Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

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

Shortcut: COM:AN

  Welcome   Community portal   Help desk
Upload help
  Village pump
copyright • proposals
  Administrators' noticeboard
vandalism • user problems • blocks 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
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, 51, 52, 53
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
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, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55
Translate this page
Commons discussion pages (index)



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raul654/Raul%27s_laws[edit]

Hi. My name is Steve. I was directed to the above link (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raul654/Raul%27s_laws) while searching in google for the following: https://www.google.com/search?q=rule+with+extreme+prejudice+and+unction&oq=rule+with+extreme+prejudice+and+unction&aqs=chrome..69i57.16135j0j8&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=93&ie=UTF-8

I was surprised and actually grateful for the search string result, even though it had nothing to do with what I was originally looking for. I wanted to tell someone how much I appreciated the Raul654 "laws" of Wikipedia operational difficulties.

As an "end user" of Wikipedia search engine, I cannot remember the last time I ever had a "scholarly" issue with a Wikipedia subjects content. I'm not sure what this means or possibly insinuates about my overall level of intelligence, but I am pleased to state that I have been very comfortable with the kinds of information I have read about thousands of different topics covered in Wikipedia.

I read about half way through all the various corollaries presented by Raul654. I wonder if 99.99% of all these objections and territory wars stuff that appears to be going on within various topics contained in Wikipedia, does this happen so called "behind the scenes"?

If not, then I wonder what this might mean or suggest about me, and my ability to discern the "truth" from the "fiction" that is purportedly suggested to be contained within any particularly "contentious" Wikipedia article? The fact that I have not had the experience of coming across such an article contained in Wikipedia (that I am aware of) is somewhat disturbing to me on a deeper, more fundamental level, suggesting to me that I am not nearly as smart as I think, and suggestively project of myself to the rest of the world. I hate being ignorant of my own ignorance.

Judging by the seemingly endless list of corollaries and the difficulties that the editors face when tackling various subjects that certain individuals feel and care deeply about, suggests to me by way of implication, that either I am woefully ignorant of the kinds of topics that generate such rancor among the rank and file, or that my self generated image of my being a kind of educated "renaissance man" is laughably absurd. I am at odds my own growing realization that I am but a mere dilettante of practical wisdom and knowledge, and recoil from my own pretense that thought I knew at least little bit about a lot of stuff, whereas now I think the beginning of my wisdom begins with my realization that I don't know much about anything in particular and even less about everything at all.

mrc109 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrc109 (talk • contribs) 02:15, 4 May 2015‎ (UTC)

  • As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Commons guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, deletion requests, undeletion requests, and noticeboards. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then automatically be added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). Thank you..     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:49, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The piece you cite above is a private essay on the English Wikipedia. This is a page on Wikimedia Commons devoted to giving Administrators here on Commons notice of questions and problems, so your comments above are out of place and probably won;t receive any comment here. The best place to discuss the essay is probably User talk:Raul654. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:44, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Yes check.svg ResolvedNothing to do here. Yann (talk) 11:48, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Admin-Bewerbung[edit]

Sorry for my poor english, deshalb weiter auf deutsch:

Ich lade seit Jahren Bilder auf commons hoch. Manchmal passiert es, das ein Bildname geändert werden muss. Meistens ist das mein Fehler, manchmal mach ich das für User von WLE/WLM. Da bleibt immer eine Weiterleitung zurück, die völlig unnötig ist. Auf DE war ich mal Admin, bis ich die Rechte zurückgegeben habe. Mir geht es nur darum, das ich die überflüssigen Weiterleitungen vermeide. Mehr nöchte ich gar nicht. Gruss --Nightflyer (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Wenn ich Dateien umbenennen muss, unterdrücke ich meist die WL, aber sonst wird das hier kaum beachtet. Du kannst aber die WL zum schnellen Löschen vorschlagen. {{speedydelete|Unused and implausible redirect --~~~~}} Bewerbung als Admin geht auf Commons:Administrators/Requests, aber nur wegen der Redirects wirst du wohl keine Mehrheit bekommen. --A.Savin 22:29, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
Du kannst als Admin die Weiterleitung unterdrücken, ich als User nicht. Deshalb hab ich mich gerade fürchterlich geärgert. Ich möchte nicht, das ich andere mit meinen Fehlern belästige. OK, Schnappsidee und deshalb erledigt. Gruss --Nightflyer (talk) 22:42, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done

Commons bug ?[edit]

This file, File:Catedral Sé (17066836590).jpg should show in Category:Cloisters of Sé do Porto and not in Category:Porto where it is showing actually, despite the categorization made. --JotaCartas (talk) 22:34, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

It seems fine from here. Have you tried clearing your browser cache and reloading the page?—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:54, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
I cleared my browser cache, and now everything is alright. Thank you. --JotaCartas (talk) 23:01, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done

Error spotted[edit]

The picture http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Embroidery_detail,_Phoebe_Traquair_(angels_carrying_a_dead_child).JPG states it is embroidery by Phoebe Traquair. Actually it is a painting by John Duncan and called St Bride. Just thought someone should change it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.220.67 (talk • contribs)

✓ Done by McZusatz. Taivo (talk) 08:47, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

mass renaming needed[edit]

Please rename all promotional pictures from Special:ListFiles/Crissiburnell, there are web-address in the name--Motopark (talk) 11:25, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Most of these picture are from http://pentridgedorset.co.uk/gallery/, a website which has "© Pentridge Village and Contributors All Rights Reserved" at the bottom of all pages. They also ask readers to send in photos, so I very much doubt that they are available under a CC licence. Can an admin please nuke all uploads per COM:PRP? ColonialGrid (talk) 11:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done - all uploads deleted and user notified. Green Giant (talk) 12:30, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

User:FreightXPress[edit]

I just indefblocked the user who is confirmed sockpuppet of Tobias Conradi, known also as Derianus and Tamawashi (see meta:Steward requests/Checkuser#FreightXPress@wikidata). None of these socks has been previously blocked on Commons as far as I know, though they are blocked on Wikidata and English Wikipedia, where they caused a lot of disruption. This sock came to my attention after they started to move geographical categories out of consensus, and when their attention was drawn to this fact by multiple users started to defend their actions. This was still ok, but then they claimed they are not a sock and CU's are wrong. Since I had to deal with Derianus on em.wp and with Tamawashi and Andrea Shan, another sock, on Wikidata, I know how it was going to develop, and that it would cause a lot of extra disruption. Therefore I decided to block them indef, to spare the time of the community. Any administrator who is willing to talk to them may unblock them but please monitor their actions since they have a tendency to get out of hand quickly. Also advice how to roll back all of their edits would be appreciated.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

5 days passed, most of the edits were not reverted, and it is clear that Yaroslav will spend months on cleaning this up. This mass revert is an obvious task for a bot having admin rights, because every human user can spend his or her time in a more intelligent and productive manner.
I am astonished by the fact that massive vandalism is not taken care of here, on Wikimedia Commons. For me this raises a very serious question of why I should invest my time into a project where obvious admin actions are not taken. --Alexander (talk) 05:22, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: If you want to roll back everything there are scripts for that: i.e. m:User:Hoo_man/smart_rollback.js. --Rschen7754 05:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
The script can't revert category moves. Maybe COM:CDC should be used. --Steinsplitter (talk) 05:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Indeed, most of the mess are cat moves, and some of them have been moved twice, which complicate things. I will have a look at CDC.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:39, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

Duplicates?[edit]

In Category:Duplicate, there are currently quite a few requests by OlafJanssen to delete duplicates of images from a work on birds from the Netherlands. However, they're not quite exact duplicates or simply scaled down: If you compare, for example, File:Aardzwaluw, oeverzwaluw Hirundo riparia (7787842144) (2).jpg (which is nominated for deletion as a duplicate) with File:Nederlandsche vogelen (KB) - Riparia riparia (034b).jpg, you'll notice that the "duplicate" is a slightly different crop (you don't see the edges of the page as in the other file) and also has a larger file size (555 vs. 422 KiB). So, I'm not sure that these should really be deleted as "duplicates", but asking for more opinions... Gestumblindi (talk) 20:15, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

The former was uploaded by OlafJanssen. Hence, he requests his upload to get deleted. --Leyo 20:20, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, yes, but we don't simply delete files because the uploader requests it. AFAIK we do "courtesy deletions" for uploader mistakes and the like, but not for valid, free files that have been on Commons for a long time, if they're in some way useful. So, my question is whether these alternative, "cleaner" crops are worth keeping, which I'm inclined to answer with "yes", but I'm not hell-bent on keeping either. Gestumblindi (talk) 20:26, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I am opposing courtesy deletions generally, but I wouldn't use this term here. --Leyo 20:37, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the considerations. Perhaps it might help to see the images in the Bird images from Koninklijke Bibliotheek cat are not used in any Wikimedia projects (other than Commons, according to the glamorous tool). The cropping of the deletion-requested files was done by one of my colleagues before he uploaded them to Flickr years ago. The main improvement of the images in the Nozeman-and-Sepp-cat is the much better metadata. I think that having two commonscats with overlapping (nearly) identical images is not helping Wikip/medians. Best regards, --OlafJanssen (talk) 13:01, 20 May 2015 (UTC)
Well, still some might prefer the other crops for other purposes? After all, Wikimedia Commons isn't just a repository for Wikimedia projects, but for everyone. The better metadata from the newer uploads could be copied over to the other versions. Gestumblindi (talk) 21:44, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Does it hurt to keep both versions? After all, we do have quite a lot of variants of the Mona Lisa, too. You could link one image in the respective other one’s file description page (I personally like to do this using <gallery></gallery>-Tags). Rgds  TRN 3.svg • hugarheimur 22:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
When we have more than one copy of an image, with only slight differences, we routinely delete an item if it's sent through a DR. Why do we need to file DRs for these images? We generally object to deletion upon uploader's request because such images are generally still useful and we don't want to get rid of good images just because of the request of one person. Here, we lose nothing by getting rid of the extra images (they clog up categories and are similar enough that that they can cause confusion, especially if you don't know there are two versions of the same original), so we ought to go and delete them as duplicates upon the suggestion of the uploader. Nyttend (talk) 05:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

We are screwed[edit]

We are screwed without [1]. Is there anyone who knows enough scripting to take on reproducing what this page does now that it's admin has quit? This was so useful I'm amazed that it's not a permanent part of our tool kit. Barring the ability to make it work again, anyone know how to see the "new users feed" without it? Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:19, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

Let's hope that the user who operated that page will return... --Stefan4 (talk) 20:36, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
As well as cleanup of transfers from other projects.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:38, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
Unblocking the bot might work for some time at least … --Leyo 20:42, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • While it's not quite the same, [2] is the uploads of "new users". If you also have the "popups" gadget enabled, you should get a popup with a small thumbnail and the wikitext of the page on mouse hover over the links. Lupo 21:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • And then there's [3], which shows uploads by users not in any local user group (i.e., such as autocreated accounts of people uploading through a Wikipedia). Many of these users have low edit counts, too. Lupo 21:33, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Tools seems back again. :-) --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Bearbeitungsfilter[edit]

Bitte die Datei File:Michael Kühntopf.jpg auf die Version von User:HaTikwa, 15:22, 22. Dez. 2010, zurücksetzen, um diesen seltsamen Grünstich zu entfernen. Ich selbst kann das nicht, denn die Aktion „kollidiert mit dem Sperrbegriff“ .*[Mm]ichael.[kK].hntopf.*. Grüße  TRN 3.svg • hugarheimur 23:17, 20 May 2015 (UTC)

Ist die Rücksetzung denn unstrittig? Optisch stimme ich da durchaus zu. Aber die grüne Fassung war immerhin seit >2,5 Jahren aktiv. --Túrelio (talk) 10:10, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Das ist nicht der Missbrauchfilter sondern die TitleBlacklist. Kühntopf ist global geblacklistet (und das sicher aus guten Grund). --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:31, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
+1 Also ich finde die grüne Version auch überflüssig (um nicht zu sagen Quatsch, dass eine Version lange "genutzt" wurde hat leider nichts zu sagen). Zudem ist ein Benutzer der einzig dieses Bild bearbeitet eh erstmal suspekt. User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?)  11:46, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Why isn't it possible to overwrite files if the file name appears on the title blacklist? Isn't the title blacklist only supposed to prevent people creating new pages and moving pages, whereas editing existing pages should be possible? I think that the version from 2010 looks better than the version from 2012. The file could be {{split}} if someone prefers the green version. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
@Túrelio: Wenn mich der Filter nicht gehindert hätte, hätte ich das Bild jedenfalls ohne Umschweife revertiert. Dass es sich so lange in diesem Zustand gehalten hat, ist für mich dabei kein Argument. Ich sehe ehrlich gesagt auch sonst keinen Grund, der für die Version mit "Grünstich" spräche. Man könnte natürlich, solltet ihr anderer Meinung sein, die alte Version unter neuem Dateinamen hochladen -- allerdings müsste das wohl wegen besagter Sperrliste ebenfalls ein Admin machen. Grüße  TRN 3.svg • hugarheimur 18:00, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
I have reverted the file. Should anyone be interested in the green version, they can upload it under a new name. --rimshottalk 19:33, 21 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much. Although I guess that only a sysop could upload the other version under a meaningful name. Not that I think it’s necessary. Kind regards  TRN 3.svg • hugarheimur 19:51, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

License review on file[edit]

Can someone take a look at File:VT-EVB.jpg? The Flickr source is marked ARR, but there are comments by the Flickr acct holder confirming that they've uploaded it to Commons under a CC license. The image is marked for review, but I'm not sure how to pass a file marked ARR. Thanks. INeverCry 21:05, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Reviewed, comment at Flickr page is sufficient. --Denniss (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)

Anyone up for a lot of moves?[edit]

I've just discovered hundreds of categories that have been given atrociously long names; one such is Category:Achmun Creek Bridge, Spanning Achmun Creek at County Road 222, Ola, Yell County, AR HAER, a category for a bridge that should simply be Category:Achmun Creek Bridge. Would someone be willing to keep a careful eye on the requests page for CommonsDelinker, or willing to have me leave a list of categories on your talk page? I really don't feel like recategorising thousands of images, and apparently (unlike at en:wp) if I move a category, there's no bot that will move the contents to the new name. I don't yet have a full list, but it won't be that hard to gather; it's just one user creating all of these absurdly long names, so I'll just need to go through the user's contributions and filter for categories and for page creations. Nyttend (talk) 04:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Nyttend, Delinker would be best but I'm happy to help if you let me know with a list. Green Giant (talk) 11:32, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Tara McDonald Live Show.jpg[edit]

Please can an Admin 1. delete this image from a flickrwashing account, 2. blacklist this flickr account. Finally, can this uploader be banned for a very long time for uploading copyright violations--as his/her talkpage suggests a history of such behavior sadly. Best Regards and Goodnight from Vancouver, Canada where its nearly 2 AM. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:51, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done - initially I blocked for a month because the previous blocks have been for 1 day and 1 week but in retrospect the user has not made a single talk page edit since starting uploading in August 2013. I don't think a month block will have much effect because it appears the user is not aware of the blocks. Therefore I've blocked them indefinitely but if they do make an unblock request, I will be happy to discuss a more definite block length. For what it's worth, I think the Flickr user may or may not be the person in the photo but it is unclear and will need a bit more researching. In the meantime I've blacklisted the Flickr ID but again I'm willing to delist if there is a good reason. Thank you for the report Leoboudv. Green Giant (talk) 11:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Thank You for your help. I think that this a fair response. If the user makes an unblock request, one can give reasons for a block and consider lifting it on a temporary basis or not. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

[[:]][edit]

Admin, Please delete this controversial map [[:]]. This map shows "Indian administered Kashmir" as "Indian Occupied Kashmir" which is clear troll. While this image don't show "Pakistan administered Kashmir" as "Pakistan Occupied Kashmir". Term "Occupied" is not used in Wikipedia articles. In standard articles like Kashmir conflict, Jammu and Kashmir, Azad Kashmir always there (must) use of term "administered" Kasmir not "Occupied" Kashmir. You can read these BBC and New York Times news too. [4], [5], [6], [7]. Thank you.--Human3015 (talk) 19:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

Deleted, the file is at least a copyright violation, regardless of any issues mentioned above. --Didym (talk) 19:36, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

This charmer[edit]

...has followed me from English WP (where I am most active), to here. Can some admin please protect my talk-page, and do the necessary rev-del and blocking? Thanks, Huldra (talk) 20:11, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done Natuur12 (talk) 20:16, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
Thank you very much; much appreciated. Please keep both my and Shabazz´s user-pages and talk-pages "watched", as he is sure to be back. (He has been at it for 5 years now....) Cheers, Huldra (talk) 20:20, 22 May 2015 (UTC)

File:China Pakistan Economic Corridor Map.jpg[edit]

This image was removed from Wikipedia for copyright violations. One user claiming it self work again posted it to Wikipedia. File:China Pakistan Economic Corridor Map.jpg. This image is copied from this website --Human3015 (talk) 11:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:25, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Commons:Photo challenge/2015 - May - Panoramas[edit]

Could an admin please move this back, and investigate how a new user is able to move this page. Thanks. -- Colin (talk) 14:42, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done - It is possible to add Commons:Photo challenge/* to the title blacklist if this happen ofter. Best --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:45, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm puzzled that new users can do this sort of thing at all. -- Colin (talk) 17:30, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Supercatwalk[edit]

If I'm not mistaken, a number of the files recently uploaded by Supercatwalk are out-of-process recreations of content previously deleted as a result of Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Supercatwalk. Could an admin please confirm, re-delete any files that we already reached consensus on, and (if appropriate) issue a warning to the user not to try to bypass proper procedures? LX (talk, contribs) 15:29, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done About half a dozen of these were re-uploads of images deleted in the earlier DR. I've deleted those. Of the new uploads, only two look like selfies; I've sent the others to DR at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Supercatwalk. I've also warned the acct. INeverCry 20:20, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Deletion[edit]

Hi, I'm not sure if this is the right place for this request: Please delete Category:Tal gilboa. I've changed the name to Category:Tal Gilboa, with a Capital G and changed all its content to the new Category. Thank you. Liadmalone (talk) 16:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done King of ♠ 16:10, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

User:CommonsDelinker and FPC log[edit]

Hi, nothing really wrong but I just want to notify : User:Hedwig in Washington deleted a file (File:Webysther 20150428130842 - Painel Tiradentes de Candido Portinari.jpg), the issue is that file was in this nomination which was in the Log/May 2015. To have used CommonsDelinker made that : [8], the result is this :{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/}} remained in the log which full copy the current FPC page in the log. I remedied the problem manually. But I think administrators, when deleting a file previously FPcandidate, should not use CommonsDelinker, or modify it, or add manually the name of the file in the log where the CommonsDelinker deleted it. Hope you will understand my English. -- Christian Ferrer 07:54, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

  • Duly noted. Smile --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 13:02, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Could it be that the problem to be fixed lies on the FPC side, not in the Delinker side? (Or, even less, in the deletion process in general, asked above to replace an automated task back to manual…) -- Tuválkin 13:22, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Far from me the idea to ask to my friends administrators to come back in the Middle Ages, that is a very strange idea. If you have a better solution or if you are able to find one, feel free to apply...there was of course nothing compulsory in my suggestions above. :) -- Christian Ferrer 13:53, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I think it is a bug in CommonsDelinker or somewhere else. There is no need to rename or delete part of the nomination page while deleting or renaming the file as the CommonsDelinker did above. It is frequently happening while moving a file which break all "assessment" tags. Jee 14:45, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
A cursory glance to the diff offered in the OP suggests that it is to blame the irregular (or at least unexpected) construct in use in FPC pages: {{Commons:Foo/File:Bar.jpg}}. I’d suggest that at least the bit "File:", which seems to confuse CommonsDelinker, could be left out (after all, a featured picture candidate is always a file…). Also, putting in double curly brackets (Mediawiki transclusion) anything not from the Template namespace is always risky…
On the other hand, granted, CommonsDelinker probably has no business deleting anything outside the “public” namespaces (articles/galleries, and categories, maybe also help and policy pages). In talk pages and project space, keeping a redlink is almost always better than have a file just disappeared.
-- Tuválkin 16:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Photo which probably I shouldn't have uploaded[edit]

Hi everyone, I recently uploaded a photo convinced of having understood the rights expressed on the website. The photo is the one of the President of the Italian Constitutional Court, and comes from the official website. In this link, it is explained the copyright of the website contents. After having uploaded the photo under the CC BY SA 3.0, I asked further opinions within the Italian wikibar dedicated to Commons, and we came to the conclusion the description of the copyrights is not very clear, and most probably the CC BY SA 3.0 is related to the open data on the website, and not the photos themselves. We felt probably it has to be deleted, and now I'm here to ask you further comments and eventually (unfortunately) the deletion of the photo itself. Please let me know what you think! If you need an eventual translation from Italian, no worries with that. I'm sorry if I eventually did a mess, the intentions were good. Torne (talk) 13:42, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

Has been dealt with by Jaquen. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

File:Graves at Arlington on Memorial Day.JPG[edit]

I'm requesting a temporary protection of this file since it keeps getting vandalised with unrelated uploads. This was first reported at the English WP today. De728631 (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

The uploader has already been blocked, so perhaps protection is no longer needed. De728631 (talk) 16:49, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Some old revisions of the file are copyright violations from this page. Can those revisions be deleted? --Stefan4 (talk) 17:01, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
    • The file history has been cleaned and the page has been protected for some time. Danke, Denniss. De728631 (talk) 00:01, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Category name change please[edit]

Hi, I am requesting a simple WikiCommons name change from MiaMia Bridge, to new name Redesdale Bridge on this page: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=mia+mia+bridge&go=Go&uselang=en

That should then properly activate the link from the existing Redesdale Bridge wikipedia page for access to WikiCommons ( Media related to Redesdale Bridge at Wikimedia Commons ).

Atthis time, the above link only produces this empty page: "This page does not currently exist."

But in truth, the Redesdale Bridge photos are shown under the category: MiaMia Bridge.

If you know of any other linking that needs easy correcting for the WikiCommons content on Redesdale Bridge, please complete it. Thanks & cheers, JAYKAY144 — Preceding unsigned comment added by JAYKAY144 (talk • contribs)

  • I don't see any administrative matter here. - Jmabel ! talk 07:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
✓ Done --Rudolph Buch (talk) 07:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Any Czech-speaking administrator?[edit]

I am dealing with this user (here the discussion) who kept on reverting categories / creating new one in opposition to the ones already existents while the discussion about a possible name change was still opened. Once I closed the discussion he kept on reverting and opening new discussions always on the same subject - in spite of a consensus for which there shouldn't be categories with the criteria he would like. I guess that an admin of his same language can explain things better than me. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:04, 27 May 2015 (UTC)