Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

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

Shortcut: COM:AN

Community portal
Help desk Village pump
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 instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email

[new report]
User problems
[new report]
Blocks and protections
[new report]
[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 at COM:HMS.

12, 11, 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
24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
Commons discussion pages (index)

Modification of main page[edit]

After many days a reply is needed here. I am quite sure it is the same than for the European competition in 2015 and WLM every year. Even for a shorter amount of time than in those cases. Let me know.--Alexmar983 (talk) 07:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok we still have countries with no upload and we need that space like in 2015.What else do you want me to do? Let me know. I wrote to some of the jurors to inform them.--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 11:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

This user's uploads[edit]

Is it safe to say that this user's uploads should all be tagged as no permission? It looks like he took them from a school site and they are derivative images. Perhaps he/she doesn't understand copyright. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 01:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Account blocked for a week, this is not the first time. Yann (talk) 11:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank You. I did not know the uploader had done this before. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 19:27, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Revision deletion requests[edit]

Please remove the frist version image in page. It is my mistake. Thanks. --Garam (talk) 16:40, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 23:50, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

User:Hebron Israel[edit]

User:Hebron Israel has an extremely insulting and provocative name: the city of Hebron is not in Israel, but in the occupied Palestinian territories. Is it possible to do something about this name/user? Huldra (talk) 23:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

the location and status is in dispute so it's not insulting. However, it implies a shared account. Artix Kreiger (talk) 23:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
Wrong, it is not in dispute. Not even the Israeli government claims that Hebron is part of Israel. Only extreme rightwing, typically Kahane followers, claim that. ( And Meir Kahane was a designated terrorist, according to US law), Huldra (talk) 23:46, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
I think the user name on itself is not something we are going to act upon. The uploads however are probably not own work and have unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Blocked. Such a name is not OK. Would any one here agree with a user name such as "Nazi Germany"? This is quite similar. Regards, Yann (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
Except that Nazi Germany was a real political entity. Hebron Israel isn't -- two separate entities. PumpkinSky talk 02:38, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
Yann, how is "Hebron Israel" similar to Nazi Germany? Can you point out the similarities between them and let us know how "Hebron Isreal" is inappropriate? Regards. Wikicology (talk) 07:14, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
This seems to be an extreme political statement in a sensitive situation. You can argue whether they are a misguided innocent or a professional troll, but that's not the point. Ultimately if there is a majority here who think this is OK, why should I care? Yann (talk) 09:54, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Huldra, there is nothing like "Hebron Israel" anywhere. So, it is meaningless like most usernames here including mine. "User:Hebron is in Isreal" is not the same as "Hebron Israel". Has this account been used to attack Hebron or Israel? I really don't get the issue here. Could you please, educate me? Regards. Wikicology (talk) 09:19, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
User:Wikicology Sure. The Israeli Kahanist settlers of Hebron commonly say that Hebron is in Israel (we have corrected them countless of times on the Hebron article on en.wp). Typically, take this picture user User:Hebron Israel uploaded: look at the title: "Tomb of Abner Ben Ner in Hebron Israel.jpg " Or a lot of the other pictures they uploaded are the same, from "Hebron, Israel". So yes: "Hebron Israel" means the same here as "User:Hebron is in Israel". Huldra (talk) 20:20, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Category:Waxham, North Carolina[edit]

Hi, I was wondering if someone could take a look at this category, because it seems there is a typo in the the naming. Imo it should be Category:Waxhaw, North Carolina. thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 04:59, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Added request for move at User talk:CommonsDelinker/commands/Category moves. Thuresson (talk) 07:31, 19 November 2017 (UTC)
@Lotje: ✓ Done   — Jeff G. ツ 00:12, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

"MP3 uploader rights"[edit]

Yes check.svg Resolved

Hi, Not sure if this is in the right place ... but is "Mp3 uploader" an actual right ? .... I assumed anyone could upload MP3s here?,
This caught my eye so just wanted to ask,
Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 23:37, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

No, to prevent copyvios en masse, we had discussions on the Village pump (I believe) and limted it to approved users. (Personally, I want to rename this userright to "Extended uploader rights" - just in case of future lititations such as for 3d-files. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:56, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
I suggested "Trusted uploaders", but George Ho wanted it to be more specific. See Commons:Village pump#Conclusions. Kaldari (talk) 04:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
I figured that "Trusted" looks more one-sided and biased. I don't mind a broader right, but I wanted a more neutral name. I don't mind a narrower right either, and I didn't mind "MP3 uploader", which I thought is a better suggestion and more neutral than "Trusted". --George Ho (talk) 05:11, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Ahhh riiight, Bizarre as it may sound I didn't know if someone adding it at PERM was some sort of sneaky vandalism, Okie dokie thanks all for answering much appreciated. –Davey2010Talk 13:38, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
Imho "Trusted uploaders" would be a better name, so we could use it in ABF/semi-automated tools as well. --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

These 3 images[edit]

Would anyone like to mark these 3 images below. The first one is heavily used but I cannot see the license anywhere.

Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 10:17, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done In fact those images are copyrighted + All rights reserved. The ones from the ministry that are explicitly released as free of use are published here. --Ruthven (msg) 13:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Thank you for clearing this issue up Ruthven. I could never find the license for these images. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Deletion requests by User:Daniella10171989[edit]

User:Daniella10171989 was blocked as a sockpuppet of User:INeverCry, but left a whole slew of baseless deletion requests mostly marked Out of scope - unused personal image. They really are baseless, I looked at just a few random ones, and most of them are of people that have EN Wikipedia articles, for example Commons:Deletion requests/File:Allisonmosshart.jpg: Allison Mosshart, Commons:Deletion requests/File:AllyCupcakeburnett2009TFPshoot.jpg: Ally Burnett, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Alireza Zamani.jpg: Alireza Zamani, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ali 2.jpg: Ali Anouzla, ... This could be used as a list of images to be added to articles. All the deletion requests from User:Daniella10171989 should be closed out. She may never cry, but I'm close to now. !@#$ it, what happened to a fine Commons admin to make her do this? --GRuban (talk) 15:25, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support nuking and rolling back any edits by INeverCry socks. He seems to have this delusion that his mass DRs and robotic categorizations are productive. No. They only inflate his edit count and his ego, and the large number of "unused personal image" DRs create a ton of extra work to investigate and close. We don't need it. Guanaco (talk) 15:33, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and nuke/reverted the latest sock, BrooklynRoger1958. Guanaco (talk) 00:18, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support It's possible that there could be something here that merits deletion, but only at the level that a stopped clock is right twice a day. Clearly it would be a waste of time to look through a bunch of mostly bogus requests by a banned user. We would literally do better to spend the time looking into random files. - Jmabel ! talk 00:11, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

File:Elle Me Dit Mika.jpg[edit]

I am uncertain about what to do with the single cover of "Elle Me Dit" by Mika. The image may be unqualified for copyright in the US because (per COM:TOO#United States) the threshold standards are very high. However, the CD single was released in France, yet the record labels (Casablanca Records and Barclay Records or Universal Republic Records) belong to Universal Music Group, an American multinational company. France's threshold standards are very low, so I wonder whether COM:TOO#France applies. I thought about deletion request at first, but that's asking for deletion. I thought about asking at VP Copyright subpage, but that's asking for mere copyright. Thoughts? --George Ho (talk) 02:48, 22 November 2017 (UTC)