Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.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	121, 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	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	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}

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.

Possibly attempted upskirts

There is an user here whose photo i believe to be an failed attempt at taking upskirts photos

Any suggestions as to how i should proceed? Trade (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know if this is worth bothering emergencywikimedia.org with so i have not emailed them for now Trade (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd start with a warning on their talk page. At very least alert them to COM:SCOPE and Commons:Personality rights. (Not knowing more about this case, I don't know if immediate block is needed, but it may well be.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:51, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That would be their second warning

Also doesnt answers what to do with the photo in question Trade (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Trade If the user has few or no other contributions, CSD F10 qualifies. If the upskirt is of an identified person and there's any question about the consent, CSD G3 also applies. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 16:28, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would CSD G3 still apply to an failed attempt at capturing an upskirt Trade (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
no, but F10 would. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:46, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dont believe the image is out of scope. its just the attempted upskirt that bothers me Trade (talk) 12:43, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First would not apply and i am unsure if she can be considered identifiable in that photo Trade (talk) 16:46, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We do have COM:CREEPSHOT. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:02, 12 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just dont know if it would count since it failed Trade (talk) 00:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Another option is to open DR and handle it that way. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 19:17, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to know what you mean by "failed" without an example. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 19:00, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gereja Yesus Sejati Salatiga.jpg license

"© Avelin Mulyati, Licensed with CC BY-SA 4.0" Is this file licensing consistent with Commons rules? Wieralee (talk) 15:08, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, CC-BY-SA 4.0 is a valid license on commons. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 15:36, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And, in fact you must own a copyright to grant a CC license. - Jmabel ! talk 23:53, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Minky Avelin/Disclaimer has nofacebook features. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:09, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G., nofacebook? All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 19:18, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alachuckthebuck: See Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Nofacebook and Commons:Village pump/Archive/2020/09#Is Template:Nofacebook valid?, 3+ years before your time here. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:15, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Altair Netraphim swept under the rug my notification of this section in this edit, rather than commenting here. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:21, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I tried a couple more times to get some clarity on that at this pump thread and this licensing thread late last year, but those discussions also went stale. I've yet to see a clear consensus on whether, when such a user fails to engage, we should delete their "no Facebook" images, step in and remove the templates, or leave them all in place because technically the user has {{Multi-license}}d their uploads, making their demand unenforcable (in a way that neither they nor most Commons visitors will realise). Belbury (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

The users "User:Looui67" and "User:Dooxcc22" are doing vandalism in 1, 2 and 3 (and there are more in their "Contributions" page), for example. Since I don't know how to use Wikimedia much, except for uploading images, I don't know how to send notifications or warnings to their talk page. Please, undo those "edits". Thank you!--Agent010 (talk) 14:41, 19 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I reverted vandalism, blocked both vandals and semi-protected the file indefinitely. Taivo (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Also I created a request for checkuser, who confirmed sockpuppetry and found one more sock. All blocked and reverted. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Георгий Долгопский

Георгий Долгопский (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions). Recent blatant copyright violations after 4 long-term blocks. Quick1984 (talk) 05:46, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 17:28, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Ff909

See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ministerial Roundtable- 21st Century Global Investment Policy Making - 44639130225 (cropped).jpg. This user should be warned to stop wasting everyone's time with invalid deletion requests that a COM:INUSE photo of a Chinese official they don't like for P.R. reasons should be deleted. I will post a link to this discussion on their user talk page now. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reminder. I think you are right about whether the pictures should be deleted. But I do not represent any official organization or work for the government. Your accusation has no basis or logic. Ff909 (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So I think this problem is resolved, but everyone should note that I made no such accusation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:37, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:اليان الغالي

اليان الغالي (talk · contribs) wants to promote an obsuce singer for which a picture was deleted. You can see their actions here [1] and here [2]. Would it be possible remind him about the rules of Commons and to protect the page Commons:Deletion requests/File:Elian ghali .jpg, please? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 08:15, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done User page deleted, user warned. This may be sufficient for now. Yann (talk) 08:29, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JLStevenNgao

I don’t know if this is report worthy but JLStevenNgao keeps bothering with some really creepy messages. Also, he also vandalized the FIFA Nations/Canada-Mexico-United States 2026 despite the fact that the next matches is in June. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 10:54, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: when you report a user on this page, you are required to let them know on their user talk page. I will now do so for you. - Jmabel ! talk 18:29, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: I am not familiar enough with the World Cup to even begin to judge who is right or wrong about any of those edits. In general, 'vandalism" means not just being wrong, but deliberately adding wrong information, removing accurate and appropriate information, and/or persisting after being corrected. If you want to bring such an accusation, you should provide diffs and a clear indication of what is wrong with the edits in question.

@JLStevenNgao: your edits on {{u|SpinnerLaserzthe2nd}]'s talk page are at best awkward, and arguably creepy. Certainly another such edit would be a reason for a block.

If another admin thinks this has already reached the level for a block against JLStevenNgao, I won't object. - Jmabel ! talk 18:38, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am yes familiar enough with the World Cup JLStevenNgao (talk) 21:35, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JLStevenNgao: That wasn't in question. What was in question was whether the changes you made are appropriate, and the way you posted on SpinnerLaserzthe2nd's user talk page. - Jmabel ! talk 22:38, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see an image of an kitten. Am i missing something vital here? Trade (talk) 07:50, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First, JL had vandalized the page because in his words “Okay Wait The Philippines As Th First The 2026 FIFA World Cup NOWǃǃ”. This is not the only time that he does this (1, 2, 3). The qualification process is still ongoing.

Second, he gave me a brainstar with any no real reason (just give a description of a TV staff from Switzerland).

Third, he gives me a kitten that said “so cute!!” in relation to the vandalism I had reverted. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 15:18, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: There are two largely separate issues here (vandalism accusation & possibly inappropriate talk page message). Let me focus for a moment on the first: I still don't understand why the addition of the Chinese flag there would be vandalism. - Jmabel ! talk 18:08, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess it had to do with cuju as the earliest form of soccer (according to FIFA). *shrugs* But that is not part of the problem. The focus is the two separate issues (namely placing the Philippine flag under qualified even though the Philippines is eliminated and the inappropriate talk page message). I do hope we get real answers from JL. SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 18:35, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might have wanted to start out with the context. The complaint just looks silly otherwise Trade (talk) 02:34, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is the relevant thread: User_talk:SpinnerLaserzthe2nd#A_kitten_for_you! Jerimee (talk) 23:14, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anak Sago

User: Anak Sago (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Selamat datang di Nagari Minangkabau.webp after block for doing so.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:05, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. 2 weeks block. Taivo (talk) 11:20, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Taivo: Thanks! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:33, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Laurel Lodged

User: Laurel Lodged (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Opened Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Dioceses of the Orthodox Church in America (Moscow Patriarchate), evidently after the cat was emptied by someone else. Has a history of arguing about naming related to orthodox churches and their divisional units on this page. See for example Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 110#User:Laurel Lodged and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 113#User:Laurel Lodged. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:34, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Opened a discussion nomination? That's a sin now? Of what exactly am I being accused please? It is usual to supply the accused with a list of charges. Laurel Lodged (talk) 14:23, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Online translation: I accuse you of obstructing the correction of a mistake that offends 5+1 religious organizations of the "autocephalous church" level. Ыфь77 (talk) 18:55, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, as I wrote below, it is pretty much anyone's prerogative to challenge the deletion of a category, unless they've been topic-banned. I would say that this comment by Ыфь77 is unconstructive in the context of this AN/U discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 19:14, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While LaurelLodged has done plenty that I'm not happy with, I believe it is pretty much anyone's prerogative to challenge the deletion of a category, unless they've been topic-banned. - Jmabel ! talk 17:50, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most of my further remarks are at Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Dioceses of the Orthodox Church in America (Moscow Patriarchate). The upshot in terms of administrative matters: LaurelLodged and Ыфь77 have had a slow war over the category names in this area. I believe that in the course of that each of them have made more than one controversial category move without any effort to get consensus in advance, which is counter to policy (Commons:Rename a category). If either of them makes such a move again, I intend to block them without further warning.

Note that that is a process matter, having nothing to do with who is ultimately correct about how the categories should be named. - Jmabel ! talk 18:09, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So there is nothing wrong with challenging a speedy delete request. Thank you. I expect that @Jeff G.: will want to withdraw this nomination. I will take note of Jmabel's advice and let others judge in the case of the Orthodox Church in America (Moscow Patriarchate). Laurel Lodged (talk) 22:04, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Bedivere (talk) 06:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)

User:2004user

2004user (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user continued to upload unfree internet images despite final waring. 0x0a (talk) 17:28, 23 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. One week block. Taivo (talk) 14:31, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hooman Mallahzadeh

User: Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:بندرگاه بوشهر 2.png after final warning for doing so.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:02, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G. Dear I asked a question about it at Commons:Village pump#Satellite maps of GoogleMap and OpenStreetMaps. So I want you to be kind until I get my answer. Thank you. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:04, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Me myself will remove all 4 images form GoogleMap if the answer is yes. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:05, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: I answered there at 15:14 before reading the above. I am kind until you violate any of our laws, policies, or procedures. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:16, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G.

Done I myself added Speedydelete template to all four images from GoogleMaps. Thanks for your answer. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: Thanks, but what about all the other files you uploaded that were deleted for copyright reasons, or have not yet been checked for copyright violations? You have 236 uploads. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:28, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G. I took all of them by my mobile phone camera. Is there any problem by this image?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D8%B9%D9%81%DB%8C%D9%81%E2%80%8C%D8%A2%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%AF_1.jpg

For others like some sculptures, before upload, I asked from museum manager that they are free, and I'm really sure that they have no copyright. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:35, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: Per COM:FOP Iran, "There is no usable FoP provision in the copyright law of Iran", and the garden complex was built in 1863, so your photo of that fountain with the garden building should not be a problem, as the copyright for the architecture of the garden building expired long ago (50 years after the death of the architect (possibly Mirza Ali Mohammad Khan Qavam al-Molk II)). Much of what I just posted was based on Google Translation of fa:باغ عفیف‌آباد, the Persian version of article en:Afif-Abad Garden. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:54, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: There is a difference between "free" to take photos of for personal use, say, and "free enough for Commons" per COM:L. Also, Andy Mabbett found four more questionable files. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:11, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to me the user is reasonably competent, well-intentioned, and learning. I don't see an administrative issue here, but it won't surprise me if they continue to need some guidance. - Jmabel ! talk 19:36, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel: Ok,

I withdraw my nomination, but I think a mentor who understands Persian and COM:IRAN would be helpful. I don't qualify based on language. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ebrahim, Mhhossein, and Satdeep Gill: would one of you either be willing to mentor or able to recommend someone who can?

@Hooman Mallahzadeh: I'm trying to find you someone appropriate you can readily go to with questions. - Jmabel ! talk 05:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel I really try to consult them from now on. Specially, I'm familiar and friend with user Ebrahim. Thanks for your advice. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 06:40, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel Thank you for the ping. I not an expert in Farsi yet. Since, the user mentioned knowing user:Ebrahim, I am glad they have at-least one contact. But @Hooman Mallahzadeh feel free to reach out to me anytime. Farsi kam-kam midonam. - Satdeep Gill (talk) 09:27, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with User:마이산

User has problems with copyright, see User_talk:마이산. And threatens other users ("위키미디어 새끼들은 절대 하지 마라. 없애버릴 거다./Don't do it you Wikimedia assholes, I'll get rid of you.") . --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Several edits by this user should be reverted as they consist entirely of vandalism. --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:57, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@PantheraLeo1359531, indefinitely blocked.

Done. Kadı Message 19:32, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:ATIF ALI JISKANI 2346 &

ATIF ALI JISKANI 2346 & (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

This editor has repeatedly uploaded the same copyrighted content that has been previously deleted despite being warned to stop. A second warning would be pointless as their behaviour here, and on the English Wikipedia show that warnings have been ignored and content that has been deleted or removed is simply recreated or added back with no discussion. -- Whpq (talk) 20:17, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done All uploads deleted; blocked for 1 month. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:45, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:UrLocalGarvin reported by User:Mvcg66b3r

This user has been uploading fake Estrella TV logos onto Commons and then putting them on Wikipedia using weird formatting. I have marked their uploads for speedy deletion. This is clearly a w:WP:NOTHERE situation. Mvcg66b3r (talk) 01:28, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Florenciac

Long-term user (and apparently professor) who is suddenly making a bunch of generic anti-porn nominations with boilerplate rationales. I looked at her edit history going back through 2021 and this seems unprecedented so either she’s just suddenly gotten offended by this type of material or her account has been hacked. Either way it’s weird and disruptive. Dronebogus (talk) 15:57, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus Hello!

Thank you for keeping an eye on my user account. I am participating in an activity on Women's Health and we were looking at different pictures related to vulva and vagina in the working group. We came across a lot of repeated pictures, and they exceeded what is educational information about sexuality... it was more like pornographic type material. I was reading what I found about deletion requests and I understood that this was the procedure ( Commons:Deletion policy) . If this is not the correct procedure, where can I get information? Thank you very much. Florenciac (talk) 16:14, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not an admin, just wanted to chime in here. Although others may disagree with your nominations, you are correct that it is the usual procedure if you have doubts on whether an image should be kept here and require a discussion with other contributors for it.

However, just an advice for @Florenciac, before you nominate an image for deletion, you should also check if an image had been previously nominated for deletion (it should show on its talk page), and see if the reason of why they were kept addresses your doubts. If you have a similar reasoning as the previous nominations and you still have doubts, it is better to discuss this on Commons:Village Pump first.

Also @Dronebogus, I think this could be first resolved in the DRs, or even their user talk page. I don’t think there is a need to bring this to AN/U, since it does not appear to be an admin problem. Tvpuppy (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What you consider “pornography” other people might consider educational, even if that purpose is to illustrate the concept of pornography. Very low quality, obviously redundant material can be deleted; one of the only high quality files we have illustrating the process of a female orgasm is clearly neither of those things. A file illustrating how female urination works is not un-educational; you could argue it was unusably poor quality if you could point to a superior example. The other two might not illustrate what you’re looking for but could illustrate erotic photography or nipple clamps. Dronebogus (talk) 17:01, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]