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	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}

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.

User:Jeff G.

Jeff G. (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user This has gone too far! This user keeps snitching on people who are not long-term abusers and wouldn't give them a chance to speak! As far as it goes, he should learn that I'm trying to add categories that are dedicated to things they like! DannyH19 (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyH19: If this is a dispute over categories, you could have discussed this with him on his talkpage. And you're required to notify the user that you've opened a thread on ANU about them. Abzeronow (talk) 23:33, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's rather obvious that this isn't DannyH19's first account. Creating an account, adding some categories, and then finding this noticeboard within 10 edits? The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:46, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DannyH19 is one of the Special:AbuseFilter/257 LTAs that likes to call me a snitch, quite possibly globally locked jermboy27. I have taken to responding on COM:FILTERT, where I run into his ilk frequently (the last time, they threatened "snitches get stitches"). I do what I can to alert Achim55 to their antics, as Эlcobbola has not been heard from in months. Admins, please bring the WP:BOOMERANG into full effect, give each LTA their own filter to make reporting easier both here and at m:srg, and act on the hits on such filters. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:39, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done DannyH19 blocked. Bedivere (talk) 02:55, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bedivere: Thanks! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:05, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff G., It isn't just you getting targeted, I've had 257's go after me and my talk page in the past. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:20, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alachuckthebuck: I guess we must be doing something right. :) — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:30, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someones gotta pick up the slack left by a MIA CU. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 20:19, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bedivere: Also, FernieT12 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) . — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:49, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gone Bedivere (talk) 14:52, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bedivere: Thanks again! — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:55, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bedivere: 47.195.236.244 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RBL • abusefilter • tools • guc • stalktoy • block user • block log) may be the same user. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:28, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

blocked one week, can't revert at the moment so hopefully someone will Bedivere (talk) 04:44, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted all the IP's removals. Are you having an error rolling back? Bidgee (talk) 05:08, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bidgee: I was unsure, thanks for doing it first. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:10, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no, I just couldn't at the moment for other reasons, thanks Bidgee. Bedivere (talk) 01:34, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User: Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas

Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user This user has been chronically problematic in several ways. The most concerning is their total lack of regard for local privacy laws, which is either severe ignorance of their own field or willful disregard for ethical and legal concerns; additionally some of their uploads can outright be considered creepshots (something they’re seemingly aware of) The second is cross-wiki sock puppeteering, which they apparently were unaware was even problematic behavior (another worrying sign). The third is general quality issues; they have a history of uploading COM:PORN of dubious scope and origins (often complaining the DRs are racist or something like that) as well as just plain bad photography and weirdness like File:Voies cyclables sur la rue.jpg (why is it so distorted? Is it even the photographer’s own work?). I let this behavior slide for awhile based on assuming good faith and feeling the constructive uploads outweighed the general behavioral issues, but eventually the pattern (combined with lack of improvement or remorse) becomes too obvious to ignore. Dronebogus (talk) 09:51, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ejemplo de plano contrapicado de la política mexicana Samantha Bulas Liguez.png Dronebogus (talk) 10:10, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the sexual images, the user makes the claim that non-white minorities are underrepresented on Commons, but most of the depictions I saw are of white or white-appearing Mexican individuals (including who I assume to be the user). At best that justification is disingenuous. Also, given the high number of problematic images that this user has uploaded, I'm very dubious that consent to publish these images was included in the consent to photograph them. Bastique ^{☎ let's talk!} 16:08, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a history of users uploading large amounts of weird photos of people in public, and there's a history of those people being blocked for those uploads. I see no reason that this user can't change for the better, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:15, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This user has been responding to other topics. I'll leave another message asking them to respond here. Jerimee (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Obligatory “Mexicans aren’t white even when they’re white you racist” excuse incoming. Dronebogus (talk) 06:27, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus, I honestly wouldn't have even considered it if it weren't a user who was already using creative justification to circumvent our rules and policies. Bastique ^{☎ let's talk!} 16:55, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the whole "This image was taken in a public place. Thus, no reasonable expectation of privacy exists." thing? Trade (talk) 19:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I share Dronebogus's concerns. Jerimee (talk) 18:05, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They have been blocked indef on wikipedia: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:CentralAuth/Miguel_Angel_Oma%C3%B1a_Rojas Jerimee (talk) 06:11, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Uploads of this user are indeed problematic. I just deleted a bunch of poor quality porn, and warned him. He should be blocked if any such upload occur again. Yann (talk) 19:47, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: I have no more respect for this user or their uploads than you do, but this seems like an abuse of admin privileges to punish a user by arbitrarily deleting their uploads. MAOR is an active user and his files might suck but are at least notionally in scope and should be formally nominated. F10 does not apply here. By denying them “due process” in this regard you’re proving their point that they’re being “discriminated against” or whatever lame excuse they have. Please undelete and nominate them properly to let the community decide. Dronebogus (talk) 10:13, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality porn is routinely speedy deleted. It doesn't matter if the uploader is new or here for some time. Yann (talk) 10:17, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: I don’t see many examples of this occurring; most SD’d porn is driveby uploads from user:JohnnyHardDick titled “muh dick.jpg”. This user is at least nominally editing an uploading in good faith, and F10 is exclusively for “Low-to-medium quality selfies and other personal images of or by users who have no constructive global contributions.” Since at least some of his uploads are harmless and useful, this clearly does not apply. Dronebogus (talk) 10:28, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how relevant this is, but they have been warned - I think by you in some cases - repeatedly over the years and they persist. I think they have an indef on wikipedia. The uploads (and descriptions!) are confusing, but the willingness to ignore policy is plain enough. Some of their uploads are constructive I have little doubt, but given the pattern of behavior I don't know how we can determine which with any degree of confidence. Jerimee (talk) 16:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@YannAs much as I want these files deleted, Unilateral F10 deletions was not the way to do it. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 16:26, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Given the history of the user's uploads, I think we can question the consent to publication of any of his graphic photos. I agree with Yann's action. Bastique ^{☎ let's talk!} 23:16, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That wasn’t really Yann’s to decide, unless there’s a privacy concern SD I don’t know about Dronebogus (talk) 13:38, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a privacy concern SD, there is PII oversight/supression, but deletion can be used as a stopgap until an OS can get to it. But that doesn't apply here. Do I agree with the end result of Yann's action? Yes. Would I agree with the action if it had been done before the DR was opened? Also yes. Do I agree with speedy deleting files at DR that had been WITHDRAWN from the DR by the nominator, they were only listed due to a mistake. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:15, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the deleted files weren’t even photographs. This isn’t the first time Yann has acted more like Commons’s nanny than a neutral enforcer of rules— in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Algorithmically-generated art of a French maid teasing the viewer.png he voted “delete” as “sexually and ethnically derogatory” (a bizarre reason in and of itself) and then deleted it himself. In both cases Yann played fast and loose with administrative protocol to target sexual content he disapproved of without appropriate community consensus. Dronebogus (talk) 19:42, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All else equal, without extenuating circumstances, if something is "derogatory" that is a valid reason and deletion is required. I understand "derogatory" is often subjective, and nearly every file has it's own set of circumstances, and those warrant discussion. There is nothing bizarre about taking exception to bigotry; we are explicitly required to do so. Jerimee (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

BLP doesnt apply to fiction obviously Trade (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of COM:DIGNITY Jerimee (talk) 20:26, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is Yann was seemingly complaining about something being “ethnically derogatory” because it had the word “French” in it (even though “French maid” is just a compound term referring to a type of costume, akin to “French bulldog”); as for “sexually derogatory” I legitimately have no idea, it was just a racy image of an anime-style maid. This is what I’m talking about where Yann does these weird morality police deletions that have no basis in policy, like here where he bulk deleted a bunch of uploads because they were sexual in nature, not because of a privacy concern. Dronebogus (talk) 21:02, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think they should just be indeffed at this point. Whether it’s dishonesty or incompetence I can’t stand users who go out of their way to act weird and suspicious then make up weird and suspicious excuses. Dronebogus (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is for the community to decide. Not just you Trade (talk) 20:00, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not well versed with our protocol for "this sort of thing" and don't want to create more work for User:Miguel Angel Omaña Rojas (should they ever respond) let alone the rest of community. Should I refrain from doing individual delete requests for inappropriate files from this user? Jerimee (talk) 18:33, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should nominate any files you think are questionable or OOS. If they’re similar then bundle them. I also think it’s suspicious the user hasn’t responded when he obviously knows this discussion is going on (he last edited after it was filed). Dronebogus (talk) 19:49, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should just bundle them regardless. Splitting them only serves to drag this DR out longer than needed Trade (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

got it; appreciate both of you Jerimee (talk) 20:05, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Katolophyromai

I would like to bring your attention to @Katolophyromai a.k.a. Spencer Alexander McDaniel. This user is uploading his own artwork on Wikimedia Commons and inserting them on Wikipedia, which constitutes self-promotion. The artworks have no encyclopedic value, as they are simple hand drawings and the artist is completely unknown. In some cases, I have found that the user is including links to his own external articles in the images descriptions. Example: Illustration of Jesus exorcizing the Gerasene demoniac.

Drawings that have been uploaded: Category:Spencer Alexander McDaniel. JohnMizuki (talk) 10:18, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure that there ain't nothing wrong with these. Jerimee (talk) 21:05, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Can you please fix the source on this file? File:Die_synagoge_des_satan.jpg You are currently listed as the author and source. Jerimee (talk) 21:05, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re seriously objecting to a user uploading files to use on Wikimedia because you don’t like they look? Dronebogus (talk) 11:11, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I would argue that such images are essentially fan fiction. They're what someone on the internet imagines a piece from the era might be. But that's an argument that needs to be had on the individual projects, and so long as it's approved of, tolerated, or overlooked, that's not our place to have an opinion as Commons. GMG ^talk 15:01, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dig the style, and I think it is because of the fan fict style you described. I find it to be more authentic not less; features not bugs! Some of the images have been used to illustrate their respective articles for five or six years. Sorry for slightly off-topic comment. Appreciate you. Jerimee (talk) 15:19, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Khotine

User: Khotine (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Keeps posting oos drivel about Rwanda, despite multiple requests to stop and despite a warning.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:51, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Blocked for 3 months. Nothing really useful here until despite 5 warnings, so not expected on the short term. Yann (talk) 19:23, 26 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppet of globally locked User:Wave of Pandas - Nel1123Nel

See [1]

Basically the same MO, useless images of Hong Kong at night. I am convinced. Krok6kola (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Blocked and deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:06, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

fake license / nor own works

User: Tandisss (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

must of files uploads by this user is not his/her work (all take from google image)- files are not from creative commons website he/she add creative commons license to the files / file from mizoline.ir deleted two days ago again upload today by this user - files for museum are not his/her own work too. please delete all the uploads and block this account - this user cheating by adding fack license and own works tags[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 07:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Modern Sciences, I'm looking through their uploads, and I haven't seen anything amiss yet. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:11, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Alachuckthebuck:

All the files such as File:Ejeei.1.jpg uploads from mizanonline.ir is using fake license (this website is not under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license)
All the files such as File:حبیب زاده مومن.jpg uploads from defapress.ir is using fake license (this website is not under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license nor on public domain to use )
Files from "mizanonline.ir" which have previously deleted uploaded again
user uploads Old Files (Manuscripts or portatratit belong to to more 150 years old such as > File:میرزا علی‌اکبر مجتهد اردبیلی.jpg

or File:کربلایی حسینقلی داوودی.jpg uploads as not own work of user

Jomeh mousqe ardabil.jpg is not own work or user]
this user cheating by adding fack license and own works

how did check these user uploads and you did not seen anything amiss yet? what are these [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 23:17, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a bit of a hodgepodge, though. The copyright notice at the source of File:حبیب زاده 03.jpg says (courtesy Google translate): "All rights reserved, use of the material is permitted provided the source is cited.", which is IMHO more of a release for press and journalism only, not a {{Attribution}} one. On File:کندوی عسل اردبیل.jpg, we do have a genuine {{Cc-by-4.0}}, though. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 18:08, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:KamyyFallon

KamyyFallon (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user keep uploading unfree Internet images after a warning. 0x0a (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Blocked for a week, everything's deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Blessingedi76

Blessingedi76 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user This user have been asked to stop using depicts (P180) to add awards and occupations to structural data twice only to apologize and continue doing it anyways--Trade (talk) 22:09, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I stop it Blessingedi76 (talk) 22:13, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

He did not stop even after this message above. I wrote him, in French, hopefully he gets the point now... Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:01, 28 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Blessingedi76: } Also please stop doing things like what you did at File:Judy Nunn.jpg (which I have reverted). This file page already indicated that it depicts Judy Nunn (Q3491691). There is no point in further adding (for example) that it depicts writer (Q36180). That is, once we have a property linking an item for the specific person, any professions of that individual belong on the Wikidata item, not on a particular picture of that person. - Jmabel ! talk 05:03, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi , I have inderstood Blessingedi76 (talk) 07:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Blessingedi76: You and Iamgreaced are both doing it - where is the photograph in File:Marelle de livres, Hommage á Julio Cortázar (2014).jpg? de minimis items should not be represented by depicts. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:47, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry about that please Iamgreaced (talk) 14:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Esther-Benbassa.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=1014908597 Trade (talk) 20:06, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As reference: Commons:ISA Tool and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T390391 Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:58, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Iamgreaced: but you continue.

I am beginning to think blocks are in order, including one against the person who started this contest and is apparently making no effort to monitor its effects. - Jmabel ! talk 16:56, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arent Donia (WIA) working for the foundation? We can just block her? Trade (talk) 18:18, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Being a Foundation employee does not mean you cannot be blocked.

Not that there shouldn't be a process, and what I'd most like to see is an end to this nonsense. I'm not interested in punishing someone, but if I were, for example, to put up a cash prize for the person who could add the most dates to files regardless of whether they were accurate, and got people adding thousands of bogus dates, and I persisted in doing such things I would presume that I would be blocked for that. Similarly if I asked for "depicts long sleeve (Q29125938)" to be added to every photo of a person in a long-sleeved shirt or jacket (to use an example of something I actually removed, which was added in the course of this contest). How is this different? - Jmabel ! talk 01:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"de minimis items should not be represented by depicts" Did we ever got consensus for that? I dont think we did Trade (talk) 03:30, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Please see Special:Diff/1015686448. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:07, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here i had to remove two occupations not even a day after he already apologized several times for doing exactly that--Trade (talk) 01:09, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be Commons:ISA Tool/Challenges#Tell Us About Her: Women in Literature - March 2025. I have indefinitely blocked Iamgreaced and Blessingedi76 from the file namespace, as they have continued to make bad edits after being warned. Several other editors including Kwameghana(Bright Kwame Ayisi) (5529 edits in the campaign) and Kolobetsoo (502) have the same pattern of bad edits, but they have not yet been warned. I would advocate for a mass rollback of all edits from this campaign, with exceptions for users 999real and Madamebiblio who appear to have made high-quality contributions.

@Donia (WIA): Of the 19,000+ edits in this campaign, the vast majority are poor quality. Are you aware of the issues with this campaign? If so, why have you not stopped the campaign? If not, why are you not monitoring it? You as the campaign manager are responsible for this problem and need to address it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:14, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you, Pi, said that there were no warning for the other prolific editors, I wrote them one: Special:Diff/995469894/1015557166 and

Special:Diff/752472166/1015557757. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 14:13, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subject: Request for Unblocking – Commitment to Improve Contribution Quality

Hello Administrator Pi.1415926535,

I am contacting you following the blocking of my account for "Repeated addition of poor-quality structured data after warnings." I understand the importance of maintaining high standards for structured data on [project name], and I regret any contribution that may have fallen short of expectations.

I would like to clarify the following points:

1. Understanding the errors: Could you please specify the main issues identified in my additions so that I can correct them and prevent them from recurring?

2. Improving Contributions: I am willing to follow the necessary recommendations and adapt my contribution style in accordance with best practices.

3. Commitment: If my account is unblocked, I commit to improving the quality of my contributions by taking feedback into account and reviewing the help pages and recommendations before making any changes.

If adjustments or a monitoring period are needed before a full release, I welcome any suggestions to ensure continuous improvement.

Thank you for your feedback and assistance.

Sincerely, Blessingedi76 (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello dear administrator Pi.1415926535, I am really sorry for my bad behavior, I did not know. And I learned a lot from my mistakes. And this will allow me to not repeat them again and I come to present you all my apologies, because I made enormous stupidities and I come to ask you to unblock me, because we have campaigns in progress at home and so please I need my user account to participate in the events. Blessingedi76 (talk) 09:52, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well for one you kept apologizing several times while continuing to add the very same bad data you were told not to do Trade (talk) 11:25, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blessingedi76, with "I did not know", you seem to tell us a blatant lie. Your talk page is a huge evidence towards that. With Special:Diff/899830638/1010737792 (17th of March), Special:Diff/1010737792/1014490367 (28th of March, you replied to it in French), Special:Diff/1014496445/1014645962 (28th March, again) and Special:Diff/1014645962/1014658947 (29th of March, message in French in case you indeed happened to have comprehension problems with English, you replied to it, too), you were told what exactly is the issue. So, you have ample information for answering the questions you raised.

) "Understanding the errors" - well, let me repeat that again for you: the errors are in adding depiction statements about overly broad or marginal items of an image. This is unreasonable and henceforth unwanted, refer to Commons:Depicts#What items not to add for instance.
) There is apparently a conflict between your aim and Commons' aims. Due to an unsound built ISA campaign, you and several others were incentivised towards edit farming, meaning trying to make as much edits as possible, in contravention to the main project object, improving Commons. Monetary greed seemed to have led you and others astray. There won't be room for adaption your edit style unless you state that you'll refrain from aiming for edit high scores.
) Per point 2, participating in ISA campaigns is the root cause for your block. So, an unblock just to continue these participations is contrary to the actual block aim.

Trying to weasel out of the situation by offering excuses, just to avoid any changes in your behaviour will not work out. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 11:56, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might be time for someone to reach out to the one responsible for the contest Trade (talk) 13:25, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's actually already mostly done. Pi pinged them, and the Phabricator link should also raise their awareness. Donia (WIA) was not recently editing, though, so I'm going to inform User:دنيا as declared second account about this discussion. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 14:13, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also my remark here and the discussion it links to. We currently have two project pages that contradict one another on how depicts should be used. - Jmabel ! talk 22:58, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I very have inderstood Blessingedi76 (talk) 23:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"the errors are in adding depiction statements about overly broad or marginal items of an image" Well ill wager the issue is mainly that he keeps adding depiction statements for abstract concepts. Trade (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Yutyo77764

Yutyo77764 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Continues to upload copyright violations and reverses speedy deletion requests on his own initiative.

זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 13:12, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@זיו「Ziv」: I declined your last speedy deletion requests. The template says Polish pictures until 1994 are in the public domain, so these should not be speedy deleted, and I don't see any reason for admin action. Yann (talk) 20:19, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Yann

That's fine with me, but I'm pretty sure they'll continue to upload problematic files. Regards, זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 08:03, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mateo Inc

Mateo Inc (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
Reason (problema):Hello, this user published complex logos,for example:
File:Alimentos Polar.jpg (removed by User:The Squirrel Conspiracy.).
File:C.E.C.A.N.jpg (removed by User:EugeneZelenko.).

Please warn this user to stop upload complex logos or block them. (Google translator). AbchyZa22 (talk) 17:34, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Deleted three files. Final warning. Bedivere (talk) 17:51, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppets of globally locked User:Wave of Pandas

Jessica.lkw (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Same useless, vague images of Hong Kong at night. Krok6kola (talk) 21:28, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Blocked and nuked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:45, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ciaox1234

Ciaox1234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Please block: disruptive editing, uploading many cocks, junk rename requests, junk deletion requests. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done blocked and gone. Bedivere (talk) 22:51, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bedivere and Taylor 49: Ciaox requested unblock. I almost unblocked him, but would like your comments. Taivo (talk) 17:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't mind if they get unblocked as long as they don't upload yet another genitalia picture we don't need. Bedivere (talk) 22:09, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I unblocked Ciaox on condition, that he will not upload photos of genitalia. Taivo (talk) 10:34, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Taivo And keep the level of activity low, and not upload and request deletion thereafter too frequently. Taylor 49 (talk) 23:46, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:PortariaPortal

Please keep an administrative eye on PortariaPortal (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user. The contribution history is not very promising, as it shows a disregard towards IP rights. The person committed quite a lot of copyvios, including from Getty images as of late. Furthermore, there's seemingly an understanding problem towards our project scope. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:44, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They could have received a final warning for copyvios in January. However, being that you just placed the template now, I'm fine waiting until their next copyvio before blocking. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:54, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That was my intent behind the report, having you and/or other admins observing the situation, too. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 12:36, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elizium23 has lost access to his account

Greetings all, especially admins:

Elizium23 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user has lost access to his account, deliberately and (he hopes) permanently.

He scrambled his password, and he's deleted his MFA secrets, as suggested by the enwiki admins on the mailing list.

“Email this User” may or may not work for his account yet...

He's mulling over creating a fresh account, however he's “absolutely, positively, permanently punished”: indeffed on enwiki and en-wiktionary both, and unsure whether it's ethical to rejoin while “under a cloud”. No block appeals or ban pleading shall be forthcoming from him. “It's a Fair Cop,” as they would admit in 1970s England?

But he’s not stopped editing logged-out from IP addresses, mostly all tracing back to en:Cox Communications in Arizona, and he’s not aware of being disciplined or blocked on Commons currently, so is this “Tolerable” or “Verboten” activity? 2600:8800:1E8F:BE00:8F44:C11F:20AE:8EA7 07:20, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elizium23's behavior that lead to their en.wiki block was repulsive. However, blocks on sister projects do not automatically carry over to Commons, and Elizium23 has never been blocked on Commons under that account. Assuming that none of their other accounts were blocked on Commons, it is not against policy for them to create a new account and edit here. However, unless their behavior has changed significantly since that en.wiki block, I would not be surprised if they eventually earn a block on this project as well. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:51, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still dont get what the point of that whole discussion was Trade (talk) 06:35, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done. I agree totally with Trade. Nothing should be done. Taivo (talk) 10:36, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Incall

Incall (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions). An inexperienced user, with little to no English and a poor grasp of licensing principles. Has received extended rights from Abzeronow and uses the interface provided by these rights to remove speedy deletion tags from files uploaded by him: [2] and threatens to rollback such edits, makes unfounded accusations of vandalism and lies: [3]. Komarof (talk) 04:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You have to give a reason for the removal rather than just saying «copiovo». Also you should not say that I have bad English, I speak well maybe there are mistakes but I have a purely academic language, not slang. Incall ^talk 05:22, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was a specific and comprehensive reason: [4]. The problem is that you don't understand what is written there. Komarof (talk) 05:26, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Under YouTube's standard licence? Incall ^talk 05:30, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. So you demonstrate a lack of experience, which you try to compensate for with careless edits and unfounded accusations. Please familiarize yourself with COM:YT. Komarof (talk) 05:37, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I realised my mistake. Incall ^talk 05:42, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:ZakiWafiIdlib

ZakiWafiIdlib (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
Problema (reason):No se si este usuario está activo o inactivo pero este publicó logos complejos por ejemplo:
File:Syrian General Intelligence Directorate.png (removido por Yann)
File:Emblem of the Syrian Ministry of Agriculture and Agrarian Reform.png (removido por Yann)

Por favor advierten al usuario que deje de publicar o bloqueen. AbchyZa22 (talk) 17:44, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not done El usario no hizo nada durante los últimos 4 años. Entonces, no hay nada que hacer. - Jmabel ! talk 23:01, 1 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ayratayrat

User: Ayratayrat (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Continued unfree files uploading like File:Kentsel değiştirme.jpg and creating bad deletion requests after being blocked 4 times for it. CIR issue. See also Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 120#Ayratayrat, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 115#Ayratayrat, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 35#Ayratayrat, and Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 39#Ayratayrat.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:04, 2 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]