Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU • COM:ANI

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

Vandalism
[new section]
User problems
[new section]
Blocks and protections
[new section]
Other
[new section]

Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.


Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.


Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.


Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.

Archives
17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)

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.

Time to appeal[edit]

The topic ban of nominating files for deletion applied by User:De728631 stated that I can appeal for the ban after six months, the time has come. --A1Cafel (talk) 07:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, this community-induced TBAN has also been discussed at User talk:A1Cafel/Archive 8#Editing restrictions. De728631 (talk) 13:41, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@A1Cafel Was that it? Most appeals have a rationale. Timtrent (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The topic ban set by De728631 stated that you may appeal this topic ban in six months from now by starting a discussion at COM:ANU where community consensus is required to lift your restrictions.--A1Cafel (talk) 02:53, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we support to lift your restrictions, do you have any reason? It looks like an immature appeal, IMO. It should atleast address why should the restrictions be lifted (taking other things such as why were the restrictions imposed and what have you done to avoid the behaviour which lead to the imposition of restrictions, aside) --Magogre (talk) 04:10, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Timtrent and Hulged: I was imposed a topic ban due to misuse of speedy deletion. I have learnt and promised not to nominate files for speedy deletion even they had FOP issues (because a discussion is required to see if it can be solved or not). Also, I will not nominate files for speedy deletion if it is not an obvious copyvio (e.g. image found on the source with smaller resolution despite it was first published outside Commons). A DR should be opened to allow discussion. --A1Cafel (talk) 16:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to this discussion and the language above, the restriction was broader than speedy deletion. The first restriction was that you would "neither nominate pages for a deletion discussion nor tag any page for speedy or delayed deletion." Did you limit yourself to only speedy deletion nominations and if so, will I find example of other deletion discussions that I hope were positive interactions at least in the last few months? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricky81682: I also refrain from creating DRs. But after clarifying with the admin, I was allowed to give comments on current DRS and make categorization. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@De728631: Can I apply the rights that was previously revoked? --A1Cafel (talk) 03:07, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@A1Cafel: Do you see any consensus by uninvolved users that your topic ban should be lifted in parts or in total? I don't. In fact the discussion didnt't even start properly. So, you don't have to ask me to reinstate your previous editing privileges, but the community of Commons users. That's how it works. De728631 (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Genuine question - Is this "appeal" a joke?, I don't see any form of rationale that explains what they've learnt from their mistake or what they do differently now . I also don't see any background information included here by the user that explains why such a restriction was placed in the first place (I for one cannot remember every single !vote I make or every single discussion we have here).
The only thing I do see here is immaturity and that no lessons have seemingly been learnt (If they had I'm sure the user would've made an effort above). In short I see no valid reason as to why the restriction should ever be lifted in 6 months or well ever really. Everybody makes mistakes = It's how you learn from them that defines you –Davey2010Talk 15:48, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Davey2010: I have been totally blocked from the deletion process, just get unban on participating DRs two months ago (after communicating with the banning admin). You can just simply look at the DR that I participated recently, IMO this is so called the evidence or the efforts that I have made.--A1Cafel (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate that and one could ask "How can I show evidence of something I'm banned from?" in which case there's more to Commons then just DRs, I'm not going to spoon feed you the answers but there's means and ways to properly get unbanned or unrestricted from things. –Davey2010Talk 21:01, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then I think I already done something to show I have changed, Apart from participating DRs, I have done categorizing, updating license from PDMark-owner to other valid PD license, etc. You can look at my contribution as reference. --A1Cafel (talk) 05:56, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr spam[edit]

RESOLVED:

Matlin has been blocked for three months and his F2C access was removed. --A1Cafel (talk) 05:58, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:Matlin uploads hundreds of Flickr images without paying attention to their quality and without properly categorizing them. For example, look at Category:Prague. The problem is not new. --Xocolatl (talk) 16:51, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Their talk page archives are a long list of deletion notifications. Unless there is a compelling case otherwise, I will remove flickr2commons access. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:02, 1 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
So you can't do it earlier? Other admins can't do it earlier? If only so, i could be able to clean up my files for month. It's hilarious... Matlin (talk) 08:08, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And deletion notifications aren't reason to do anything. For example (sorry, I have to give examples...) Magnus Manske's bot have a lot of them, Fae too. It is reason to block this users? Nope. Matlin (talk) 08:13, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Behavior of the applicant is aggressive and akin to "harassment". This user was doing spam-edits, blindly selecting all my files and adding my personal category to them for checking (Photos uploaded from Flickr by Matlin (needing check) - it's semi personal category, from which you can remove checked files, but not add them again ), even if the file was a crop from the Masovian Digital Library (see https: // commons. wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Xocolatl&offset=20220105210511&limit=5000&target=Xocolatl). It is worth noting that the User:Krok6kola user has a similar behavior, similar edits.
Also, recent file deletion requests are reckless, devoid of rational justification, and even no justification (e.g. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Witra%C5%BC_w_Sanktuarium_(5699564528).jpg). Reports are added right after uploading the file, as if this user has been stalking me.
Currently, the files that I upload are not suitable for the speedy deletion, there may be minor exceptions. This does not justify a blockage.
For now, I will not supplement my statement with threads regarding files previously uploaded (2021). Back then, I had different views. There is no time for this yet, and if it were, it might be pointless anyway.
The previous block, most likely initiated by the same user, was invalid (no right justification) and the administrator who imposed it should get a warning. I sent the administrator who did this an e-mail (EOT-clause), but I don't have a copy of it. Perhaps he has it. Matlin (talk) 08:03, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Xocolatl: Let's set aside any talk of blocking for the moment. I'd like you to address Matlin and gently outline what you would like them to do differently. Then we can discuss and hopefully you can come to a mutual agreement. Guanaco (talk) 08:59, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Guanaco, i asked him a few weeks ago to categorize his images. I won't do that again. And the other problems even aren't new. --Xocolatl (talk) 20:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think some action has to be taken. We have been quick to take users like A1Cafel to task but Matlin just continues uploading without checking. A number of people have raised this- they need to be more careful when uploading from Flickr. Time to do something about it Gbawden (talk) 09:38, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All users are responsible for three things with their uploads: making sure they are acceptable quality and in scope; making sure they are not copyvios or duplicates; and adding accurate and useful filenames, descriptions, and categories. This is doubly important for mass uploads – one error or insufficiently curated file is easy for someone else to clean up, but one thousand is a real headache. Access to powerful tools like F2C is a privilege, not a right, and it is a privilege that must be taken away from those who misuse it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:07, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support F2C removal - The Prague category is now filed with almost identical images all thanks to this user. Credit where credits due they have been categorising their images but yeah they've now created a whole new issue whilst resolving the previous issue they caused. I no longer hold any confidence in this user and their mass-uploading/categorising.
I echo Pi's sentiments - F2C is a privilege not a right. –Davey2010Talk 22:02, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Matlin doesn't categorize properly. Who will clean up Category:Ski jumping in Poland? Or Category:Events in Spodek? Or... --79.249.19.125 22:01, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This IP user is propably Xocolatl (both are removing Profile/Profiles category recently). Matlin (talk) 05:27, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that was me, I wasn't at home and therefore not logged in. --Xocolatl (talk) 20:52, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Guanaco: It is not possible to have any kind of discussion with Matlin, except perhaps if you speak Polish. The category Category:Uploads by Matlin/temp was created November 24, 2021‎ by users to put files uploaded by Matlin to delete, saying Matlin was addicted to the "Flicker hose". Those users did manage to delete long lists of files. They have now just given up, as I have. After his last block for a month, Matlin has done slightly better in terms of attempting to categorize. In the past Matlin put many files in Category: Unidentified people. Krok6kola (talk) 18:46, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support F2C removal per above. Bulk uploading from Flickr can be useful when there are many related photos of some in-scope event or subject, but should not be used indiscriminately to dump anything with a free license tag. Kudos to Matlin for enthusiasm, but despite previous discussion they continue to make a mess relying in no small part for other users to clean up, in categorizations or mass deletions. I urge Matlin to take responsibility for what they upload - please determine if something seems of in-scope usefulness before uploading it, rather than uploading everything and clogging deletion requests later, and paying more attention to appropriate categorizations, thank you. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:19, 4 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: See Category:Uploads by Matlin. He has uploaded 334,472 images, 94,453 still needing to be checked although Matlin checks many of his files himself. I do not know if this is in the range of "normal" for the Commons or not. Krok6kola (talk) 15:30, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support F2C removal. Recurring problem, see here. — Racconish💬 23:28, 5 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Three particularly troubling edits by Matlin crossed my watchlist this week, prompting further investigation:

All three edits also removed Category:Photos uploaded from Flickr by Matlin (needing check). This is unacceptable: adding a single overly-broad category, without verifying that the category is accurate (much less specific), and without adding a useful description or filename, does not constitute even a basic level of curation. From their past few days of contributions, it is clear that they are making these poor-quality edits en masse. Based on these actions and comments in this thread, I have removed F2C access and blocked Matlin for three months. (While this is a long block, I feel it is a reasonable escalation based on multiple past blocks and ongoing disruption.) Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Thanks. Now he is abusing Talk Page Access and making a personal attack.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 17:10, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just some bluster - nothing worth revoking TPA access at this point. If Matlin files an unblock request, an uninvolved admin can review it. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:20, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Pi.1415926535: Sadly, I had to disengage with Special:Mute/Matlin.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 20:01, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

POV edit warring[edit]

user:Comrade-yutyo[edit]

See file history of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_totalitarian_leaders.jpg

The user has not provided any good sources for their changes and is starting fights over at w:totalitarianism over this as well. Dronebogus (talk) 21:42, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The user also submitted a false report concerning their edit warring (rather than some problem with our abuse filters) in this edit.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 21:55, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have provided sources yet they are called "biased", while literally Hayekian capitalists' ideas on totalitarianism are put as reliable. I am not accepting this. Remove the entire photo which is naturally biased anyway or accept right-wing capitalist totalitarianism of Pinochet who is responsible for an awful regime. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 21:58, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The user did not notify the subject of the following subsection via user talk page as required above.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 22:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the file history, Dronebogus tried to revert back to a version that was bring the file back where it was originally, which was inline with COM:OVERWRITE, since it was User:Comrade-yutyo overwrote it with their preferred version. The file should be reverted back and protected, Comrade-yutyo should upload the file under a new title. Wikipedia issues should be dealt with there, not here. Bidgee (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

user:Dronebogus[edit]

This user, while discussion was not over yet, had reverted the addition of Pinochet in the https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Historical_totalitarian_leaders.jpg to clearly commit whitewashing. --Comrade-yutyo (talk) 21:52, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The user deleted this subsection when it was a section, and did not notify the subject of the previous section via user talk page as required above.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 22:02, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Dronebogus: , why did you blank this very thread? Please don’t do that, leave it for Admins. Bidgee (talk) 23:34, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • ✓ Done I've protected the file for 2 weeks. @Comrade-yutyo However, replacing Pinochet by Francisco Franco is no POV and should be discussed (Franco is contemporary to the other leaders in the collage). Ruthven (msg) 08:00, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I added some subsection verbiage to my writings above. Why can't we have all the authoritarian figureheads represented? If we want to limit representation, how many people must they have killed or denied fundamental human rights?   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 11:52, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It’s a question of reliable sourcing. Franco and Pinochet are not described as “totalitarian” in any sources provided so far Dronebogus (talk) 15:17, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flogging the Iberian horse[edit]

Yet more edit-warring by Finoskov (talk · contribs) as to whether it's Iberian horse or Iberian horses. Issue is "dead and closed" some time back, per @Montanabw: , so this is just trying to edit-war and hope no-one notices. See CfD and COM:AN/U. @Tm: Andy Dingley (talk) 16:39, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest leaving Iberian horses as a redirect to Iberian horse, then protecting it. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:44, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just two more cents, if i´am not mistaken, Category:Iberian horses was deleted by Montanabw, after the closure of CfD and COM:AN/U, but recreated by Finoskov. I could be wrong, or it could be merely a redirect that was made. Tm (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
MontanaBW tagged it for speedy deletion and suggested salting it too, but this was reverted by Finoskov a few hours later. Personally I'd favour a redirect as the best solution. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: Category:Iberian horses protected indef and former revisions undeleted. Categories are made for to ease the search for information. Whether A redirects to B or vice versa is merely a minor cosmetical problem. --Achim55 (talk) 21:18, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Special:Contributions/Donat_Zubovych[edit]

A lot of users contribution seems to be copyright violation taken from internet.--Renvoy (talk) 20:57, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I warned the user and I encourage everybody to nominate all his copyvios for deletion. Taivo (talk) 07:49, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IP disruption at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine.svg[edit]

A non-static IP user is making disruptive edits at the file description. Cannot message the users since their IP changes after each edit. Can you semi-protect the file please, thanks. Viewsridge (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. IP blocked für 1 day. File semi-protected for 1 week. --Túrelio (talk) 13:23, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

HSLC Assam Is[edit]

The user is only engaged uploading derived/copyright works with false license of being in public domain and own work. Run n Fly (talk) 16:08, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. The user is warned and I deleted all his/her uploads as copyvios. At moment that's enough. Taivo (talk) 11:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]