Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

Shortcut: COM:AN/U · COM:ANU

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)


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.
  • 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.

Stas1995[edit]

I was unaware of @Stas1995:, until I saw Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Unused personal files. This DR, for over a hundred files, was created by Stas adding files to a personal cleanup category, and a (later clarification: creating a DR page with no list of files) DR page, and then using VFC to 'edit' the individual file pages for the category members to add the deletion template, instead of using the 'nominate for deletion' mode. By doing it this way, not only were the files not listed on the page (thus making it clear what files were nominated, and preventing others from being added later) but none of the uploaders were notified.

I warned him that if he ever nominates a file for deletion again without notifying the uploader I will block him for disruption.

Given the history in his block log and talk page, and given that he has been here previously over deletion nominations, I think the community might want to consider further sanctions. Reventtalk 20:08, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

  • I will not nominate any files for deletion (with notifying or without) in future. Thank you. /St1995 20:13, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - Since Revent mentioned previous concerns over deletion nominations, I think Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 58#Stas1995 and his speedy tags and harassment may be relevant here. Wikicology (talk) 20:48, 19 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment IMHO, I don't think additional sanctions should be made against Stas1995. I believe it was a mistake in their part. And mentioning here their previous AN/U is nonsense, since Stas1995 didn't harassed anybody nor tagged out of scope images for speedy deletion. In fact, he nominated the out of scope images at the category mentioned above for deletion (in the wrong way though), and even responded here saying that he will not nominate any file for deletion in the future (which is unfair if you will sanction somebody like that for a mistake). Poké95 11:50, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
@Pokéfan95: I specifically clarified to Stas on his talk page that I was only, personally, warning him to not nominate files for deletion without notifying the uploaders... he was using a 'novel' method to do so, and it was very clearly unacceptable for a couple of reasons (and required more effort than doing it the normal way). Any decision to not nominate 'any' files for deletion his purely his, as far as I am concerned... I only care that he does so in a way that is not disruptive. Reventtalk 09:38, 27 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree with Pokéfan95 that additional sanction may not be required considering Stas1995's comments above. I assume good faith that this problematic behavior won't repeat itself. I decided to bring the previous thread here for transparency sake since it was mentioned by Revent. This is because some users will based their judgement on these reports (past and present) without deeming it to review the previous thread. Wikicology (talk) 12:26, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Copyright violations from Prashantpking[edit]

User:Prashantpking has uploaded a bunch of TV station logos claiming them as own work which is obviously not true. This is after being blocked for copyright violations in July. In fact, this editor's contributions have all been copyright violations. --Whpq (talk) 01:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Indeffed. We don't need more copyvios. INeverCry 04:01, 21 August 2016 (UTC)


Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Wikicology (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:GaryFG8125[edit]

Hi. GaryFG8125 edits en.wikipedia in the area of Irish politics and politicians. An incident report for him has been opened at WP AN/I, which concerns his recent uploads to WP Commons - basically all of his recent uploads appear to be copyright violations. Examples include:

  • This image uploaded to Commons, used on the Government of the 32nd Dáil article here and replacing an image that had been verified as suitably licensed, has been taken from The Herald.

There are many more similar incidents from this user.

Can something be done, please? Bastun (talk) 16:33, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Copyvios deleted and user blocked 3 days. Эlcobbola talk 16:37, 22 August 2016 (UTC)
That was quick! Thanks! Bastun (talk) 16:58, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Wikicology (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Shinzo17[edit]

Could we a have a couple of eyes on User:Shinzo17, please. His upload from Flickr of File:Arvind Kejriwal Taking Charges As Delhi's First AAP CM.jpg looks like it's been grabbed from somewhere else. At the same he tags for speedy deletion multiple images of the same Indian politician taken by User:ThinkingYouth, photos we have had for three years. On enwiki Shinzo17 has removed one of these photos from w:Chief Minister of Delhi, inserting his derivative Sam Sailor Talk! 12:38, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Sam Sailor, The original image was published here on December 28, 2013. I doubt Shinzo17 is the copyright holder of this work. The copyright holder of the image is probably AFP. Wikicology (talk) 14:57, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • This is clear Flickr washing; the Flickr account was created, and the images uploaded, on 24. August 2016, the same date as the upload to the Commons. A higher resolution, more complete version was here in February 2015 and, of course, is on numerous other sites as well. I've deleted the copyvios. Эlcobbola talk 15:06, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Wikicology what do you mean by AFP?Shinzo17 (talk) 15:03, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

  • This user appears to be an example of someone who is clearly not here to build a repository of media. Their edits here, 1, 2, 3 are troubling. Also Taivo reverted their disruptive edit here, here, and here. Considering all these and their disruptive behavior at en:wiki, I think an indef block would be in order. Wikicology (talk) 15:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
    • I've just started in, but so far every file uploaded by TY that Shinzo17 tagged as a speedy actually has been a copyvio. COM:AGF, please. Эlcobbola talk 15:21, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
I understand that most file uploaded by TY that Shinzo17 tagged are likely to be copyvios considering the use of different camera models but they weren't nominated for speedy in the spirit of AGF. They linked the sources to website that actually took the file from here. For example, this file was uploaded by TY on October 2012, Shinzo17 tagged it for speedy deletion, pointing to this website as the source, also this mage was tagged by the user, pointing to this source. They continued like that for all TY's images they tagged for deletion. The fact that TY's images are likely to be copyvios does not address Shinzo17's problematic behavior here and en:wiki but I'll AGF. Wikicology (talk) 15:44, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

cc @INeverCry, SpacemanSpiff: This Shinzo17 smells like an old friend of ours. Indopug (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

And flickrwashing is indeed part of his MO. Indopug (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Artículo bueno.svg Confirmed. Эlcobbola talk 15:54, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Wikicology (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Wikicology (talk) 18:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Panoramio upload bot does not honor disambiguation cats[edit]

Panoramio upload bot keeps adding photos to disambiguation categories like Category:Kreuzberg. I notified User:Shizhao twice about this problem, but got no response. While this categorization problem is not huge, it causes unnecessary work for other users and should be prevented at the bot level. What I find quite concerning is that a controversial bot like this is seemingly running unsupervised, and its maintainer is not responding to queries on its talk page. Any suggestions? --Sebari (talk) 16:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

I see that you left a note for them here on August 2, 2016 and here on August 8, 2016. This user is actively editing. It is not clear why they aren't responding to query. I don't want to believe they ignored you. Wikicology (talk) 20:56, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
No way Shizhao ignores the problem. Maybe work already started or busy with other stuff. Give it some time. café --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:42, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
I thought as much. Wikicology (talk) 07:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Restoring this section as it has not been resolved. Today, again, photos were uploaded to said categories. This is really annoying. --Sebari (talk) 18:24, 24 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I'm surprised Shizhao has not comment here since this was reported last week. I think they need to tell us how they are fixing or intend to fix the bot. Srittau, I am not sure the user is aware of this thread. Do you notify this user? Wikicology (talk) 07:32, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
sorry, it fxied...--shizhao (talk) 12:52, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
@Shizhao: Thank you! --Sebari (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sebari (talk) 17:44, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Exoduslexis[edit]

Hi,

I think that Exoduslexis is not here to contribute. He uploads images found around the Internet regardless copyrights. Is the following image summarizes his thinking?

File:Lexis.png

Best regards, --Lacrymocéphale (talk) 13:16, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Final warning given. Will block if further copyvios are uploaded. INeverCry 19:30, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Wikicology (talk) 20:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

User talk:XPanettaa[edit]

Could an administrator please review User:XPanettaa's request for unblock? I have unblocked once, so I don't feel like I'm in a place to review the request.

Some background: this user has uploaded copyright violations and even sockpuppeted in the past. I decided to give a second chance. However, soon after unblock s/he uploaded some fairly simple logos. User:Steinsplitter blocked because the Netherlands has a low threshold of originality, and this is a repeat offender. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:43, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

  • Regarding my Dutch comments. In short I explained what Dutch case law says about the threshold of originality and the fact that just because someone only uses basic geometrical shapes it doesn't mean the work isn't eligible for copyright since arranging those shapes can most certainly generate a copyright. (Regarding the rest of the text, I mostly explained that the Netherlands is a civil law country and some other basic stuff like which sources of law we have and how precepts “created” by judges work.) XPanettaa ignores my argument, doesn't cite any case law and simply keeps repeating that the logo's concist of " simple geometric shapes". This user claimes to be a native speaker of the Dutch and English language but no matter what langauge I use, my argument is dodged. Just as a brief summary of what we discussed in Dutch. Natuur12 (talk) 09:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree with Natuur12, apart from that the user know very well that the TO in NL is low, i have the feeling that he is trying to play the system. @Magog the Ogre: can you please elaborate what you mean with "and this is a repeat offender."?
Last but not least: The user has sent me a e-mail, i answered and explained him the issue with logos under nl jurisdiction (i also cited a court ruling and legal opinion from a nl attorney), but got no reply. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Pinging users who blocked XPanettaa in the past: @Taivo: @Yann: --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:18, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Just a word: The latest logos look quite simple. However for the previous blocks in January and February 2016, I think that XPanettaa wrote elaborate arguments, but still seems to refuse to acknowledge previous issues. I feel dubious when he said "I don't know how to do that". And as Эlcobbola said, the issue of socking/block evasion should be addressed before unblocking as well. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:44, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
I read his talk page history and it is uncomfortable for me to unblock him. I suggest not to do that. Socking has not been explained. He has not confessed himself guilty. He has not archived his talk page, but has deleted its content. Taivo (talk) 11:51, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
@Yann: please don't close DR's early. Plus you are ignoring almost a decade of Dutch case law. Natuur12 (talk) 11:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

Arbitrary reverts by User:Jdx[edit]

User:Jdx is edit warring in Commons:Deletion requests/File:New Logo Google Earth.svg. Although having been told to stop his arbitrary reverts he continues his disruptive editing[1][2]. Request for administrative address to tell him to refrain from arbitrary reverts. --87.123.58.137 20:01, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

The reverts by Jdx are totally justified. Please stop disturbing this DR with your behaviour. Jcb (talk) 20:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
It's very nice of you that you started this topic because I was going do do it. Anyway, 87.123.58.137 is a cheat who wants badly File:New Logo Google Earth.svg to be deleted. He voted "delete" and signed his vote with his IP and several minutes later he voted "delete" once again, but this time he signed the vote with non-existent user name. Also please note that his IP and IP of DR creator belong to the same /16 subnet, one is located in Essen and the other one in Wuppertal (distance less than 40 km), so it is very likely that the same person created DR and then casted two fake votes. --jdx Re: 20:31, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Your guess is wrong. Instead of arbitrarily starting an edit war you should just have told me. If you are more happy with it, I'll mere the different texts into one. However, how can Anna and me, who are in fact sitting in the same office (no, it is not 40 km long) both vote, without you calling us a "cheat"? --87.123.58.137 20:46, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
So let's blame somebody else? Did you get inspired by en:Wikipedia:My little brother did it? Jcb (talk) 20:59, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
I can only tell you how it is. I don't have to justify anything to you and it is irrelevant for me, if you believe me or not. So if I created a few fake accounts, then I would have been allowed to add even more votes even without my co-worker? Ok, I'll know for the future. --87.123.58.137 21:08, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
87.123.58.0/24 blocked for 1 week for disruption. We don't have time to play these games. INeverCry 21:27, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, and I don't believe a word the co-worker story. At first not many offices in Germany do have a dynamic DSL IP. Second, if you would have been in an office at 11:00 and still have been in the same office past 23:00, you would clearly violate the de:Arbeitszeitgesetz. Jcb (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Seems like a fair block to me. My colleague did it. Lolz Wikicology (talk) 21:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

User:Beqabai[edit]

Beqabai is making very disruptive edits to a number of files. First, he reverted File:South Ossetia physical map.svg to a previous version uploaded by a different user which changes the border of the region and removes the internal divisions. I just recently reverted that file with saying that Commons is not Wikipedia and that there is no NPOV policy so adding disputed borders to maps is not necessary, it is much better to upload a new version. He later continued the edit war on File:Continents vide couleurs.png by changing the more visually appealing and better quality update of the map first uploaded by User:Spesh531. He also made a new map of Georgia in Europe calling it File:Europe Georgia.svg, identical to File:Europe-Georgia.svg except without the disputed territories which were there for different Wikis to follow NPOV. He then globally replaced the old file with his new one which entirely goes against the Wikipedia NPOV policy. Two of these issues parallel with disruptive edits made by User:Damianmx who was blocked not too long ago. I suspect this may possibly be a sockpuppet of his. --Turnless (talk) 17:59, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

  • I flagged two of their files for deletions as copyvios but I have not review their edits that led to this report. However, I like to remind the OP that allegation of sock-puppetry is a serious one. If you believe someone is using sock puppets, you should create a report at COM:SPI. That being said, I don't think there is a link between the two accounts (a CU may prove me wrong). User:Damianmx created account here on 7 December 2015 and was blocked on 3 August 2016. User:Beqabai created account here on 26 July 2015. After their first two uploads, They were off for six month. They returned on 18 January 2016. They were off again in February but returned in march and they have been editing without a long break since then. They uploaded this image on 3 August 2016 , the day User:Damianmx was blocked. In fact, there is no interaction between them on that day. BTW.... before posting a grievance about a user here, I thinks it's necessary to consider discussing the issue with them on their user talk page or the files talk. Wikicology (talk) 22:37, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes maybe you are right about them not being connected. They were just both involved in edit warring on the same files. I didn't start a discussion with them because of the speculation that the user may be a sockpuppet. I'll revert the edits explaining why and see if the user cooperates. --Turnless (talk) 23:10, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
I've reverted the disruptive edits, globally replaced the old file back, marked the new one for speedy deletion to prevent from further POV pushing and left a message on the user's talk page. I hope they do cooperate now and don't continue with their disruptive editing. --Turnless (talk) 23:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)