads have been engineered to improve upon existing substrate like dirt, while gravel roads are just dirt roads with gravel on top.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:00, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
So, in short Albedo's comment here amounts to an effort to get around a topic ban. Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 18:39, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
@Jmabel: You're welcome. I suggest a topic ban extension or an expansion due to incompetence.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
I would favor a topic ban extension. This post was not a good sign. - Jmabel ! talk 22:07, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
+1. This post was the nail in the coffin. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done I have extended the Category namespace block to indefinite. If anyone would like to propose a shorter extension, please feel free to propose it. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jeff G., Jmabel, and SHB2000: Worth asking if they're attempting to circumnavigate their category namespace ban by adding categories that don't exist. I also reverted their last two uploads, which were probably violations of Commons:Overwriting existing files, and declined their most recent file rename request, which didn't meet Commons:File renaming, so they seem to be flailing against our policies and guidelines all over the place. I wouldn't be opposed to a block across the project itself, rather than just the Category namespace, but don't feel strongly enough to do that unilaterally. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:17, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: in case I was not clear enough about "expansion" above, I again call for a block of this user. The big previous discussion was archived to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 34#Albedo blocking. Others have been archived to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 101#Non-consensus renaming User:Albedo, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 31#Albedo, and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Vandalism/Archive 19#Albedo.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
This is a grader
  • From what has been written , it appears to me that "graded roads" and "Gravel roads" are two different things. The description in Wikidata suggests to me that a "graded road" might be a completed road (for example , a farm track) or it might be a partially constructed road which is awaiting some sort of surfacing. As a child in a small town in South Africa in the 1950's I certainly remember graded roads that did not have a gravel surface, but were finished off using ash which was a by-product from the loical power station (and if you fell off your bicycle, you knew all about it). I disagree with User:Jeff G. that "... while gravel roads are just dirt roads with gravel on top." Again, as a child in South Africa, I remember a new gravel road beign built a little outside the town where I lived. It certainly had a proper sub-base.
In the present discussion, I suggest that User:Albedo be invited to provide a proper citation for his entry in Wikidata and once that has been done, that his case be re-examined. Martinvl (talk) 17:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
@Martinvl: sorry, no. This was an effort to evade a topic ban. End of story. If you want to raise the issue in a normal way through a CfD or whatever, fine, but that's not an administrative issue. - Jmabel ! talk 21:10, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Digilogic Systems

Digilogic Systems (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  only uploads Digilogic Systems images without META data to prove ownership. I have flagged some of them and warned the user that Commons is not for commercial advertisement. Could and administrator verify the status of this user uploads and keep an eye on him/her? Pierre cb (talk) 14:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. I blocked him/her indefinitely for inappropriate username and mass deleted all uploads as spam. Taivo (talk) 10:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Sankaryadhav29

Sankaryadhav29 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  was blacked already due to copyvios. Again the user continue the same as well as manipulating by this and that. AntanO 11:55, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a month. Yann (talk) 12:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

User:41.213.235.225

I've just now blocked User:41.213.235.225 for a month for incivility and probable vandalism. Apologies that I don't have a chance right now to look into this further; I'm at the end of a long day and about to quit for the night. Someone will want to look through their extensive edits and see if there is a ton here that will need reversion, or of these are just a few unacceptable actions by someone who also did a fair amount of legitimate work. [8] and [9] suggest the latter. - Jmabel ! talk 05:46, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

41.213.235.225 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  for the clickable links, FTR. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
I looked through most of their edits and most seem productive. They seem to care a lot about Madagascar and just lost their cool in the deletion discussion ... in full Austrian style, which tends to be very graphic. Kritzolina (talk) 12:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
@SHB2000: I am finding {{Ip}} more helpful to me because it doesn't try to ping the user and fail, giving me a notification.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:36, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Bolitachan

Bolitachan (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Uploaded 2 non-free files after being warned not to do so Kelly The Angel (talk) 07:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. 1 week block. Taivo (talk) 09:38, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

trone#gamer

en:coded 2001:FD8:B211:36C7:ADC3:5F5F:FBE:7ABD 07:49, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Excuse me, what did you mean? Kelly The Angel (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 Not done They're test edits. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Giov.c

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:35, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but no copyvios are uploaded since August and now it's December. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

User: 103.97.162.97

103.97.162.97 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

One of User:Rishad 57pymr's various IP addresses. Attempted to revert my deletion request at File:66 Infantry Division Insign of Bangladesh Army.svg as well as his old comment chain at User talk:Alexphangia.

Would also appreciate if an admin could deal with my deletion request. This guy - who has a long history of sockpuppetry and copyright violations - reuploaded something I made and claimed to have created it himself. ReneeWrites (talk) 13:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. 3 days block. Vandalism is either reverted or deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:22, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Yilku1

For the last 8 months, this has repeatedly removed Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires from this one photo.

No explanation was offered, even though pinged for it in the talk page, no geolocation or any other form of spatial identification was offered to justify the repeated uncategorization. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@Yilku1: What location in Buenos Aires is depicted in File:TranviaBsAs.jpg?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:48, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
This photo is in Buenos Aires City, this is not an unidentified location. Yilku1 (talk) 15:34, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done. Yilku was made autopatroller on 11th of November. But (s)he has copyright problems (see his/her talkpage) and this removing "unidentified" templates problem as well, so I removed his/her autopatroller bit. Taivo (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Should I add back Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires to that photo (and to any other in the same situation) now?, or would that be edit warring? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 20:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin: So you just come here to report me first instead of just first leaving a comment in my discussion page? (i don't remember that ping, i do a lot of edits be more specific) Yilku1 (talk) 20:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
You ignored my quaery to you on the file’s talk page after you repeatedly vandalized its categorization. You were reported here not too soon: Your absurd reply above (15:34) is all the proof I need that you’re either trolling or lacking competence, and I have neither time nor patience for either. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin: Why do you accuse me like that? The photo was taken in Buenos Aires, is not an Unidentified location, and call me a troll for saying that? why? Maybe you vandalized the image after it is clearly not an Unidentified location and taken in Buenos Aires. Yilku1 (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Okay, I’ll bite: what part of Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires you don’t understand?
Please note that one of its parent cats is Category:Buenos Aires, which refers to the city itself, not to the surrounding (but not encompassing) Category:Buenos Aires Province — so this is not a case akin to, say, Category:Unidentified locations in São Paulo (state) versus Category:Unidentified locations in São Paulo city.
I suggest you either find out the location of this photo and add it to the file page (through specific categorization under Category:Streets in Buenos Aires and/or geolocation), if you know BA well enough, or else drop the stick and let others improve this filepage.
-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:32, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
So you are just going to spam the category to every image that doesn't have coordinates? Yilku1 (talk) 18:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
@Yilku1: "Spam" is a rather unnecessary pejorative here, unless you think it would be appropriate to ask if you are "spamming" questions to this conversation. Buenos Aires is a large enough place that if there are no coordinates, no street address (or even an approximation to that), no indication of neighborhood, then it is appropriate to add Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires. Have a look at Category:Unidentified locations in Seattle, Washington, for example. - Jmabel ! talk 22:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Jmabel. When it comes to trams in unidentified locations within a given system, we can at least be sure that the location in question is somewhere along the (usually well known) track, extant or extinct (unless the tram in question is set off track, of course). When there’s enough categorized media to justify it, a specific category can be used, to simplify the geosleuths’ work, as in Category:Trams in unidentified locations in Lisbon, which in turn is under Category:Unidentified locations in Lisbon/along known routes. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Yes, all images and other media files that portrait or refer to unidentified locations in Buenos Aires should be categorized in Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires, just like, say, all images and other media files that portrait or refer to sculptures of trolls in Sweden should be categorized in Category:Sculptures of trolls in Sweden. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 12:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
Replying to myself concerning the edit warring issue: Taivo already fixed it. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Meanwhile a much more helpful user did identify the location of the photo in question, so it was then correctly removed from Category:Unidentified locations in Buenos Aires. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Lofty abyss

Hello there, this might seem weird as Commons is not my most active spot, but I have some concerns regarding the user Lofty abyss. He is an admin here on Commons, and does in fact meet the activity requirements, but I'm still concerned about this user's activity over the past couple of years. Examples:

  • He has made only 50 edits between February 2015 up until now, and 100 edits between May 2012 up until now. Many of them are also just him moving user pages of renamed users, and not actual edits. He has also not made a single edit to Commons since February 2021.
  • This user has a little more than 1,500 edits on Commons, and the last 500 of them have been from December 2009, the month he became an admin, up until now. Most of these edits are between 2009-2011, after which his activity seems to have really dropped.
  • He has made 100 admin actions since October 2019, and none since August 2023. Most of his admin actions during these years also seem to just be him deleting duplicate/empty categories as well as some userpages, and not actual files. I'm also noticing that most of these actions come within months between each other with about 5-7 of them each time, both of these points makes it look like he's just making these actions to retain his adminship. He has not handled any deletion requests since June 2020, not made any blocks since July 2020 and has only one logged action in the user rights log from 2010.
  • He has not made a single file upload since December 2009.

I don't know if this actually qualifies for a de-adminship or anything, but I think this is very low for an administrator here on Commons and I barely think these points demonstrate a need of adminship. EPIC (talk) 17:31, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

To paraphrase George Washington John Quincy Adams (I stand corrected), we don't need to go out into the world in search of monsters to destroy. There is no problem having someone minimally active keeping admin privileges, as long as there is no sign that they abuse those privileges. I myself might be perceived the same way as a minimally active admin on en-wiki. - Jmabel ! talk 20:20, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Jmabel (talk • contribs • blocks • protections • deletions • moves • rights • rights changes) shows plenty of blocks, protections, deletions, and moves, and even some rights changes. You are a valued Admin here, as well as the most helpful person at the Help desk and the Village pump. I appreciate your many insights. You use your Admin bit on enwiki to help people who post here.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:30, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
On that last, exactly. I rarely do admin things on en-wiki that don't start with issues on Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 20:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
@Lofty abyss: At least you should mention that you are an admin on your user page, and it is customary to mention which language(s) you speak. Thanks, Yann (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
It's not really the central issue here, but that's John Quincy Adams. GMGtalk 12:13, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done Consensus that there isn't actually any problem here. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: I would have waited until "Lofty abyss" answers, but I agree there isn't any problem here. I added an admin template on their user page. Yann (talk) 09:58, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Why the haste? It's not even 24 hours yet and only 2 people had opposed out of only 4 that participated. We've had community desysoping for inactivity previously, not something extraordinary. I think this should be left open for input from others. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

교복을 입은것은 아청법에 위배됩니다

삭제해주시기 바랍니다. 116.42.92.73 02:20, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

If Google translate has handled the above correctly, it is a claim that "Wearing a school uniform is against the child protection law" and a demand that some unspecified thing be deleted. (I have no idea what user this person is claiming to have a problem with, and I suspect the information simply isn't there.) I have no idea what country, if any, has such a law, but I'm utterly certain that there is no such law in the U.S., where our servers are hosted. School uniforms in South Korea gives no indication on any limits about wearing or displaying school uniforms. I cannot readily find any reference to any law of this sort with 10 minutes of searching, so unless someone can cite something solid, I am not inclined to take the claim seriously. - Jmabel ! talk 08:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
FWIW there is a South Korean prohibition on sexualized images of children, even if those are drawings rather than photographs, and their courts have apparently held that a school uniform is enough to mark the subject as a child for this purpose. But this would only apply if the images are sexualized. Certainly such images are common in Japan and legal in the U.S.; school-style uniforms are a common adult fetish object in both countries and doubtless elsewhere. There might be some issue about such an image being uploaded by a user who is a citizen of or resides in South Korea. As for us hosting such an image, though, we are no more bound by that than by a Saudi prohibition on showing a woman's arms. - Jmabel ! talk 08:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

7BIGDREAM again (the 3rd time)

7BIGDREAM (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

7BIGDREAM is back uploading copyrighted content again with this, this, this, this, this, and this in December 2023. Was warned previously in this AN report, followed by blocked in this AN report. I don't see, how they have learned their lesson, as they are still uploading copyrighted content without care, even after their block expired with this, this, this, this, this, and this in April 2023 (2 months after their block expired), hence would support a indef block as I believe enough is enough. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 09:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 3 months. Lets see if they get the message. Final chance Gbawden (talk) 09:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

User Albedo, categories, and block discussions

On 9 December 2023, user Albedo once again categorized files into a non-existent category (also misspelled) and they removed these same files from a valid category. I commented on their talk page at Moving photos from Flora of North Carolina. After perusing this noticeboard, I see this is a behavior the user is repeating, even after a now-indefinite block of editing categories and at least one topic ban that I can see. There are at least two problems with the changes made on 9 December: the files were removed from a valid category created by project consensus, and the (non-existent) category name was misspelled. See, for example, File:Sericocarpus asteroides 45807689.jpg. It looks like the user has changed their M.O. to editing Plants files from which they are not banned. Jeff G. called for a block of this user above in #Category:Graded roads. That might not be a bad idea at this point. Eewilson (talk) 00:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Looking at Category:Asteraceae in Nortth Carolina (sic, note the misspelling of "North"), it appears to be composed entirely of files placed there by User:Albedo. This seems to me to be an effort to get around the block against editing in category space as such. Unless there is a much better explanation than I expect, I would support an outright indef-block at this point. - Jmabel ! talk 02:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
@Eewilson and Jmabel: I moved those files back to Category:Flora of North Carolina. I, too, would support an outright indef-block. Here is the latest evidence of incompetence.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:05, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. Eewilson (talk) 18:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
The user continued to edit without replying here, so I blocked indef.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Also, thank you. Eewilson (talk) 19:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: Thank you!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry (Tinkubhoi)

Tinkubhoi (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Hi! There's been a good deal of disruption on en.wp from this user and numerous socks. I've nominated some files here for F10 deletion, apparently all depicting (and uploaded by) the same person. The accounts I found include: User:Oojhh, User:Bhohfugig7zrx, User:Kkkkllllpp, User Laxmo, User:ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜୀ , User:Laxminarayanmmmmm, User:Nmkjgyu and User:Oojhh; I expect there are more. I've not notified Tinkubhoi as he's apparently not registered on this project. Over to you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@Justlettersandnumbers: Please link usernames as follows:
Oojhh (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Bhohfugig7zrx (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Kkkkllllpp (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Laxmo (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜ୍ଜୀ (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Laxminarayanmmmmm (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
Nmkjgyu (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log )
You also failed to notify them per above or mention them. I did that for you.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done All blocked. Tinkubhoi is not registered here. Yann (talk) 19:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry (images of June Spencer)

User:Enujrecneps ("June Spencer" backwards) was blocked on 13 October for uploading copyvio images of actress June Spencer, falsely claiming them as own work. All the images were deleted.

User:Moskcorbenuj ("June Brocksom" backwards, Brocksom was her husband's name) uploaded further images of actress June Spencer on 20-23 October, claiming them as own work. Unclear if any of them were reuploads of the ones deleted above. Belbury (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Enujrecneps was blocked for a week by Achim55. I blocked Moskcorbenuj indef. for socking. Yann (talk) 18:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

User: SK Jahid Islam

SK Jahid Islam (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Sockpuppet of Rishad 2522, long-time vandal and uploader of copyrighted material. See also the report on 103.97.162.97, belonging to the same user, which is still on this page. ReneeWrites (talk) 22:25, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. Indefinitely blocked. Uploads are deleted or nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 08:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

ArnaudDarko

ArnaudDarko (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

The user re-uploads the same file over and over, ignoring the last warning given by Mdaniels5757. Günther Frager (talk) 00:28, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done indef-blocked. They have appear to have uploaded the same copyvio half a dozen times, and the account has no other meaningful activity. - Jmabel ! talk 01:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

User:OrlandoR503

OrlandoR503 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Lots of frivolous deletion requests, often of files COM:INUSE. Sure, there are somewhat random examples of files that might have copyright problems, but that doesn't make their approach to deletion requests valid. One example: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bandera De Concepcion De Oriente, La Union, El Salvador.gif. User contributions. I'm not suggesting a block at this stage, but a warning in Spanish would be good. My Spanish is survival-level, so I'm not the best one to do it, but I'll post something to their user talk page now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Convenience link: User:OrlandoR503 - Jmabel ! talk 20:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
@OrlandoR503: al menos, no es aceptable nominar un archivo para remover con un una justificación sin sentido ("FDFGHJKL"), ni sea "Ya No Me Sirve" mucho mejor. Los archivos no quedan aquí para servir un usuario en particular. - Jmabel ! talk 20:56, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 Comment Last warning for vandalism sent. DRs closed. Feel free to block. Yann (talk) 11:45, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Permanent Block request for violation of Topic Ban by A1Cafel

1. Originally, in 2021, A1Cafel was blocked against Deletion Requests (DRs) here. Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 93#A1Cafel and yet more abusive deletions
2. In August of 2022, the topic ban was partially lifted.
Regular DRs are OK, however, their was an exception for speedy deletions. Quote:
"Tags for speedy deletions and timed deletions such as missing permission etc. may still not be applied though. (emphasis added)
3. There are no written exceptions to this Speedy Deletion topic ban.
4. A1Cafel has not appealed their topic ban.

5. A1Cafel violated their topic ban by a Speedy Deletion request here: [[10]]

I had made this a regular deletion request (with comment) here: [[11]]

A1Cafel's "Second Appeal on the Topic Ban" here: [[12]]
Closing Admin. wrote,
"Per this discussion, A1Cafel is now allowed again to create regular deletion requests (DR). Tags for speedy deletions and timed deletions such as missing permission etc. may still not be applied though. If after three months from today, A1Cafel has shown that their newly created DRs are constructive and successful, the overall topic ban may be appealed at this board. Such an appeal shall include the notification of all participants in the original TBAN discussion. De728631 (talk) 12:39, 31 August 2022 (UTC)"
I cannot find any appeal since 31 August 2022, like that offered above.
A1Cafel was automatically notified on his talk page, when I changed the speedy deletion into a regular DR with the following comment:
"Is this user allowed by community consensus to do speedy deletions now?"
A1Cafel Without any comment, they removed the DR notification from their talk page. [[13]]
Also, as of today, there has been no comment by A1Cafel at the regular DR nomination page, where the Speedy Deletion had been converted to a regular DR by me. [[14]]
and he wrote,
"My block" "I noticed that an IP tagged File:Geoffrey-Pyatt.jpg for deletion per CSD F8 as a duplicate of File:Amb. Geoffrey Pyatt portrait.jpg. As it was not an exact or scaled-down duplicate (but a crop), I declined the deletion request. I noticed that A1Cafel had uploaded the image the day before. This is, in my opinion, obviously A1Cafel. Looking at the IP's range (Special:Contributions/219.78.0.0/16), I noticed that there were multiple other edits that appear to be A1Cafel, including untagging his own file for speedy deletion without attracting the scrutiny that doing so logged-in would provide. There may be others on another IP range.
Accordingly, I blocked A1Cafel. I determined a block of one month was appropriate, given that the previous block for this was two weeks.''"

and the concluding discussion, quoted here:

"Discussion
  • I think a block was reasonable given the evidence provided. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:02, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  • This is their third block this year, plus the topic ban, plus numerous admonishments for overzealous behavior. If anything, I think this block is shorter than warranted. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:47, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  • "Ban evasion, please create an account to edit" I dont think someone block evading should be asked to create a new account. Odd block reason. --Trade (talk) 12:38, 3 August 2023 (UTC)"

I appologize in advance if I included too much text, missed relevant facts or other flaws, as this is my first such request. --Ooligan (talk) 22:46, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

This seems like massive overkill; was the intent of the ban to actually prevent the user from requesting that files they just uploaded be deleted because they were misuploaded?--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
It looks like you're right. What should they have done instead? Is there a board on the Administrators' noticeboard where they could have requested speedy deletion? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:34, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
What is the harm in invoking COM:CSD#G7 on own work within 7 days?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Wait, I checked and the user tried to have another's upload File:Geoffrey-Pyatt.jpg deleted to replace it with their own upload File:Amb. Geoffrey Pyatt portrait.jpg via COM:CSD#G8. It wasn't an exact duplicate, and in such cases Admins delete the newest upload anyway.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:18, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Proposal: Clarify topic ban

A1Cafel's topic ban is modified, so that it does not prevent them from tagging their own uploads for speedy deletion. Yann (talk) 20:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I think that the intent of the community's speedy deletion topic ban was to ban them from requesting speedy deletion on files uploaded by other users. Nowhere in the discussions was there anybody who complained about the user tagging their own files for deletion. Yes, based on the written word of the TBAN, this is a violation of a topic ban, but I don't think that we ought block the user for this. As such, I propose that the text of the topic ban be modified to additionally state that A1Cafel's topic ban does not prevent them from tagging their own uploads for speedy deletion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, if all that happened was an {{SD|G7}} of their own upload, I wouldn't even want to discourage that. It's basic housekeeping. - Jmabel ! talk 01:06, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:15, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Adv Sh Mishra and Ansh2512

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Both blocked. Yann (talk) 11:39, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Yann: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:58, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Labicanense

Reason for reporting: This user is a puppet of e.g. User:Livioandronico2013 and User:Fiat 500e. Same camera and same kind of spamming behaviour, i.e. replacing old images with their own on Wikipedia articles without looking for consent. For example, see this version history. Disembodied Soul (talk) 09:36, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 11:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Dr Selvaganesh

Dr Selvaganesh (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  continuously uploaded his personal images. AntanO 09:37, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Warned, file deleted. Yann (talk) 11:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

User:DMLSAQ

DMLSAQ (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  File:Irena Ponaroshku 2023.jpg is probably re-uploaded after warning and deletion, several more copyvios detected, other uploads are also without metadata. All are from articles created as undisclosed paid editing. Komarof (talk) 12:35, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent, and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by DMLSAQ‎. Yann (talk) 12:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

User:RAGlobal2

RAGlobal2 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  - uploading a series of self-promotional PDFs. Omphalographer (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef., spam only after warning, file deleted. Yann (talk) 18:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Sleevachan

Sleevachan (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

This is a known sock, blocked on EnWiki, who keeps uploading deleted images (see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Esthappanos Bar Geevarghese). They then add the images to EnWiki as an IP. Please indef. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:09, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef., all files deleted. I also blocked Phillypaboy123 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information), probable sock, and for massive copyright violations. Yann (talk) 13:33, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
Brilliant, thank you! ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Guilherme delara

Guilherme delara (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) keep uploaded unsourced out-of-scope pictures. They were warned, but kept doing it. They also likely have several socks. Accounts like Guilherme delara 20 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) and GUI DELARA (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) are en:WP:DUCKS to me. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 21:46, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Deleted all the uploads and blocked all the accounts. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:58, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Rione I Monti

Rione I Monti (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

This user is a puppet of e.g. User:Livioandronico2013, User:Fiat 500e and User:Labicanense. Same camera and same kind of spamming their own photos all over Wikipedia. After being blocked user reappears with a new account. Disembodied Soul (talk) 07:51, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 13:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

TylerKutschbach sock opening several deletion discussions (User:GraydenCat)

Hi. User:GraydenCat is already checkuser blocked on English Wikipedia for being a sock of TylerKutschbach (CentAuth). This sock came to my attention here via Commons:Deletion requests/File:Florida Presidential Election Results 1888.png, which ironically had also been nominated by Tyler. Curbon7 (talk) 05:21, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Person 18.0 Persistent disruptive editing and tag misuse

This editor is tagging all instances of images of the letter Z and all images of the Belarusian flag with Template:Russian militarism symbol, as well as tagging images of members of the Kim dynasty as communist symbols. I reverted, and this editor left the following message on my talk page page:

Note: there is a following badge supporting Russia in its invasion of Ukraine, so the letter Z is considered a symbol of Putin's hatred, including the flag of Belarus and a Ukrainian province occupied by Russia, although However, in some other files, it is only a reminder to avoid confusion by the Russian Armed Forces

I removed the comment, and the editor reverted me. Twice. On my removal of their weird comment from my own Talk page. Their edit description for the second time: hey, just a reminder here, there's nothing to delete

Clear from this person's edit history and talk page that they are a persistent disruption. Zanahary (talk) 07:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

I know, but you also have to think of banned political symbols that have been recorded on Wikimedia Commons Person 18.0 (talk) 07:49, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
The editor has begun reverting my reverts. [[File:Kim Dynasty.png]], a file with no symbols whatsoever, now has a communist symbol tag again. Zanahary (talk) 08:01, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I have given the user a temporary 1 day block to stop the edit war. Gbawden (talk) 09:46, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
I don’t think the edit war is the problem. The problem is marking all instances of the letter Z as a symbol of Russian military aggression, and photographs of the leaders of communist countries as communist symbols. Zanahary (talk) 18:46, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
Truly. In Greece, in the early 1970s, that same letter would have been a symbol of resistance to the fascist regime of the colonels. - Jmabel ! talk 19:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
It should be noted that I found this user’s edits because I saw that they had changed the Twemoji template so that every single Twitter emoji would be marked as a communist symbol. Zanahary (talk) 21:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
@Zanahary: That is just plain wrong. They are blocked for a day for edit warring after warnings.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:51, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

Dr Selvaganesh

User Dr Selvaganesh (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  is not listening and today loaded another personal image. AntanO 12:10, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef., nothing but out of scope personal images. File deleted. Yann (talk) 12:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Al12si

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

What is this? I wasn’t advocating anything; I was just stating a fact. Anyone who saw the form would reach the same conclusion. Are stating facts not allowed here? Al12si (talk) 11:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
@Al12si: Stating that the "WMF wouold[sic] be happy" with uploads that violate policy or copyright laws is untrue, see Foundation:Resolution:Licensing policy and https://freedomdefined.org/Definition/1.0 for details.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:27, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
That’s a fact. I can’t point out systemic discrimination. And I can’t point out facts. What else can’t I say? Why do you even tell people to ask? This is outright a trap. This is bullying! Al12si (talk) 15:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
@Al12si: What accounts are COM:FLICKRWASHING? Who at the WMF is happy about that? You forgot to ping me.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
We apply FoP copyright laws equally to Flickr uploads, so if there are Canadian murals (which generally aren't covered under FOP unless they are works of artistic craftsmanship like mosaics), we'd look to see if there is an appropriate permission for the mural from the artist. If you believe Canadian copyright laws are discriminatory, then please lobby to change them so they are less so. In the meantime, we will follow copyright laws as best we can. Abzeronow (talk) 18:04, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 21:42, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Yann: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Phuc Truong Dinh

I happened to see this user adding nonsensical deletion requests today. I do not know the conventions and how to act, can all requests be closed and the edits reverted? They also uploaded two images "by mistake". Should the user be warned? Thanks, Ellywa (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

 Comment I blocked Phuc Truong Dinh for a week, and provisionally Vinoth offl for a day. Feel free to block them further. Yann (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

User:SELVAGANESH BHP

SELVAGANESH BHP (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  and Dr Selvaganesh (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  seem same user since both uploaded same files - personal and non-Commons. AntanO 18:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@AntanO: You may file a report to the Checkusers at COM:RFCU.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
I don't like to report at RFCU due to some over smart users :) Please do your best. Thanks AntanO 18:40, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked, file deleted. Yann (talk) 21:45, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Roman Ivanovych Kovalchuk

Copyright violation: from video

And also other files with Copyright violation. It is too much! This must be stopped. --Микола Василечко (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

@Микола Василечко: You failed to mention or notify Roman Ivanovych Kovalchuk (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) , as instructed above. I did it for you.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
I gave the user a final warning 17:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC). File:Каскад ставків в селі Мухавка. 5-й став.png was deleted 18:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC) by Yann. They have since uploaded File:Володимир Тарнавський.jpg 08:48, 13 December 2023 (UTC) with doubtful licensing and File:Galizien und Lodomerien (1779–1783) Muchawka.png 01:54, 17 December 2023 (UTC) with also doubtful licensing (it was removed with alleged source and alleged author by Микола Василечко (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) ).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:44, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
And also false «own work» in files with name "Šematizm...", "Schematismus..." and other. --Микола Василечко (talk) 12:20, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
They also uploaded copyvios File:Chapel of the Mother of God.png and File:Cerkva in Mukhavka.jpg after that final warning.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:56, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Judging at least in part by dialogue on their talk page, at least as far as FOP violations, the user does not seem to understand that copyright expiration in Ukraine is based on the creator's death date, not when the work was executed. I remarked back to them on that (simple enough that I trusted Google Translate to write it in Ukrainian). But, yes, if they won't even acknowledge that they've been uploading outright copyvios and promise to stop doing that, I don't see how the situation is salvageable. Does someone want to reach out one more time, or just block? - Jmabel ! talk 19:10, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I think I made it clear above that they need to be blocked. Furthermore, they insulted you with "Маразм!!!" in this edit.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:37, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
Pinging @Ahonc, Well-Informed Optimist, Андрей Романенко, George Chernilevsky, Butko as Admins with expertise in Ukrainian.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
He just does not understand. Believe me, it is not easy for a person from another culture to understand, why he cannot make a photo of the church in his village. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 15:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
There are two separate issues here: lack of freedom of panorama in Ukraine, and the fact that (I'm pretty sure legitimately) he posted this content to Facebook before posting here. The latter is easily resolved; the former may make it impossible for us to have some of these specific images. But I still think it's worth having the discussion with him. User:Андрей Романенко, could you see (and possibly translate) my latest remark on his user talk page?
I'm pretty sure the guy is a good photographer who is having trouble understanding the subtleties of copyright and licensing. I think it is worth working with him to sort that out, rather than kick him off the project. - Jmabel ! talk 18:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Weird behavior by Aka

Hi. Aka is an administrator and seems to have an ongoing battle with Falk2 who contributes under IP after they've been blocked. Note that I agree with Aka that Falk2 can have disruptive behavior and was even involved in the discussion that led to them being blocked. Two things are in my opinion not OK and should stop:

  • After Aka blocks Falk2, they revert some of their valid edits and therefore bring pages to a worse state: Revision #831669841 as an example. This has been discussed on their talk page already: User talk:Aka#Kategorisierung. I really don't see the point of these edits other than being punitive actions that are a net negative for the project.
  • Undiscussed wide range block: I talked to Aka on their talk page about it. Instead of following procedure, they lifted the block and deleted the discussion from their talk page with the summary please go away: Revision #802704878.

I'm no administrator but these actions wouldn't be OK for a regular user and even less for an administrator. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 02:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aka: For my part, of course, I would  Strong support a Wikimedia-wide ban of Falk2 -- he knows why, you know why, many others meanwhile probably know why as well.
However, as long as he is not banned (not to confuse a project-wide block with a global ban!), we don't delete his uploads "only because it's by Falk2", and we don't revert good-faith edits* (* = edits that we normally don't revert if they are made by any non-blocked user) on these uploads. I agree that this is a problematic behaviour by you to say the least. An admin should not delete questions on the own talk page, either. Would you please immediately STOP these practices? Thank you!!
It would be way more useful if you would initiate a Global ban proposal for Falk2 on Meta instead. As stated, in this issue you have my support. Once Falk2 is banned, all his subsequently submitted uploads and other IP or sockpuppet edits are subject to speedy deletion and rollback. And this is really overdue. --A.Savin 04:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Blocking policy says User accounts or IP addresses used to evade a block may and should also be blocked. Falks2 regularly circumvents his permanent ban as an IP. I'm blocking this and reverting his posts. I never deleted an upload of him. -- aka 07:27, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
@Aka: Once again, reverts of good-faith edits, even of those by sockpuppets, are not allowed. The only exception are global banned users. Please go ahead and start the ban proposal. But as long as he is not banned do not revert edits like this one. Repeating this despite of multiple requests to stop it may be considered vandalism. Frankly I'm disappointed about your responses. It appears a bit like pretending to be deaf. An admin should not behave like this. Please reconsider your behaviour immediately, otherwise it will have consequences for you. Thanks --A.Savin 12:14, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
@Aka: your unwillingness to address the issues that I'm raising (and that have been brought up to your attention on your talk page) does not reflect well on your ability to be an administrator. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 12:43, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
I now understand it and will adjust my behavior. I'm not sure whether his behavior is bad enough to warrant a global ban. Beside this, I don't have any experience with these global bans. -- aka 13:32, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Great. You could start by reverting your reverts of valid edits. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 13:15, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aka: Honestly it feels like you're just paying lip service. You've failed to address in details the issues that I've pointed out, and failed to follow by actions. It took me poking you for you to silently take action and not even acknowledge on this thread that you've done so. In my opinion you have failed your duties as administrator. The only thing stopping me to ask for de-adminship is that COM:DEADMIN mentions "an administrator is acting against policy and routinely abusing their status". I don't see this as routine yet but will ask for de-adminship if you fail again. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 14:35, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

  • As a side note, I'm not fully sure I understand why our toleration extends to users blocked for something like harassment and intimidation. That seems to send a message that hypothetically, someone could be blocked for slinging slurs and epithets and we're still obligated to tolerate their continued participation so long as they successfully evade the block. It seems to run contrary to the spirit of all the talk at the Foundation level about enforcing friendly spaces. GMGtalk 14:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
    Yes, I did this with the best of intentions, of course. -- aka 15:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
    I think the reason is similar as for en:WP:Clean start -- as long as the blocked user is contributing valid content and not making the same problems as those led to their block, such kind of evasion may be tolerable. However it's not like I personally would support further Falk2 uploads at any price, because I suppose that a real clean start by the person behind the account Falk2 is impossible, and we're not that poor to take "tainted gift". --A.Savin 18:34, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2601:47:4081:50C0:0:0:0:0/64

Seeing some strange behavior on deletion discussions from this IP range, and it looks like they've been blocked previously (ping: @Elcobbola). Might need a reblock? Omphalographer (talk) 03:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

This is indeed a returning LTA in need of a reblock. Per DENY, I would recommend removing or disregarding the referenced DR comments. Эlcobbola talk 14:48, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

User:ライロヲ

This user is using the user page and the talk page for pranks. This user has been blocked at JAWP for the same reason despite repeated warnings. (cf. Records) And the user is also over-creating unnecessary categories and doesn't seem to understand policy of Wikimedia Commons. The user should be blocked. Bart Buchtfluß (talk) 08:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 Comment I cleaned the talk page, and sent a warning. I let others decide about a block. Yann (talk) 13:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Marina bauer

Marina bauer (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Another user with a long history of uploading copyvios. I've just tagged a couple which jumped out at me but I suspect there are more; some closer attention is probably needed. Omphalographer (talk) 23:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Omphalographer: You should have notified her on her talk page; I did that for you. You also should have mentioned that she got a last warning 16:13, 6 May 2023 (UTC).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked for one week. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

ChrisWx

Clearly has a vandetta towards Long Islanders interested in weather records. 47.16.96.33 22:21, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Reporting IP blocked for vandalism. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for continuing my conspiracy! ChrisWx 🎄 (Happy holidays!) 18:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrizwx (talk • contribs) 18:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Impersonation...
Please block Chrizwx. · מקף Hyphen ෴ · 18:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 18:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Sobhannadi

Sobhannadi (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

The user uploads what seems like self-portraits, while also nominating existing photographs for deletion for bogus reasons. (Reporting here because it looks like borderline vandalism to me.)

The first upload was File:Sobhannadi.jpg back in November, and it was followed the next day with a nomination to delete File:Frösjö lake.jpg Because it is nonsense, absolutely unusable in any article, a selfie which is not used in any article, which doesn’t appear to be in good faith. (Full disclosure: I’ve myself suggested, off-wiki, for this file to be uploaded to Commons; not to imply such suggestion was necessary, mind.)

— Ivan Shmakov (d ▞ c) 20:17, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

M.Bitton

I was led to this board by @Mdaniels5757 from the vandalism board, since they decided that it wasn't an instance of vandalism. Issue: User M.Bitton keeps reverting edit on File:Administrative Regions of Morocco.jpg, which corrects the dating of the image, and refused to comply after being prompted in the discussion page. The image dates back to 2018 as shown here, but the user entered the archiving date instead (February 2021) which is misleading. I had made a correction by putting the original date of the image on cia.gov, and the current URL, and moving the archiving URL and its date to "alternative versions" section. To put this in full context, there's another dispute open against M.Bitton on Wikidata (here), for biased edits concerning the Western Sahara conflict (and constantly reverting edits that contradict his views on the matter). I was led to the image in question from that discussion when an admin yesterday posted the link to another dispute page on enwiki (here), and I noticed that the image was used in the infobox in the article, and had to check its source and date. If this is not the right location to place this complaint, please let me know. Ideophagous (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

@Ideophagous: I note that you neglected to notify M.Bitton, as required above, and that the user replied on COM:ANV#M.Bitton. I notified them for you.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
@Jeff G. You're right. Thanks for your help. Ideophagous (talk) 16:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
@Ideophagous: You're welcome. Now, please stop hounding M.Bitton.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Hello @Jeff G.. I have zero interest in hounding this user, as I have better things to do on Wikimedia projects and elsewhere, but it so happens that he's always involved in vandalizing or creating controversy regarding Morocco-related pages. And speaking of which, what do you call writing on my talk page to warn me about unrelated issues? Please focus on the topic at hand, or let an administrator take care of this. Ideophagous (talk) 16:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
@Ideophagous: I call that warning as a result of patrolling. It happens every day here. I actually brought Template:File copyright status here. When I see something, I say something. Please see the file redlinks on User talk:Ideophagous/archive up to 2022 and the history of User talk:Ideophagous.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:50, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
@Jeff G. As I have already answered you on my talk page, those issues are old, and have already been handled, which is why I moved them to an archive subpage. Now please stop wasting time. Ideophagous (talk) 17:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
You brought it up.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:07, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  • This is clearly a case of harassment by a single purpose nationalist editor. As for the map, I listed the original source (which is more than enough) and the date of the upload (which also happens to be the date the derivative was made). M.Bitton (talk) 12:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
    @M.Bitton. There's no harassmnent involved, since I simply followed the trail of pages as I already explained, and surprise surprise, it happens to be the same editor vandalizing Morocco-related pages on various projects with obsession. The date is simply incorrect, and you could have gracefully accepted the correction and moved on. Ideophagous (talk) 16:19, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
    • If it's a derivative work, then the date of the derivative work is indeed the date the derivative work was made. However, it should correctly indicate the date of the source map on which it was based, since it presumably represents the situation at the time of the source, not at the time of the derivative. If the derivative reflects changes after that date, it should almost certainly cite a source for the differences. - Jmabel ! talk 18:08, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
      • It's a derivative of a map that is in the public domain (most maps that are based on them don't even include the source). The original link to the cited source that was used to create is archived and no longer accessible. M.Bitton (talk) 18:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
        • Archive.org link is fine. Do we know the date of the map? And, yes, a lot of people are really lousy about sourcing their maps, which keeps being a problem whenever there are disputes. - Jmabel ! talk 23:42, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
          • I don't know, and to be honest, even if I did, I still wouldn't change the description of a map that has been in use for a while, least of all, comply with the demands of an editor who keeps personally attacking me and wasting my time. As far as I'm concerned, doing so would set a bad precedent and would go against the very freedom that the public domain licence gives editors such as myself. If it bothers them that much, they'll just have to look elsewhere and keep using the utterly ridiculous maps on their favourite project. M.Bitton (talk) 02:03, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
            • @M.Bitton My point, quite independent of this editor, is that it should be clear what date a map represents, and in cases where there is controversy, whose view of the situation it represents. In particular, it is based on a CIA map where all you/we can confidently say is that it was some time before your version, with unspecified changes made by you. For encyclopedic purposes or other educational purposes that doesn't sound particularly useful. Understand, I haven't examined it closely, I have not even given more than passing thought to what specific objections someone would have beyond "area of the world with lots of disputed borders," and the only axe I have to grind here is analogous to believing that articles should cite their sources, especially in controversial matters.. - Jmabel ! talk 07:30, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
        @Jmabel @M.Bitton The original work is accessible, the url was simply changed on cia.org. You can find the list of location maps of Morocco here which includes the year of each map, and that specific map here. Ideophagous (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
        That's not the original URL (which is cited in the source). Please stop harassing me all the time with your pings and personal attacks. M.Bitton (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
        @M.Bitton It's the URL to the original work, still on cia.gov, not the original URL, which as has been mentioned, does not work anymore. You're not being harassed, you should simply accept being corrected with grace and move on. Ideophagous (talk) 09:26, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
        Please stop harassing me with your pings and personal attacks. M.Bitton (talk) 16:19, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
        • @Ideophagous if M.Bitton does not wish to be pinged, please don't ping him. If he complains about being blindsided, you can point here (use a permalink) to indicate that you were doing what he requested. - Jmabel ! talk 22:13, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
          @Jmabel Alright, will do, thank you. Ideophagous (talk) 22:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
          @Ideophagous: as far as I can see, the pointer to archive.org is a perfectly acceptable way to acknowledge the source. Given that M.Bitton seems committed to using that, I suggest dropping that particular issue. Is there something you think I'm missing about that? - Jmabel ! talk 22:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
          My only concern is that the date of the original work is not specified, which would be misleading to other editors, especially coming from Wikipedia where the image is used. I originally opened a discussion on en:Talk:Regions of Morocco (where M.Bitton himself responded voluntarily as I didn't ping him there) specifying that the file should not be used in the infobox, as it misrepresents the topic, but also the position of the US regarding the territorial conflict, which has been changed officially in 2020, and no longer reflects the content of the map. Dating the file to 2021 is grossly misleading, to say the least. If on the other hand it's a common practice on Commons, to date files only according to their last modification or addition on the site, then so be it. I still find it strange that the user refuses to update the data in the description of the file, and agressively reverts edits to that effect, despite being provided with compelling proof as to the original date and the new URL on the same website where it was hosted. Ideophagous (talk) 22:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
          Your so-called "concerns" about what is misleading are frankly laughable given that in your favourite project, you've been editing this article about Western Sahara (permalink) (which denies it very existence) and that the article you're referring to displays about 4 or 5 maps that are misleading beyond the pale, but for obvious reasons and in line with your nationalist agenda, that doesn't seem to bother you one bit. M.Bitton (talk) 22:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
          As I have already explained on en:Talk:Regions of Morocco, I only edited that article to revert vandalism and/or make minor stylistic adjustments. If I had a nationalistic agenda as you claim, you would be looking at a long detailed article written from a pure Moroccan POV, which is not the case, since I don't actually care about this conflict that much to begin with. Furthermore, since this is a very sensitive topic in Morocco, changing the map on the Moroccan Darija Wikipeia would create a backlash, which I frankly don't want to get myself into as it would be a complete waste of time, and a distraction from more important stuff I want to do (just like these whole conversations have been). Let politicians come to an agreement on the fate of that region, and then we'll just reflect the consensus from reliable sources, whatever it is at that point. If the map really concerns you, feel free to suggest a neutral one that does not trigger the sensitivities of the editors on that project, and if the arywiki community accepts it, I will add it myself. Ideophagous (talk) 09:26, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
          @Jmabel I see that you added the file to Category:2018 maps of Africa. If the state of the page is overall in line with Commons policies and guidelines, then I'm satisfied. Ideophagous (talk) 22:40, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done I blocked M.Bitton for 2 weeks for the last edit, also now reverted. Yann (talk) 12:22, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Britchi Mirela

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done The threshold for blocking for FoP violations is quite high (so long as the photos are in fact own work), and IMO it is not met. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: I replied at User talk:Britchi Mirela#Copyright violation using Google Translate. I also noticed that they tend to reply to DR notifications on their user talk page, rather than on the DRs. Romanian speakers welcome.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I also want to add, as someone who has spent a fair amount of time in Romania and has at least a moderate knowledge of the language: Romania's extreme lack of FoP (plus some other laws left over from Communist times about what you may not photograph) make things very difficult for anyone doing photography there. Quite a few Romanian contributors have railed against these laws, often blaming Commons for having some sort of anti-Romanian bias because we enforce their own country's copyright rules. It is sometimes very unintuitive: a century-old building that has status as a Monument Historic is still in copyright because the architect lived into the 1970s; an absolutely innocuous Communist-era apartment house of no particular architectural merit is considered copyrightable; the massive Bulevardul Unirii leads dramatically to the Palace of Parliament, all Stalinist kitsch by certainly one of Bucharest's best-known and most photographed vistas and buildings, and basically none of this can be shown in Commons because it is all from the 1980s. Etc. Think of the FoP situation in France, but in a country where many regions have few surviving buildings predating the 20th Century, and you can imagine. Yes, we need to delete the FoP violations, but we shouldn't really be angry at people for uploading them, and anyway these are steadily falling out of copyright at which point we will be glad to have them here to undelete. - Jmabel ! talk 19:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
I agree with KoH and Jmabel here. I agree with deleting Romanian FoP violations as we find them. I sympathize with Romanians that wish to photograph their countries monuments, and I hope whichever Wikimedia chapter is in Romania receives organization support for changing copyright laws so there is an acceptable to Commons freedom of panorama in the country as Romania has many beautiful buildings and monuments that we currently cannot host due to copyright laws. Abzeronow (talk) 19:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Fitzkarl

User:MCGAMER YOUTUBE

A usor has numerous files containing copyrighted (non-libre) works and series and being out of project scope grabbed from YouTube. See a relevant nomination here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by MCGAMER YOUTUBE. - The Harvett Vault | he/him | user | talk - 00:14, 21 December 2023 (UTC); edited: 00:18, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. I warned the user. If this does not help, then (s)he must be blocked. Taivo (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
I will take a wild guess and say that he did not bothered to read your warning Trade (talk) 15:16, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked by Herbythyme. Yann (talk) 16:49, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

copyright violation and fake license

non of these files are uploader own works [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 08:51, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 09:12, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Singlemotherof4

Singlemotherof4 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) : while edits are spaced out months apart, other than one now-deleted upload this seems to be a single-purpose account to vandalize pages related to porn actress Cindy Pucci. - Jmabel ! talk 23:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef as VoA. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I accidentally made a mistake

I should not use {{Bad name}} to the category page "Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency Working Station", but it was deleted before I could undo my edit. I don't know how I could restore the original version of the category?--125.230.89.198 13:51, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Yann, could you help me restore it?--125.230.89.198 13:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
It is empty. Yann (talk) 13:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
I know. Because I haven't corrected it yet. Category:Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency Working Station should redirect to Category:Working stations of the Forestry and Nature Conservation Agency.--125.230.89.198 14:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:11, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

User:LlywelynII

LlywelynII (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

I would like to highlight the user LlywelynII. He / she is a person who is incapable of collaborating, who imposes her point of view and is not willing to serenely discuss a solution. Not only does he / she change categories that would first require a public discussion, but when one of his mistakes or arbitrariness is pointed out to her, he / she very quickly moves on to insults and to be offensive. I see that this is a frequent behavior of him / her that he has not only with me, but also with other users.

I recently pointed out to him the incorrectness of having changed the "Coins of the ancient Roman Republic" to "Coins of the Roman Republic" here, since there were other Roman Republics in other periods (in 1798-1799 and in 1849), not only in the ancient period, and I did it in a polite and kind way, but I only got a rude and arrogant response. My next reply to him/ her he deleted it.

Years ago I politely pointed out to him some errors in his categorization in the Category:Ptolemaic Italy (see his discussion page), even then receiving insults instead of a collaborative attitude. I believe that his uncooperative, arrogant, and only self-referential behavior, accompanied by insults and offensive words, is unacceptable in a collective project like Commons. DenghiùComm (talk) 14:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

When there is a disagreement like this, the appropriate vehicle for discussion is usually a CfD, possibly linked from the Village pump (where the description of the conflict should be as neutral as possible). Yes, it's better if the person who wants to change things in a way that is potentially controversial starts a CfD before taking action, but you can always start one after the fact proposing a move back to the prior name. Jmabel ! talk 21:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

User:地下高雄

地下高雄 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Per COM:LP category names should be in English, but unfortunately the user insists on keeping non-English names, especially since his choice of language is "Bân-lâm-gú". Its pronunciation and spelling is completely different from English. See Chen Jhong-he and compare with Tan Tiong-ho, the former is the English pronunciation and the latter is the Bân-lâm-gú pronunciation. If we choose a non-English language to name the categories, it will cause these problems:

  1. Does not match the page name on Wikipedia (including Wikidata), which can confuse readers even more.
  2. For readers who are not familiar with the Bân-lâm-gú language, they can't find the corresponding categories via the English names.

We should strive for consistency and usability for all users, so I've tried fixing them:

However, User:地下高雄 seems to disagree with me because he reverted all edits and he say, “According to Commons:Naming categories, For subjects of only local relevance, proper names in the original language are used generally, original Taiwanese names are in line with historical and linguistic background of these people, shouldn't be regarded as 'Bad name',shouldn't exclusively prefer for single Romanization method.”

Additionally, this is the first time I discuss with you in English. If you feel that my English expression is so bad, there's nothing I can do about that.--125.230.88.69 02:38, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

I disagree. There are quite amount entries / pages with pre-Mandarin Sinic name are not named with Mandarin, for example, Koxinga (國姓爺 in Hokkien), Lo bah png (滷肉飯 in POJ), Misua (麵線 in TL), Lor mee (撈麵 in SE Hokkien), Bak kut teh (肉骨茶 in SE Hokkien), or Category:Tan Seng Ong Temple, Jakarta (陳聖王廟 in SE Hokkien). Those names are original names and predate Mandarin; they are definitely not "Bad names".
Additionally, those so-called "bad-named" pages are already provided with Mandarin spelling as English name(s) thus enable non-BLG users reach those pages via search. --TX55TALK 03:15, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Neither of these are English. The line from COM:LP that you cite later links to Commons:Categories#Category names, which states: "Latin alphabets are used in original form including diacritics and derived letters, non-Latin alphabets are transcribed to the English Latin script." So policy does not state which romanization of Chinese to use, only that Chinese characters are not allowed in category names. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:18, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I thought that category names should be spelled one way when the first time I read COM:LP. However, Taiwan's category pages are sometimes named in English, and sometimes they are named in Bân-lâm-gú. Why does Taiwan need two languages? Also, how do you people decide which category pages should be named in English, or Bân-lâm-gú?--125.230.88.69 04:24, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Subjects existed before Mandarin becomes the official language in Taiwan usually named with TW-BLG, Hakka, or Formosans (example as seen aforementioned); People who has English names and use it internationally, it's English name, such as Category:James Soong. --TX55TALK 04:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Because their mother tongue is Chinese, and their government's official language is Mandarin. But, Chinese including Hakka and Bân-lâm-gú (TW-BLG). When they change their category names from Chinese to English, we won't be able to distinguish which languages is Hakka, Mandarin, or Bân-lâm-gú (TW-BLG). As a result, people who are only familiar with someone language will think other languages ​​are wrong. This is why edit wars happen. To avoid it happening again in the future, we need to know how do Taiwanese people decide which category pages should be named in which languages.--125.230.88.69 05:40, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
According to Development of National Languages Act, every language in Taiwan shall be deemed as equal as official language. Article 4 states all national languages shall be treated equally and using them shall not be discriminated nor limited. So it is reasonable to name entry by their own mother tongue.
Additionally, Category:Mona Rudao is "Mona Rudao" instead of "Muo-na-lu-tao", while "Category:Seediq people" is not named "Sai-tê k'ê". All those entries have their own legit Mandarin names, but their international entries are still their mother tongue name. --TX55TALK 09:11, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Also, Mandarin is the official language of Singapore, but the entry Category:Teo Hong Road, Singapore is not named in Mandarin. In addition, there are many Singaporean people's entry (Category:People of Singapore of Chinese descent) are not named in Mandarin, such as Category:Tan Kah Kee.
The entry Ng Man-tat, an Hong Kong actor, is named in Cantonese, even it is not an official language in current Hong Kong, nor in British Hong Kong. --TX55TALK 09:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I think this user confused the presentation and pronunciation of Chinese characters. Words written in Chinese characters can not only be pronounced in Mandarin. For example, 大阪 is pronounced as Osaka (Japanese) instead of Daban (Mandarin), 國姓爺 is pronounced as Koxiga (Hokkien: Kok-sìng-iâ) instead of Guoxingye (Mandarin). It is necessary to consider the cultural and historical background of the name, and respect the language used by this person.
Take 陳中和 as an example. He was a Taiwanese (Taiwanese Hokkien) speaker under the Qing and Japanese rule. He had never experienced the Republic of China, which promote Mandarin. He called himself Tan Tiong-ho (Taiwanese) throughout his whole life, and never called himself Chen Jhong-he (Mandarin), because 陳中和 was originally a Taiwanese name.
Most people today may be more familiar with these names in Mandarin, but this does not mean that Taiwanese or Hakka names should be regarded as "bad names" for granted. In addition, today there are also people in who choose Taiwanese pronunciation as their English names, such as Hsaio Bi-khim (蕭美琴).
In these categories, I always provide descriptions and Wikidata Infobox to help people recognize the different pronunciations of a Chinese character name. In addition, we should respect the existing category names too(nc: FCFS). I have never changed existing Mandarin name to a Taiwanese or Hakka name either. 地下高雄 (talk) 04:45, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
You seem to be blaming me? I have never done this. 大阪 and 國姓爺 are Chinese characters, but the former should be pronounced as "Osaka" in Japanese and the latter should be internationally named as Koxinga. So, I haven't done any edits with these two categories: Osaka and Koxinga. 地下高雄, it's better to keep the discussion on the topic rather than speculating me.--125.230.88.69 07:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
You might have misunderstood; this was an example rather than blaming you. The example was meant to express that Chinese characters are not exclusive to Mandarin. When we see someone romanize Chinese characters in Japanese or Cantonese, we won't criticize them for not using Mandarin pronunciation because it's the original pronunciation of this term in specific cultural context. Following the same logic, why should Taiwanese and Hakka be considered incorrect spellings? Are local languages considered inferior? Using the original pronunciation not only avoids a lack of respect for local culture as people did in the past but also provides historical evidence. For instance, using Xingang or Hejinding, we can't find anything in the Dutch East India Company's documents. However, using the original pronunciations like Sinkan (Sin-káng) and Kimtingh (Hô Kim-tīng) helps us connect these terms in different linguistic and cultural context. As for the confusion caused by spelling variations, it can be resolved through appropriate description. 地下高雄 (talk) 23:02, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Exactly. Original names shows not only "respect" to the subject, but also present its the historical context as well as cultural background. --TX55TALK 04:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
地下高雄 and TX55, allow me to ask a question about this: The question is how do you know which language to name categories? For example, "蕭美琴" in Chinese, it can be "Louise Hsiao" in English, or "Hsiao Mei-chin" in Mandarin (Chinese pronunciation), or "Hsaio Bi-khim" in Bân-lâm-gú (Taiwanese pronunciation). If we don’t know, I believe someone will make the same mistake as me in the future.--125.230.88.69 05:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Non-Mandarin users tend to use the most used or formal international name of the subject, take 蕭美琴 for example, her name is internationally known as "Bi-Khim Hsiao", a combination of BLG (in POJ) and Mandarin (in WG) for given name and surname respectively. Since she already has an internationally, the chance of mistake is low; while for other subjects predates ROC Taiwan (= Mandarin-as-official-language Taiwan), even they go with non-Mandarin names, users can still find them via search in their Mandarin names. That's why there is {{en|Name spelled in Mandarin}} which will allow user to find them. --TX55TALK 08:44, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
你這有說等於是沒說。正如我剛才說過，台灣人對人物類別的命名方式是令人難以捉摸，有時候會用國語，也有時候會用閩南語，只從Commons這裡是完全看不出來。原因是我們將中文轉換成英文，在Commons這裡只會看見一串英文字組成的名字，可是英語、國語、閩南語之間的書寫卻是大相逕庭。也就是說，單靠名字來看，無論是用哪一種語言，其實他們同樣都是英文字母組成，看起來就與英文名字是沒什麼區別。正因為如此，當初我考量到命名的一致性與跨語言連結的相應性，才會將User:地下高雄所建立的類別給改掉。
如果要避免未來再發生這種問題，最好作法是在類別上添加解釋，以提醒大家該類別使用的名字是根據什麼，否則真的會混淆。就像你舉例蕭美琴，一個人居然有三種名字：1.Louise Hsiao，2.Hsiao Mei-chin，3.Hsaio Bi-khim，而且每一種都是同樣用英文字母組成，乍看就像一個人有三種英文名字，那當然會有人搞不清楚，搞不清楚的結果就是如這一次陳中和發生，誤將自己看不懂語言的拼寫給改成自己認為通用的另一種語言拼寫。但是，我絕對不是故意這麼做，所以我必須在一次強調，我是從Commons這裡只看見英文字母組成的一串名字，並不清楚這當中居然還有分國語、閩南語、客家語，甚至是原住民語，因為當初我以為台灣只有國語一種語言（而我現在中文書寫就是國語），並不是像User:地下高雄所說我對國語羅馬化的拼寫有特殊的喜好。往後，還需要請你們加強這方面的提醒。
此外，台灣政府向來只用國語作為轉換成英文的主要語言，因為Commons有很多道路標示牌的照片可以看到，中文下方有一串英文字母組成的名字。可是，台灣原住民部落在英文命名上似乎是用自己的語言，因為用國語轉換成英文而來的拼寫，完全是與他們的部落名字是對應不上。請恕我抱怨，真的是太多語言，令人實在不知道你們是如何依據哪些情況該用哪種語言？--125.230.88.69 10:23, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
我想我已經說得頗明白了，包括稍早強調在頁面中加註各種已知的外文名稱與發音轉寫。「令人實在不知道你們是如何依據哪些情況該用哪種語言？」簡單來說：名從主。先查詢是否有既定或常用的外文名稱（可能是台語、客語、族語、華語，或其他外文如英文），若無，再採用華語拼音作為國際名稱。
「漢語族主題的漢字名稱之頁面標題」是時常會有名從主的狀況而不一定使用華語作為其國際名稱（international name）。如前所述，台灣人像是「蕭美琴」就是台語名字配上華語姓氏WG拼音的「Bi-khim Hsiao」、全台文的「史明 / Su Beng」、全族語的「莫那魯道 / Mona Rudao」、英文名字的「宋楚瑜 / James Soong」、華語WG拼音的「鄭南榕 / Cheng Nan-jung」，以及姓氏華語WG拼音配上名字粵文（粵語拼音）的「孫逸仙/ Sun Yat-sen」和「蔣介石 / Chiang Kai-shek」。與台灣無關主題的，也有香港武術家「葉問 / Ip Man」（粵語）、新加坡道路「趙芳路 / Teo Hong Road」（福建話搭配英文）、東南亞食物「肉骨茶 / Bak kut teh」。
「名從主」原則基本上就是
1. 該主題是否有自行取了慣用外文名字或官方外文名字，如：蕭美琴 Bi-khim Hsiao、史明 Su Beng、林昶佐 Freddy Lim、宋楚瑜 James Soong
1b 或是有通行、常見的國際名稱，如：蔣介石 Chiang Kai-shek、肉骨茶 Bak kut teh。
1c 地名與路名大多都已有官方外文名稱，大多為華語，少數例外是淡水 Tamsui（台文）、司馬庫斯 Smangus（泰雅語）；基隆則採用舊的拼音Keelung，其他縣市則是WG拼音。
2. 若無，先以使用者母語為主，如：陳中和 Tan Tiong-ho（過世時，華語尚未在台灣成為官方語言）、莫那魯道 Mona Rudao
至於中華民國政府開始統治台灣之後，因為國語政策，使得官方語言‧國語（中華民國華語）成為了強勢的主要語言（dominant language），因此大多這時期後出生或出現的主題，若無特別國際名稱，基本上都是以華語WG拼音作為國際稱呼。
附帶一提，您稍早做的變更名稱，是WG威妥瑪拼音、TY通用拼音、HY漢語拼音混雜。基本上目前中華民國的慣例是：在無特定狀況之下，人名與縣市地名採WG拼音；區、鄉鎮市、道路名稱採漢語拼音或是通用拼音（視縣市而定）。
--TX55TALK 15:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
(English translation for non-Mandarin user) I think I've made my statement clear enough earlier, including emphasising that known international or foreign names should be added to category pages to increase the accessibility.
As for "This makes people unable to know what's the basis for you guys to decide what language should be used as page name for each entry (topic)", I will put this in simple: proper names in the original language are used generally. We should check if the subject already has an established forein names, which could be written in Taiwanese, Hakka, Formosan, or other foreign languages, such as English. If not, Mandarin should be used instead.
International names for "Entry name (page title) with Sinic character" are usually Latinized original names and they are not necessarily Mandarin. As mentioned earlier, Taiwanese, such as Bi-Khim Hsiao (蕭美琴), is a combination of Taiwanese POJ (for given name) and Mandarin MG (for surname), Su Beng (史明) is a Taiwanese name in POJ, Mona Rudao (莫那魯道) is in Seediq, James Soong is 宋楚瑜's English name, Cheng Nan-jung is 鄭南榕 in Mandarin WG, and Sun Yat-sen as well as Chang Kai-shek are combinationes of Cantonese (for given name) and Mandarin (for surname). Additionally, take some non-Taiwanese topic entry for example, the Hong Kong-based martial artist Ip Man is 葉問 in Cantonese, while Teo Hong Road (a street in Singapore) and Bak kut teh are written in Hokkien.
Basically, the rule of "proper names in the original language are used generally" includes:
1. Does the entry have its own common foreign name or official international name? Examples are: 蕭美琴 Bi-khim Hsiao、史明 Su Beng、林昶佐 Freddy Lim、宋楚瑜 James Soong
1b. or general international names? Such as 蔣介石 Chiang Kai-shek、肉骨茶 Bak kut teh。
1c. International names for locations/places or road/street are mostly official and Latinized from Mandarin. There are some exceptions which are not Mandarin, such as Tamsui (淡水 in Taiwanese), Smangus (司馬庫斯 in Atayal); The spelling of Keelung is an old transcription, which other county and city names are transcribed by WG.
2. If not, mother tongue is used as first priority, such as 陳中和 Tan Tiong-ho (a Taiwanese who died before Mandarin became official language in Taiwan)、Mona Rudao (a Formosan indigenous).
For those entries come into existence after ROC began to govern over Taiwan, due to the Mandarin policy, they should be transcribed from Mandarin if they don't have any name in mother tongue.
Additionally, I'd like to point out those edits you made earlier include three transcriptions system for Mandarin: WG, TY, and HY. Currently, the usual practice in Taiwan under normal circumstance is: WG for people's names and City/county names, while TL or HY for municipality unter city/county.
--TX55TALK 19:59, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [Poorly translated; Original text in Mandarin post at 15:28, 15 December 2023 (UTC)]
Indeed, so you also know that in Taiwan, a name often has multiple pronunciations. This represents the "fact" that we have multiculture. That’s why we shouldn’t exclusively prefer for only one language, but should respect the pre-existing language, and then help people easily recognize different languages.
For example, the English wiki of Souw Beng Kong(蘇鳴崗), Lai Afong(黎芳), Sun-sun(純純), Chiu Thiam-ōng(周添旺), Su Beng(史明), and Koh Se-kai(許世楷) are all non-Mandarin pronunciation, and they are also internationally known by these names. Wouldn't it be confusing for non-Mandarin speakers when they search for information of these figures in Mandarin? This is what I (and other users) have said again and again, that multilingual descriptions can overcome this problem, rather than treating other languages ​​as wrong or inferior.
In addition, in response to your six consecutive comments on my page, here is my reply:
1. Category: Tomb of Chen Chung-ho (changed to Tomb of Chen Jhong-he by you) was an existing category created by other user, not me. Considering NC:FCFS, I didn’t change the name, but add a description to help people recognize it.
2. FYI, the Presbyterian Church in Taiwan has a process of respecting and adapting to the local language during the missionary activity, Toa-kia Presbyterian Church is the official name they have used for a long time, just like Bangkah, Bunsen and Kî-âu Presbyterian Church ( According to their inscription). 地下高雄 (talk) 10:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
I know that your language still spoken is Mandarin. 蘇鳴崗, 黎芳, 純純, 周添旺, 史明, 許世楷, etc., they are written in Mandarin. How do you know which language (or, say spelling way) to choose for naming categories? When converting from Mandarin to English (not English but it literally looks like an English name), you should have a method to know which language to use first. What are your guidelines based on?--125.230.88.69 11:41, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Those names are not written in Mandarin (a spoken language); they are written in traditional Chinese (a writing system). It is not possible to tell whether a name written in Chinese characters is Mandarin, Cantonese, Hokkien/Taiwanese, etc. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:59, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
But, I see a very serious problem: When I type the title of the category page in the search box, it shows a red link, which means it cannot find the correct category. For example, typing "Tekitsu" in the search box, and it shows "Category:Tekitsu" instead of "Category:Tē-ki-tsú". Any suggestions on how to solve this?--125.230.89.198 03:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
Make a redirect from one to the other.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
The problem is that we don't know the correct category is Category:Tē-ki-tsú unless the search engine can find it. Therefore, typing "Tekitsu" in the search box is cannot find the category we want to, but we also don't know that the page already exists and it called "Tē-ki-tsú". I think that ē and ú symbols cause problems for users when searching. However, some people ignore this completely and continue to name categories in the same way. How to solve this?--125.230.89.198 08:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
People who create cats with non-latin character sets and with dashes should make redirects to them using latin character sets and no dashes, as appropriate. Why did you not create the redirect? Also, if you already have an account, what is your account name?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:28, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
This isn't a serious problem because your premise was incorrect. In languages like Taiwanese and Hakka, each syllable is usually written separately, such as Tē-ki-tsú or Te Ki Tsu, and not combined like Tekitsu. You can look at 臺灣閩南語羅馬字拼音方案連字符使用規則 for guidelines. When dealing with unfamiliar matters, the best practice is to make an effort to understand and maintain respect, just as many people are not familiar with English or Mandarin either.
Regarding the search problem with symbols like ē and ú, I'm not sure if you've actually tried: whether you use Tē-ki-tsú, Te-ki-tsu, or Te Ki Tsu, you can effectively search for Category:Tē-ki-tsú. No only Taiwanese, other languages with non-English characters have similar situations. For example, searching for "hong nam hung" effectively retrieves the Vietnamese category "Category:Hoàng Nam Hùng."
By adding appropriate description and Wikidata Infobox, you can effectively find the same category by clicking the Categories and Pages tab under the search results, regardless of whether you use "地基主," "Tē-ki-tsú," "Dijizhu," or "Ti Chi Chu." 地下高雄 (talk) 23:05, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
地下高雄，我還是不明白你的意思。如果你是想告訴我，經由臺灣閩南語羅馬字拼音方案連字符使用規則去學習，然後就可以找到那些用閩南語發音而命名的分類名稱，那麼我還有二個問題：
(1) ē ú 這些符號是要用哪種輸入法如何打字出來？
(2) 遇到那種維基百科沒有，那要如何知道commons.wikimedia已經有存在分類？
這二個問題，尤其是(2)是最令我頭疼的，因為我們並非是以閩南語為母語，因此當要針對分類名稱搜尋時，無論是用中文，或者是用英文字母 (也就是你說將閩南語羅馬化)，就會發生搜尋引擎找不到，這種情況又沒有維基百科提供跨語言連結，我們肯定是不知道你們已經有建立分類。或許我舉Tē-ki-tsú這個例子是錯了，不過你可能不知道的是，這裡commons.wikimedia是獨自運作，並沒有與維基百科同步。正是因為沒有同步，這需要有人手動將維基百科與commons.wikimedia連結，這種連結就是我指的跨語言連結。我言下之意是，手動就表示會有時間上空窗期，所以當我們在commons.wikimedia這裡先建立分類，卻還沒有人去將維基百科連結，或者是維基百科還沒有人建立條目或分類時，這一段空窗期就會形成我說 (2) 問題。因此，你們相對於我們，就好像是明眼人看著盲人在走路，我們瞎找分類，也不知道你們有沒有建立分類，我們是要如何做到你說「the best practice is to make an effort to understand and maintain respect」?--125.230.93.95 16:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
地下高雄，不是我不尊重你，而是我提出的問題是真實發生的問題，只有將問題解決才是實際。因此，我與其像盲人那樣花時間找分類，倒不如將問題簡單化，所以我昨天在這裡有提出解決方法，就是你們繼續用，而我用英文字找不到分類，那麼我就自己另外建立分類。我知道這麼做可能會同時出現二個一樣的分類，但我沒辦法，因為我找不到，而我又不知道我要找的分類所使用閩南語是怎麼寫的，相同分類只能交給熟悉閩南語的人去請他們合併。--125.230.93.95 16:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I just want to point out that this problem is not specific to Taiwan and Hong Kong (or even Singapore). For example, Category:Chin Gee Hee is about a Taishanese man who spent much of his life in the United States (although he was born in China and died in China). We use the form of his name that he used in an English-language context. He was not a Mandarin-speaker. - Jmabel ! talk 20:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Céline Husetowski WMFr

Someone just tried to have two files deleted with the rationale that they show an «ancien logo»:

This is so obviously wrong and so contrary to the spirit of Commons and of any Wikimadia project that it can only be treated as a case of inappropriate username — even if this account is really not a hoax and indeed Wikimedia France has put their trust on someone who’d work on their outreach and P.R. in such and amateurish and vandalistic way. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 02:12, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

  • That's quite concerning. Either this is an inappropriate impersonation, or someone with an editorial capacity at Wikimédia France displaying a remarkable ignorance of Wikimedia projects. Is there someone here who has any sort of relationship with Wikimédia France who can follow this up, rather than a random admin? - Jmabel ! talk 07:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    hello,
    I'm working for Wikimedia France.I'm a beginner in Wikimedia commons. These logo are ancient and not used anymore. I had a comment on discussion to finally add them on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikimedia_France_communication_archives. Céline Céline Husetowski WMFr (talk) 09:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    Hi,
    I am a volunteer at Wikimédia France, and can confirm Céline works there. So no, there's no impersonation going on with this account.
    Most of the employees are encouraged to contribute to Wikimedia projects but not all of them have previous experience in doing so.
    While I understand that this account being potentially "inappropriate username-y" has raised concerns, please remember to assume good faith, especially for newcomers . Poslovitch (talk) 10:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    Thanks for your fascinating reply @Poslovitch:
    • You state that «most of the employees are encouraged to contribute to Wikimedia projects», which is to me as absurd as a hospital director saying that most of their staff are “encouraged” to attend medical school. Why the heck is WMFr even considering to hire (i.e., personally support with donation funds), even as floormopper, anyone who is not an established WMF editor?
    • And then you presume to teach about COM:AGF: This is not an ordinary newbie who forgot to close a bracket, this is a user with an authoritative-sounding username asking for content removal on an absurd premise.
    The fact that you make light of this is worrying. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    Hello @Tuvalkin. As a board member of WMFr, I can give you some answers. Your worries are legit: it is a subject commonly discussed regarding the hiring process. I consider that the main skills we’re looking for in a floormopper position are the mopping skills, not the knowledge of how to contribute to projects, even less of some rules on a Wikimedia project. Same for other positions. Indeed, I think it takes more times to obtain the skills needed for the position than the time needed to know how to contribute to projects. Thus, to know how Commons works is not a necessary condition to be hired. Furthermore, as a contributor with some experience, I was not aware of that specific Commons rule. If Commons is the place for the affiliates to upload their files, then it seems understandable that they may want to manage these files, and delete the outdated ones. I don’t think this is an absurd premise. You could have just explained that Commons keep the old logos, and not accuse @Céline Husetowski WMFr of vandalism. Or, explain that Commons is media repository with archives, not a cloud for the affiliates, and if affiliates want to manage their files, Commons is not the place to do so. Cheers, Cédric Tarbouriech (talk) 23:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    @Cédric Tarbouriech: addressing a few different things: (1) I totally understand that a certain percentage of any organization are going to be hired very much from outside. I do think, though, that the entire Wikimedia community is still suffering from the fact that when WMF began really hiring up a decade or so ago there was, if anything, an aversion to hiring people with experience as Wikimedia editors. I think it's improved a lot in the last 6 years or so, but there are a lot of scars. (2) As far as I can think, Commons treats content generated from WMF and its affiliates exactly the way we treat any other content. I would presume that it is in the spirit of the movement that, insofar as possible, WMF affiliates release the content they generate under free licenses, making Commons the obvious place to host media files. (3) Wikimedia Commons is one of the longest-standing of the WMF sister projects. I don't think I'm going out on a limb to say that it is comparable in importance to Wikidata, and that those stand only behind Wikipedia itself in importance (and probably only the Wikipedias in a dozen or so languages really have that greater importance). I assume that someone in a communications role at a major affiliate would understand the basic policies of Wikipedia: e.g. that articles are supposed to be from a neutral point of view rather than promotional, that we try to avoid conflict-of-interest editing, that history is as important a part of Wikipedia content as describing the present state of things. I take it from what you are saying that is not nearly as true for the basics of Commons. It is a bit surprising to hear that "as a contributor with some experience" you didn't put together that CC licenses are irrevocable, and that we don't delete files that describe the past rather than the present.
    Do understand that what brought this to AN/U, was that this was wrong enough that it led two of us to wonder whether this was someone falsely impersonating Céline, rather than being Céline herself. If an ordinary user had made this mistake, we would have just explained policy. What made this an administrative issue was the possibility that this was someone posing as someone else. - Jmabel ! talk 00:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
    @Céline Husetowski WMFr: Hi, and welcome. We keep ancient logos as in scope. They are helpful in logo history sections of Wikipedia articles (even those not yet written as such), and can also be helpful elsewhere.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
    One other remark: if this is more of a "style guide" issue, probably a style guide belongs somewhere outside of Commons, most likely either on meta or on the affiliate's own site if they have one. - Jmabel ! talk 00:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
✓ Done I added in the description that these are old logos. Yann (talk) 10:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Carigval.97

User Carigval.97 repeatedly uploading copyright violations, despite warnings. I think they now warrant a block. Bedivere (talk) 02:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done. I warned the user – (s)he was not warned previously. All uploads are nominated for speedy deletion. Taivo (talk) 09:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Jyix2944884

Jyix2944884 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

This User not only only uploaded only and a bunch of Copyvios, he already uses Commons very openly in titles and image discriptions for his personal view an his propaganda:

Ge is already blocked at ar:WP and ar:WS. I think, he also should be blocked here indefinetly. But I would like to have a second pair of eyes. Marcus Cyron (talk) 08:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

And now the attempt to whitewash his last upload File:EdyCohenWithHisOlderBrother.jpg with a new upload of the same image under a new title, but other source: File:Edy Cohen as a Child With Wis Older Brother.jpg. Marcus Cyron (talk) 08:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
okay okay (روح تعطي) Jyix2944884 (talk) 08:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Fine ( روح قود تعطي ) Jyix2944884 (talk) 08:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
Farid1917 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  is a confirmed sockpuppet of Jyix2944884. Both accounts were blocked due to sockpuppetry at ar:wp. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
I've now indef'd the sockpuppet Farid1917. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

ヨンヨンヨンジ

ヨンヨンヨンジ (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

This user not only uploads copyvios, he/she also claims, that they are free, because they were AI created. That's more than just image stealing, that's blatant license forgery. A second opinion would be nice. Marcus Cyron (talk) 14:52, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent. Yann (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Maroof Rachyal

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done: Thanks for reporting this, Jeff G.. The account has been indef'd. --AFBorchert (talk) 16:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)
@AFBorchert: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

User: Suryam FM

Suryam FM (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  uploads copyvios images. Admin can take action. AntanO 13:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Already warned by Jeff. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Ritaspina

Ritaspina (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  uploaded several copyvios. I left a final warning in their talkpage yesterday and today they uploaded the same picture that was deleted yesterday. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 16:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week. File deleted. Yann (talk) 20:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

User:XDDD F YTP

XDDD F YTP (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  seems to love uploading copyrighted material. His uploads were removed several times. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 17:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Warned. Everything already deleted. Yann (talk) 20:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Socks VasylGenesis and Наталія11

VasylGenesis (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Наталія11 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Same uploaded files

And other files is cause suspicion of authorship. Микола Василечко (talk) 17:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Last warning sent to VasylGenesis, and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by VasylGenesis‎. Any more such upload should lead to a block. Yann (talk) 20:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I deleted 2 files by Наталія11. All other uploads are of high resolution with EXIF data, so they should be OK. No upload since 2017. Yann (talk) 20:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Commons as promotion by two accounts

user:Iranireza34 User:AmirRezaei2024 use commons as promotional page please delete all these uploads these uploads

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 08:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Some of these images are screenshots that might have some value and thus fit in COM:SCOPE. However, copyright permissions are necessary. I have tagged these files as "No permission". If no valid permission is sent to VRT in due time, the files will be deleted. Some files like this File:Amirreza Borzooei.jpg, File:امیررضا برزویی.jpg and File:امیررضا برزویی چقاگلانی.jpg are not out-of-scope (albeit they might be used for promotion elsewhere). These image have a valid metadata and would likely be useful. Images like File:Japan karate1 img.jpg seem to be quick copyright violation. ─ The Aafī (talk) 08:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by AmirRezaei2024 should be considered. There does appear a connection between the two accounts? ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
Given what I believe seeing contributions of both the accounts doing is their promoting Amirreza Borzooei. AmirRezaei2024 is the oldest account. The files uploaded include several as DR'ed on Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by AmirRezaei2024. File:Amirreza Borzooei.jpg uploaded by Iranireza34 and File:Amirreza,Borzooei.jpg uploaded by AmirRezaei2024, and both claim own work. Accounts are not too-active and I believe running a CU-check would be a waste of time. Behaviourally these accounts appear to be socks. I wouldn't in such a case trust the high resolution photos (with metadata) uploaded by Iranireza34 as original. ─ The Aafī (talk) 09:18, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

AmirRezaei2024 (talk · contribs) has been warned and all uploads deleted. --AFBorchert (talk) 13:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

AmirRezaei2024 (talk · contribs) uploaded the first pictures in April 2021. Later, Iranireza34 (talk · contribs) became active in January/February 2022 with unsuccessful attempts to submit an article at en:wp (see this draft and this log). AmirRezaei2024 (talk · contribs) retried this in November 2023 and had still no success but Cclite (talk · contribs) created an article afterwards. I went through the uploads of Iranireza34 and found two images that were also published at Instagram, I've submitted them for speedy deletion. The remaining uploads are covered by this deletion request. Searches for permissions at VRT were not successful. --AFBorchert (talk) 15:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

User:1maneofficalmusic12

Hello, 1maneofficalmusic12 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  makes his promotion on Commons by writing his biography, uploading a PDF version of it, uploading personal pictures, and by vandalising the page of File:Disambig grey.svg and User_talk:1maneofficalmusic12. Is it possible to make him understand he needs to stop? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 19:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked as spammer. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Ironplex

Ironplex (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  is starting several DR as retaliation against Jeff G. Pure disruptive move. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 20:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for 2 weeks. Yann (talk) 20:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@Yann Thanks. Can you close all the DRs? Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 20:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@Yann and Kacamata: Thanks! I closed the rest of the DRs. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ironplex. I am now convinced that Ironplex doesn't have the competence to participate here in a collegial manner.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Seeing the comments in the DR, I indef. that account and deleted all files. Not here to contribute constructively. Yann (talk) 21:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@Yann: Thanks again!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Yann deleted one of his nonsense DRs, should an admin delete others too? A09 (talk) 22:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@A09: I don't' think that's necessary.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:44, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Kannansivaram

Kannansivaram (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  is already warned for copyvio and the user continues to upload same type of image and the contribution seems COM:HOST and COM:ADVERT. I just report here for admin intervention. ~AntanO4task (talk) 08:57, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, copyvios deleted. Some of your deletion requests are {{PD-textlogo}}. Yann (talk) 10:11, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Thearmanevrahim

Hello, The user Thearmanevrahim uploaded a bunch of pictures. It is not the first time. Would it be possible to make him understand it is not ok, please? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 21:15, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

User:LukasG2005

Can an admin please take a look at LukasG2005 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) ? The licensing of their uploads isn't only questionable, but their motives may be as well given that they tried to use File:Bill Gates with Epstein.webp as the main infobox image of en:Bill Gates, File:Man smoking.jpg as the main infobox image of en:Conor McGregor, and File:Daniel Larson.jpg as the main infobox image of en:Jack Shore. For reference, the account has already been blocked locally on English Wikipedia for vandalism because of the aforementioned edits and others like this; so, it seems highly unlikely they will be a net-positive to Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 16:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

I took all the photos LukasG2005 (talk) 17:01, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
What’s the problem LukasG2005 (talk) 17:03, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
How, when and where did you take those pictures? And how did they end up in major media outlets? Kritzolina (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 Comment Last warning sent. Yann (talk) 19:56, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Socks of IvanRamonTrillos

Please block Sbshshib (talk · contribs) and BX XBXBVDV (talk · contribs). They both reuploaded File:Oscareduardo10 Logo.png and therefore are socks of globally locked spammer IvanRamonTrillos (talk · contribs). Thanks. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 03:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done: Thanks for reporting this, Kacamata. Both accounts and IvanRamonTrillos are obvious sockpuppets of LTA case Oscareduardo10 (talk · contribs). I've indef'd the accounts. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
BTW, there are far more accounts involved in this case of LTA, see now Category:Sockpuppets of Oscareduardo10 for the sockpuppets that are associated with Oscareduardo10 and which were active at Commons. See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Oscareduardo10/Archive for more background and CU confirmations. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
@AFBorchert: Thanks for the block and for supplementing m:srg#Global lock for socks of locked IvanRamonTrillos!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @AFBorchert and @Jeff G.. I found another sock Clgucjfsls (talk · contribs). They just uploaded File:Oscareduardo10 Logo.png. Can this file be protected against recriation? Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 20:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
@Kacamata: This wouldn't help. The socks have used other filenames as well. --AFBorchert (talk) 23:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
@AFBorchert I see. Thanks. Kacamata! Dimmi!!! 23:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sbshshib (talk · contribs), BX XBXBVDV (talk · contribs), and Clgucjfsls (talk · contribs) have been locked on 10:42, 1 January 2024. --AFBorchert (talk) 10:19, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kacamata: You're welcome.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:21, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

With LiveEdu (talk · contribs) another short-lived sock appeared which was indef'd by The Squirrel Conspiracy. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Marginataen

Marginataen (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Marginataen has uploaded a large number of images of people associated with a Danish political party. None of the ones I have looked at have metadata, although Marginataen claims to be the photographer in each case. It is possible that they travel around Denmark taking photos at party events, but if so, they should upload the original images with metadata to prove their authorship.

Some are clearly not there own work. For example, File:Peter Seier Christensen og Nigel Farage, 2018.jpg comes from Facebook, specifically here. Marginataen uploaded the original in April but recently uploaded a slightly cropped version without metadata.

The Marginataen account has been indef blocked on English and Danish Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. One of the sockpuppets, Zeitgeistu was recently involved in uploading AI "upscaled" images to Commons. It looks like the Marginataen account may have been doing the same thing, See File:Jevgenij Prigosjin, 2023.jpg. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

It is correct that am I currently blocked on the English Wikipedia. I don't get what is wrong about experimenting with the possibilities of AI image enhancement. I'll comment some more tomorrow. Marginataen (talk) 23:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
@Marginataen Some of the concerns with "AI image enhancement" were discussed here after you uploaded an "AI enhanced" portrait of Adolph Hitler. There is nothing wrong with experimenting with such tools, but when you upload the results to Commons without identifying them as "AI enhanced", that may be a problem. Personally, I am more concerned about the possibility that your uploads are be copyright violations. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 00:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
In my view: "that may be a problem" => "that is a major problem". - Jmabel ! talk 01:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm real tired. Pls give me 48 hours to write a more through response where I'll commtent on File:Peter Seier Christensen og Nigel Farage, 2018.jpg and more. In the meantime, you might want to read this. Marginataen (talk) 17:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@Marginataen: I suspect that was the wrong link. You linked Steinsplitterbot archiving a bunch of threads. - Jmabel ! talk 18:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
No, it was not. Scroll down to the discussion about "File:Lars Boje Mathiesen, 2023.jpg" Marginataen (talk) 18:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
(for anyone trying to follow this, this is a more useful link to the same content. - Jmabel ! talk 00:05, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
@Marginataen I am sorry to hear that you are tired. I am feeling a little tired today, myself.
Can you please explain how on 14 September 2023, you were able to upload a larger (less cropped) version of the File:Pernille Vermund - Ny Borgerlige.jpg image that Ulla Højgaard uploaded as their own work on 9 May 2019.
Can you also explain how you appear to be a photographer but are unable to provide the original images with metadata, even for very recent pictures? Thanks. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Considering their history of copyvios both here and on da.wiki (including a number of deleted files on this project spanning years), and their refusal to explain how they took these photos but don't have metadata, I have nominated all of their 'self' uploads for deletion here. Unless they're able to explain themselves, I'd also support an indef block on this project. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 12:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

First of all, many thanks to @Jmabel provide at better link .I will refer a lot of what I otherwise would have written here to that linked discussion as I really this is just a repetition of that one. As stated there, I regreabbly damaged by credibility by uploading files not belonging to me. When Marchjuly pointed this out to me, I began adapting. With regard to File:Vermund, juni 2018.jpg, I was just a less cropped/higher resolution version of an imaag by Ulla Højgaard. If you go to that file, I under "Source" explicitly wrote (in Danish), "I didn't create this file, but assume it's okay to publish, as it's just the uncropped version of a file already released under a free license on Commons (see link)". I got it from a now removed blog post by Pernille Vermund about Lars Løkke on party's website (https://app.apsis.one/invalid-link). There is no way in which I would be able to prove this but you can see here in a non-removed blog post where a similar image is used or here where she uses a cropped version of the image in a Facebook post. Again, I never claimed ownership or authorship over that picture. Marginataen (talk) 13:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
@Marginataen So Ulla Højgaard isn't another of your accounts? I notice that you seem to have accidentally linked to some kind of marketing company instead of the party website. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
No, it is absolutely not another account of mine. I simply found a better version of the file she uploaded. I wrote that I assumed (Danish: antager) that is was ok because it was just a better version of that file. If that is not the case just delete it. If she uploaded the original file legitimately that has absolutely nothing to do with me. I explicitly write that I wasn't the author of that file. Marginataen (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
@Marginataen: I don't have any opinion as to whether you're using multiple accounts, but I don't think that the statement I was just a less cropped/higher resolution version of an imaag by Ulla Højgaard. If you go to that file, I under "Source" explicitly wrote (in Danish), "I didn't create this file, but assume it's okay to publish, as it's just the uncropped version of a file already released under a free license on Commons (see link)" is correct when it comes to Creative Commons licenses and Commons. My understanding is that the copyright holder has the right to release their work under a resolution of their choosing and of a size of their choosing; so, if a copyright holder releases a low-resolution crop of their work under a Creative Commons license that Commons accepts, then it's only OK to upload that file to Commons either at the same or a lower resolution and at the same or smaller size. I don't think it's OK to "un-crop" files and "re-resolution" files unless the license clearly allows it. In other words, it's not OK to upload a full-sized uncropped high resolution version of a cropped low resolution file unless the full-sized uncropped high resolution version has also been released under an acceptable free license by its copyright holder. I believe it's possible for a copyright holder to release a cropped low-resolution version of their work under one license (e.g. CC-by-sa-4.0), while at the same time releasing an uncropped higher resolution of the same work under a different license (e.g. CC-by-NC-ND) I think this is one of the reasons that Commons encourages those uploading their "own work" to upload uncropped full-sized high resolution versions of their work because then cropping or reducing the resolution of the work doesn't become an issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense which using the word "assume" also kind of implies :) In that case, just delete the better version Marginataen (talk) 10:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
Could we centralise the dicussion to either this threat or to here? Marginataen (talk) 10:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

✓ Done I've blocked Marginataen for 1 year for uploading non-free files after warnings, and for their extensive attempts to obstruct, distract, and otherwise prevent Commons from removing files they knew not to be theirs. I was vacillating on whether it should be indefinite or not, and would not object should another admin decide their conduct warrants a longer block. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

@The Squirrel Conspiracy You should probably block their alternate accounts, Zeitgeistu, Bubfernr, and LatteDK. Økonom can probablly tell you if there are others. Even today, Zeitgeistu is uploading. Counterfeit Purses (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, I zapped those. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

User:CT69

Please review the userpage and its discussion, both smell like an attack on the depicted person. Denniss (talk) 22:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Looking at their contributions across projects, I think it's possible. At the very least though, it's inappropriate uses of user and talk pages, so I've wiped them. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

JTulioPT

JTulioPT (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  appears to be exclusively uploading columbian radio station logos, from what I've seen all tagged as {{CC-BY-SA 4.0}}, hovewer, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that the copyright holder agreed to release them under the terms of the CC-BY-SA. So far I have identified three distinct "groups" of files, so-to-speak:

They appear to have been blocked by @Yann: while I was composing this, however, I'm going to report this here anyway so someone with more experience on the columbian threeshold of originality can decide what to do with the uploaded files. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

At least 3 among the 4 last are PD-textlogo IMO. Yann (talk) 12:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

48Riyazyatir

48Riyazyatir (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  after the last warning given last December, the user continues uploading plain copyvios. Günther Frager (talk) 17:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked for a week + Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 48Riyazyatir. Yann (talk) 17:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Atatnoone

Atatnoone (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  uploads thumb photos of models of unknown source and claim their ownerships without META data to prove it. Pierre cb (talk) 05:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pierre cb: I warned this user. When you tag files, you should inform the uploader. Yann (talk) 05:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Yann: I did. Pierre cb (talk) 05:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
It is above another notification, where you marked one of the files as personal. Why did you? Guido den Broeder (talk) 05:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Ah sorry, User:Netora tagged the files, but didn't inform the uploader. Yann (talk) 05:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

 Comment SDG or SDGs stands for Sustainable Development Goals. These are pictures of some conference. A couple do have META data. Guido den Broeder (talk) 05:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

User:SchroCat

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Abusive behavior in Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Dee's -Eyes Only- signature.svg. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Note that I duly informed them about this thread and they reverted the edit with additional abuse. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll note that part of the problem is that there are some policies that can be claimed to contradict COM:INUSE and COM:NPOV, so if we want to avoid having needless discussions from people vociferously and sometimes insultingly arguing that Commons should debate and delete files used in one or even numerous articles on other wikis, we have to make sure it's unambiguously clear that such deletion requests will never be considered here. I'm not up to starting that thread now, but it needs to be started on the appropriate policy page(s), and we will need to overcome our inertia and actually make the needed changes. Otherwise, this kind of crap will recur any time anyone points out why we don't even consider whether a file in use has incorrect content. -- Ikan Kekek (talk)
The substance of the discussion is fine, but Pinging @SchroCat: "Don't patronise me, sunshine" and "you are stepping away, which is a delight" are totally out of line. - Jmabel ! talk 20:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Meh. If someone wants to be passive aggressive with “What an irritating comment!" and then being patronising, I’ll pull them up on it. Passive aggressive nonsense is out of line, and it really was a delight when someone acting that unpleasantly decided to step away. I’m out: have fun bad mouthing me in my absence.- SchroCat (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Aggressive aggressive nonsense is also out of line. Blocking for a month. (If the user is also out of here voluntarily, fine.) - Jmabel ! talk 23:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
@Jmabel FYI User has already asked for an unblock Gbawden (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
  • It's not about what I would have a problem with, it's about what our policy is, as represented by our regular practice. Now this isn't Wikipedia, but I regularly receive much worse than this, and from people (frequently admins) who are way above such a sanction as this. Even on this page and thread, look here !
To be honest, I'd prefer this to the cloying politeness of Wikipedia's toxic back-stabbing.
But what's the root cause of all this? Ikan Kekek arguing against the deletion of such an obvious, and already widely disseminated, hoax image. How can you do this? To argue INUSE for a deliberate hoax? I completely fail to understand that one, so I can certainly understand SchroCat's frustration over this. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
We delete copyvios without hesitation but if there is not a legal problem, we will keep all COM:INUSE cases without exception including hoaxes of which we have quite a collection. We do not decide at Commons what other Wikimedia projects use or not use. Some might even consider to show that particular 007-signature as example for a hoax. Ikan Kekek refered patiently to the relevant policies within the DR and it would be better if everyone makes themselves familiar with these policies before continuing to discuss against COM:INUSE. --AFBorchert (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  • But we do delete against INUSE, and not just for copyright. As an acrimonious example, look at the bulk deletion of AI images (where SCOPE had then to be redefined to suit) and an indef block was also given. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Indeed, we do, e.g. per COM:SPAM. Guido den Broeder (talk) 03:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Note that COM:INUSE specifies "any use that is not made in good faith does not count [as in use]." Spam is not a good-faith use. - Jmabel ! talk 04:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

 Support a block, neutral on duration SchroCat was being uncivil, but Ikan Kekek egged them on with "What an irritating comment!". I think a 72 hour block would have achieved the same outcome of forcing a deescalation, though SchroCat seems to have indicated that they don't intend to return regardless. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

+1. Yann (talk) 20:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
A block was warranted but one month is in my opinion far too long. I suggest to shorten the block to 72 hours. --AFBorchert (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support a block, preferably between 72–144 hours. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment I do find it irritating to be accused of supporting hoaxes, etc., etc., when I simply point out that we do not (or should not) debate the use of files on other wikis, per COM:INUSE and COM:NPOV, and I don't consider expressing my feelings about that "egging [someone] on." I don't think SchroCat should be blocked for more than 3 days or so, though, as a first block. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Oppose a block, per Andy. I'd rather reprimand Ikan Kekek for the 'I'm not listening to anything you say' attitude and their eagerness to remove the opposition from a discussion. Guido den Broeder (talk) 03:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Since this may have been lost in the shuffle, I want to repeat two things:

  1. I have no problem with another admin choosing to shorten this block.
  2. The block was ultimately not so much for the initial incivility as for the response here basically defending what he said, saying he would say it again, followed by flouncing. Up to then, I wasn't planning to block.

At this point, I think I've said what I can usefully say, and will only comment further on this thread if directly addressed. - Jmabel ! talk 05:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done I think enough has been said on the subject. I have shortened the block to 72 hours - block will expire on Monday 8 January Gbawden (talk) 06:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek Please take note of the feedback about your behaviour. Comments like 'I'm not listening to anything you say' are not helpful and often make the situation worse. I consider this discussion closed Gbawden (talk) 06:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Gbawden, I didn't make that comment, and you ought to take note of that " before you "consider this discussion closed". Guido den Broeder claimed I had an "'I'm not listening to anything you say' attitude," whereas I would say that I simply explained exactly what I find irritating. I would think you, as an admin, would understand that merely going by Commons rules and having others attack you for it is irritating. Maybe it's best not to say so in a deletion requests thread, but don't carelessly misquote me. I wouldn't make a comment like the one you misattributed to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Guido has a track record for behaviour like that – I wouldn't worry about it too much, Ikan Kekek, knowing it is an overexacerbated and misattributed comment. SHB2000 (talk) 12:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
It is rather Ikan Kekek who has a track record like the behavior displayed here, and you who has a track record of making personal attacks against me. Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I've been dealing with Ikan Kekek for a while now and have never seen them say or do anything even slightly offensive. Whereas you seem to just be on here to participate in or stir up drama. --Adamant1 (talk) 16:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm an experienced admin (no, not on Commons, but elsewhere). While I solved some cases that others wouldn't handle, you got yourself blocked here twice. Guido den Broeder (talk) 00:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Guido den Broeder: Which project are you an admin on? If your an admin somewhere then you should know people who are blocked in the past don't somehow lose the right to have an opinion about other people's behavior because of it. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
As a freethinker, I strongly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, at all times, no matter how dark, irrational or illusory. However, expressing them is another matter. I have zero tolerance for cyberbullying. Then again, I also allow people to start over and do better with a new, unblemished account. Guido den Broeder (talk) 06:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
I wasn't blocked for cyberbullying. So I'm not sure what your referring to. Allowing people to start over with a new unblemished account is interesting idea, but not really relevant to the conversation. So we probably end it there. Thanks for the response though. Even if you weren't willing to tell me what project your an admin on ;) --Adamant1 (talk) 09:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
You could try writing a Wikipedia article about me and watch users fall over each other in their hurry to provide you with all the wrong answers :) Guido den Broeder (talk) 14:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Adamant1: Guido imports drama from other wikis, harassing users via talk page messages and pings. He falsely accused me of having "accused a user of fraud for no reason whatsoever". He countered my evidence of that fraud as "Irrelevant". He refused to take back the accusation linked above, opting to be left alone. See also Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 100#Guido den Broeder.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
And yet somehow I came out on top. You lost, live with it. Guido den Broeder (talk) 05:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Which was a miracle. There's no need to get so passive aggressive when Jeff G was simply mentioning what you said. I'm sorry, mate, but you can't change the past. "Live with it." --SHB2000 (talk) 05:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
The reader can simply follow the links and judge for themselves. I'm living fine, as you can see, and feel no need to comment further. Guido den Broeder (talk) 11:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I can comment further as I see fit. --SHB2000 (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
+1 to the first part, I find Ikan Kekek's comments in deletion requests always helpful, and by no means "offensive" (?). Strakhov (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I have read hundreds or more comments by Ikan Kekek in FPC and QI discussions over the last years, and must state that he is one of the politest, most sensible users I know on Commons. --Aristeas (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
I wasn't saying that he isn't - I too appreciate his comments in DR's. A number of editors felt that their comments weren't helpful which I pointed out. All I asked is that they be mindful of how others interpret their comments. Can we move on and close this discussion? Gbawden (talk) 06:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, once you admit you misattributed a remark by a man who decided he's my enemy to me. Please be responsible. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:52, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
This is the behavior I was talking about. As long as people agree with you, all is fine. But when someone disagrees even once, you see a lifetime enemy. Guido den Broeder (talk) 21:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
I've worked with Ikan Kekek on several Wikimedia projects since January 2021 and they've been my biggest mentor to me; we've had minor disagreements, but not once have I ever seen Ikan attacking other users. You're the only one who claims they are, Guido. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
There are five users in this thread alone who agree with me, whereas all you can produce is personal attacks against me. Guido den Broeder (talk) 05:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Yet another exacerbated, unsolicited, and enigmatic claim from you. You claim we're the ones who are "personally attacking" you but there are countless examples of you attacking other editors time and time again. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
If you think so, start a discussion. But wait, that already happened, and it didn't confirm anything you say about me. Now, I would again calmly refute all your lies, no matter how often you try to have the last word, but you we have already been told to take it elsewhere. So here it ends. Guido den Broeder (talk) 11:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
You call my (and Jeff G.'s) comments lies but have no backing evidence to say otherwise. SHB2000 (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I warned Guido den Broeder that he might be blocked soon, because of these allegations. Yann (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm not the one making allegations. But follow the link provided by Jeff G if you must, closing comment by Ellywa. Actually, we were all told to take it elsewhere. Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:35, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I'm closing, I don't see any point in continuing here. --A.Savin 13:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


User:WC-QHS

以下三張照片：

標題是寫學生，但是卻被歸類為校友，這些都是由User:WC-QHS做出的編輯。可是，目前的分類只有學生歸學生，校友歸校友，並沒有將學生歸為校友的這種分類。因此，我將這問題曾向User:WC-QHS詢問過，等候23天，他還沒有回應，而他也沒有對照片做出修正，所以現在不清楚是標題Students打錯還是歸類Alumni放錯。最關鍵的是，照片中的人全部身穿便服，無法分辨是學生還是校友，這也就是為什麼需要將問題拿來這。如果是標題Students打錯，就需要將照片重命名。如果是歸類Alumni放錯，就需要將分類改為Students。--125.230.91.191 11:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done 我已經為它們重新分類了。下次請您直接糾正明顯的錯誤，無須在此處報告。 0x0a (talk) 12:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Dolores sepiol

He continues to upload copyrighted images and appears to exhibit a pattern of behavior involving uploading other copyrighted images after previous ones have been removed.

Rastinition (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

So where did he get the META data? Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Guido den Broeder: no idea what metadata you are referring to, but File:Louisa-mak-black-dress.jpg was all over the web in 2020 and was a recent upload here. If User:Dolores sepiol is the author, even then she would have needed to go through COM:VRT to upload previously published work. - Jmabel ! talk 20:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Possibly, but a new user wouldn't know that. Guido den Broeder (talk) 21:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Rastinition: when you bring up someone's conduct on this page, you are supposed to notify them on their user page. You didn't do that; if fact you wrote your post here in a manner that did not even mention them in a way that would give them a notification. I've now notified them. Please be more careful about that in the future. - Jmabel ! talk 20:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@JmabelApologies, as the reported account engages in cross-wiki activities, I will make sure to copy information to various wiki versions in the future. Additionally, when copying that information, do I need to translate the text into the local language of each wiki version? Rastinition (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
@Rastinition: Nothing about "various wiki versions" here. You did not notify her on her Commons talk page, and you didn't use a form on this page like [[User:Dolores sepiol]] or {{ping|Dolores sepiol}} that would automatically notify her. - Jmabel ! talk 00:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
@JmabelI've simplified the issue. Never mind what I said about him on other wiki versions. I guess here, I just need to add @Dolores sepiol and change the title to User:Dolores sepiol. Rastinition (talk) 09:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I believe he did receive the notification, but he still chose to upload images with copyright issues (and it's the second time he uploaded File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg from the same webpage to here). Rastinition (talk) 09:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm kinda new to this whole thing. I've just figured out how to view these messages here. All the photos I've uploaded was sent to me personally by the person who was photographed in the picture (who this wiki page belongs to), requesting that I help replace her original wiki photo. But as a public figure, a lot of her photos (which she took herself and might have posted onto her own social media) were stolen, or "used", by other webpages. And I believe wiki has even misidentified the source/copyright owners of some of these aforementioned photos that I've uploaded. Would any of you be so kind as to shine a light on the easiest way I could get rid of the original photo without going through a long-winded process of proving I do indeed have permission to use these images, or keep getting my photo taken down because Wiki is unable to identify the correct source of the image? Dolores sepiol (talk) 10:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
  1. If we consider the perspective of the original file size and the file information attached to the image File:Louisa-Mak-Red-Dress-Event.jpg, I might believe that it was taken around the same time as the series of photos from https://www.instagram.com/p/CXyKSdzpB6W/. However, the photos in that series have a non-square aspect ratio, while the version you provided is square. Therefore, the version you uploaded is very likely a cropped and reproduced product.
  2. File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg is clearly not the original image; it has been compressed.And File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg also shows clear signs of being cropped. It appears to be cropped from https://www.lukfook.com/tc/category/events-and-promotion/post/2023lukfookraceday.
Rastinition (talk) 10:43, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
I have 3 questions regarding (1),
a. the photo in question was indeed taken around the same time as the post you linked. However, even the photos within the posts are cropped in different aspect ratios, what made you arrive at the conclusion that it was the photo I uploaded which was cropped?
b. the photo I uploaded (File:Louisa-Mak-Red-Dress-Event.jpg) has not been published anywhere else on the internet, so why would it be a copyright violation?
b. assuming I am the owner of the photo, can I not crop my own photo, and then upload it to wiki? You are making it sound like it is forbidden to upload any cropped images onto the site. Dolores sepiol (talk) 10:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
  1. The image with relatively complete file information is not mentioned for deletion, and I am not asserting that it has copyright issues. I am simply stating the possible status of that image. If my statement is not clear enough, I am stating that the image not requested for deletion is very close to the original.
  2. The image mentioned for deletion is clearly a reproduction. Regardless of who provided the image, it is currently being reasonably used by other websites, and those websites have not granted authorization to you. If the channel through which you obtained the image has already granted authorization for its use to you, you should also verify whether the provider holds complete copyright. Depending on the form of authorization, sometimes even the photographer may not necessarily possess complete copyright.
Rastinition (talk) 11:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
@Dolores sepiol: Hello, if you are copyright holder, you need to go through COM:VRT to verify permission. If no, you may ask the author or copyright holder send an email with copy of a written permission to VRT (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). Thanks for your understanding. SCP-2000 13:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
@Dolores sepiol: I second what SCP-2000 says here: presumably you can have the author or copyright holder go through the process described at COM:VRT to explicitly grant an appropriate license, and the deleted pictures will be restored. (This also goes for the one that is not deleted, given that you are not the copyright holder.) - Jmabel ! talk 18:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

And with that, I would hope we are done discussing here, unless Dolores sepiol has further questions. Clearly there is no administrative matter here. The user may have been unaware of how some things work on this site, but clearly did not have bad intentions. - Jmabel ! talk 18:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

User ignoring COM:OVERWRITE when AI upscaling

Guise has uploaded a lot of good French literary artwork over many years. More recently they have been returning to files they uploaded themselves years earlier and overwriting them with "better res" versions: in some cases that better resolution has clearly been obtained through AI upscaling rather than taking or finding a higher quality scan of the original source.

For example, File:William Nicholson (1872-1949) - Characters of Romance, Porthos.jpg is a scan of a 1900 drawing of Porthos the musketeer, originally uploaded in 2022. Guise replaced it this week with a double-sized "better res" AI version, improving the line quality but also replacing the simple dots of Porthos's pupils with detailed, glistening AI irises that William Nicholson never drew.

User_talk:Guise/Archive_3 has four archived COM:OVERWRITE warnings from last November, including my attempt to explain why their replacements were going beyond "may be replaced by their uploader shortly after they are uploaded", and asking that they follow the guideline and make these AI versions separate uploads. I'm concerned that they haven't seen these messages, have misunderstood them, or wrongly believe that their edits are only "minor improvements" and not a form of digital restoration. Belbury (talk) 11:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the supposed AI improvement is ultimately disappointing for this Porthos file due to the modification of the pupils. Note that I've read your messages since I'm gradually revising my uploads in order to cancel the files with such a problem (for instance [18], [19], not to mention what remains to be done [20], [21]), in addition to clearly distinguishing original scans from AI-retouched files (as in the Sâr Dubnotal category or the Milady file). Regards. --Guise (talk) 13:44, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
This is almost a textbook example of something that calls for uploading under a distinct name, linked as an "other version" or "derivative work". Also: "better res" is an absolutely misleading edit summary for that upload. It should have said something like "sharpened and upscaled with AI" (and ideally with an explicit mention of what AI tool), which would also be the case if it were uploaded under a distinct filename. "better res" misleadingly suggests a higher-resolution scan, not upsampling. - Jmabel ! talk 19:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
It is such a textbook example that it's the 5th example of what not to do in Commons:Overwriting existing files § DO NOT overwrite. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 03:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Bolitachan

Uploaded 3 non-free files after a warning not to do so Kelly The Angel (talk) 07:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kelly The Angel: All three images gave as their sources journal articles under free licenses. In one case, it was the exact image. In another case, the image Bolitachan uploaded and the image in the article were nearly identical except for the color balance and the figure number, so I uploaded the correct version and hid the original. In the last case, Bolitachan uploaded a picture of an entire tree, while only the bottom half of that picture was in the source itself. I nominated that one for deletion. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here, but it would be nice to hear Bolitachan's response. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Most likely, Bolitachan uploads non-free files in good faith and just doesn't know how copyright works. Kelly The Angel (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
I have informed Bolitachan about this discussion. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

user:Komajo.jh.kouhou

they contributed same school pictures. those photo is include non public areas. maybe the contributor is school staff. those photo include due to law concerns. --eien20 (talk) 16:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
@Eien20: You must inform a user when you report them here. I did it for you this time. Yann (talk) 16:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

request

Please block 弟魯 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  sock of globally blocked user 14.0.174.246 09:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done the other way round: Requesting IP blocked per Special:Contributions/14.0.226.128 and File:Victoria Harbour & Kowloon.jpg semiprotected for 1 year. --Achim55 (talk) 09:27, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Neat response – I've reported the IP to m:SRG for long-term abuse (they're a known LTA). --SHB2000 (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
@Achim55: Thanks, cool boomerang.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:11, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

User:Daniel5785

Daniel5785 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  This users uploads have been deleted or marked as personal or advertisement photos. He was warned but continues, so he should be blocked indefinitely. Pierre cb (talk) 04:53, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done. One week block, all contributions deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

DellaGherardesca

DellaGherardesca (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  This user is a puppet of e.g. User:Livioandronico2013, User:Fiat 500e, User:Labicanense and User:Rione I Monti. Same camera and same kind of spamming their own photos all over Wikipedia. After being blocked user reappears with a new account. Disembodied Soul (talk) 11:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 12:44, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Guido den Broeder

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

You neglect to mention that I did provide the requested evidence. I rarely ping, as most users (myself included) find that terribly annoying. But I was absent for a year due to medical complications. Did pinging become mandatory during that time? Guido den Broeder (talk) 00:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Guido: no, in most circumstances pinging isn't mandatory, but it is customary. I take it from your remark above that you'd rather not be pinged.
@SHB2000: when you say, "All they do on Commons is stir up dramas," is that intended to be taken literally? Offhand, [23], [24], and [25] look like productive edits. Are you saying they are not? It looks like he's had a pretty contentious couple of days, but that's a long way from "All they do on Commons is stir up dramas." I take seriously what Jeff G. says above, but please don't muddy the waters. - Jmabel ! talk 01:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
No, not literally. SHB2000 (talk) 01:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I think that during all the years that I have been here, I have started only two or three discussions on a drama board. On my own wikis (I have 6) we don't have such boards. We don't need them, and I can't even remember the last time that I blocked someone. Guido den Broeder (talk) 02:22, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
@Guido den Broeder: What wikis are those?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 04:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I don't see the relevance. Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:53, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
What happens outside of Wikimedia is irrelevant to what happens on Commons. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment While I agree on repeated incivilities by GdB and that a warning message to stop incivilities is relevant, still a "stop vandalizing" template was clearly misplaced here. --A.Savin 02:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Where I wrote I would again calmly refute all your lies, this was in reference to a possible repeat of the discussion of 2022, where I did so, and not to the discussion at #User:SchroCat. Guido den Broeder (talk) 04:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support a block (3 months?), so that they get the message. Yann (talk) 07:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    Could you explain to me what the message is? Why should I be blocked when I am the one getting attacked? Are you still claiming that I vandalized this page or do you acknowledge that your warning was misplaced? Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    The message is, that you should urgently stop uncivil comments like this one. The fact that a wrong warning template was selected does not make the intended warning from personal attacks null and void. The essence is the same, gaming the system will not work here. --A.Savin 14:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    This is the user problem noticeboard. If there is a problem with a user, it should be safe for everyone to report so. Do you think that the ad hominem by Ikan Kekek that I responded to, a man who decided he's my enemy to me, was fine? Guido den Broeder (talk) 14:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    You've attacked me ever since I cited COM:INUSE in two or three deletion requests you started. I had literally forgotten about your previous abusive behavior toward me until you started it again in a recent thread. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
    If you're still reading this, you're the one who's attacking everyone, making Commons a less enjoyable place to edit. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Back in 2022 there was a thread here about Guido. At the time, I had this to say: The main concern I've had about Guido is that he seems primarily interested in two things on Commons: self-promotion and noticeboard drama. - This still appears to be true. Just glancing at his recent contributions they are largely dramaboards, a couple DRs, and edit warring with TU-nor to include a link to WikiSage, a website Guido founded, at Commons:Alternative outlets, and then even giving TU-nor a "final warning" about it. We don't have a version of WP:NOTHERE, but basically this is a case of COM:NOTHERE. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    And on Wikisage we promote Commons. Isn't that we we're supposed to do, support each other? Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    No. We provide the best resource we can to our users. That doesn't include linking to another wiki just because they link to us. There is no good reason to link to Wikisage, among all the hundreds/thousands of other online encyclopedic projects out there, as the sole link next to our sister project, Wikipedia, except for your own promotional interests. — Rhododendrites talk |  17:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    When TU-nor finally took a look at Wikisage, he understood, and stopped editwarring. There the content dispute ended. That is how I solve content disputes, not by running to the drama board. And now you are editwarring in violation of the prevailing consensus. Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    I removed an unhelpful external link added multiple times by a user here primarily to promote himself and his interests (and willing to issue warnings to those who get in the way). Edit warring is repeatedly making the same edit. You are the only one that has done that here. I find it shocking that even here you're still combative about your abuse of Commons for promotion. — Rhododendrites talk |  17:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    This here is not a dramaboard per se. You turn it into one, every singel time I have seen you editing here. Try to solve conflicts respectfully and without drama here as well. Kritzolina (talk) 17:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    Are you saying that I should ignore personal attacks against me? I'm not sure I understand you correctly. Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    And that is just one way you turn this into a dramaboard. You derail at every possible turn. Kritzolina (talk) 17:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
    I utterly resent the remark When TU-nor finally took a look at Wikisage, he understood, and stopped editwarring at Commons:Alternative outlets. For one thing, I was not editwarring. I made 1 – one – edit to the page, removing the link to Wikisage with the edit summary "Rmv. self-promotion". My edit was immediately reverted. Even more I resent the creation of a totally unfounded and fictional reason given for my lack of further edits. No, I did not 'finally take a look' at Wikisage. I had already studied it enough to know that the English version is a completely useless arena for writing an encyclopedic article (at least if you want it to be seen). No, I did not 'understand' the reason for keeping it. Truth is, I just could not be bothered to waste time on it, since my main work is in other Wikis. --TU-nor (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
✓ Done I blocked Guido den Broeder for 3 months. I wasn't aware of the details, but the information given by Rhododendrites, and Guido's answers, clearly demonstrate that he didn't understand what are expected from contributors here. Yann (talk) 17:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Indeed, he is now trying to promote "an alternative to Commons, one without the hate and the porn". I wonder if they will, once launched, steal images from Commons, like the one meanwhile banned guy from the so-called "Ruwiki" did. --A.Savin 18:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
The message from him is clear: he doesn't belong to Commons. Reblocked indef. without talk page access. Yann (talk) 18:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Indef seems right per NOTHERE. I'll also say that I'd support an appeal down the road if it clearly articulated constructive activities he'd undertake and committed not to engage in any promotional activity. — Rhododendrites talk |  19:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Removing talk page access simply for leaving a single comment asking people to join him on a different website is complete overkill Trade (talk) 01:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Long overdue; thanks for the block, Yann! --SHB2000 (talk) 21:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
I feel, that if somebody will create a "hate-free" alternative to Commons or Wikipedia, it will inevitably become safeplace of racists, antisemites, neofascists, anti-LGBT propaganda and conspiracy theories. Taivo (talk) 15:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
In essence, that's what X has become after Elon wanted to promote "free speech" on the platform. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
This guy already has a Wikipedia-clone with mostly copies of articles deleted at the Dutch Wikipedia and some attack pages. Good block. NOTHERE. Natuur12 (talk) 23:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
In the likely case of launching a Commons' clone with stolen contents from Commons, the WMFOffice should urgently consider a ban, too. --A.Savin 00:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
How does one steal content that are under a free license? Trade (talk) 01:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Content is considered stolen if it's being imported/uploaded improperly, in violation of the terms of a Free license. "Ruwiki" did exactly this. --A.Savin 01:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Would that be in the case of importing/uploading content improperly be if they fail to give attribution and the like? (also, I'm curious: what exactly happened at "ru.wiki"?) --SHB2000 (talk) 01:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, most of our content is not Public Domain so proper attribution is absolutely necessary. There is WP article about that resource; en:Ruwiki (website). --A.Savin 02:05, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Ah, right. Strange (but not surprising) that w:Ruwiki (website) even exists. Thanks for the link. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
I think WikiSage only has like 38 users to begin with and its mostly garbage. So he probably couldn't even do it if we wanted to. Really his whole thing just comes off like a weird, badly done deep fake or something. I don't know, but there's almost zero shot him of making an actual alternative to Commons. --Adamant1 (talk) 01:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
For the record, I've started a global ban discussion at m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Guido den Broeder. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_109&oldid=844467722"