Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

Shortcut: COM:AN/U

  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 legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

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

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 here.

Archives
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, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50
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


Note

  • 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.
  • It is usually appropriate to notify the user(s) concerned. {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.


Corkythehornetfan[edit]

Corkythehornetfan's constantly been uploading copyright-problematic images, whether too complex for PD-simple, PD-USGov not supported by source, or obvious copyvios. This isn't something new, either; the images I linked are all recent uploads, but https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_in_Lyon_County,_Kansas&action=history shows a lot of images being deleted last November after Corky added them, while the last three edits there consist of Corky adding two photos, which then get removed by bots after they're deleted here. The images I linked are unambiguously problems with Corky, and while I suppose it's possible that he was just adding links on the National Register list to bad images uploaded by other people, it's not at all likely. As this user's contributions are full of copyright issues, I expect a long-duration or indefinite block to be in order. Nyttend (talk) 13:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

The logos I only upload if they are marked Copy to Commons on the English Wikipedia. Otherwise, I won't do it. As for the photos, it'd be nice if the users here could be more helpful and not rude and just say that it's been nominated for deletion. It'd be nice to have them say "Hey, could you please find a license for this photo, please." If you notice it, just tell me and not report me. I don't intend to do it on purpose, just that I'm not sure. How do I find a license? No one can be nice and help out without me asking... if it is a reoccurring problem, maybe try helping the users out and give them suggestions. CorkythehornetfanTalk 23:00, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
You're continuously uploading photographs and tagging them as being Creative Commons licensed, or as being in the public domain, when they're quite obviously not that. Remember: in no case is an image CC licensed unless there's a statement with the image releasing it! And we can never tag something as being PD-USGov without an explicit statement that it's a work of the US federal government. The problem isn't that you're failing to identify the correct license: it's that you're claiming that all-rights-reserved images carry Commons-acceptable licensing or that they're in the public domain. Permit me to suggest that you upload no photographs whatsoever, except for ones that you've taken yourself, until you understand the situation better. Nyttend (talk) 01:55, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
That's fine. I'll stop uploading photographs, as long as I won't be blocked. Is it okay if I still transfer files from the English Wikipedia if they have a Copy to Commons tag? CorkythehornetfanTalk 02:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I have nothing against you personally; if you're willing to do that, I won't object. Please remember the warnings at {{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} regarding eligibility here: you mustn't assume that an image is suitable here just because someone else has tagged it with this template. Please continue uploading things that are just plain text, but please be careful with things with originally arranged text (example), since they really are eligible for copyright protection. Nyttend (talk) 03:12, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I know, you're just doing your job on here... I respect that. Is the example photo you mentioned Copyrightable? If so, I'll move it back to Eng. Wikipedia and request for it to be deleted on here. CorkythehornetfanTalk 04:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

This does, tangentially, raise another issue, which we would need to primarily address at en.wp, but could maybe be somehow helped here, too? (after all, we're all on the same team...)
{{Copy to Wikimedia Commons}} is applied by some users on a large scale, without enough care. Yes, there is a subsequent duty of care on the user transferring it, but the combination leads to the horrible scenario, which does happen:

  • Image exists at en.wp and is in use.
  • Image gets tagged "Move to Commons", when it should be best kept as fair use
  • Image is moved without proper consideration of that, by a user who thinks they are helping by moving files in a backlogged category, with "official" looking tags
  • Image is deleted at en.wp as now redundant
  • Image subsequently deleted at Commons (as non-free usually...)
  • Big hole in article, missing image that could still be fair use at en.wp but now exists nowhere.

We should probably look at ways to make that scenario less likely to cause harm (even if that harm can be fixed by reuploading to en.wp - that may not be an easy remedy/procedure understood by all good faith users, and requires access to the deleted image or another copy). Begoon - talk 16:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

In the past, w:Template:MTC was added to lots of files by bots operated by Commons admins User:Fastily and User:Sven Manguard, based only on templates which were present on the file information pages. Later, User:Piandcompany continued with this bot tagging. More recently, User:Sfan00 IMG has tagged lots of files manually, but errors do not seem to be too uncommon in his tags. For example, some images may be deleted on English Wikipedia per COM:NETCOPYRIGHT.
I think that we have three ways to go further:
  • Continue tagging all files which are marked as free in both the United States and the source country with w:Template:MTC. In this case, the template should maybe be modified to more clearly stress the need for review before transfer.
  • Only tag files which are clearly free in both the United States and the source country, and only tag files after a careful review. Is there any point in doing this? If I carefully review the copyright status of a file, then moving it to Commons takes only minimally more time than tagging it with w:Template:MTC, so it is better to move the file to Commons immediately instead.
  • Remove all "move to Commons" tags.
This is maybe more of a problem on English Wikipedia than on Commons, though. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
AFAIK bot tagged files set an additional template parameter which adds a red box cautioning any would-be transferees to thoroughly cross-examine the contents of any file bearing said tag. IMO no need for a block of Corkythehornetfan, they don't seem to have acted in bad faith; fwiw borked transfers are easily reversible within a few clicks. -FASTILY 03:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Marito nico[edit]

I blocked Marito nico (talk · contribs) for 3 months for copyvios (2nd block). All his uploads probably need a review. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:49, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Soccer kits revert war[edit]

There's still a slow-moving revert war going on on soccer kits. See e.g. [1] and check the file histories of the soccer kits there. Also looks like block evasion by Rizky Iconia (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploadsblock user reappearing as Rizky Shaimoery (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploadsblock user. Lupo 17:28, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Blocked the sock, obvious duck, still thinking what to do with the main account. Looking in to it further since a lot of the "soccer kits people" have had previous warnings because they continue to editwar. Natuur12 (talk) 17:58, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I've blocked the main account Rizky Iconia indef, considering this latest sock is atleast the 4th sock he's used. The above sock Rizky Shaimoery had on it's userpage "back soon," so more socking is likely. @Magog the Ogre:, @Trijnstel:, @Tiptoety: CU may be needed here. INeverCry 19:52, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Rizky Iconia ;). Thanks for changing block btw. Natuur12 (talk) 19:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I wonder who's sock Tonse12 is? I also noticed that the post above this one concerns kits... INeverCry 20:44, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Tonse12 is also a sock. Hold tight - I'm running checks and have a few more socks to block. Эlcobbola talk 21:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Lanuskit, Ficheirokits, Interkits, Jooooooao, Juventusfans, RMFA12, Tinhaleiras, Tubler123, Uruguayana2.0, and Vakovakovako were also socks and are now blocked. Category:Sockpuppets of Futbase should now be populated with all known socks. Эlcobbola talk 21:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

GilboNormand[edit]

In spite of deletions and warnings @GilboNormand: keeps on uploading deleted images, such as this one. Best regards --Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 06:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done, blocked for a week. Indeed, no useful content from this user. Yann (talk) 07:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)