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-reports | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Vandalism [] |
User problems [] |
Blocks and protections [] |
Other [] |
|
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 | |||
124, 123, 122, 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 |
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
| ||
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.
Khiao do (2 report)
[edit]- Khiao do (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) (2 veces renombró su cuenta como Renamed user 5bfd0706f2d167ffc5c9ab48d43fd77a)
- Reason (problema):Este usuario nominó logos simples de partidos políticos venezolanos después de la advertencia por parte del Usuario Yann por ejemplo:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tarjeta solidaridad.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tarjeta PJ.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tarjeta MDD.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Partido futuro.png (el usuario comenzó por segunda vez el DR)
Por favor bloquea a este usuario y cierra los deletion requests inválidos (invalid Deletion Request) AbchyZa22 (talk) 18:36, 9 August 2025 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Bedivere (talk) 03:44, 14 August 2025 (UTC) Fiorysolmorales
[edit]- Fiorysolmorales (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Promo-only account / spamming. Jonteemil (talk) 20:54, 11 August 2025 (UTC)
Done. I warned the user and mass deleted all his/her uploads. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Артем Загребельный (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) recent blatant copyvios (1, 2) after multiple warnings and a block. Quick1984 (talk) 07:53, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done. One month block (second block). User promised to be more careful in the future. Taivo (talk) 09:47, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Baddu676
[edit]- User: Baddu676 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:"Rameshwaram Street with Tower Gateway of the Great Temple".jpg after final warning for doing so. Made malformed rename requests.
— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:36, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- It was uploaded on july 22 not today or yesterday. I uploaded thousands of images. Some may be mistakenly uploaded. Baddu676 (talk) 15:19, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- Looks to me like that was an honest mistake in not realizing that a particular 97-year-old photo is still in copyright in some countries. This sort of error is not normally a reason to block someone (though, @Baddu676, it is your responsibility to research copyright status before uploading, and clearly you are not consistently doing that. I strongly suggest that you be more careful: this sort of error creates significant work for other people, and you should be doing it yourself.). - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
Almeshneb1a
[edit]- Almeshneb1a (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Continues to upload copyvios despite one prior, very recent, block. Jonteemil (talk) 21:59, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done. The user is blocked for 2 weeks. Taivo (talk) 09:48, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Kunalpancholi18
[edit]- Kunalpancholi18 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Violates {{Scope}} and {{Dont recreate}} by reuploading the same out of scope file a third time after warnings. Jonteemil (talk) 14:58, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a month, file deleted, no useful edit anywhere. Yann (talk) 15:54, 14 August 2025 (UTC)
Vandalism by user @Adamant1
[edit]User @Adamant1 keeps vandalizing the Logos of postcard publishers because he wants it in a way that is not a consensus and currently in discussion. He deletes plenty of information there. Can an admin stop that until we discussed it on the talk page how it should be? Carl Ha (talk) 06:57, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- 3 things here:
- 1. There's a gallery for logos of people who publish postcards and there's a separate one for logos of postcard publishing companies. Both galleries follow the exiting systems where people and companies are separate from each other in the category trees.
- 2. I've been moving images and categories for logos of postcard publishing companies over to Logos of postcard publishing companies and the correct categories for a while now since it goes against the guidelines to mix them with ones for people. Carl Ha came along recently and dumped a bunch of logos for companies back into the gallery for people and then reverted me when I tried to correct it. I didn't "delete" any information. I moved the logos to the proper one for companies. Per the universality principle and exiting category system. t's something I've been doing for months now without any issues. No one has had a problem with it until Carl Ha got involved.
- 3. I asked Carl Ha several times if they would be willing to create a more general gallery for logos of both people and companies instead of just dumping the logos for both into a gallery for people. I think that's a totally reasonable compromise but they decided to edit war me and start this instead. That should be the solution here though instead of violating the guidelines by mixing logos for people and companies into a gallery for people when there's no reason to. If anything Carl Ha is the one committing vandalism by reverting edits that I've been doing for months without issue and that follow the guidelines. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:06, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Anyway, it seems like it's been dealt with here. So I guess it's a non-issue. I'm going to resolve this since I was the one who moved it here to begin with. Anyone is free to reactivate it if they think there's a reason to. Although I'd prefer they didn't ;) --Adamant1 (talk) 07:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- I agree. Carl Ha (talk) 07:38, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:35, 15 August 2025 (UTC) Yepthatwork
[edit]- Yepthatwork (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Likely another Kiananjomani sock. Recreates File:British Airways Boeing 747-236B G-BDXH London - Heathrow England, United Kingdom 14 March 1981.jpg, previously uploaded by sockpuppet Unfortunately I'm lonely at work. Also recreates File:Pan Am Boeing 747-100; N736PA@LHR, April 1972.jpg, also created by Unfortunately I'm lonely at work. The user's third upload, File:Egyptair airbus a320 232 SU-GCC Istanbul Ataturk Yesilkoy Int'l Airport - LTBA, Turkey.jpg, AFAICT has no connection to a previously deleted file however I find it weird that the user added VRT permission themself. Jonteemil (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked and deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Stratovarius22
[edit]Account created for sabotage a Wikimedia's Argentina contest, no sense deletion request create in all the campaign --Ezarateesteban 21:09, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
Disagree I don't see it as sabotage. I think their balance between COM:TOO and COM:PACKAGE is a bit skewed too far towards the later, but they are pointing out a legitimate issue and at least some of their nominations are correct. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:26, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
.svg/20px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png)
Comment Account created in 2013 and used on es.wiki, it was not created to sabotage any campaign. This user's complaint comes after being notified of the opening of a deletion request for a photo he uploaded. Open requests are well-founded and not arbitrary. While opinions about their relevance or lack thereof can vary, and dissent is welcome, the approach used by Ezarate does not seem to presume good faith. --Stratovarius22 (talk) 21:28, 15 August 2025 (UTC)
User is going around nominating in-use (or at the very least unproblematic) files for deletion seemingly to make a point after a bunch of their MS paint doodles and other random useless files were nominated for deletion. (See: 1 2 3 4 5) Dronebogus (talk) 03:22, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Dronebogus
WTF? Are you kidding me? Seriously? You accuse me of 'going around nominating files for deletion'? Let me get this straight: I point out files that literally make zero sense on an educational media repository and suddenly I'm the problem? - My MS Paint scribbles? Useless files? Compared to what, exactly? Blurred screenshots of your breakfast? Random cat gifs? I should sit quietly while my Information Society drawings are deleted for being 'out of scope', but somehow your random meaningless files are magically good? Vitor Hello? 03:43, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- w:wp:othercrap is not an argument. Even if it was you have no right to be going around nominating COM:INUSE files for deletion. In any case your MS paint drawings are poor even by the standards of the medium and have zero educational use. A lot of them seem to be vanity uploads for your personal pages, which are tolerated for productive users. You are pushing the limits of both toleration and productivity. Dronebogus (talk) 03:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Dronebogus
- You think my arts sucks?
- “Wow. Just… wow. Let me unpack this:
- 1. My reference to wp:othercrap is ‘not an argument’? That’s adorable. I’m literally pointing out inconsistent enforcement of policy, but sure, apparently reasoning is optional.
- 2. ‘You have no right to nominate COM:INUSE files for deletion’? Oh, I see. So anyone can upload nonsense and it’s immune to review, but if I dare point out obvious out-of-scope content, suddenly I’m the villain. Brilliant. Truly democratic.
- 3. ‘Your MS Paint drawings are poor even by the standards of the medium and have zero educational use’? Are we seriously judging MS Paint doodles with the same rigor we apply to centuries-old manuscripts now? This is ridiculous.
- 4. ‘Vanity uploads tolerated for productive users’? Let me get this straight: my productivity is apparently irrelevant if my uploads don’t align with… what, exactly? Aesthetic taste? Subjective whim?
- Congratulations 🥳 , you’ve officially created a bureaucracy so absurd that even Windows ME would be jealous.
- I suggest either enforce your rules consistently or admit that your moderation is entirely arbitrary. Until then, count me in as someone who will continue to highlight blatant contradictions—MS Paint skills or not. Vitor Hello? 04:08, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Vitorperrut555: if a file is use on any WMF project that is sufficient for it to be in scope. Of course, you can nominate these or other in-scope files for deletion if they are copyright violations or other legally problematic content for us to host. - Jmabel ! talk 06:12, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- w:wp:othercrap is not an argument. Even if it was you have no right to be going around nominating COM:INUSE files for deletion. In any case your MS paint drawings are poor even by the standards of the medium and have zero educational use. A lot of them seem to be vanity uploads for your personal pages, which are tolerated for productive users. You are pushing the limits of both toleration and productivity. Dronebogus (talk) 03:50, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Hi, I added 2 warnings to Vitor, and deleted some out of scope files. Yann (talk) 04:43, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- Comment Vitor was indefinitely blocked from the Portuguese Wikipedia for similar behavior. However, this topic appears to be a special exchange of barbs between the two users, as Vitor has opened several DRs regarding Dronebogus personal drawings, which I agree some are out of scope, btw. Also, Vitor has some out of scope drawings here, which, after Yann's warnings, I believe he'll understand better the project scope. heylenny (talk/edits) 16:06, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree with that characterization of my uploads, but I wouldn’t mind the nominations if Vitor hadn’t nominated them after I nominated his files with an identical rationale. Would Vitor even have noticed or cared about my upload history if I hadn’t done so? You can be completely “right” in terms of process, but still be in the wrong because of the context you perform the action in. Dronebogus (talk) 21:13, 16 August 2025 (UTC)
Rafe87
[edit]Rafe87 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
After having been told in no uncertain terms that File:Still from Israeli government ad.jpg was a copyvio, Rafe87 uploaded File:Captura de tela 2025-08-16 132842.png, the same image plus a caption. I see only three possibilities here: (1) the files are not copyvios, though certainly if this is the case it is not on the basis of either rationale that Rafe87 put forward in that linked discussion; (2) the second upload is a deliberate upload of a copyvio; and/or (3) Rafe87 lacks the level of understanding of copyright called for by CIR ("competence is required"). These are not, of course, mutually exclusive, and the first of the three would surprise me. - Jmabel ! talk 00:08, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- In light of the fact that I can't see the files, I'm inclined to lean towards a CIR block, but keeping TPA. Indefinite doesn't always mean infinite. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 05:44, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Alachuckthebuck: Image is figure 3 of this article, on page 11. I think the background is way to complex for it to be below TOO, which is the only basis on which I could imagine accepting it without a license. - Jmabel ! talk 06:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Alachuckthebuck: I agree with Jmabel on this. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:26, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Jeff G.@Jmabel, I'm going to put it above ToO in country of origin. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 21:15, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- I endorse this report, and at the same time would encourage admins to review 1) Rafe87's claims about copyright and 2) their accusations of censorship and other malfeasance, each in the linked discussion.
- en:User talk:Rafe87#Notice that you are now subject to an arbitration enforcement sanction may also be relevant. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- For the context, please see the Help Desk. Yann (talk) 11:46, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- That is the discussion linked to in the opening sentence of the report. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- I added the link to the whole discussion, which includes accusations by Rafe87 of censorship. Yann (talk) 11:54, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- That is the discussion linked to in the opening sentence of the report. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done I blocked Rafe87 for a week for reuploading copyright violations. Feel free to block longer for unfounded accusations. Yann (talk) 18:33, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
Turkish Patriot1974
[edit]- Turkish Patriot1974 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Reuploads copyvio File:Flag of the Ministry of Defense (Turkiye).jpg as File:Millî Savunma Bakanlığı forsu (Türkiye).jpg after final warning just a mere hour prior. Jonteemil (talk) 18:14, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a week, file deleted. Yann (talk) 18:31, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
Andres 6788899
[edit]- Andres 6788899 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Continues to upload out of scope files despite being warned. Jonteemil (talk) 18:40, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a week, files deleted. Yann (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2025 (UTC)
Shams948
[edit]- Shams948 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
This is the fourth time this user has continued with disruptive behavior related to categorization. You can see my first and second report. After the last one, the administrator Taivo blocked him for a week. After being blocked or warned, he usually temporarily stops his malicious activities, and then resumes them after a few months, like in recent days. This morning again I warned him to stop, but he replies with threatening me and with repeating conspiracy theories that I'm a part of some cyber army. --Orijentolog (talk) 08:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Orijentolog: Could you please give a diff of recent "disruptive behavior" about categories? Thanks, Yann (talk) 15:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Yann: There are tons of examples: placing categories from Lahijan within Hamadan, even though the two cities are 400 km apart [1], playing like adding already existing categories [2], opening duplicates like Monuments in Hamadan, Mountain Alvand, Foods from Iran and Foods in Iran, and then placing numerous images [3] and categories [4] into it. Furthermore, persistently opening agricultural categories named after the city of Bahar, even though it was explained to him repeatedly not to do so because the photos are actually from Bahar County. This morning, it took me several hundreds of edits to fix all of his mess. --Orijentolog (talk)
- Also, putting the same photos or categories under two different cities [5], removing existing correct categories and replacing them with nonsense, opening categories with illiterate names, changing the unified categorization used in hundreds of other cities [6], brutal overcategorization [7], etc. He targeted some categories three times over periods of several months [8], never listens to complaints and just repeats the same thing. --Orijentolog (talk) 16:42, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done. Blocked for a month (second block). Taivo (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
PayamAvarwand
[edit]- PayamAvarwand (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
User has uploaded some seemingly-legitimate own work (e.g. File:Ahvaz-Sunset.jpg) but also many copyright violations (see their talk page). Despite a final warning on 18 July 2025 and a follow-up conversation on my talk page after which they seemed to understand our licensing policy, they have continued to upload photos with inadequate proof (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:New-Site-Ahvaz.jpg). Consigned (talk) 11:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a month. Lets hope the time out helps Gbawden (talk) 12:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
LeaFGJU
[edit]- LeaFGJU (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Keeps uploading files of unclear origin or copyright violations, tagging them as own work. Files have repeatedly been deleted (Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LeaFGJU) and the user has been warned numerous times on the talk page. It seems that they do not understand what they are doing wrong (User_talk:LeaFGJU#Copyright_violations), so maybe a French speaker can explain it to them. However, their most recent uploads are already copyright violations again. I suggest deleting all uploads and blocking them with talk page access allowed to maybe have a conversation and have them understand what they can and cannot upload. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 13:53, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a week, some files deleted. Yann (talk) 16:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
Request for review of administrator actions by User:GPSLeo
[edit]Hello,
I would like to raise concerns regarding the repeated deletion actions of administrator @GPSLeo.
My concerns are as follows:
1. Lack of policy-based reasoning
- The administrator deleted Category:AI Image of Ahmed al-Sharaa and its contents with the justification of “AI-generated and not in use.”
- However, as noted in my [request], per COM:AI and COM:SCOPE, neither of these reasons is a valid deletion criterion.
2. Failure to allow community discussion
- The deletion was executed without a sufficiently broad discussion, with no chance for wider community input from both supporters and opposers.
- Per COM:DEL, disputed deletions — especially whole categories — should go through community discussion (e.g., at Commons:Deletion requests), not be handled unilaterally.
3. Subjective reasoning (“ugly” file claim)
- In another case, User:GPSLeo requested deletion of a different AI-generated file I uploaded solely on the grounds that he personally considered it “ugly.”
- This reasoning is **not supported anywhere in Commons policies**. File quality or “beauty” is not a deletion criterion.
4. Perceived targeting
- The pattern of deletions and subjective reasoning gives the impression of unfair treatment and personal bias against my contributions. This undermines the assumption of good faith and the principle of equal treatment of contributors.
My request
I kindly ask for:
- A review of the deletions made by User:GPSLeo to ensure they were compliant with Commons policies.
- Confirmation that AI-generated/enhanced files, when disclosed and licensed correctly, should not be deleted for purely subjective reasons.
- Guidance to prevent unilateral or subjective deletion actions in the future without community discussion.
Thank you for your attention. Masry1973 | مصري1973 (talk) 21:04, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Masry1973: I would take this much more seriously if the UDR had been successful. - Jmabel ! talk 21:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- The remark about "ugly" was not in his capacity as an admin, and it was supplemental to a policy-based reason. - Jmabel ! talk 21:17, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- I would guess that well over 90% of AI-dependent contributions to Commons are deleted. There is a strong consensus against most uses of AI here, though that is short of unanimity. Unless you are also having a large number of non-AI-dependent images also deleted, it is very unlikely that you are being targeted. And if an administrator such as GPSLeo has seen what looks to him like a pattern of bad uploads by you, it is entirely appropriate that he continue to look at your uploads to see if the pattern continues. - Jmabel ! talk 21:21, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- I will leave this open to give others a chance to comment, but my own inclination would be to close this as "not done", and unless someone else besides Masry1973 sees this very differently than I do, I would hope it will be closed within 24 hours. - Jmabel ! talk 21:23, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, @Jmabel, for your comments. I would like to respond point by point, with reference to Commons policies:
- On the UDR not being successful
- Whether or not an undeletion request was accepted does not automatically validate the original deletion. Per COM:UNDELETE, the purpose of UDRs is to re-examine deletions, but consensus and outcomes can vary depending on participation and timing. The fact that one request was not granted does not close the door to legitimate concerns about administrative actions.
- On the “ugly” remark
- I understand your point that it was “supplemental.” However, it is concerning when an administrator introduces personal aesthetic judgment into a deletion discussion, regardless of whether it was the decisive factor. Per Commons deletion policy, deletions must be based on policy grounds, not personal taste. Even supplemental remarks by administrators carry weight, so it is important to keep discussions strictly policy-focused.
- On consensus about AI-generated content
- Indeed, I acknowledge there is broad debate about AI on Commons. However, as of now, COM:AI permits the uploading of AI-generated or AI-enhanced files under certain conditions (proper disclosure, licensing, and compliance with scope). Unless the community reaches a formal consensus to prohibit all such files, individual administrators should not impose de facto bans based on personal interpretation.
- Also, per COM:SCOPE, unused files are not automatically out of scope. Many free files remain on Commons precisely to allow future use.
- On claims of “pattern”
- While I appreciate the vigilance of administrators, this must not cross into the appearance of preemptive targeting. Per :COM:ADMINACCT, administrators are expected to act with neutrality and avoid the impression of bias against particular contributors.
- My concern is not scrutiny of my uploads, but rather whether scrutiny is being applied in a consistent, policy-based manner across Commons, not disproportionately toward certain contributors.
- Conclusion
- My goal here is not to escalate conflict but to ensure clarity:
- AI files, when disclosed and properly licensed, are currently permitted.
- Deletions should remain firmly policy-based, without subjective reasoning.
- Administrators should apply consistent standards for all contributors.
- I trust the community will evaluate these points fairly Masry1973 | مصري1973 (talk) 21:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- These were proper admin actions. AI-modified junk does not belong on Commons, especially modified images of people. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:45, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535, I am concerned that this file was deleted by you (UDR here) while a community discussion on the same issue was still ongoing, which is not consistent with COM:DEL where proper consensus is expected. The rationale cited (“journalistic standards” and “ugly”) is not policy-based, but subjective. Per COM:SCOPE and COM:FR, minor retouching for clarity is acceptable. Deleting the file under these circumstances appears premature and unfair. Masry1973 | مصري1973 (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- The DR had been open since the 5th. If we had enough admins on this project, the file would have been deleted on the 12th or 13th. You are attempting to bludgeon the process with way too much prose, bold text, and quoting rules, but it's not going to work. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:14, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Pi.1415926535, I am concerned that this file was deleted by you (UDR here) while a community discussion on the same issue was still ongoing, which is not consistent with COM:DEL where proper consensus is expected. The rationale cited (“journalistic standards” and “ugly”) is not policy-based, but subjective. Per COM:SCOPE and COM:FR, minor retouching for clarity is acceptable. Deleting the file under these circumstances appears premature and unfair. Masry1973 | مصري1973 (talk) 22:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, why didn't you try Commons:Undeletion requests? Msb (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2025 (UTC)
- The images went through regular DR, so it did have a “chance for wider community discussion”. Also, file quality is considered a deletion criterion, see Commons:Deletion policy#Redundant/bad quality, low-quality files can be deleted if realistically there aren’t any educational use for them and there are higher-quality alternatives available. Tvpuppy (talk) 00:13, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Not done Lots of noise, little to no substance. Jmabel hit the nail on the head very early on in this discussion, and the problem here is not GPSLeo. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:16, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Sockpuppets
[edit]- هزاع الحويطي (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
- شهم السهم العمري (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
- شهم الشهم العمري (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
- الظبع العمري (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
All sockpuppets of دامر العمري, reuploading deleted files uploaded by other socks. Evidence from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files:
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Hamadan_-_Mausoleum_of_Esther_and_Mordechai.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=1063317386){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Pumpkin_Bahar1.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=1073948281){kind=link}
_Manal_Awad_Mikhail_1.png){kind=link}
_Manal_Awad_Mikhail_1.png){kind=link}
Jonteemil (talk) 09:52, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done. All indefinitely blocked and tagged by Squirrel and their uploads deleted. Taivo (talk) 16:47, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
伊藤文四郎
[edit]- 伊藤文四郎 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Reuploads File:旧赤穂村役場（現駒ヶ根市郷土館）.jpg a third time, this time as File:現駒ヶ根市郷土館.jpg, after final warning two days ago by Yann. Jonteemil (talk) 11:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 15:33, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Iamsaifsarkar
[edit]- Iamsaifsarkar (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Promo-only account. Already blocked on enwiki. Jonteemil (talk) 11:52, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Warned, files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:32, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Наталія Прадун2
[edit]- Наталія Прадун2 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Reuploads copyvio File:Презентація книги авторкою.jpg as File:Олена Бондаренко.jpg after final warning by Yann nine days ago. Jonteemil (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked by Lymantria. Yann (talk) 15:34, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
Namihka
[edit]- Namihka (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Is it ok to just create blank categories? I believe all these new pages should be deleted (except the ones that somebody else has already developed). Gikü (talk) 12:30, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked for 3 days, all new categories deleted. Yann (talk) 15:36, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- Isn't that a bit too harsh for a first time offender who only joined 6 hours ago and even responded to Gikü's message on their talk page? They might have created the categories in good faith just not knowing the policies and procedures here. Or were the categories crystal clear vandalism? Nakonana (talk) 16:44, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- I'm also confused what happened here, though creating several dozen blank category pages is certainly a problem (hides the fact that the category doesn't really exist). Still, it looks to me like, for example, Category:Villa F. Lechien (1976), when deleted, was a reasonable category, largely built up by Abxbay. Similarly for Category:Players of Gimnástica de Torrelavega, built up by Herodotptlomeu. I haven't checked too many more, but Yann, I think you should review these deletions (they look like a mixed bag), and probably unblock the user. None of these blank categories came after they were warned by Gikü. They had been creating them up until minutes before the warning, and four hours had elapsed between the warning and the block. - Jmabel ! talk 19:46, 19 August 2025 (UTC)
- OK. A few hours would have been enough anyway. Yann (talk) 04:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Yann: will you be reviewing the deletions? - Jmabel ! talk 05:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- In order to evit another block of my user, I left to you review the deletions. Thank you. Namihka (talk) 06:36, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Yann: will you be reviewing the deletions? - Jmabel ! talk 05:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- OK. A few hours would have been enough anyway. Yann (talk) 04:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
Cannot upload photo
[edit]I tried to upload file Aeshna viridis f1 from W. Commons to my paper "Фітохорія" in Wiki ua, but failed. Please help me. В. Николов (talk) 08:13, 20 August 2025 (UTC)
- You don't need to "upload" it, you just need to "add" it by typing
[[File:Aeshna viridis f1.JPG|thumb|Your description]]when you use the Source Editor. @В. Николов. Nakonana (talk) 08:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)- @В. Николов nevermind, I fixed it for you. The problem was that you wrote ".jpg" in lower case letters instead of ".JPG" which would have been the correct file name ending in this case. Nakonana (talk) 08:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)