User talk:Daceyvillain

Welcome to Wikimedia Commons, Daceyvillain!

First steps tutorial Our first steps tour and our frequently asked questions will help you a lot after registration. They explain how to customize the interface (for example the language), how to upload files and our basic licensing policy (Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content). You don't need technical skills in order to contribute here. Be bold when contributing and assume good faith when interacting with others. This is a wiki. Getting help More information is available at the community portal. You may ask questions at the help desk, village pump or on IRC channel #wikimedia-commons (webchat). You can also contact an administrator on their talk page. If you have a specific copyright question, ask at the copyright village pump.

Goodies, tips, and tricks Put Babel boxes on your user page so others know what languages you can speak and indicate your graphic abilities. You can find the files you have uploaded in your Uploads. Please sign your name on Talk pages by typing ~~~~. To link to an image page without embedding the image, type: [[:File:Foo.jpg]], which produces: File:Foo.jpg. You may enable gadgets (custom features) for your account. There are several tools to upload files. Have you edited Wikipedia before? This guide might be useful. Made a mistake? Do you want to have a file renamed or moved? Use the move link and wait for an authorized user to rename it. Do you want to have your recently uploaded picture removed? Tag it as {{speedy|reason here}}. For more information read the deletion guidelines.

-- Wikimedia Commons Welcome (talk) 12:48, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Can't say I'm very impressed with you referring to bans on Wikipedia in deletion discussions. Commons is not Wikipedia. Stop conflating the two, it's not productive. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 03:10, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I don't understand how the relationships between the Wiki related sites work. But my point was only that a user (who appears to have about 5 or 6 usernames across the different Wiki sites) was pushing an agenda on Wikipedia and harrassing people on Wikipedia when the evidence (e.g. official/gov sources) were not in support of their agenda. And then they seem to have started pushing the same agenda on other Wiki sites, like on Commons. Daceyvillain (talk) 03:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

This was already discussed on the Commons noticeboard. It was determined they were doing no such thing. If there are problems on Wikipedia or other projects, take it up there. We don't need the sort of drama that is produced by the cesspool known as the English Wikipedia on Commons. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 03:17, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

> This was already discussed on the Commons noticeboard. It was determined they were doing no such thing.

My understanding is that the Commons noticeboard discussion was about different (but also map-related) issues regarding the accuracy of maps. I only learned about it recently.

On Wikipedia, there was a different noticeboard discussion in relation to the Eastern Suburbs and harrassement, which led to Mapper2000 being IP banned

In general, my impression is that Mapper2000 (and their aliases) is trying to create maps to promote their opinion of where suburb boundaries should be, even when they know that official/gov sources don't support their opinion.

cc @SHB2000 Daceyvillain (talk) 03:28, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

TLDR: Mapper2000 is likely committing x-wiki abuse. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

(though the maps should still be kept since files are not deleted on Commons for inaccuracies) SHB2000 (talk) 03:49, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

He's not committing any abuse on Commons. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 04:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Mapper2000 was initially. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I respectfully disagree. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 07:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Re: the other discussion at User talk:Mapper2000#You are not banned here

I did not realise that Chris.sherlock2 was banned on Wikipedia. I don’t know the circumstances around that, but I assume that you are not a big fan of Wikipedia

My earlier point about Mapper2000 being banned was more about the reasons for their banning, i.e. for harassment and for spamming false information. The edits on Commons appear to be a continuation of that false information. And Mapper2000 is using the presence of their maps on Commons to establish a false legitimacy for them and to link to them from other Wiki sites like Wikivoyage and Wikitravel, despite implying that they had no intention of doing so. Daceyvillain (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

I don’t care much about the other sites. He hasn’t been disruptive on Commons. Bring disputes about his supposed behaviour on other wikis on those wikis and leave them off commons, unless you can prove he is disruptive on commons. There is no evidence Mapper2000 has been disruptive on commons. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Uhm, you don't consider the use of sockpuppets on and the mere existence of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Central Sydney Districts.png problematic? --SHB2000 (talk) 10:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Note that the anonymous IP on that discussion page, 203.49.228.129, is actually Mapper2000.

In other words, Mapper2000 replied to their own request and voted Delete, but used an alias (their IP) to do so. Daceyvillain (talk) 14:13, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I don’t. You have no proof it is him, and even if it was, who cares? He didn’t participate twice. And no valid reasoning was given for deletion. This was previously addressed on the Commons admin notice board. Drop it. This is getting to be close to a vendetta. You can do what you want on the English Wikipedia and Wikivoyage for all I care, but the contributor is not being disruptive on commons.

on the other hand, it could be seen as disruptive to list all his files for deletion based on reasoning that is valid on the English Wikipedia and not valid on Commons! - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 16:27, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Have you heard of w:en:WP:DUCK. It's not a policy but a guiding principle. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:39, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Alright then...

Instinctively we know these are all the same person (the various IPs / Mapper2000 / Voyage2023 / Traveller2000 / etc), because of the timeline of edits and the types of edits being made and the usernames they chose and their pattern of abuse/manipulation

But if you want more specifics:

From Wikipedia we know the abusive person pushing the South East Suburbs concept is 203.49.228.129 e.g.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1124

In addition, we know 203.49.228.129 is Voyage2023 because of this (for example):

https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sydney/Eastern_suburbs&diff=prev&oldid=4688823

https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASydney%2FEastern_suburbs&diff=4779825&oldid=4779239

Compare the language:

203.49.228.129: "The page is getting quite cluttered. Perhaps a thought would be to create..."

Voyage2023: "The initial purpose of creating a separate South-Eastern Suburbs page was to declutter"

In addition, we know 203.49.228.129 is Mapper2000 because of this:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Chris.sherlock2&diff=prev&oldid=773963787

Mapper2000 links to https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Talk:Sydney on June 13 and asks for you to read their discussion there

Mapper2000 complains "no one there is really backing up my new scheme with the new maps"

But on that talk page, the person who is promoting a new scheme with the new maps is 203.49.228.129

e.g. https://en.wikivoyage.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASydney&diff=4668483&oldid=4668185

Aside:

Note that they have several IPs, a range of mobile/roaming IPs (which look like 2405:6e00:289:b4fc:581:37c3:da1:6c8a, 2405:6e00:289:b4fc:49c6:f3aa:3d01:764d, etc) and also an office/static IP, 203.49.228.129

See Wikipedia noticeboard for details

But also see their comment at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=774052941

Where Mapper2000 wries "2405:6E00:48F:E430:C10A:516D:41F6:534D is the IP I use if I'm not logged in when commenting"

But that is a Vodafone cellular IP and so their IP is likely to change frequently (as it evidently does)

TL;DR Mapper2000 is 203.49.228.129 is 2405:6E00:48F:E430:C10A:516D:41F6:534D (et al), and also is Voyage2023, Traveller2000, ... Daceyvillain (talk) 22:34, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

In particular this means Mapper2000 has been abusive on Commons (e.g. by requesting deletions and then by posting support of their deletion proposals using a different IP, or by posting new maps and then writing support of the new maps using a different IP, etc., etc.) Daceyvillain (talk) 22:46, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

I would be far more likely to entertain you if you actually did substantial contributions to Commons. So far you have uploaded one file and decided to do a sock puppet investigation. Commons is not like Wikipedia. Unless there is real evidence of disruption, we don’t play drama games like those on the Wikipedia admin’s noticeboard. Nor do we gang up on people.

I suggest you take your vendetta elsewhere. As a victim of Wikipedia witch hunt myself, which ended decades of productive work, I now contribute thousands of photos of South West Sydney to Commons. Unlike Wikipedia, we largely care about content and not politics and look down on those with an axe to grind.

Perhaps when you contribute significantly to Commons, I might be mire inclined to take your issues more seriously, but so far you have uploaded one file and brought your dramas from Wikipedia to pursue a contributors work on Commons without any understanding of Commons policies or norms, and assumed we are a mini English Wikipedia. We are not, so I suggest you cease causing unnecessary drama. You have Wikipedia admins noticeboard for that, but it won’t work here. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 01:40, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

As evidenced above, there is clearly someone using multiple accounts and IPs to vandalise different Wiki sites, including vandalising Commons.

I get it that you have a low opinion of Wikipedia, but just because someone was banned on Wikipedia, that doesn’t automatically make them a saint on Commons.

It isn’t a badge of honor to be banned from Wikipedia… Daceyvillain (talk) 01:47, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

The one who caused my ban is currently banned and it is a badge of honor for them. But I don't care about that. If you are so concerned about "abuse" on Commons, I wonder why you haven't followed Commons processes to do something about it. What it looks like to me is that you've waltzed into Commons expecting us to be Wikipedia, and discovered we are a distinct and separate community. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

You asked for evidence that they were the same person and I provided some.

SHB2000 indicated that some deeper checking can be done (Meta CU?), I am not familiar with that but I expect that it would result in the same conclusion. Daceyvillain (talk) 02:03, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

You've just answered your own argument. Follow the processes appropriate. You aren't doing that. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:08, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, then I will request a “Meta CU” if that should be the next step here. Daceyvillain (talk) 02:12, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Go ahead. I wonder why you didn't do this earlier, rather than just list a bunch of commons files for deletion. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:54, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

I supppse because the files are purposefully inaccurate having been created by a known troll and they have a big button that says “Nominate for deletion”.

They don’t have a button that says “Request Meta CU first”. Daceyvillain (talk) 03:09, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

SHB2000 why would I give two hoots about a Wikipedia guideline on Commons? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 01:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Because it's a guideline/essay which can be applied anywhere. Many other WMF projects use that guideline, too. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:59, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

No, I'm not bound to an essay on Wikipedia. I work on Commons. Quoting Wikipedia policies to me is not helping you make a case. From COM:NOTWP: "we stand apart from the rules that may be imposed locally by each of those individual projects". I'm not going to be lectured to by Wikipedians, especially as they as a group abused me. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:06, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

"Quoting Wikipedia policies to me" – it isn't a policy, it's a guideline. COM:SOCK implies that abusively using multiple accounts is disallowed, including a link to w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry. There is no difference between Commons' and the English Wikipedia's policies on sockpuppetry.

Re "I'm not going to be lectured to by Wikipedians" – I am more active on Commons than I am on Wikipedia. I'm more aware of Commons policies than enwiki's policies. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:50, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a Wikipedia guideline you quoted to me. I'm not going to pay any attention to Wikipedia only guidelines. I was not referring to you in particular.

In all of this, neither you nor Daceyvillain have followed any Commons processes to properly address your concerns. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

I think I was a little too strident towards yourself and SHB2000. I did not mean to insult you, but I believe I did. This was wrong, and for which I apologise.

I don’t believe Mapper2000 is a troll, merely someone who has particular ideas about Sydney regions. I quite like his ideas, but let’s face it - regions of Sydney are a farce because they are completely subjective and none of what we come up with is official.

Also, I’m particularly sensitive about deletion discussions that introduce bans from other projects. As someone even did decades of work on Wikipedia, my own ban was heartless and causes me a great deal of pain. The person who caused the pain got banned herself only recently, but her behaviour towards me was never taken into account, but what it resulted in was a great deal of productive work will now never be done because I cannot contribute things like suburb histories and articles about Australian women. I now have taken extensive photos of South West Sydney which I upload to Commons in an effort to make a comprehensive, free and reasonable high quality historical record of Sydney. Having myself made an effort to categorize the regions of Sydney I know how difficult and subjective this can be. It’s why I dislike people calling Mapper2000 a troll. He’s not: he has a well reasoned view that he uses to justify his ideas. He probably approached it the wrong way, but the way people gave reacted looks very much like hounding that gas spilled over to Commins. He has caused no disruption in Commons and it has been discussed on the Commons admin noticeboard already and no action was deemed necessary as we concluded he was not being disruptive on Commons.

In terms of the deletion requests you have submitted - you appear to have failed to acquaint yourself with Commons policies. What we accept on Commons is very different to what is allowed on Wikipedia. Wikipedia frowns on Original Research (as an aside, I note that it is not forbidden, a common misconception) but Commons does not. Wikipedia allows for Fair Use images, but we do not. Arriving on Commons, contributing a single file and then almost immediately listing images for deletion for reasons you would get away with on Wikipedia but which are invalid on Commons will not endear yourself to this community, and you yourself may even be considered to be disruptive. Pursuing someone for perceived or actual problematic editing on another Wiki and letting it spill into Commons is similarly something we find particularly unimpressive. Commons has drama, but it is far less than the cesspool of drama that is on Wikipedia. Many of us want it to stay that way, and blundering into Commons thinking it will be exactly the same as Wikipedia will cause you no amount of heartache.

So I urge you: if you have issues with cross-wiki abuse, take it to meta. That is the appropriate forum for this sort of issue, not Commons. And I strongly advise you look at Commons policies and guidelines before doing things like submitting files for deletion. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Chris. Appreciate your feedback.

Just one note - as far as I can see, Mapper2000 (and aliases) arrived on Commons, uploaded a bunch of maps which they knew contradicted official/gov sources (like the ABS), and then they marked other existing maps for deletion. I believe this is why SHB2000 was originally upset.

What I have done - making a long history of referenced/cited contributions to Wikipedia (and a tiny bit to Commons), and then marking Mapper2000’s knowingly inaccurate maps for deletion, doesn’t seem entirely unreasonable to me…

In my opinion Mapper2000 has been essentially using Commons to build a false legitimacy for their maps, so that they could repost the inaccurate maps on other sites like Wikivoyage, Wikitravel and Quora (they did all of this), and eventually I assume they will try to post them back on back Wikipedia (probably using yet another account). Daceyvillain (talk) 22:48, 2 December 2023 (UTC)