Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

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

Shortcut: COM:AN

Community portal
introduction
Help desk
uploading
Village pump
copyrightproposals
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks and protections

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 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 here.


Archives
10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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)


Incorrect message group statistics[edit]

I am not sure where report this issue so I am writing here. I have translated all translatable POTY pages into Polish and I have been surprised when I found out that there are still 79 untranslated messages (out of 652). I have dug a little and found a few examples of messages that are not visible in the standard translation interface. Some of them are translated into Polish (message #2) and some are not (messages #20 and #21). Translated or not, they cannot be edited/created because of This namespace is reserved for content page translations. The page you are trying to edit does not seem to correspond any page marked for translation. Even originals, i.e. English versions, cannot be edited. I am pretty sure that they are "dangling" (similar to dangling pointer) because they have been removed from translatable page. Two questions arise:

  1. How to fix statistics? IMO it should be possible because MediaWiki somehow knows that a message is dangling or not.
  2. Should those dangling messages be kept? They are not needed anymore.

--jdx Re: 19:38, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Wiki bloked my user help[edit]

My user blocked please help My IP is 186.215.0.154 Please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mario2016wikimedia (talk • contribs) 17:52, 26 May 2016 (UTC+1)

Neither your username nor that IP has ever been blocked here, and neither is currently blocked on any Wikimedia wiki, as far as I can tell. Storkk (talk) 17:04, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
It is now, no open proxies. ~riley (talk) 18:17, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Careless DRs by Ellin beltz... once again.[edit]

I already came here due this issue, the ridiculous (or at least careless) DRs from this admin.

I cannot open this thread without this infamous phrase: Copyright paranoia. Ellin Beltz are still making DRs for invalid reasons and still claiming that everyone are assumming bad faith (including Me when I transferred the Bethlehem Steel logo), invoking every time the COM:EVID, but without providing any proof of copyvio, in other words, guilty until proven innocent, and forcing to other to do the job (research properly before nominating). Another notable example of Copyright paranoia and Copyfraud is this this DR (originally a Speeyd tag) of a blatanty uncopyrightable symbol (the Taijitu/Yin Yang), that is even an Unicode character.

Straight to the point

This month, some DRs opened by her called my attention, specially this, opened with the classic Internet culls & COM:COPYVIOs., without considering the U.S. Copyright Law. The copyright status of these advertsing is discussable, but accussing someone for Copyvio is severe.

But, this DR called my attention widely (and I spent several hours to research, time that I could used to review the OTRS queue). Why? Ellin Beltz nominated 174 files at once (spent 30 seconds or less), all of them transferred to Commons by Adem20, despiste these files has been/are:

  • Already uploaded to Wikipedias several years ago, some of them the 2005!
  • Google Image Search didn't returned results for these files prior to the date of original upload for almost all of these files
  • FOP cases, one of them already nominated for deletion (another deletion process is not allowed, specially if the second DR is for invalid reasons)
  • Effectively {{own}} works (from the original uploaders) and properly souced ones
  • Simple diagrams bellow the COM:TOO
  • And the worst, files from OpenStreetMap, NASA and NOAA, the last two ones in the Public domain according the U.S. Laws.

The above DR is more than a mistake, is a careless behaviour that has been repeated over and over the time. Therefore, I request to the andmins the following:

  • Speedy close this, this and this DRs.
  • Get more concensus about Copyfraud. Copyfraud is punished in some circumstances, and acussing for Copyvio to someone innocent who transferred several files to Commons in good faith (including works in the PD) is a severe case of Copyfraud and a violation of the Deletion Policy.

Almost everyone could know the personal problems with this admin, but personal problems should be moved away, and pay attention to that actually matters. I'll not request anymore against this admin; I preffer to leave this case in the hand of other admins. But, invalid DRs and false copyvio accusations should not be allowed anymore. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:44, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

In an attemp to justify the disruptive DR, she answered this in her Talk page. By requesting to me to AGF, she are, IMHO, implicitily assumming that I'm assumming bad faith (and as the Spanish Wikipedia mentions, Assumming good faith does not mean Ignore bad actions, like the above careless DR). As I mentioned, is not easy to stay mellow when I spent several hours to research. Instead of taking responsibility (by, at least, closing the mass-DR). --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:37, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Jeesh, you must have made a lot of friends playing in the sandbox. Or are you still playing in it? COM:WORK OR FUCK OFF is still redlinked I see, I might need to make it. You've hounded Ellin, and you've been told to give it a rest in general. I see you've already wasted your time with a dozen edits just writing/editing this section alone, move on and do something constructive instead of calling out admins. People make mistakes. If you feel we're wasting your time and pulling you away from the OTRS queque, focus purely on that. I'd love to see you stay out of drama like the average user does. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I could opted to just follow the DR and don't vote. But, what about if admins close the DR as Deleted? I don't thing that most of the admins will just follow the reasoning provided by Ellin Beltz and get rid the 174 files at once, but I fear might happen (and that already happened). Everyone know that deleting files without researching properly is a violation of the Deletion Policy (and some UDEL has been requested by Me due improper deletion). --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I see nothing wrong with the deletion nominations, which is not to say all should be deleted. If you believe you can argue to keep one or more files, please do so in the DR. If the closing admin feels that the files are too heterogeneous, that is for them to decide, not you. Certainly, I see no speedy keeps here (or indeed at the vast majority of those DRs where you !vote Speedy Keep). The only problematic behavior I see here is yours: with your attitude towards nominators in general, and Ellin specifically, your consistent failure to assume good faith, and also in your spurious Keep votes on obvious copyright violations and cavalier attitude towards licensing. The fact that someone with such a cavalier attitude towards licensing and such deplorable people skills is an OTRS agent is extremely troubling. Storkk (talk) 08:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I admit that I'm still confroontational. But, if you're talking specifically about the 174 files' DR, I found only few files that are actually copyvio; the rest are totally OK. The problem is that the DR is not just too heterogeneous (that should be detected by the user who opened the DR), but also totally innapropiate, for that reason, and the ammount of files nominated, the DR called my attention deeply. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree with ~riley and Storkk. And this is not the behavior (communication skills, understanding of COM:L, COM:PCP, ...) that i expect from a OTRS member. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:57, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, this is not the proper way of communication, I admit. But I already told Ellin Beltz to be more careful, but she continued... and neither of us are newbies, we're longterm and experienced users; some times commit mistakes (even Me), but if a user (including admins) are already warned for such behaviour (including warnings to Me), them should not be repeated... but, one thing leads to another. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • We all do make mistakes from time to time. The links refer to deletion requests which are already months old with the exception of this one from yesterday. Probably the point that these files were transfered from other wikis was overlooked. This could have been solved with a nice little talk page contact. I do not see how a somewhat less than optimal DR opened in good faith justifies a thread at this board. --AFBorchert (talk) 15:06, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I mentioned the older DRs due this admin made exactly the same mistake with the latest DR that I cited. Is easy to determine that the DR is wrong even before opening, by seeing two or three files and say «oh, these files has been just transferred... and ohh! This file has been uploaded to Wikipedia more than 10 years ago! This file is from NASA, etc», but not, she claimed that the user who transferred the files to Commons is the sole uploader, and is not the first time. As I mentioned above, I already told this admin to be careful, but... --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Can't we just give Ellin a second (or third?) chance? Poké95 00:08, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Authorship information[edit]

Hello, could someone e-mail me the original description and authorship/license information for File:JZ foto.jpg? There's ticket:2016041110004787 regarding this file, written in Czech. I'd like to take a look on the file description before I can eventually ask for undeletion. Thank you! --Michal Bělka (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done I've attached a notice to the ticket. --AFBorchert (talk) 16:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Another Bangladesh Facebook sock[edit]

Can an admin block User:Amilfsjfd and delete the copyvio video uploads? Thank you. INeverCry 16:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done by Zhuyifei1999 --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:53, 27 May 2016 (UTC)