Jump to content

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

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
24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 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
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
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
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.

A1Cafel upload restriction review

[edit]

See User talk:A1Cafel/Archive 14#F2C ban to familiarize yourselves with the context. In October 2024, I imposed a topic ban on A1Cafel from using Flickr2Commons due to issues raised on this board. A few days later, I discovered that he was using Flickypedia to transfer Flickr images just as before, the only difference being the choice of automated tool. To close this obvious loophole, I restricted him to only built-in MediaWiki upload tools and additionally imposed a limit of 10 uploads per day, since a major concern in that discussion was his indiscriminate upload of large quantities of images without due diligence. A month later, on appeal, I agreed to allow him to use automated tools again, but with the 10-upload limit in place. Recently he has asked me to increase the limit to 20 per day. To me there's not a huge difference but it just seems like kicking the can down the road. What does the community believe to be the best way of ensuring that A1Cafel handles large-scale uploads properly? (Note that I have previously banned him from F2C per an AN/U thread in April 2020, but agreed to lift it on appeal a few months later. Clearly that hasn't worked, so I'm trying to find something that does.) -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have there been problems with his uploads this last few months? If not, 20 is still far from bulk, and presumably still leaves him in the range where he will have good motivation to review what he's uploading instead of grabbing randomly. Again, intention should be to prevent trouble, not to punish. - Jmabel ! talk 17:11, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As long that there has been no evidence of any issues with uploads he has done, I do not see a problem with increasing it to 20. Bidgee (talk) 18:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Support. I agree as well, 20 is allowable. Taivo (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak support A1Cafel is a tough case. They do a high volume of good work, but we have to build these fences around them because they also have a history of going off the rails (overzealously, not maliciously, I would add). I see A1Cafel as a net positive and want them to stick around, and am content to trust the people that have been managing those fences keep doing so. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:44, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Support As the person who made the flickypedia discovery, 20 sounds well within the range that he can manually check. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 18:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Support A1Cafel has done a lot of good work in the past and increasing it from 10 to 20 seems like a small enough change where it won't cause any concern. RandomUserGuy1738 (talk) 15:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts I think there's consensus to raise the limit. Bedivere (talk) 01:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts, Bidgee, Taivo, The Squirrel Conspiracy, Alachuckthebuck, and Bedivere: Marking this as resolved/done.
@A1Cafel: you can consider your limit now to be 20/day, with the usual reminder to be cautious about what files you bring over and not to "game the system." This is still probationary, but headed the right direction.
✓ Done - Jmabel ! talk 17:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Jmabel ! talk 17:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Sohanur Rahman 2.0

[edit]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:00, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Already warned, no new uploads. Yann (talk) 17:19, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: Per Special:Diff/1006494036, "the user again started doing same thing." CC আফতাবুজ্জামান, Moheen.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also informed him about this issue. The problem is that the user hasn't responded on his talk page, so it's hard to figure out what exactly the problem the user is facing. ~Moheen (keep talking) 15:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Moheen: Lack of respect for copyrights?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:34, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppets of globally locked User:Wave of Pandas

[edit]
✓ Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dessplaywtf

[edit]

Uploads File:Budapesti Honvéd SE 1950-91.png which seems like a blatant copyvio and has been blocked before for copyright violation. Jonteemil (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Deleted and blocked as very likely sockpuppet. Bedivere (talk) 01:34, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel12121212

[edit]

Uploads File:Honved-se-budapest-logo.png after having been tagged with {{End of copyvios}} the day before.

Given the overlap at File:Honved-se-budapest-logo.png and the similar uploads I suspect this user and the one above are sock or meatpuppets. Jonteemil (talk) 22:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, all files deleted. Bedivere (talk) 01:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diamocasin

[edit]

Keeps uploading copyvios, all related to "Frikimalismo" podcast. Most of them are screenshots from the podcast, some of them are scans of posters advertising the podcast. Doesn't react to warnings on the talk page. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 02:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Blocked by Bedivere. --Ratekreel (talk) 10:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ToPSURJ4311 (again)

[edit]

ToPSURJ4311 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  - continued copyvio upload after multiple warnings - Jcb (talk) 10:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Blocked for two weeks. --Ratekreel (talk) 10:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concerns about Grandmaster Huon

[edit]

Grandmaster Huon (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  has a weird obsession with nominating things for speedy deletion. Almost all of their recent edits are just nominating things for speedy deletion, One of these are the MOTHER boxarts, which this user repeatedly claims and nominates for deletion because of the earth used in these logos (despite it being in the public domain) . Despite commons "explicitly permits the hosting of photographs that carefully reproduce a two-dimensional public domain work", this user still tries to nominate these files for deletion. Again, just a concern. TzarN64 (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding onto this, This user has been asked many times to calm down on their mass deletion requests over a month ago, It seems like this has been happening for awhile, now. TzarN64 (talk) 17:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most mass deletions have been successful though. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 20:52, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and I perfer a strict interpretation of legal matters per COM:PCP. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 20:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy deletion should only be reserved for obvious cases. For example, Mother 2 image should have been a DR, not a speedy in my opinion. COM:PCP also requires significant doubt about the freedom of a file, not merely theoretical doubt. Abzeronow (talk) 20:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Some files still need to be reviewed because of copyright concern. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:26, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The MOTHER's earth Logo is substantially different from the NASA version. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:27, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well isn't the point of Commons to be free of copyvios? Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you don't want copyvios hosted on Commons, at least develop an automated program to at least tag them. I'm honestly tired of using visual file change to tag and notify copyvios, it becomes very tedious. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New problem with that contributor today, nominating for speedy deletion files for more than dubious reasons. At least de minimis should be discussed first[1]. Nominating that many files for speedy deletion is problematic. XIIIfromTOKYO (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. This user has a huge obsession with deleting things for some reason? And some of the deletion reasons don't make sense to me- they're either very obviously de minimis or falsely claiming files under COM:TOO. I believe this is really problematic and this user either needs to stop falsely tagging things as copyvios. TzarN64 (talk) 01:15, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Grandmaster Huon: if there is anything much short of certainty, you should not be requesting a speedy delete. Please use the normal deletion request process if there is room for doubt. - Jmabel ! talk 02:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel This user has repeatedly been asked to stop mass nominating things for deletion yet he still does it. This is the second time he's been brought to AN/U, and he has had an history of mass tagging things as well. For example: Grandmaster Huon has been banned from both EN and FR Wikipedia for the same mass AfD nominations. This user has repeatedly kept doing the same disruptive behavior. Even if we ignore the mass deletion requests, most of their speedy deletion requests are either very obviously de minimis, or just images derived from pubic domain images, which has been allowed on Commons for years per COM:PDARTREUSE.
TDLR; Grandmaster Huon has repeatedly kept doing the same disruptive behavior over and over again even we asked to stop. TzarN64 (talk) 15:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
FR wikipedia was not in AfD, merely translation. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am planning on visiting Tahiti for a few weeks, and I'd love to share pictures of my Holiday on the site too. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most of my speedy deletions were successful though. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Grandmaster Huon has been banned from both EN and FR Wikipedia, mostly for the same kind of issues : AfD/TfD/FfD/MfD nominations and bad patrol reverts. Grandmaster Huon is simply repeating the same kind of disrupting beheaviour on Wikicommons. XIIIfromTOKYO (talk) 09:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this makes sense. I will take a pause. I was not banned, merely blocked. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what de minimis is now. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
EN wiki sanctions were done only a year ago, so was FR wiki and that was file transfers and inadequate translations, not for EN wiki reasons.. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Current and Previous disputes should not downplay the fact that I have uploaded numerous constructive photos to this platform. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 16:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Grandmaster Huon: Yes, you've done plenty of good work, but that does not give you a license to be disruptive.
Given that you seem to have trouble telling where the line is between a speedy-deletion copyvio and a DR: please only use speedy deletion if the file itself is apparently a plagiarism of someone else's work, and you have the URL of where it was copied from. Anything else, if you think there has been some violation of copyright (e.g. photo of a sign or building in a country with no FoP; copy of an artwork by a living or recently living artist) stick to DRs so if there are nuances there is a place to discuss them. - Jmabel ! talk 02:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying, I do not have an intent to be disruptive, and if it seemed to be disruptive, this disruption would only be temporary and a small price to pay for a better platform for free media, similar to how spring cleaning or the construction of a new building has a minor impendence to household or urban life, but eventually leads to a more robust environment. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 04:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Grandmaster Huon: No, there is no upside to you nominating things as speedy deletions that should be handled as DRs. You don't do yourself any favors by trying to justify it. - Jmabel ! talk 05:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[undent]Given the name of this thread, I want to report another concern with Grandmaster Huon. They make a lot of good deletion requests, but I question a lot of them, and more importantly, a very recent action of theirs really shocked me. See User talk:Grandmaster Huon#Consider backing off a little and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Akihabara August 2014 09.JPG, particularly this difference and my response to it. I've never seen someone vote "on my behalf" like that, and I'm really shocked by the chutzpah of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:59, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Steamlox

[edit]
  • User: Steamlox (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
  • Reasons for reporting: Vandalism. Continued copyvio uploading after warning for doing so (including marking as own work files which are evidently not own work). Recreating a file deleted due to consensus. Not responding on user talk page. Making nonsense and incomplete deletion requests.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to the last - creating baseless deletion requests with rationales copied from other unrelated requests. Omphalographer (talk) 21:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Putting invalid no source since templates from User:Umbento

[edit]

The account seems to add the above templates to numerous files even though they have verifiable copyright status (like own work pictures with metadata or third party work with links). The account is also made just this day. HyperAnd (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-wiki uploads by User:Ng Huy Hoàng

[edit]

Ng Huy Hoàng was created on February 26, 2024, and remained unused for a few days before. On March 2, the account start cross-wiki uploading various files from other Wikipedia Commons, most of which seemed to have been tagged with {{Permission ticket}}, but also some which were tagged with {{Permission received}} and still in need of verification. Many of the early moves have " Ticket permission added by non-VRT member OTRS permission added by non-OTRS member" in their edit summaries. Ng Huy Hoàng has also created Template:OTRS chứng which could just be a Vietnamese translation Template:Permission ticket, but not sure. Ng Huy Hoàng is moving files at a fairly fast pace (sort seems like en:WP:MEATBOT) without anyone really checking on their work. Cross-wiki uploading is of course permitted by Commons policy, but it's also something that can be problematic because a fair number of files aren't properly vetted before being moved. Local files often get deleted by default once they've been moved to Commons regardless of whether they were OK to move in the first place; so, an inappropriate move could lead to two files being deleted. There have been several licensing related notifications already added to Ng Huy Hoàng's user talk page since the account was created, some of which have resulted in deletion. For sure, anyone can make mistakes, but these notifications indicate (at least to me) that maybe Ng Huy Hoàng is moving too quickly and probably should slow down. It might be a good idea for someone to take a look at all their moves to make sure they're OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:10, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Marchjuly: I'm having trouble following some of that, which may be related to why this has been sitting for 20 hours with no action. Could I ask you to please reread what you wrote & see if you can maybe make this clearer? - Jmabel ! talk 17:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is looks like an evolution from the "no permission" spam from taiwanese accounts. @Krd, can you take a look, as you were involved the last time somthing like this happened? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jmabel: TL;DR: User:Ng Huy Hoàng is uploading copyvios falsely tagged with various permission tags, and moving files from other wikis resulting in deletion in both places.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a full scale mess. I have no idea how this can be cleaned up. I suggest to block the user and delete all uploads. --Krd 16:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you implement that? I'm also willing to open a CU case if needed. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please do. --Krd 16:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G., I can't find the original thread about the issue, do you remember where we had the dicussion? (@Krd, You were at that dicusssion as you were the deleteing admin. @Bedivere, Do you remember where the dicussion took place? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:56, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not aware that there was any prior discussion. Krd 16:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was due to Your mass deletion of a bunch of files falsely tagged with {{no permission}} about 5 months ago. This may have been at abuse filter, but I can't find the report in the archives. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 17:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't remember this incident at all Bedivere (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Alachuckthebuck: Marchjuly's post was the first I remember seeing of this; I just distilled that post. There was probably something on another wiki that I didn't see (perhaps enwiki).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:03, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This happened a few months ago, and was due to some users going on a no permission tagging spree. 1 week later, Krd deleted the files, I noticed via IRC, and I forgot where the dicussion happened. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 17:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Alachuckthebuck Are you referring to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 97#Unusual Deletion of Images of Vietnamese Artists? Tvpuppy (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am, thank you for finding it! All the Best -- Chuck Talk 01:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd, I have filed the case. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 02:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies Jmabel for not responding sooner; I was away for the past couple of days and was unable to edit using my phone. I also apologize if my original post was confusing. Basically, Ng Huy Hoàng made a lot of cross-wiki uploads from English Wikipedia and also apparently from Vietnamese Wikipedia over the past few days, and some of the ones moved from English Wikipedia probably shouldn't have been moved because they had be tagged with {{Permission received}} templates, i.e. an email was sent to VRT but was found to be insufficient. Some of the other files moved had been tagged with {{Permission ticket}} templates, but the edit summaries for some of those files (like this one) indicate the "Permission ticket" templates weren't added by a VRT member. So, I just thought that it might be a good idea for an admin or VRT member to take a look at the files Ng Huy Hoàng had already moved to see if they're OK for Commons. Most of the ones moved from English Wikipedia seemed to have been tagged for speedy deletion per en:WP:F8, which is fine if the files are OK for Commons but not so good if they're not. I'm not familiar any issues related to Vietnamese Wikipedia and the mistagging of Vietnamese Wikipedia or Commons files with {{No permission since}}. I really only noticed Ng Huy Hoàng and their uploads because four of the files COM:VRTN#Ticket #2024100410007511 and COM:VRTN#ticket:2024121610007888) moved from English Wikipedia had been still awaiting VRT verification; these files have, however, been deleted since I asked about them at VRTN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note on the terminology: This is about file import from other Wikis. Cross-Wiki upload is something totally different. Cross-Wiki upload uploads the files to Commons never touching the local Wiki. GPSLeo (talk) 06:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for catching my error GPSLeo. The files I referred to above were imported to Commons from English Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd: Since you've blocked Ng Huy Hoàng, there will be no new uploads to sort out for at least awhile. There are, however, files like File:Susan Hespos.jpeg, File:Ricardo Ernst.jpg, File:Robert Frykenberg.jpg, File:Vasilis Fthenakis.png, File:Fakhreddine Karray.jpg, File:Stephen Phillips.jpeg, File:Lingyan Shi.jpeg, File:George V. Mann.png, File:Lars Henrik Smedsrud1.jpg, File:Lars Henrik Smedsrud2.jpg, File:Ulrich Walter.jpg, File:Rolf Reitz.jpg and File:Anudeep wikipedia image.jpg that might need a closer look since they were all imported to Commons even though they still haven't been verified by VRT. In addition, there's also File:WMCA Good Guys 1964.jpg and File:WMCA-AM 570 Good Guys January-February 1964.jpg which were inported but also which seem to be the same image with different file names; one of these has been VRT verified but the other has been tagged with {{npd}}, which seems odd since (once again) they're the same image. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WestSydPol

[edit]

Keeps uploading images taken from the web or screenshots from TikTok videos of (probably mostly non-notable) influencers. As their uploads have been repeatedly deleted for copyright violations, they seem to have switched strategy and are now uploading copyright violations in which they have replaced the background with a solid color, making the tracing of the copyright violation harder.

Examples:

ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 02:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked and all uploads deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

user:Mahram3

[edit]

COM:NOTCENSORED violations, vexatious deletion nominations Dronebogus (talk) 03:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This seems a little excessive for one single DR. They've not done any other relevant DRs, and I don't see any other relevant edits.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Not done per Prosfilaes. No activity since the 8th either. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 15:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

user:Idriss755

[edit]
  • User: Idriss755 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
  • Reasons for reporting: Continuous upload of copyvio material, also, the user never responding, which might be for the better, as the user is very generous on insults on the French Wikipédia, with death threats and other [2] (but his last contributions are nearly all as violent as this one). Would it be possible to act on his uploads, or at least to give him a firm reminder, please?

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done This user should be blocked indef. on the French Wikipedia for such a comment. Warned here, and probable copyvios tagged or deleted. Yann (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
He's blocked. It's unacceptable, and I suspect he still continues to vandalize pages under an IP. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
RFCU is this way! All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CoffeeEngineer, @Alachuckthebuck, and Yann: I filed m:srg#Global lock for Idriss755 for you yesterday (12:04, 9 March 2025 (UTC)).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

user:Idriss755 #2

[edit]

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 23:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment User has received last warning and continued to upload problematic flags. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 00:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is a similar section above from 13h28m earlier (look for "10:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)").   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked indef., all files deleted. Clearly NOT HERE. Yann (talk) 17:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]


User:Hi-s24

[edit]

After copyvio warning, this user didn't stop uploading copyvio logos. See also his log. Netora (talk) 12:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, obvious copyvios deleted. Other files may be PD-textlogo, but they have a wrong license. Yann (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tantofazz

[edit]

Keeps uploading screenshots from a likely copyrighted video game as well as full-length copyrighted movies. Examples: Back To The Future Part III, Ghostbusters. No valuable contributions, only copyright violations. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 14:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI0912J

[edit]

Keeps uploading promotional photographs tagged as "own work" despite them having been deleted and having been asked to stop tagging third-party images as own work. Note that after the last batch having been nominated for deletion they have already uploaded further images instead of engaging in discussion on the DR. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 17:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Last warning sent, all files deleted. Should be blocked at the next problematic upload. Yann (talk) 19:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: They are at it again. File:Patahuddin Bupati Luwu 2025-2030.png, File:Muhammad Dhevy Bijak Pawindu Wakil Bupati Luwu 2025-2030 (another version).png ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 01:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked for a week, files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User Hua0316

[edit]

Only dick-uploading User:Hua0316 vandalises Deletion Requests when his files are proposed for deletion. 186.172.10.255 04:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done Files deleted. No new uploads since final warning. Revisit if they return. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:00, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SuzyLover

[edit]

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

Persistent uploading of copyrighted materials and ignoring final warning. Final warning issued at 15:04, uploaded File:SUZY LONGINES 2025.jpg (deleted at 15:25) at 15:09. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 15:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, file already deleted. Yann (talk) 17:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BENJAMINHPP

[edit]

BENJAMINHPP (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) - persistent copyvio uploading. Recently blocked for the same behaviour, just continues the behaviour after expiry of the block - Jcb (talk) 18:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for 3 months, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 18:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

user:سعد المؤرخ

[edit]

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for 3 months. Yann (talk) 22:11, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Andreibucurestiromania

[edit]

Por favor advierten al usuario que deja de publicar logos complejos o que lo bloqueen a este usuario. AbchyZa22 (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uploads by user 12akd

[edit]

Unfortunately user:12akd is uploading out of scope, completely meaningless images by the hundreds. I think this activity must be stopped and these images should be deleted.

For instance:

At least the #77, #32, and #22 are fine. It is useful to have pictures of ordinary objects and places. Yann (talk) 09:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks and incivility by Adamant1

[edit]
Moved from w:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents

At Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/03/Category:BSicon Adamant1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) responded to my thought that his CfD may not be logistically practical in the real world, with accusations and abuse:

05:05, 11 March 2025

  • "The needless condescension on your end"
  • "all your [sic] capable of is swearing at other users"
  • "resorting to grade school level potty mouthing"

05:55, 11 March 2025

  • "It is a little rich that your [sic] being that judgmental towards me when you don't even know what website we're on"
  • "You either have no idea how this works or your [[sic] to [sic] busy throwing a fit over it to care. My guess is that it's a little bit of both. You're clearly overcompensating for something with the bad attitude."

20:24, 11 March 2025

  • "I know people love to knee jerk fear monger and throw around insults the second someone suggest something"
  • "The hyperbolic, knee jerk opposition really just comes off as bad faithed concern trolling at this point"

(Admittedly, I did accuse him of having snark and causing a shit-disturbance.)


He then moved on to Jkudlick:

02:02, 12 March 2025

  • "Your [sic] just trying to derail the discussion."

02:34, 12 March 2025

  • "I'd appreciate it if you and Useddenim did the same [bow out of this (discussion)]."

Useddenim (talk) 03:41, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Useddenim This is an issue for Commons to resolve, not English Wikipeida. Please raise it at :c:Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems instead. – robertsky (talk) 03:45, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Robertsky: Thanks for moving the report. People pretty frequently think this is Wikipedia for some reason. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:12, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
⬆️ Further evidence of Adamant1's jumping to conclusions and/or sloppy editing (and including a back-handed insult, too). Please review the page history. Useddenim (talk) 04:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1 the move was done by @Useddenim, after I told them so above. And Useddenim, unfortunately it is true that the English Wikipedia admin venues do receive reports about other projects, Commons included. We just point people the directions to the right venue(s). Robertsky (talk) 07:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
⬆️ "There's this thing that Wikipedia follows that's called w:wp:consensus and I'm not going to make a unilateral change to a major project."

Boomerang proposal

[edit]

I'm aware that I'm topic banned from here King of Hearts said that I was allowed to post here to defend myself if someone reported me. So hopefully this is OK.

More to meat of the report, as people can see from [edit] Useddenim edited out of the lot both sides of our back and forth before filing this to make it seem less hostile on their end. It seems that a couple of their bullet points are also taken out of context. I'm not going to cover everything that was said here but a few points:

  • My comment that they were swearing and "resorting to grade school level potty mouthing" was directly in response to them saying "Go shit-disturb somewhere else." The last time I checked "shit" is a swear word. But they purposely edited it out of the discussion and didn't include it here to make it seem like there was no reason for my comment.
  • "I'd appreciate it if you and Useddenim did the same [bow out of this (discussion)]." What I actually said there was "I think I'm going to bow out of this on my end for now so other people have a chance to comment. I'd appreciate it if you and Useddenim did the same. The endless back and forth here really isn't productive." I really don't see what the issue with that comment is. The back and forth clearly wasn't productive.

The rest of their bullets points are much of the same. Comments that I made directly in response to (and as a result of) insults on their end that they purposefully edited out of the conversation and then didn't included here to make it look like I was just saying things randomly for no reason.

This was supposedly filed due to "accusations and abuse." Their whole "Go shit-disturb somewhere else" is clearly abusive. There's other things that they said in the original discussion before they edited it that aren't any better. It's also extremely beyond the fray for Useddenim to edit large parts of the conversation out in a way that makes them seem less hostile and then report me based on the edited version of it. So I'm proposing a boomerang block or at least a warning since this is clearly an attempt to use ANU as a form of harassment and bullying on Useddenim's end. Adamant1 (talk) 03:58, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"shit-disturb" is not swearing in Canadian English, as a quick google search will show. My user page has indicated that I use Canadian English, implicitly since August 2016 and explicitly since November 2017. Useddenim (talk) 04:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Shit" is a swear word. It wouldn't suddenly stop being one if someone calls another person a "shit bag" or something. Maybe I'd chalk it up to the Canadian thing if you hadn't of edited that part of your comment out to though. You certainly didn't say it wasn't a swear word in Canada when I called you out for it. Otherwise maybe I'd believe you. --Adamant1 (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

[edit]

Looks to me like you both gave about as good as you got. I'd much rather leave you both alone than block you both, but at the moment that seems like the choices I've got. May I suggest that the two of you voluntarily agree to an interaction ban? Is there any good reason not to? And please don't respond to this by saying your own behavior was fine, it wasn't, neither of you. - Jmabel ! talk 05:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its not hill I'm going to die on but I started the CfD and Useddenim was the one who instigated things to derail the conversation. Their one of the main people involved in the Biscon thing and we've never interacted with each other outside of this as far as I'm aware. So if we are interaction banned I would be forced to say F it to the whole thing. Whereas all that happens on their end is that they get their way because I'm forced to piss off it at that point. I'm more willing to accept an interaction ban as long as its under the understanding that they leave me along in relation to the CfD and anything else related to it though. Really, you should just ban him from participating in the CfD. That would essentially deal with it. I don't have a problem with him outside of that though. --Adamant1 (talk) 05:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think an actual interaction ban is needed as long as you both de Facto don't mess up with each other. Adamant, just let it be Bedivere (talk) 05:34, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I assume "Biscon" means "BSicon"? - Jmabel ! talk 06:13, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:18, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=1008723253"