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
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
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
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 (index)

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.

Jinmez23[edit]

Jinmez23 (talk • contribs • block log • filter log) has uploaded copyright violations despite being warned. --Ovruni (talk) 20:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Yann warned the user once more. All contributions are deleted. Taivo (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dronebogus name calling and bad faith comment[edit]

Dronebogus reported my post as porn. I point out images that are more obviously porn and he started name calling in bad faith NuManDavid (talk) 03:03, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just an FYI, but COM:PORN is a thing and at some of the files in that DR clearly seem to cross the line. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, you should also notify @Dronebogus: about this on their talk page per the text at the top "Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s)." Although I'm sure they know about it now since I just pinged them, but it's still good practice regardless. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Literally all I said was “I don’t know why you’re citing the only two quality videos of gay anal sex on Commons in contrast to your low-quality heterosexual pics, unless it’s to come across as homophobic.” (Emphasis retroactive) Instead of refuting or at least just respectfully disagreeing with them, you report me. This is a frivolous bad-faith request; if you don’t want your posts nominated for deletion as porn, or people to think you’re homophobic, don’t post porn or make comparisons that obviously could be read as homophobic (which I never called the user or even thought the user was). Dronebogus (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done No admin action needed. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I warned NuManDavid and deleted the files. Yann (talk) 07:39, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continued copyright violations / advertising by User:Mipagolf[edit]

I noticed User:Yann's previous notice on their talk page, and it seems like they are continuing to upload the same copyrighted images seemingly for advertisement purposes, see Special:Contributions/Mipagolf. Palemeditation (talk) 17:18, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week. All files were already deleted by Jonatan Svensson Glad. Yann (talk) 19:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry - forgot to block. Thanks Yann! --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 19:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:PoundinMyCock4U[edit]

Inappropriate username. Dronebogus (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Blocked per Commons:Username policy. --Túrelio (talk) 09:30, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now globally locked + hidden. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:14, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alice0815[edit]

Alice0815 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Indiscriminately mass-nominated a bunch of files with the same rambling, incomprehensible rationale; mostly posting this here so someone with more patience than will see this and speedy close all these frivolous, invalid nominations. Dronebogus (talk) 10:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not the first problem from this account. - Jmabel ! talk 14:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I concur, seems to be a rambling form of en:WP:IDONTLIKEIT. See also Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Vandalism/Archive_22#Alice0815.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:51, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: same link I posted.
However, it looks like these are all pictures of one person, a cross-dressed man or MTF transsexual (can't guess from images how someone identifies), many with potentially disparaging file names, and this person seems to be saying it is them, that these were accidentally given free licenses on Flickr, that they are scrubbing them from Flickr and would like them scrubbed here. If I understand correctly, that would be a reasonable courtesy deletion request.
@Alice0815: if I have understood that correctly, please say so here and I would support a courtesy deletion request. Since these are all the same issue, this really should have been done as a Mass deletion request and you certainly should have written the rationale more coherently, but those aren't enormous issues.
I will ask Alice0815 not to make any further edits before replying here. If they abide by that, no need for a block. - Jmabel ! talk 14:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether this user is the person appearing in those photos, some of these files need to be renamed. Regardless of how the Flickr uploader originally titled the image, a filename describing the subject of a photo as a "sissy prostitute" (for example) seems inappropriate. Omphalographer (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hatomizinko3 Hatomizinko3 insults using photo description ＋ Multiple account operation[edit]

This is a story in the Japanese version, but I wasn't sure where to report it, so I decided to report it here.Hatomizinko3 used the photo description to insult me ​​for posting a photo taken with an old camera. I warned him in a user note on the Japanese version of Wikipedia, but he not only recruited me, but also insulted me by saying that the quality of the photos was poor. While we were discussing how to respond, he threatened to find me and told me he didn't care if I was blocked because he would keep posting pictures on the commons. He runs another account on Commons called Hatomizinko. ジョンドウ (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ジョンドウ: when you posted here, you should have put a notice at User talk:Hatomizinko3. I have now done that for you. - Jmabel ! talk 18:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
At File:ジャスティンミラノ 皐月賞 優勝時.jpg, according to Google translate, the original caption "EOSKissX4ごときでとられた写真を貼るんじゃねーよ" means "Don't post photos taken with something like EOSKissX4." @ジョンドウ: I'm not immediately sure why that is supposed to be an insult to you in particular. - Jmabel ! talk 18:28, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean by "recruited," that word makes no sense here.
The remark here seems a bit out of line, especially the apparent obscenity of "クソ面白いです, " which I suspect is more extreme in Japanese than its English equivalent. But that is on ja-wiki, not Commons. Similarly for the last link: again, a bit rude, probably particularly unacceptable in Japanese, but I don't see anything that amounts to a threat to "find you." - Jmabel ! talk 18:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The word "ごとき" is a word that looks down on the subject and has the meaning of discriminating against old cameras.I don't think it's acceptable to make comments that discriminate in editorial policy because the camera is old. Intimidation refers to the part where both parties "meet and talk" knowing that each other will be at the racetrack. He feels that a person can be identified by the camera model. ジョンドウ (talk) 23:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Amaterasu_1-1[edit]

After releasing from block, this user restarted uploading copyvio or unfree logos and these files were removed; File:Logo workman.svg, File:Logo Far Eastern Federal University.svg and File:ROC Ministry of Foreign Affairs Emblem.svg. Netora (talk) 03:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. 3 months block (third block). Taivo (talk) 13:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Malttew9983 and socks[edit]

The three accounts are the same user, focused with uploading the same political flags, there are requests and speedy deletions but the user creates new accounts with the same objective (changing slightly the name of file). Taichi (talk) 06:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked them all. Taivo (talk) 13:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Malversation[edit]

Bonjour, Un contributeur juge une personne d'extrême-droite alors que c'est une liste citoyenne composée de 81 personnes. Sachant qu'il y a des personnes de tout bord politique à l'intérieur. Gauche radicale, gauche, communiste, droite, centre, etc...

Il ne s'est même pas renseigné sur toutes les personnes présentent mais affiche que tout le monde est d'extrême-droite. Pourriez-vous y remédier ? Car c'est de la discrimination pour les 80 autres personnes.

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_des_listes_aux_%C3%A9lections_europ%C3%A9ennes_de_2024_en_France

Je vous remercie Archess Ney (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Archess Ney: Bonjour, Cela ne semble pas avoir de rapport avec Commons (ce site-ci). S'il y a un problème sur fr.Wikipédia, il faut vous adresser à fr.Wikipédia. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Affandy Abdul Rahman Saleh Lee Ully[edit]

Affandy Abdul Rahman Saleh Lee Ully (talk · contribs) contributions appear to be all spam. - Jmabel ! talk 15:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked him indefinitely as spam-only user. Taivo (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A.I. generated "enhancements" by Riad Salih[edit]

I have noticed and encountered a number of files related to Algeria were overwritten with watermarked "enhancements" (colorization, upscales) showing clear A.I. artifacting from User:Riad Salih in the past few years, some of these also have doutable sourcing information (they seem like Flickr washing, but they are all PD from what I know). This raises obvious concerns per COM:OVERWRITE, COM:AI, and COM:WATERMARK. I am unaware of the full extent of these "enhancements" and I can't revert this myself (I am not autopatrolled) so I deemed this worth raising to the noticeboard, here are some instances:

File:Colonel Amirouche.jpg - overwritten with upscaled, watermarked, and colored, used as infobox photo

File:Mustapha Ben boulaid.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, used as infobox photo

File:Arrestation de Larbi Ben M'Hidi.jpg - colored, upscaled and watermarked, used in Wikipedia

File:Ali la Pointe-bennacer.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked

File:Une délégation du FLN au Caire.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked

File:1975 Algiers Agreement.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked

File:Amar Ouamrane.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, infobox

File:Taleb Abderrahmane.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, infobox

File:Krim belkacem.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, infobox

File:L'arrestation de Zohra Drif en 1957.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, infobox

File:Fatiha Bouhired.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, infobox

File:Mohamed Lamouri & Amirouche Ait Hamouda & Ali N'mer.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, wikipedia

File:Mohamed-Larbi-Ben-M'hidi-avant-l'exécution.jpg - upscaled and watermarked

File:Danielle Michel-Chich (guerre d'Algérie).jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked, wikipedia

File:Benkhedda 19march62.jpg - overwritten with upscaled and watermarked

Thank you very much. NAADAAN (talk) 16:07, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While probably any of these would be acceptable as derivative works, absolutely none of them should overwrite the originals. I'll revert them all; someone else can address User:Riad Salih about this. @NAADAAN, I don't see anywhere on his user talk page where you notified him of this discussion. Am I missing something, or did you skip a required step? - Jmabel ! talk 16:35, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notification got reverted. NAADAAN (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel No rush, I will provide an answer. Thank you. Riad Salih (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reverted all except File:Mohamed-Larbi-Ben-M'hidi-avant-l'exécution.jpg, which is Riad Salih's own upload (for which he appears, unfortunately, not to have provided the original documentary photo). - Jmabel ! talk 16:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I think this is settled now unless I find more instances of overwritten "enhancements". NAADAAN (talk) 16:44, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Or, no need for a full explanation; it's just a waste of time. Thanks, Jmabel, for the revert, even though it happened a year ago. I have already reverted most of the pictures, except for the ones I overlooked.
I restored over 100 pictures without using AI, (01, 02, 03) as it requires significant effort to restore them. Most of the pictures were not processed by AI, with only a few exceptions. I don't want to receive any more notifications; one notification is sufficient. The background of this nomination revolves around the Algeria/Morocco war.
If the person who initiated the nomination genuinely cared about authenticity, they could have kindly asked me to restore the pictures. It seems they are more interested in scrutinizing my account for potential issues, as we regularly engage in editing on the English Wikipedia.
Wishing everyone a pleasant day Riad Salih (talk) 16:45, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I notified you because it was a requirement for this message board. I am not aware of any "Moroccan-Algerian war" happening since 1963 so I have no clue what this is about, this has nothing to do with English Wikipedia. Please COM:AGF rather than portraying me as someone who "[does not] care about authenticity", neither of us are autopatrolled, so I did not think it would be possible to revert them without any intervention -- I commend you for having reverted some photographs before. Hope this clears up some things NAADAAN (talk) 16:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:BMarGlines[edit]

This user appears to be uploading homemade TV station logos, particularly for CW affiliates. These logos are not used on air or on the stations' websites. I have nominated these logos for deletion. This user has already been warned over on Wikipedia (w:User talk:BMarGlines#May 2024). Mvcg66b3r (talk) 16:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have looked at one of the so-called station logos for WCAX and it's not accurate either. File:WCAX 2023.jpg I have nominated that for deletion as a hoax. Possible that many of this users uploads may be fan creations of some sort. -- William Graham (talk) 05:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )[edit]

The user included the whole PDF file OCR-ed content into file description page File:William Francis Norton (1857-1939) memoir.pdf. As Commons is not intended to host document texts nor such content is permited by out guide, I removed the OCR. And this action was reverted by the uploader. I consider this revert to be vandalism. Please, resolve the dispute between us. Ankry (talk) 19:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not it's within policy, I really struggle to understand why you think this is vandalism. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • At Commons:Village pump no one could point to a specific rule banning the combination of text and image of a document. We have over 100,000 djvu and pdf files with embedded text, as I pointed out prior to the reversal. Ankry directed us to Commons:Guide to layout but has not quoted a specific rule. We are currently migrating older formats for books (jpg pages or pdf for a multi page document) to the djvu format because it contains the text. --RAN (talk) 19:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should we delete all the text contained in Djvu files too? I don't see the difference between storing on the page and storing it within the Djvu file, they take up the same amount of space. We also have over 1,000 news articles with text that are not at Wikisource, not every document is welcome there. Can someone point to a rule that demands deleting transcribed text? Eventually we will have a tool at Commons that allows us to create Djvu files directly, and the text and image can be merged. Calling it vandalism is just silly. --RAN (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not to take a position on it either way at this point, but what's the actual benefit to it on our end and how do you think it fits with this mainly, if not exclusively, being a media repository? Because it seem like from reading through both discussings is that your only justification amounts to "other stuff" or "but there's no rule against it." --Adamant1 (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Assuming this is, indeed, in the public domain, I think this belongs on WikiSource, not Commons, and the text content probably should be moved there. They are much better set up to handle content like this.
  2. @Ankry: in what sense do you consider this "vandalism"? What has been damaged, let alone willfully damaged? I certainly do not believe RAN should be sanctioned for having done this on Commons rather than WikiSource. (Continuing to do this against an apparent consensus might be another matter.) - Jmabel ! talk 05:32, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, RAN didn’t do any vandalism. It is a content dispute. No block is required. Only if as Jmabel said, if there is a consensus that states this should be only on wikisource or if there is a disruptive edit war (in which case both parties would be possibly blocked or the file protected), but we are not anywhere near that. Bidgee (talk) 06:22, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=877729045"