Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU • COM:ANI

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

Vandalism
[new section] 		User problems
[new section] 		Blocks and protections
[new section] 		Other
[new section]

Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.


Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.


Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.


Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.

Archives
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

Note

  • Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
  • It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; Please try to remain civil with your comments.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

پاسبان

[edit]

Repeated {{No advertising}} violations. Jonteemil (talk) 10:24, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also consider deleting and protecting File:Exilamer.jpg from recreation. Jonteemil (talk) 10:26, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Indef., spam only. Yann (talk) 10:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Indef blocked by Yann Gbawden (talk) 10:50, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And now the account is globally locked. Taivo (talk) 08:14, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Laurenmarler

[edit]

Violates {{Dont recreate}}. Jonteemil (talk) 09:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done blocked for a week and the file deleted. Regards, Aafi (talk) 09:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MalabariEditor

[edit]

Another obvious Bobanfasil sock. Jonteemil (talk) 11:24, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, file deleted. Yann (talk) 13:58, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Praphakorn

[edit]

Reuploads copyvio after been given {{End of copyvios}}. Jonteemil (talk) 11:33, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, files deleted. Yann (talk) 14:00, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Csmegb a likely sock

[edit]

Per an overlap in uploads with other socks in this sock drawer (such as Sleevachan), I'm inclined to believe that Csmegb is another account belonging to a paid employee of the Syro-Malabar Church. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:36, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed, blocked, and nuked. Эlcobbola talk 21:43, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Srbernadette

[edit]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:21, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done This user had some copyright issues in the past, but was responsive for fixing the mistakes. The errors have already been corrected. I think this is a productive user. We should assume good faith. Yann (talk) 19:14, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Can we assume these accounts are sock or meatpuppets given they all four have uploaded the same file and the usernames are so similar, at least the top two and the bottom two are very similar to each other? Only one of the accounts are blocked.

Timestamp File Uploader Deleted file Uploader
Aug 31 2024 11:26 AM File:Godrej Thanisandra.jpg Delete Google image search Godrejthanisa (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 2 edits) File:Adarsh savana.jpg (Und | Log) Godrejwhitefieldblr12 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Aug 31 2024 11:26 AM File:Godrej Thanisandra.jpg Delete Google image search Godrejthanisa (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 2 edits) File:Adarsh Euphoria.jpg (Und | Log) Adarsheuphoria (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Aug 31 2024 11:26 AM File:Godrej Thanisandra.jpg Delete Google image search Godrejthanisa (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 2 edits) File:Adarsh savana.jpg (Und | Log) Adarshsavanablr (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)

Jonteemil (talk) 14:43, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done All accounts blocked. Yann (talk) 18:10, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet

[edit]

FotoZaragoza2024 was blocked in eswiki because is sockpuppet of CarlosArrimadas, and here is very active and doing block evasion, @Elcobbola: Ezarateesteban 15:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 18:12, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Global locks requested. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:53, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mollathevalor

[edit]

Mollathevalor (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) recent copyvio immediately after receiving the 'last' warning - yet another upload of a previously deleted file. Quick1984 (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked 1 month Ezarateesteban 17:38, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Camilonava

[edit]

Camilonava (talk • contribs • block log • filter log) has uploaded copyright violations despite being warned and having had a previous block --Ovruni (talk) 01:51, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Эlcobbola: FYI.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:11, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Moghal-meteopathy

[edit]

Moghal-meteopathy (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  has reuploaded a picture of a book similar to one deleted previously for copyvio. Pierre cb (talk) 03:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

[edit]

Per es:Categoría:Wikipedia:Títeres bloqueados de Caroca52 (Sockpuppets of Caroca52). Jonteemil (talk) 09:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked them all, deleted most of their uploads and created a sockpuppet category. Taivo (talk) 10:10, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding mass-overwritten by User:氏子

[edit]

The user constantly overwriting files since registered in 2019. There is a considerable amount of evidence that shows these files should not be overwritten with substantially different content. I've compiled a list of files that need to be split, and saved it in my computer. He overwrote over 500 files, including files already tagged {{Split}} or reported to COM:HMSR. But I've come to realize that my time and energy are limited; I simply can't do this work today. Before 3 hours I issue a warning to the user (see: this message), so I selected this report just to alert administrators to his future behaviour in order to prevent such edits from happening again.--125.230.83.144 18:08, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide samples you find problematic. I don't think File:紫色繡球花.jpg is.
For links: 氏子 (talk · contribs)
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 18:15, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Although I haven't had been through the contributions of the user but I did perform a split of on one of the files and it seems that overwriting was performed unnecessarily and it should not have happened at the first place. Regards, Aafi (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
File:蝦籠子.jpg is for example very significantly different from File:蝦籠子 1.jpg Regards, Aafi (talk) 18:40, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I went through some of the contributions, but didn't find much. File:銅漆金佛陀立像.jpg currently on COM:HMSR is problematic.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ArielBZ

[edit]

Reuploads a bunch of files already deleted as copyvios. Was given {{End of copyvios}} a few days ago. Jonteemil (talk) 22:58, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, files redeleted. Yann (talk) 05:15, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

[edit]

@Graywalls: See: Special:Contributions/Graywalls where the editor is reversing my restoration of the familytree function that acts as a navigation device between family members. The template is valid, there is no rule demanding that they be removed, the template is used in over 1,000 entries. Graywalls rationale is that Greghenderson2006 asked at Commons:Help_desk/Archive/2024/08#FamilyTree, about Graywalls deleting the tree function template and one editor gave their "humble opinion", which does not rise to community consensus. Graywalls appears to target entries by User:Greghenderson2006. I would like a warning to stop the removal and have Graywalls actually gain community consensus for their removal, or gain consensus for the template to be deleted from every entry. Ad hoc deletion created selection bias. This should have been discussed at Village Pump, not the Help Desk to gain community consensus. Again: one "humble opinion" is not community consensus for deleting a template from categories. RAN (talk) 08:55, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't community consensus in keeping it either. COM:HOST and COM:NOTSOCIAL are relevant here, because the discussion at en.wiki clearly suggests its someone hosting a family tree about their own extended family rather than something relevant to Wiki projects. Maybe I am not familiar with the differences between Wikipedia and here, but in this situation, does retention prevail? After 1RR, I try to discuss this on your talk page proof, but you immediately took the concern here, and did not even provide a talk page notice. Graywalls (talk) 09:08, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please don't tell people that the answer is in the Bible, just read it. You need to give me a chapter and verse. You keep saying its all there in COM:HOST and COM:NOTSOCIAL, but you never quote the actual rule you are referring to. COM:HOST and COM:NOTSOCIAL talks about party pictures and porn. It does not mention the template that you keep deleting. Why do you keep bringing up English Wikipedia, this is Commons with its own rules. Ad hoc removal from ones you do not like is the wrong way to go, gain consensus to have the template deleted so it is removed from every category, not just the ones with your beef with User:Greghenderson2006. --RAN (talk) 09:28, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question @Graywalls How is having a family tree on Category:Jean-Baptiste Boisot a violation of COMːWEBHOST Gbawden (talk) 09:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My understanding of it is that edits made specifically to spread out one's family tree to build a family tree on this platform is hosting and I felt there's no educational use in it. Graywalls (talk) 09:40, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you were building a family tree on Commons I would consider that a case of NOTWEBHOST. In this case its use is valid. Following your logic we would disallow the family tree of Elizabeth II as NOTWEBHOST. Gbawden (talk) 09:45, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Gbawden: , personal family tree building is the way it appeared to me. You'll see that Greghenderson2006 created a category for himself, and has a category for each of his parents, extended family members. Basically, categories being used as profile pages for his family members. This is where I was getting how I believed it was being used in a "web hosting" way. I know Common isn't en.wiki, but this certainly is quite suggestive. Graywalls (talk) 10:01, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    For context link to en.wiki ANI and within that discussion, please take a second to see this So I think I understand Gbawden's perspective, however my application of COM:HOST is that when an editor builds a category page like it's a folder or a profile, then uploads pictures of themselves, their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and a category for each one of their own extended family members for obvious purpose of curating their personal family history, I do believe that's a valid application of "out of scope" and COM:HOST. They may not be "vacation photos" but when someone starts uploading photos of everyone in their family, their obituary notices, gravestone photos, then start building a category here for each one of them, is that still considered within scope of project? Graywalls (talk) 17:03, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I reverted most Graywalls's removals of information, and sent a warning. Hopefully, that will be enough. Yann (talk) 09:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AlessioRO

[edit]

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

Multiple copyvios, continues uploading after warnings. Gikü (talk) 11:44, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Yes, source of last upload is Google Maps. One week block and I'll look his uploads. Taivo (talk) 09:23, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Zaitei tochhawng

[edit]

Obvious sock of Chhanchhana zote hmar. Jonteemil (talk) 18:54, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done GPSLeo (talk) 19:02, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect, shouldn't their files be deleted as well though, per DENY? Jonteemil (talk) 19:06, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just created Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Aibawk. GPSLeo (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ZaragozaFoto2024

[edit]

Such as FotoZaragoza2024 obvious sock of Namest 2003. Jonteemil (talk) 20:42, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked by Elcobbola. Yann (talk) 22:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Praggan Saha

[edit]

The latter is a sock of the former. Both are recently blocked on enwiki. Jonteemil (talk) 20:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked both and deleted last remaining upload. Taivo (talk) 09:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass reverts, edit waring, and refusal to get the point by User:Orijentolog

[edit]

I've been going through and cleaning up categories for non-exiting WikiProjects for cities in Iran that were created by User:Orijentolog a few years ago. The categories clearly shouldn't exist since again, there there aren't Wikiproject's that necessitate the need for the categories to begin with Orijentolog subsequently reverted me over 300 times and is continuing to do so even though I told them on their talk page that there's absolutely zero reason to have the categories. Can an admin step in please and tell them to knock off it and that they shouldn't be making categories on here for non-exiting subjects? As a side to that they created a bunch of categories for "buildings by shape" that only contained a single category for towers, which I told them was wrong because "towers" aren't a shape. Apparently they didn't get the point there. So it would be good if they could be told not put categories for things into ones for shapes when the thing isn't a shape to begin with. Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 04:07, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Only thing you're doing is DESTROYING the categorization and making mess. Nothing else. --Orijentolog (talk) 04:11, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I told you why the categories were wrong and should be deleted. It's not my issue that your unwilling to get the point or don't care about the rules. At least stop reverting me until it's dealt with. Mass reverting someone more then 300 times without even discussing the issue with them first is totally ridiculous. It's also not what the revert feature exists for. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:16, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can maintenance categories be wrong?! Where did you get such an idea? You saw very well that I opened all those categories, as well as that I'm part of a group which deals with Iran-related images. You did not contacted me or the Wikiproject, just started with hundreds of edits which produced an utter mess in many categories. And you're surprised for getting reverted? --Orijentolog (talk) 05:54, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Now their edit waring me over it. Can an admin just temporarily block them for edit waring and vandalism since they clearly aren't willing to get the point or resolve this in a collaborative way? --Adamant1 (talk) 04:24, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm reverting your vandalism and nothing more. Those categories stood for years and no one had an issue with them, until you come. I'm categorizing Iranian art & architecture for years here, and today you destroyed hundreds of them over a single night. And you ask that I get blocked? --Orijentolog (talk) 06:02, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You reverted me multiple times on multiple files ncluding over 100 times after I opened this. 100% you should be blocked for editing waring and reverting me over 100 after I filed the complaints. Its clearly disruptive, uncollaborative behavior. You should have stopped once I filed the complaint and at least waited to continue it until other people weighed in. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:14, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disruptive behavior is when you destroy something created by many years, based on subjective ideas. Perhaps you believe they are "great" but I find them as totally nonsensical. To repeat it once again, most of these categories are not intended for existing WikiProjects, but for separating huge WikiProject Iran by city, and they mostly serve as maintenance categories. Towers are buildings by shape for years and there's zero logic to change it. --Orijentolog (talk) 06:30, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disruptive behavior is when you destroy something created by many years, based on subjective ideas Be my guest and tell me where exactly there's a "WikiProject Karaj" here or on any other Wikimedia project. There's no reason you can't find a better way to separate things in WikiProject Iran that doesn't involve mass creating categories for imaginary Wikiprojects.
most of these categories are not intended for existing WikiProjects I'm aware. Which is exactly why I nominated for them deletion. There's zero reason to have "Wikiproject X" categories for Wikprojects that don't exist.
Towers are buildings by shape for years and there's zero logic to change it. It totally makes sense to change it if "towers" isn't a shape. I don't care if it's been that way for years. It's clearly wrong and how long it's been that isn't a valid excuse to mass revert me or edit war me when I tried to correct things.
Please don't troll here, I said those categories are being used for separating huge WikiProject Iran, not for existing individual projects. They serve its purpose fine. And no, you did not "correct" anything, just making an utter mess all around. I don't care ... it's clearly wrong - again subjective opinions. Towers are defined as narrow buildings or structures, higher than its width. That's related to shape, i.e. the external form, contours, or outline, not necessary to geometric figures. --Orijentolog (talk) 09:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Towers are defined as narrow buildings or structures, higher than its width. That's related to shape I agree that something like the word "narrow" is related to shapes. But "narrow" isn't a shape. If your going to put a category in one for categories "by shape" then that's what it should be. If you want to create a category called "square towers" that contains categories for or images of squares towers and put it in a category for "buildings by shape" then cool. Do that, but you can't just put a category for a random tower in "buildings by shape" and then be like "oh whatever. It's totally fine because the towers are narrow and the word 'narrow' kinda sorta maybe relates to shapes. So whatever! Waahhh your just trolling and making a mess!" That's not how this works. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I protected Category:Towers in Iran for 2 weeks, and I blocked 5.112.70.121 for a week. Yann (talk) 17:28, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tô Ngọc Khang

[edit]

This user has already been blocked for a week for uploading numerous copyvio images of aircraft involved in accidents and their behavior doesn't seem to stop. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 06:25, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. One month block (second block). Taivo (talk) 09:29, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

6042*UB80*2K36*1890*7269*9WBK/Asharujayne

[edit]

Both accounts, created last August, uploaded photos about Japanese animator Shikei Shokatsu that seems to be a copyright violation. 1.33.123.150 06:53, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So far only warning and short block, but if sockpuppetry is confirmed, then longer blocks are needed. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppetry confirmed. Thank you. But here comes suspected third account...

Asharujayne uploaded File:Shikei Syokatu Portrait 2024 14.jpg, then deleted, then 諸葛子敬 uploaded same file as File:諸葛子敬近影2.jpg, then deleted, then Asharujayne uploaded same file as File:Shikei Syokatu-2.jpg, then deleted. Username 諸葛子敬 means exactly Shikei Shokatsu. 1.33.123.150 22:45, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And here come fourth and fifth accounts: 北京人文大学 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information), Bujiwaiokma (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) 1.33.123.150 03:22, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sixth account appears: Jenifadosaga (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) 1.33.123.150 03:42, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the real name registered account, please check.The previous error has been corrected, so sorry!! It is now operated by professionals. Jenifadosaga (talk) 03:57, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In addition, the previous account was stolen again, and now it has been recovered through Google account and changed the password. Jenifadosaga (talk) 04:06, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jeremy.toma

[edit]

Hi, I think Jeremy.toma's behavior should be looked at more closely. He's been told countless times that his way of treating the licencing of his files is wrong. He's now asked for some of his files to be deleted because he's not happy with the way some people are using the files (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thoiry (Ain, France).jpg). Now he's adding notes on his images stating that he must be contacted for all reuse of his files, which is contrary to the licence under which he published the files (Special:Contributions/Jeremy.toma). I have come to the point that I fear he'll ask for every one of his files to be deleted at some point. As a lot of his files are used on Wikipedia, this creates a lot of problems. I have already asked him to reconsider his involvement in Commons since he's never made any effort to understand the licencing process of it all. I think it's time an administrator looks into this. Thanks, Espandero (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciated the user's uploads and think they are a great contribution to the project.
What's the recommended action to solve the user's attribution problem?
I notice some suggest that users who insist on being credited have their images compulsorily marked the attribution while Jeremy.Toma actively supported efforts to remove in-image credits, but now faces the problem of not being credited at all.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 02:30, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"I would appreciate it if you let me know…", the wording on File:Thoiry (Ain, France).jpg, is fine. Same for «"veuillez me contacter» in an ImageNote, though an ImageNote is a very odd place to put it. Conversely, the deletion request has no merit. CC license are irrevocable.
If he would rather have a different attribution, then at User:Jeremy.toma/License, in {{Self}} he can set the "author" parameter to anything he likes. - Jmabel ! talk 12:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes he says "veuillez me contacter" but the condition on his user page clearly states that anybody who wishes to use his files needs to ask for his permission beforehand. This is not in line with the licencing. And I feel like putting this kind of messages in notes on the image is also contrary to the spirit of free licencing. And the fact that he wishes to erase some of his content because it is being reused elsewhere seems very telling to me. - Espandero (talk) 15:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Isn't the problem that some of the reusers don't credit him as required? I think a solution should be found to help the photographer with that.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 11:24, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MohsenT021

[edit]

Reuploads copyvio after having been given {{End of copyvios}}. Jonteemil (talk) 15:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:55, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I do however suspect that it's possible that this account was created as block evasion of Mohsen.ghezel which was blocked previously. See below.
Timestamp File Uploader Deleted file Uploader
Sep 04 2024 02:18 PM File:Khaledabadi.jpg Delete Google image search MohsenT021 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 19 edits) File:Khaledabadi.jpg (Und | Log) MohsenT021 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)
Sep 04 2024 02:18 PM File:Khaledabadi.jpg Delete Google image search MohsenT021 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 19 edits) File:محمدرضا خالدآبادی.jpg (Und | Log) Mohsen.ghezel (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Sep 04 2024 02:18 PM File:Khaledabadi.jpg Delete Google image search MohsenT021 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 19 edits) File:محمدرضا خالدآبادی.jpg (Und | Log) Mohsen.ghezel (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Jonteemil (talk) 15:57, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Both accounts blocked indef. Yann (talk) 17:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Negerimusik

[edit]

Uploads copyvio after having been given {{End of copyvios}}. Jonteemil (talk) 18:17, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked the user for a week. All contributions are deleted. Taivo (talk) 06:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ajikeminiooon

[edit]

Uploads copyvio after having been given {{End of copyvios}}. Jonteemil (talk) 18:32, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked the user for a week. All contributions are deleted. Taivo (talk) 06:41, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Romanmalikkhan

[edit]

Edit warring and unaterially closing a CfD by User:Orijentolog

[edit]

Can an admin please look at the edit history of Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/09/Category:Towers in Iran and deal with User:Orijentolog's waring bullshit? Adamant1 (talk) 08:16, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no point in discussing with this person, because he opens discussions with the aim of harassing, accusing and insulting, and he unilaterally removes proper categories all around, thereby disrupting the categorization tree that has been built for years. --Orijentolog (talk) 08:19, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just don't participate in the CfD then. You don't own the categories and you can't just close a CfD after a day and one person commenting just because you don't agree with it. I have every right to start a CfD to discuss with other users if a category system makes sense or not. The only problem here is your petty, uncollaborative attitude and ownership issues.

Also look at the edit history of Category:Buildings in Babolsar by shape where they also reverted me and @Fralambert: multiple times. There's absolutely zero reason I should have had to report his uncollaborative edit waring nonsense twice. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:21, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fralambert obviously intended to remove Wikidata template, as he explained on the sister project, not to delete valid category which is not empty. Opening discussions with false accusations and insults (like that something is "beyond my ability to understand") is not only a violation of the project rules, but is below the level of civilized discussion. --Orijentolog (talk) 08:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's pretty clear you didn't understand what I was telling you. I was just trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that it was something you were confused about. It's not like you haven't repeatedly insulting me over and over since this whole thing started though. So spare me the cry bullying. It's still not an excuse to unilaterally close a CfD that had only been open for a day and had commenter anyway. You were clearly just looking for a excuse to shut the conversation down. So I could give a crap. It's not your call to make if other people can discuss it or not just because you created the categories. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understood very well, but you continued with misbehavior. And it should be noted that such an arrogant approach has cost you several blocks lately, while I haven't had a single penalty in 15 years of activity. --Orijentolog (talk) 08:46, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What misbehavior? People are allowed to open CfDs dude. It's only an issue because your turned it into one. And your whole "arrogant approach" comment is exactly I'm talking about with the cry bullying. How dare I say you weren't understanding my explanation but it's totally cool for you to call me arrogant. Right. Right. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:53, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User Adamant1 seems to have a habbit of insulting others in discussion pages and opening very problematic deletion requests. He has been blocked for that in the past and should be given permanent block. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes. @Orijentolog you can just ignore the annoyance, which will soon move on to new targets and forget about you. :p RZuo (talk) 13:43, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@RZuo: Multiple administrators disagree with Orijentolog's actions here and they even got an in edit war with one of them. I know your just being an opportunist here, but you might want to think about if it's worth support that kind of behavior just because of some petty personal beef. For all the hemming and hawing from people like you about how I act I'm certainly not out there anywhere getting an edit wars with administrators. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:27, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've reverted the close. Orijentolog was too involved to close this CfD. Abzeronow (talk) 23:23, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

M-ONE GRAND MUAYTHAI

[edit]

Uploads copyvios after having been given {{End of copyvios}}. Also I think Prathan-Worramanin is a block evasion account since master is blocked on thwiki. Both accounts uploads Muay Thai related media and also there is one account of reupload by the newer account of a file by the master account that was deleted as copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 09:40, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked the master for a week, and the sock indef. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 09:48, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kutlwano Maboe (Steak)

[edit]

Promo-only account and sockpuppetry. Jonteemil (talk) 09:50, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Both accounts blocked indef. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:12, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AriyanDnath

[edit]

Promo-only account. Jonteemil (talk) 10:07, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Yann warned the user and I deleted his uploads. Taivo (talk) 10:21, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raaz Tiger

[edit]

Violates {{No selfies}}. Jonteemil (talk) 10:11, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, file deleted. No useful contribution anywhere. Yann (talk) 10:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fry72

[edit]

Reasons for reporting: For years, I have been railing against incomplete deletion requests, which are caused by malformed use of {{Delete}} templates and lack of follow-through, and which are populating subcats of Category:Incomplete deletion requests. This problem spurred the creation of that category 17:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC), over 17 years ago, and my tracking of it 18:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC), over three years ago.

As a precedent, ColorfulSmoke was blocked 17:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC) by Mdaniels5757 with an expiration time of 3 days (account creation blocked) for "Continuing to make malformed deletion requests despite repeated instructions; not responding to concerns on talk page", pursuant to the discussion archived at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 29#ColorfulSmoke, and Alex Neman was blocked 16:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC) by Yann with an expiration time of 1 month (account creation blocked) for "Continuing to make malformed deletion requests despite repeated instructions; not responding to concerns on talk page" pursuant to the discussion archived at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 34#Alex Neman.[reply]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:05, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.: it is really hard to read that solid block of link-filled prose. Would you mind if I reformat it as bullet points to make it easier to follow? I won't change any content. - Jmabel ! talk 12:02, 6 September 2024 (UTC) [now reformatted - Jmabel ! talk 12:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)][reply]
@Jmabel: Please go ahead.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:12, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reformatting done. Sorry I don't have the focus to follow this up further right now (traveling, and very tired), but at least that should help someone else follow this. - Jmabel ! talk 12:19, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayratayrat

[edit]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:14, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=920128695"