Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:AN)
Jump to: navigation, search
Skip to table of contents

Shortcut: COM:AN

  Welcome to Commons   Community Portal   Help Desk
Upload help
  Village Pump
copyright • proposals
  Administrators' Noticeboard
vandalism • user problems • blocks and protections
Administrator's assistance

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 instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email

(edit | watch)
User problems
(edit | watch)
Blocks and protections
(edit | watch)
(edit | watch)

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 (i.e. requested moves/renames) which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed here.

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
Translate this page
Important discussion pages (index)
Gnome User Speech.svg


  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links if required as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • If appropriate, notify the user(s) concerned. {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

LR backlogs again[edit]

Seems FlickreviewR gave us a huge backlog and gone...

  • CAT:FLICKR has +900 files (and still increasing) as of 03:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

And we still have lots of Panoramio imaages to review

Thanks for your work reviewing images. Revicomplaint? 03:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

I think the bots are failing because of the new flickr upgrade (more like downgrade)..regarding the backlog, most images are uploaded by trusted users/admins..maybe an option for licence reviewers to allow users to "pass" multiple image at once, a script maybe..would save time as going and doing it on individual images may take forever..and till the bug on FlickreviewR gets fixed..seems like every image uploaded from flickr is getting thrown in that category..maybe an alternate bot?. I think one user has one bot ready for use....give it temporary rights maybe?--Stemoc (talk) 04:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
@Stemoc: FlickreviewR 2 is approved, and it is supposed to work - however it is not working now. And, well, I am not sure if multiple review script will work fine, and there may be false positives. Revicomplaint? 07:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999:, can you pleas run the bot's (per cronjob) every hour one time? --Steinsplitter (talk) 09:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
✓ fixed --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 09:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
The Flickr Bot fails to review the images because they have a rotation problem, thumb is OK but fullsize is rotated. --Denniss (talk) 11:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Administrator attention needed[edit]

Administrator attention is needed at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#SiBr4 and File:Flag of the Isle of Man.svg. The dispute has been ongoing for more than a week without getting anywhere and without apparently attracting attention from anyone who is prepared and able to deal with it. Thryduulf (talk) 01:44, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

This still needs attention from an administrator. The two users involved in the dispute have clearly shown that they are unable to resolve it themselves and my attempts at getting them to actually talk to each other have failed. Thryduulf (talk) 14:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
COM:AN/U is on the watchlist of of many admins. No need to write here. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2014 (UTC)


Although it might not be used very frequently: Something is broken there, our project isn't called Wikimedia Commons, ..    FDMS  4    20:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done: MediaWiki:Sitesubtitle, Thanks for reporting. --Steinsplitter (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2014 (UTC)


This user is another account of the indefblocked User:Григорий225 (a CheckUser in RuWP has just checked this and blocked this account). I think it needs to be indefblocked here as well. --Michgrig (talk) 08:15, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done. --A.Savin 08:19, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Out of scope uploads[edit]

Special:Contributions/Graphic_design_graphic_design Palosirkka (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done Nuked and warned. --Alan (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Mismatched copyright and OTRS due diligence[edit]

In investigating a deleted article on en-wiki, I came across this image: File:Cyclic Corrosion Test Chamber.jpg.

What's wrong with this picture?

  • The image is clearly labeled with a copyright owned by a company
  • The uploader claims to be the copyright holder, implying the photographer
  • The OTRS ticket does not establish that the uploader has any authority to transfer copyrights for her employer

I have left a note in the OTRS ticket, and hopefully the person handling it will notice.

The same person also uploaded the following images without any OTRS reference, claiming "own work" but the images clearly show a copyright notice:

My question here is, what does one do (that is, what tags are appropriate) for an image where the uploader claim doesn't match the copyright notice that's part of the image, and the cited OTRS ticket doesn't adequately establish the claim of the uploader? Amatulic (talk) 19:52, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Put them for deletion? Even if a valid ticket comes later, that gives some time and space to discuss this issue. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
I just noticed that the OTRS ticket has some additional email traffic, so hopefully the uploader will clarify the situation to everyone's satisfaction soon. And Grasshoofd answered the second part of my question (thanks!) by tagging File:Cyclic Corrosion Test Chamber.jpg with the tag {{OTRS received}}, to indicate that the permission received was not sufficient. Amatulic (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

category with help request[edit]

I don't know the right page for this, but please have a look at this category with a help request of N.johnson10018 on it: Category:I have created this file. It is my personal photograph. I am Leanne's business manager and I personally took this photo. It's from January already and the user used to set it onto his own talk page. --October wind (talk) 23:28, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I deleted the category, because this was empty. I am not sure, that the category counts as a OTRS-permission. But such kind of permission is needed to host this kind of file. Taivo (talk) 09:57, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

When should deletion requests be deleted?[edit]

I just came across Special:DeletedContributions/MsEndri96 where the user opened a deletion request because they accidentally uploaded a file. This deletion request has been granted and both the request and the file have been deleted. Is this how uploader requests are handled? I was under the impression that those requests should be closed just like any other so that a) the user knows what has happened and b) other people can trace what has happened. Is there some special policy for handling uploader requests that I am not aware of? Regards, --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 09:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Looks like an accidental error to me. IMO, troll-type-DRs might be deleted, but this one doesn't fall into that category. --Túrelio (talk) 09:29, 9 April 2014 (UTC)
I restored the DR. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:34, 9 April 2014 (UTC)


User:NASA_USA is creating some pages (example: African_Computer_Engineers) about NASA Scientists(?). Can someone look at it? Southparkfan 18:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)

Removal of photo on MicroTiles[edit]

Could you please restore the image that you have deleted? I have discovered that it is in fact a public domain image. if I need to change how I stated ownership could you please advise. Also, I have no idea why it was removed in the first place when I indicated copywright information and had even received approval from the photographer. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BBibble (talk • contribs) 00:16, 10 April 2014 (UTC+02:00)

(admins: deleted image)
Hi BBibble, the information on the image does not suggest that you own the copyright to the image. As "source" you gave a website and we have no way of knowing whether that website is yours or not. Also you did not add a license template to the page therefore making it unclear what the copyright status of the image was. Can you please elaborate a bit and explain why you think this is PD? Thanks and regards, --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 11:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/2013/11/09[edit]

Does anyone else know what to make of this? We've got four new DRs added to a long closed log. Leitoxx, who made the edits, thinks it is a software bug. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

It is a bug of MediaWiki:Gadget-AjaxQuickDelete.js then. Does this happen frequently? -- Rillke(q?) 11:17, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Special:PrefixIndex/Commons:Deletion_requests/2013/. -- Rillke(q?) 11:18, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
It's the first time I have seen it, but I deliberately do not watchlist DR logs, so my seeing this one was an anomaly. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Category:Deletion requests July 2012[edit]

(Edit conflict) There are also much older deletion requests as of July 2012: Category:Deletion requests July 2012. 53 files in the category by now. The page Commons:Deletion requests/2012/07 has already been deleted as empty in March 2013. I've added this old category here: Commons:Deletion requests/Older discussions. But I don't know if anyone finds it there. I haven't seen, if these requests are really old or if it's also a bug. --October wind (talk) 11:20, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

I think those files have been undeleted because of any request on this page. All the files on Commons:Deletion requests/PD-AR-Photo de la Guerra de Malvinas 2 are blue instead of red now, but had been deleted in September 2012 because of unclear copyright status. Can anyone do anything with this? --October wind (talk) 11:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
Seems to be this request: Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2014-04#Commons:Deletion requests/PD-AR-Photo de la Guerra de Malvinas 2 linking to this recent URAA discussion. --October wind (talk) 11:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Azhar sabri (talk · contribs)[edit]

User is still uploading out of scope images after being released from the last one-week block. --TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 08:03, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Also, he seems to have frequently logged out and edited his userpage as an IP like what happened on the English Wikipedia. Might need to do a check for the underlying IP if he warrants another block. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 08:10, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

BSicon request[edit]

Could someone please delete obsolete BSicons and redirects listed here? Thanks. YLSS (talk) 11:55, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 07:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Island of Cyprus in File:World location map.svg[edit]

Island of Cyprus was not in File:World location map.svg. I've noticed that it is also missing from many derivates of that map. --RicHard-59 (talk) 14:39, 11 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Flag of Austria-Hungary (1869-1918).svg[edit]

Please protect the file from editing. Various users keep reverting because they do not like the simplified crowns, despite the fact that their preferred alternative exists as another file. Fry1989 eh? 00:12, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Done -FASTILY 07:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

picture of Caroline Klebl removed[edit]

The picture of Caroline Klebl that I used has been removed cited "no permission" Can you please tell me what I need to do in order to get the picture back up

Nerdypunkkid (talk) 05:25, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Please send an email to OTRS and explain your situation to them. If everything checks out, they will restore the file for you -FASTILY 07:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)


It seems to me that some bot is working unlogined but it's IP is making me confused - why is it an internal IP? Who is the botowner to write to? rubin16 (talk) 06:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Blocked for a day. It probably got logged out when the WMF reset all login tokens in response to the recent OpenSSL bug -FASTILY 07:42, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Pinged User:McZusatz, obviously YacBot running wild. --Denniss (talk) 10:25, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, the above is correct. I was not online on Saturday so I could not intervene. Thanks for making me aware of the issue and sorry for the disturbance. Though I remember loggin in two days after the heartbleed bug... --McZusatz (talk) 19:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Pictures from Oman[edit]

I think a review needed for images like this in category Category:Sultan Qaboos Grand Mosque and more images in Category:Buildings in Oman per this FOP update. See this previous discussion too. Jee 06:48, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, yes. See also en:Sultan Qaboos Grand Mosque, it is a contemporary building completed in 2001. --A.Savin 08:07, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Japanese speaker requested to help with deletion request ( 日本の話者が削除要求を支援するために要求され )[edit]


I nominated a *large* amount of files at this deletion request. These appear to be a number of scientific (or pseudo-scientific) diagrams. However, the descriptions are written in a haphazard combination of Western characters (which are clearly meaningless garbage) and/or Japanese script (which a combination of Google Translate and common sense suggests is either nonsense, or meaninglessly short).

However, I would be happier if a native (or reasonably competent) Japanese speaker could verify or refute this. Is this the right place to ask?

Google Translation:-

この削除要求で Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Taku_Ueki コモンズ]私は、ファイルの*大*量を指名した。これらは科学的な(または擬似科学的な)図表の数であるように思われる。しかし、説明は(明らかに無意味なゴミである)西の文字、および/または日本のスクリプト(Google翻訳と常識を示唆しているとの組み合わせのいずれかナンセンスか、無意味に短いです)の無計画組み合わせで書かれています。
ネイティブ(または合理的に有能な)日本の話者が確認するか、この反論ができればしかし、私は幸せになるだろう。 これは尋ねるために適切な場所ですか?

Thank you.

Ubcule (talk) 13:29, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I have added my opnion to the DR. whym (talk) 13:35, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Removal of the QI status[edit]

I think is not correct the removal of the status of quality images for these images:

Regarding this image, for instance, the Mona Lisa was not created by a user of Commons (of course), but the photographical reproduction yes! This photo fully complies with the quality images guidelines ("photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible") and it has also been evaluated in the appropriate page. Best regards. --Angelus(talk) 23:23, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I doubt these are photographs. Do you have any evidence therefor? Besides, I fail to understand why to discuss it on two different places. --A.Savin 08:09, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Could you explain why do you think that this image "is not a photograph"?? --Angelus(talk) 08:38, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Because there aren't any EXIF data or similar info in the description. As it is often the case with artworks, it is far more likely a scan of a printed reproduction. --A.Savin 08:58, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
In the EXIF data, is mentioned Photoshop CS6 because, before uploading, I corrected some imperfections. --Angelus(talk) 19:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I agree with you that it is better discussed at QIC talk. But IMHO, any reproduction by a Wikimedian can be accepted irrespective of the tools used. Not many Wikimedians have good scanners though. Jee 09:01, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Symbol keep vote.svg Agree - Angelus(talk) 19:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
I've scanned printed reproductions, like File:Sibirskai Surikov.jpg, and if you're starting from something that will fit on a normal scanner, the printing features become notable--see especially the original of that file. File:La Gioconda.jpg is certainly a photograph, IMO; the only other possibility in my mind is that someone took a high-quality painting and run it through a drum scanner, but those are quite expensive.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Symbol keep vote.svg Agree - Exactly... --Angelus(talk) 19:25, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

The discussion continues here. --Angelus(talk) 21:43, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --> No admin action needed, pleas discuss this on the relevant talk page. --Steinsplitter (talk) 19:28, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

User:YaCBot and "category-cleanup"[edit]

What is the point of edits like these, being made en masse by YaCBot (talk · contribs), which make absolutely no difference to the the rendered page (merely moving categories onto separate lines)? If that's a useful thing to do, couldn't the Upload Wizard be configured to format categories that way, thus not making needless work? I don't know what the policy is on Commons, but pointless edits are very strongly discouraged on enwiki. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Only a single line of code has to be changed, so it is no problem if there is "consensus". --McZusatz (talk) 20:23, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
IMO this is useful. I absolutely hate it when categories & templates are chained into one-liners. Wiki-syntax is horrible enough as it is to read (and even more so for new users), so let's not make it any more difficult please. -FASTILY 23:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Cannot edit Special:AbuseFilter/60[edit]

Yes check.svg Resolvedasked a steward as no local user was able to edit this filter Rillke(q?) 23:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Please have a look at Special:Permalink/121473082. I cannot show the request here because the abuse filter is hidden … Thanks in advance -- Rillke(q?) 22:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Security through obscurity is silly. The filters should all be publicly visible. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 23:17, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
With gerrit:126168, administrators are now able to modify these abuse filters again. Thanks hoo man and DerHexer for caring about the issue so quickly. -- Rillke(q?) 23:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Template:GFDL 1.2 or cc-by-nc-3.0[edit]

I think this should be merged to Template:GFDL or cc-by-nc-3.0 as being redundant; the family of multilicensed GFDL templates are typically labeled "GFDL or..." not "GFDL 1.2 or...", for evidence compare Special:PrefixIndex/Template:GFDL 1.2 versus Special:PrefixIndex/Template:GFDL or. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 02:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

No, the first version specifies GFDL 1.2 only whereas the other GFDL 1.2 and any future version. --Denniss (talk) 14:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
My mistake, didn't read the fine print carefully. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 00:17, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Rubyyadav and her suspect images[edit]


What she uploaded before has been deleted. She is now uploading more. She says she got some from the "newspapers". Then she says she took them, which seems impossible. She avoids saying she "owns" them, except in the upload field.

See also:

Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 05:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This may be obvious, but there is no metadata, indicating the photos weren't taken with a camera. --Jakob (talk) 11:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
Analysis There is room for good faith here, advice on how to write to OTRS to validate that photographs published at the website are owned by the same person is worth doing. Though the EXIF data on the external site here gives information that this was taken on a mobile phone, the data on Commons here is consistent with the source, with a potential explanation that the photographs were published on another website such as Panoramio, which may have itself cut most of the publicly visible EXIF data. The photograph on Commons appears to be at a credible higher resolution than that released on the official website, which itself should encourage us to avoid an automatic assumption that these are copyright violations.
The nature of correspondence here, would indicate that this is not Ruby Yadav, however this could easily be someone related to her campaign. The photos have educational value and the user has already asked for help and advice; it would be nice to see that given and some patience for someone who may be new to copyright issues or may not often write in English.
Update On en.wp the same account has claimed to be Ruby Yadav. I have provided some basic advice on writing to OTRS on her en.wp talk page. -- (talk) 12:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Remove a file[edit]


I uploaded a picture I realized afterwards was already in Commons. It is not necessary to keep it, so please delete it.

Sorry and thank you,

Daehan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daehan (talk • contribs)

✓ Done. --A.Savin 05:53, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Cleanup needed (copyrighted files)[edit]

See the upload history of Special:Contributions/HelenChimonidi. Several copyvios was uploaded over free ones, and now need to be removed. Nymf (talk) 13:31, 18 April 2014 (UTC)