Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
< Commons:Administrators' noticeboard
Revision as of 16:49, 21 June 2016 by Colin (talk | contribs) (→‎Colin: outdent section per Davey's wishes)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU

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

Archives
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 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
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
97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 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
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

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.

CommonSense Link in German Upload Page to be removed

The Wiki Commons German Upload Page for own works calls in step 2 to use CommonSense [1]. But this project has been stopped (project page says "R.I.P"), so this link to CommonSense in the section "step 2" - Make information retrievable - should be removed. --Polimorph (talk) 10:35, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Polimorph: German Upload Page? Please provide a link. Thanks. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:19, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Steinsplitter: Da die Seite auf Deutsch ist, mache ich auch auf Deutsch weiter. Ich beginne hier und folge unter "B) Formular bisherige Hochladeart" dem Link "Es ist ausschließlich meine eigene Arbeit." Dort steht dann

Schritt 2. Mache die Datei auffindbar. (Commons hat mehrere Millionen Dateien) Verwende einen aussagekräftigen Zieldateinamen. Benutze keine Standard-Dateinamen! Beschreibe den Inhalt der Datei. Suchmaschinen suchen nach Text, nicht in den Pixeln eines Bildes! Benutze das CommonSense-Werkzeug, um passende Kategorien zu finden. Und diese Seite ist R.I.P. Vielleicht nicht für so viele mehr relevant, da inzwischen mehr der Wizzard genutzt wird (?), aber trotzdem sinnvoll es rauszunehmen oder? Grüße --Polimorph (talk) 13:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the situation

I have never had a non-administrator and nominator of a file revert any of my administrative closes of Deletion Nominations until today. Please see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Foto recente..jpg where the nominator Davey2010 not only reverted the close, but removed the photo from the user page where it was in use. I find this action troubling on several levels and wish others to have a look and render opinions. At this point, my concern is not with the photo itself, but with the (1) blanking that user's page (2) nominating a one-week old user's page for deletion which seems rather unfriendly and (3) reverting a Deletion Nomination close which disagreed with his nomination. I would not like to see this become a trend as it makes even more work for admins than we have already. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not the first time and the last time he promised the following:

I shall not revert any admin closures ... There we go ... Can someone close this before I lose the will to live. –Davey2010Talk 15:07, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Natuur12 (talk) 14:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Re-closed --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 16:43, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The userpage was IMHO bordering on privacy concerns and so I felt the best option was to delete that and the image,
Ellin Beltz - Re:DR - I don't know if you're a male or a female (Plenty of men have women names and vice versa and as I've never heard of "Ellin" before I didn't want to guess your gender (especially if you were a male!), I admit I perhaps should'nt of CSD'd his page and the image however I was trying to actually help them out not scare them off, I agree I should've messaged you and I apologize for not doing so, And nope I wasn't trying to game the system - I was simply trying to help, I admit I could've done it all better tho,
One last thing - Life would be alot more easier if there was a DRV here - If I disagree with the closure and just renominate - That's just disruptive on all forms and a waste of my time - I'm not going to agree with every closure that's a fact but in this case I fail to see how just renominating again is any better than me just reverting ? ... Either way the file's up for deletion again?, Yes it's an admin closure but as there's no DRV you're not left with any choice except to ask the admin to kindly reopen....., Anyway I know I promised before but I know one day my DR-reverting will end up with my arse blocked so Infuture I'll just renominate!, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was a bit thrown off by this because I couldn't figure out which userpage was being discussed, I now realize it's their userpage on pt.wiki, not here. If a DR has run its course, and an admin has decided to close it, that closure is generally now considered written in stone. If you have a new or better explained valid reason for deletion (invalid reason), reopen the DR explaining it. ~riley (talk) 21:00, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah you shouldn't have been so quick to revert as I was actually writing a valid reason and wanted to use the actual DR box instead of the "nominate for deletion box", COM:AGF and all that, –Davey2010Talk 21:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Part Two

Once this image was kept, it was immediately renominated, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Foto recente..jpg. The apparent series of events was that Davey2010 wiped out the user's personal wiki page, making the image "not in use" and renominated the file. Subsequent to that, a particularly nasty comment was made and after several hours reverted. I find all this incredibly unnecessary especially the personal comment which was reverted: "Ellin's a crap admin and not only do their replies here and at the "user problem" board prove that but also for the way she handled your image DR, One truly wonders how she became admin in the first place."[2]. To answer the only semi-question in the comment: I became an admin via election like all the other admins, see Commons:Administrators/Requests/Ellin Beltz. I do not feel I am a crap admin nor do I feel that language of that sort has any place in the project. For my record, please see Template:Adminstats/Ellin Beltz and Commons:List of administrators by recent activity. Assistance is requested. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dave has a track record of crossing the line [3], but has not been blocked for disrupted behaviour so far on Commons and their uploads here have been productive. This morning they stated on their user talk page "I think it's best I shut up and move on anyway." So perhaps this can close on that basis.
In the past, the norm on Commons has to been to allow a great deal of flexibility in language, however recent blocks show that a number of active commons administrators are confident to block based on use of 'bad words', so the norm of what is allowed per Mellow may be reducing. If we want to adopt civility policies to extend the interpretation of BP, including how far one can go with angry language before it is taken as personal attacks/harassment, then now may be a good time for someone to write up a proposal. However the focus here needs to move away from the words (like "crap") as personal attacks may be made in non-vulgar language and everybody's definition of bad words will vary. For example, classic misunderstandings arise from quite different cultural usage and emphasis of "bitch" and "wanker" between British usage and American speakers, even when used to describe the same thing or are being used offensively, let alone how words like "maricón" are a magnitude more shocking if subject to literal English translation. --Fæ (talk) 14:46, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fæ, can you indicate where people have recently been blocked "based on use of 'bad words'" (which you later claim could open to misinterpretation). You claim there are several recent examples. I can think of one recent case involving bad words aimed at myself that led to a block, but I'm sure you will agree it was an obvious personal attack, obviously using language to be offensively insulting towards an individual, and (you wouldn't believe this) actually contained the words "now this is a personal attack", leaving the blocking admin of no doubt that the user was no longer mellow. Can you expand on what you mean be "allowed per Mellow"? That essay certainly advises being slow to anger and to consider misunderstandings or cultural differences, but can't see the part where it encourage/permits calling someone a "crap admin" or "an insufferable w****r". It permits "speak your mind" but only in a "mellow way". -- Colin (talk) 17:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fæ, since you have been unable to supply evidence of "recent blocks...based on use of 'bad words'", I shall call it out for what it is: a barefaced lie. And your bizarre concept of Mellow or weird attempt to suggest there is another usage of "wanker" is just more misinformation. -- Colin (talk) 07:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ellin Beltz - Could you explain why for the second time you've ignored my DR nomination and have instead come here complaining again?,
Fæ - That's completely unfair - The block over at EN Wiki shouldn't have any bearing over here - The blocks for edit warring was due to my misunderstanding of it and the AFD closures were as I admitted over there were a complete mistake but all that's irrelevant here,
For anyone that missed it I even apologized on my talkpage[4] which again was completely ignored - Ellin seems to prefer ignoring me and just bringing everything up again and again and so you wonder why I'm losing my patience ... I'm more than happy to discuss it but that's the point Ellin doesn't discuss anything - It's just report after report, I'm not here to make enemies - I admitted I was wrong for the way I handled it but instead of guidance or even a discussion I'm simply dragged here, I apologized twice for my mistakes (and even tried having a bit of a laugh to try and make us get on again [[5]] and yet again here we are,

The crap admin part was me venting and ofcourse I didn't mean it and in my defence after a warning I did come to my senses and remove it which I didn't have to do but I chose too - As I said I'm not here to make enemies - I'm here to hopefully carry on uploading, helping out and making friends along the way...., Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I recognized your backing off on your talk page. As for unfair, it is true that your en.wp history should be irrelevant here, but people will look at it and it is recent even if a tangent. However saying you are crossing the line is justifiable and it's a mild criticism, not intended as a lit torch or pitchfork. Ellin has taken offence, so it's better to leave her out of any action you may be looking for and find other administrators to help. It's only going to look personal otherwise, and I'm sure you don't want it to. --Fæ (talk) 15:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What a hypocrite. You brought it up and "people will [only] look at it" because you mentioned it. If you think it "should be irrelevant here" then why be the one to bring it up? Davey2010, your block log on other WMF projects is relevant and mentioning it is not unfair, particularly as it concerns AfD closures which is not dissimilar to the DR issue here. The only reasons Fae's digging now is that he's often the loudest voice of complaint whenever WP block logs or bad behaviour is mentioned on Commons. One doesn't become a saint just because the URL changes. Funny how those who claim bad WP behaviour "should be irrelevant here" tend to be those who have WP blocks and bans. How about you try not to have a recent block log on either project, rather than moaning about fairness. -- Colin (talk) 07:24, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Mentioning my block log on another project is entirely irrelevant here especially when I'm not closing any DRs nor am I edit warring over anything, How about you stop trolling and go do something useful ?, I believe everyone's entitled to their opinions however you're now what I would classify as trolling, Let the thread die and do whatever you enjoy doing here. –Davey2010Talk 12:18, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fæ - Sorry I meant the bringing up WP was unfair not the crossing the line thing, See that's it I'm not looking to take any action against her - I have nothing against Ellin or anyone on here - I could say "blah blah blah I hate you forever and I'm holding a grudge for enternity" however that's just dumb - In all fairness we're both to blame for the recent mistakes here but I'd rather we all brush it under the carpet and start from scratch (As I said I've apologized twice so there's not more I could've done), –Davey2010Talk 15:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You raise several points which are inaccurate. I didn't "ignore the DN"[6]. I added information to this discussion after having been spoken about (not to) and the request reopened. It would be nice if you could just work on the project without the need to cause additional disruption, drama and bad feelings. Saying "I'm sorry" and heading out to do the same thing immediately over again shows that the apology was pro forma and not valid. Also, you were given guidance, the prior DN had a lot of discussion; it's rather internet-trolling-style or 4-channish to say that everyone has done you wrong, over and over, when the diffs show rather the opposite. Please take a chill pill, remove the four letter words from your public vocabulary and find your COM:MELLOW. There's plenty to do here without unnecessary over-emotionalism. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ellin - This is becoming tiresome and pathetic, Instead of arguing all the time It may be a wise choice for you to take a step back for a while and come back with a more forgiving-and-forgetting attitude instead of what now is becoming battleground mentality, I've apologized for the revert as well as for the way I originally handled that DR - You don't have to accept it however you don't need to continue arguing with me either, It's a shame you can't put this stupid squabble behind us and just start fresh but hey it's your choice,
Needless to say I sure as hell won't ever revert another admin on here again (and as me and you Ellin are regulars at DR If I disagree with your closure I'll obviously discuss it with you aswell), I won't be responding here anymore, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Colin

With respect to Colin's targeted sarcasm and ad hominem attacks intended to create a hostile environment, please refer to User_talk:Fæ/2016#Colin, where after over two years of being hounded I stated "Go away, you are obsessed with me, I find it creepy and it is unwanted attention." I had hoped that after a direct request for his long history of personal attacks and deeply unpleasant public hounding to end, he might back off or tone it down. I do not believe that anything Colin has written here furthers the aims of this project or aids our collegiate work.

Should anyone other than Colin feel there are real questions worth me answering, please ping me or email me. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 12:01, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know you'd like to characterise this as some kind of creepy obsession. But I'd be just as critical of anyone else who comes to the drama boards to tell complete lies. Don't worry, Fae, it's not just you. I'm pretty critical of several others on this site, one of whom is now globally banned and another lost his admin bit. It's just that Fae is dishonest more often than anyone else, by quite some margin. What Fae wrote above ("recent blocks show that a number of active commons administrators are confident to block based on use of 'bad words' ") is utter bullshit. Fae's bringing up of Dave's WP block log and then claiming "en.wp history should be irrelevant here" and shoving the fault for onto [other] people looking at it, is utter hypocrisy from a user well known to us all as a vocal critic of mentioning anything off-Commons in an argument when it suits his case. I ask anyone to find an example of where I've been critical of Fae that hasn't been justified by what he just wrote. In contrast Fae's statement above in this section is misinformation, generic personal attack, and irrelevant to this page. The conclusion from Fae's statement is that he doesn't defend that he lied and doesn't disagree that he's a hypocrite, but that he would like to get away with it please.
Honesty is a vital requirement for engagement on Commons, particularly so when judging "user problems" or suggesting policy change. It is one thing to disagree on matters. Quite another to base one's arguments on complete lies and misleading remarks [I've had quite enough of that in the UK/EU referendum]. We don't censor valid criticism on Commons. So go on.. find one example where Fae has just been minding his own business, being truthful and fair, not being dismissively biased against Wikipedians/Wikipedia, not accusing anyone unjustly of "heteronormative" bias or other close-synonyms for homophobia, and where I've "hounded him". Find one example of a so-called "personal attack" that isn't actually fair criticism of his edits. -- Colin (talk) 14:35, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Can we all stop the bickering here ? ..... My behaviour was complained about which I've acknowledged blah blah blah so the best thing we all can and do is simply move on,
Fæ and Colin - If you both have an issue with each other than start a new section instead of derailing mine (and I mean that in a nice way) otherwise go your seperate ways and enjoy editing here,
Could I ask an admin to close this whole section please - Keeping it short any more DR disagreements will be dealt with on the closers TP so keeping this open is now rather pointless, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
At first glance I notice that the message was indeed clear, however, I researched this carefully and there is clearly an attack behind soft words. Colin is a person with excellent technical photography knowledgebase and very observant qualities, with a power of the word very ceremonial and diplomatic. However, in deep down he is carried away by emotions, emotions that are exalted with users who have a critical position to certain matters of WMF. He force the view to support their convictions and decisions and in some cases reaching such attacks, and it's another example. @Colin: , I invite you to give you a look in the mirror, a look of retrospection into the past and what you want in this project now and in the future. I consider Colin a necessary part of the project belonging to users who blindly respect any decision of WMF. Colin invite you to be on the right side of the story before this project finished, I also invite you to apologize to Fae for all the damage done and leave messages with double meanings. All these things are not an obligation on your part but if a call to morality, decency, respect and obviously common sense.--The Photographer (talk) 16:47, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Josekale

Josekale (talk · contribs). Usuario que posiblemente inflinge copyright. Ver su discusión y sus subidas. --Jcfidy (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Personal attacks

I edited the File:Visa policy of Ukraine.png file and another user then added some wrong information (that some countries require an invitation letter for Ukraine) which was not confirmed by any source so I removed it. The other user quickly undid my edit (which he does all the time), then I guess realized he made a mistake and undid his own edit but with a note that says "Twofortnights，你妈在天上飞，你的孩子没屁眼。" Google translates the Chinese part as "Your mother flying in the sky, your child did not asshole.". Now even though it makes no sense, I am pretty sure mentioning my mother and an asshole is not related to the file edit description. This user is harassing me all the time, several files and several wiki articles were locked because he pushed to add something that was disputed without ever willing to discuss on talk pages, always without any meaningful explanation like here where the reintroduction of content that has no source is justified with "It's necessary to exist.". But this is another level, it is absolutely unacceptable to resort to personal insults. Even if it's just a saying, it's terrible manners to address me in a language I don't speak, but to use a rude saying is something that deserves admin attention.--Twofortnights (talk) 10:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the meaning of the phrase with a native Chinese speaker. She said "That is a very nasty insult". I looked at the edit war created by Whisper of the heart and I do not see any reason for it to be occurring. I support a block on "Whisper of the heart" for both edit-warring and insult, followed by a reversion of the images to the last solid copy by Twofortnights. Please also look at the user contribs ([7]), this map may not be the only one affected by the POV editing. I see templates which were changed, files which were changed - it's only because Twofortnights is active on his watchlist that we even know about all these edits. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:25, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for looking into this matter deeper. On my part I didn't know how to handle this issue, therefore it was usually shrugged off as some edit warring or a one-off content dispute, but it's been going on for a while. It repeatedly happened in so many files and articles, he comes in and adds something that is POV or simply nonsense and then pushes for it without willingness to discuss until the file or the article is locked and then moves on to another one. But the dots were never connected. I try to keep all those hundreds of files in visa maps field neat and tidy, in line with references on Wikipedia, and it's not always easy to keep it cool when someone like that comes in trying to destroy the work or spew vile insults at you, so thank you again.--Twofortnights (talk) 14:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
For the first offense of unappropriate language usage, I have realized that it's my fault and I sincerely apologize to Twofortnights here. Although there was other things annoying me at that time, I shouldn't make my mood out of control and use unfriendly word to other people online. In the future, I will pay more attention to the online etiquette. Once more, I am terribly sorry for using uncivilized language.
For the edit war, I don't think this accusation should be for me only because my edits are not "POV or simply nonsense", actually those are constructive edits with valid sources. Currently, nobody here is trying to "destroy" files and artiles. If you find it is "not easy" to maintain contents, it would bring you lots of convenience by cooperating with others instead of treating others like potential enemies.--Whisper of the heart (talk) 19:04, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've revdeleted the cursing summary in question. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 13:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huraimi

Huraimi (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  with two uploads (1 & 2) meant to degrade the represented people. I don’t know how this should be handled, so I will follow a more experienced user here. Thank you. Ariadacapo (talk) 16:41, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=199588990"