Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 91

Template:Cite book

Hello, I'm going to work on Category:Pages with non-numeric formatnum arguments. Some of the errors come from Template:Cite book. I can't edit it, I left a message on the talk page, no response. Could an administrator replace the two {{formatnum:{{{pages|}}}}} by {{{pages|}}}. In the documentation : Use an en dash to separate a range of pages, like this: "425–430", which is not a number. Merci, Gzen92 (talk) 13:59, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

block request

Hi, Could someone block Oinkers43 and delete all of their idiotic redirects please, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:04, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

The user is not registered, could you please correct. Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Apologies @Ymblanter, I meant (Oinkers43) but Elcobbola has since actioned this (many thanks Elcobbola, Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 19:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

@Davey2010, blocked by another admin. His edits on your talk page reverted and revisions deleted. Thank you for the notification. Kadı Message 19:19, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks @Kadı for reverting and revdelling, everyones help has been greatly appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:26, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Copyright violation and a fake license

Moonlight_betohen (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/Moonlight_betohen

all of the uploads of user: Moonlight betohen is under fake license and all copyright violation

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 22:15, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

@Modern Sciences: Please see COM:MDR and wikt:copyright.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 07:48, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I deleted a lot of files with "source – Website" and "author – unknown" and one with "source – Wikipedia". The rest are all claimed own work – this is suspicious as well. Taivo (talk) 08:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Moonlight betohen and several others. Yann (talk) 10:36, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

revdel request

Hi, Could someone revdel this and this please, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 01:35, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

@Davey2010: Thanks. Relevant revision has been deleted. You may want to verify. - Jmabel ! talk 02:04, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant many thanks @Jmabel, I've relooked and both links no longer show that, Many thanks, Warm regards, –Davey2010^Talk 12:30, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Google Duo icon.svg

Permanent semi-protection is required as the file has been constantly vandalized by IP scum for years. --94.42.40.5 13:24, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done for another year. --Achim55 (talk) 13:59, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

image source request

Hi, Would it be possible if someone could give me the Flickr URL to File:Wacom (34670932580).jpg, I like to see what images of mine get deleted and sadly Google cache is no longer available as many hours have passed, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 13:26, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

It's this one. It was deleted as derivate work of the artwork on that wall. --rimshot^talk 15:24, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Brilliant thank you Rimshot much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 16:23, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

revdel request 2

Hi, I don't know if this is revdel worthy but an troll IP has made this comment, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done @Davey2010, you can warn the user. Kadı Message 18:22, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries @Kadı, Would rather be safe than sorry, Happened before where I didn't report a joke and it turned out it should've been revdelled so thought I'd ask, Thanks for reviewing this anyway :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

Cat undeletion request 2

Hi, Could someone undelete Category:Davey2010/Buses please, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 23:53, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

@Davey2010,  Done. Kadı Message 07:35, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks Kadi, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 09:45, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Scotiapiper.jpg

For some mysterious reason the file has been constantly vandalized by IP scum for years. --94.42.52.105 04:52, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Semiprotected indef (4th protection). --Achim55 (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Mongolian peoples party logo.svg

Could an admin have a look if this file is the same as File:Mongolian People's Party logo.svg?--Antemister (talk) 18:46, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

@Antemister: I tagged File:Mongolian People's Party logo.svg as a copyvio whether or not it is the same as the subject logo.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 18:57, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

ANyway, the files are PD as a simple logo.--Antemister (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

@Antemister: Please feel free to comment at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mongolian People's Party logo.svg.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 19:14, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

/Blocks and protections

Please unprotect this page. Thank you. 143.44.165.14 02:18, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

You may write here, instead.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 02:22, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Christopher M. Mattei.jpg

Can an admin check to see whether File:Christopher M. Mattei.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Christopher M. Mattei.png are the same file? The jpg is currently not being used and the English Wikipedia article it apparently was being used in was deleted per en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Mattei. The jpg file is "used" by Wikidata, but that's all; so, I'm not sure it makes it OK to keep per COM:INUSE. If it is, it's still lacking EXIF data or any other way to verify that it's the uploader's "own work". -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:42, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

@David Mattei: When was the subject one of the "Assistant Attorneys General of the United States"? How do you know him? Would you please follow COM:HR?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 13:03, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Marchjuly, File:Christopher M. Mattei.jpg and File:Christopher M. Mattei.png are not the same image but obviously of the same session (same clothing, same background). --Achim55 (talk) 21:56, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Lead attorney for the "Sandy Hook" plaintiffs in the Alex Jones trial. [1] Also led a successful prosecution of a former CT governor. [2] Certainly meets our notability criteria on Commons; I'm kind of amazed that wasn't enough for Wikipedia. - Jmabel ! talk 03:48, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

It's possible that the article was deleted per en:TOOSOON if the things you mentioned happened relatively recently. It's also possible that en:WP:BEFORE was a bit lacking and the focus was only on his notability as political candidate. Either way, being deleted via en:WP:AFD doesn't necessarily mean an new article can be created or that a en:WP:DRV can't be requested per en:WP:CLOSECHALLENGE for the deleted article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:17, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Couple of changes on protected page

See message on File talk:Douglas B-17G-95-DL Flying Fortress ‘VP-X - L - 483872 - X’ “Texas Raiders” (NL7227C) (50657253887).jpg. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 17:23, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 21:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

FlickreviewR 2 does only review files with names starting with 0 to 9 and A to H

FlickreviewR 2 (talk · contribs) has an ever-growing backlog, because it does not review files with names starting with the letter I and all the following letters until and including Z. This has apparently begun at least a week ago, according to User talk:Zhuyifei1999#Backlog. It is becoming urgent that this bug be fixed. Could someone look into the problem? Thank you, Edelseider (talk) 13:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@Edelseider: my wild guess is the issue might be caused by the author of File:Hyosung RT 125.jpg "Mountain/ \Ash". the slashes might have broken the bot.

if anybody can please manually review that photo so it's bypassed, we can see whether the bot can function normally for the rest. RZuo (talk) 14:07, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

@RZuo: This sounds like a very convincing explanation, many thanks! --Edelseider (talk) 14:18, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Let us know if any more oddities pop up that may be impeding the bot. Hopefully the slash issue can be resolved. — Huntster (t @ c) 14:19, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Seems the bot works normally again – right now it is processing files with names beginning with “K” – hurray! Thank you very much, Edelseider, RZuo and Huntster! --Aristeas (talk) 14:29, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Flickr2Commons - the duplicate machine

This is a very serious problem that I have come across often and that seems to be getting worse. Flickr2Commons is unable to recognize files that have already been uploaded from Flickr using the Upload Wizard. Take this Flickr album, for instance. Most of its 458 files have already been transferred to Commons with the Upload Wizard. And yet, Flickr2Commons indicates that all 458 files are available! This is how an unlimited number of duplicates can be generated on Commons. I suggest Flickr2Commons be reprogrammed or recalibrated. Thank you, Edelseider (talk) 16:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

No one seems to be taking that up because I may not have formulated it clearly, but Flickr2Commons and UploadWizard are incompatible, and this should be mended by adjusting Flickr2Commons. Thank you, --Edelseider (talk) 10:25, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

You should give specific examples with links to the photo in Flickr AND to the same photo on Wikimedia Commons. -- Zache (talk) 11:01, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

@Zache: File:Collégiale Saint-Thiébaut, Thann, Haut-Rhin - 52469300743.jpg, https://www.flickr.com/photos/96064256@N04/52469300743/. --Edelseider (talk) 11:43, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

It detects in the upload phase that the photo is already in Wikimedia Commons and gives a message This file exists on Commons as File:Fronton,_collégiale_Saint-Thiébaut,_Thann,_Haut-Rhin_(52469300743).jpg. This is most likely because of Wikimedia Commons server-side duplicate detection. So it is more like a bad user interface than actually uploading duplicate files. --Zache (talk) 12:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC) Needs more investigation --Zache (talk) 12:12, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

@Edelseider I will look this more at some point, but it looks like a bug if I looked correctly the flickr2commons code doesn't set the "ignorewarnings" flag, but for some reason duplicate upload still goes through. --Zache (talk) 12:30, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

@Zache: this has been a problem for quite a while, as I said, and maybe it has even been a problem since the UP became able to upload Flickr files as well. The F2C tool is much older, if I am not mistaken. Thank you for looking into it. --Edelseider (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

The main issue is that F2C is maintained by a single user, on his own time, rather than by the WMF. He's put in a heroic effort maintaining it over the years, but it's become a scaling problem. What works for a tool used by a few users to upload single well-curated files, doesn't work for numerous users uploading large batches. Because such a load-bearing part of the project, it should really be a WMF project - it's the sort of tool that needs dedicated staff time, which is not fair to demand of a volunteer editor. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:45, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

You are correct in the analysis of where the bottleneck is. However, this is more of a philosophical question of who should develop tools. If we keep adding tasks for WMF to support all of the tools, then the number of employees of WMF will skyrocket, and the costs if they are hired, for example, from the US also. It would be more useful to create a more distributed network of actors and give responsibility (and funding) to the chapters and user groups for managing the tools. This would also be a good place to support global south chapters and user groups on building capabilities as IT work is not linked to the place and it doesn't need a high amount of capital for tools. There is also potential to move in that direction in the movement chapter under discussion also. (see in emerging movement charter which community discussions are ongoing right now) However, this is off-topic for the Administrator noticeboard, and discussion could be done elsewhere. -- Zache (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

@Pi.1415926535: , @Zache: If I may come back to the technical aspect - the key word seems to be "batches". I, for one, would only use the UploadWizard if it could handle batches of thousands of files in one go, like Flickr2Commons does. Alas, the UP can only handle up to 500 files in one go, which means that really big Flickr albums, or whole photostreams, cannot be uploaded as a whole. If both tools were merged into a single one, all these problems would go away! No more duplicates, and no more limitations! --Edelseider (talk) 06:50, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

How about the fact that Commons talk:Flickr2Commons is tagged with {{Magnus is not here}}? Is that on-topic?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Dalek Voice.ogg

There was vandalism on File:Dalek Voice.ogg which left some very obscene text in the edit summary. Is it possible for the edit summary of the offending edits to be deleted, or for the offending revisions to be deleted? Specifically this revision and this revision have obscene edit summaries. 68.43.231.28 05:13, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I hided both revision content and edit summary on 3 revisions. Taivo (talk) 09:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Flickr licence history feature

Posting here for admin opinions - can files rely on Flickr's new licence history feature? There is a related ongoing deletion request. Joofjoof (talk) 06:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

I discovered the feature already and I trust it. Taivo (talk) 09:04, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

@Joofjoof: Yes. I opined there.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:50, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Rename requested for Category:Visitor attractions of l'Albufera (1927)

I recently renamed Category:Landmarks of l'Albufera (1927) to Category:Visitor attractions of l'Albufera (1927), because the term "landmarks" was deprecated some time ago. However, user B25es pointed out that the things in the category are more along the lines of "marks on the land", so "visitor attractions" doesn't work, either. I was unable to undo the move because the old category was left behind as a redirect. Could an admin please undo my rename? Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 07:50, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 08:41, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@Taivo. Thanks. -- Auntof6 (talk) 09:34, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Request for removal of permissions

Hi there! Please remove filemover and autopatrolled from this account. Thanks! EpicPupper (talk) 17:52, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@EpicPupper:  Done --AFBorchert (talk) 19:05, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Are there Any Chatting Pages On Wikipedia Or something

I'm Just Curious If there Is - Your Pal EM Editor moment (talk) 18:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

Commons is not place for chatting. You can ask different questions in village pump, but we are not interested in simple chat. You know, this is encyclopedia. Taivo (talk) 09:08, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

@Taivo: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, Commons is a file repository.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:03, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

@Editor moment: There is no place for chatting on wiki, but there are several channels related to the Wikimedia universe in several chat plateforms. See, among others, en:Wikipedia:Discord and en:Wikipedia:IRC. Yann (talk) 12:12, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Commons has an official Twitter account. Guido den Broeder (talk) 13:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Minor follow-up on block review

A small update in the interest of transparency. Two years ago, I displayed some seriously poor behavior. It resulted in me getting blocked, a block review on this noticeboard, a request to stay calm and a thread about Magog the Ogre. Zhuyifei1999 and Majora resigned as admins over the way the case was handled. (they are missed) It was a bad time. In the block review, various community members (including some administrators) incorrectly interpreted statements that were made as meaning I had threatened checkusers off-wiki. AFBorchert asked specifically about that and I think it was a sticking point for Natuur12.
This weighed heavily on me for all this time. Today, it has finally been debunked: All the awful things Alexis said were on-wiki.
I had posted a number of poor comments on-wiki and I paid the price, but whatever threats people imagined I would have made off-wiki: no need to imagine as there weren't any. For me personally, this debunk is a great relief. That's all, folks. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:20, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

For more context I recommend this thread from my meta talk page. The relevant statement which pointed to non-public information came from CU Jameslwoodward and not from Krd. This statement, however, does not imply that checkusers were threatened off-wiki. Whenever checkusers issue a block on base of non-public information, this has to be handled by the CU team but not by regular admins who do not have access to this information. --AFBorchert (talk) 19:04, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

AFBorchert, to this day I have no idea what James' comment refers to. All the information is either public (like what I said) or not relevant to the block (like the numbers of my IP). At least the myth of me having said anything awful off-wiki has been debunked. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 11:08, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Cat move request

Hello, Could an admin move:

• Category:Iveco Daily (1999–2006) to Category:Iveco Daily (1999)
• Category:Iveco Daily (2006-2013)‎ to Category:Iveco Daily (2006)‎

Please, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 20:43, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

@MB-one: You created these redirects 2 days ago. What do you think about the proposal? Taivo (talk) 08:21, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

@Taivo He's moved these without any sort of consensus so they should be moved back and consensus should be sought, Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 12:25, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Considering, that the minuses are different (one long and one short), at least one of them must be wrong. So I moved the categories back. Taivo (talk) 12:34, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks @Taivo, I also forgot to mention but all commercial vehicles (vans, buses) all follow this naming style ("x (2001)") so yeah it makes sense to have these follow one style and not have random and different confusing ones, Anyway many thanks for your help :), Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 13:43, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

File:APK format icon (2014-2019).png

Gets constantly vandalized by IP scum. 94.42.36.239 00:32, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Semiprotected for 3 months. --Achim55 (talk) 09:16, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Turkish Airlines Euroleague.png

Would an admin mind taking a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Turkish Airlines Euroleague.png and assess whether further discussion is needed. It was opened back on July 4, 2022 and basically remained commentless until earlier today. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:11, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done by Krd. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 22 November 2022 (UTC)

User: Rul Joules

I am an administrator on English Wikipedia and noticed that this account had added what appeared to be a copyrighted image of a children's book cover. I removed the image. Then I came here to Commons and noticed that they have uploaded 26 children's book covers. I have spot checked a few and it looks likely to me that they are all inappropriate for Commons. Please do what is appropriate. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 02:19, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Deleted and warned. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Pi.1415926535. Cullen328 (talk) 17:53, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Somalia (orthographic projection).svg

Apparently the recent reversion should be reverted once again... Possibly the file merits indefinite protection? And possibly there is some sockpuppetry here... 94.43.66.179 20:09, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

•  Done Reverted, semi-protected, sock blocked. Yann (talk) 20:17, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Country calling codes map.svg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --94.42.48.232 14:48, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done semi, 2 years. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

User:Ricow ricow

It looks like a stupid account. The categories do not match, remove them please. Dromedar61 (talk) 15:45, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Until now just a few edits on their own user page. Cats removed. --Achim55 (talk) 21:06, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

RfC closure request

The RfC at File talk:Flag of Afghanistan.svg has been open for nearly a year and has had no new comments since April. I believe it should be closed as disambiguate since neither option gained clear consensus and there was acknowledgement that context matters in deciding which is the flag of Afghanistan. 25stargeneral (talk) 00:52, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer/bn

Edit count link isn't working. Kindly replace https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/commons.wikimedia/{{urlencode:{{{1|$1}}}}} with https://xtools.wmflabs.org/ec/commons.wikimedia/{{urlencode:{{{1|$1}}}|PATH}} (same as MediaWiki:Sp-contributions-footer). Thank you. আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 02:55, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Pierre Poilievre.jpg

Got an email with a copyright usage complaint about File:Pierre Poilievre.jpg on English Wikipedia. Image from https://www.flickr.com/photos/28644554@N04/12938781575/

Seems copyright was charged years ago....Does this matter after the fact?

“	License History Date April 8, 2014 Old License All rights reserved New License Attribution (CC BY 2.0) Date March 9, 2016 Old License Attribution (CC BY 2.0) New License All rights reserved	”

Moxy (talk) 06:24, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

I think it should be noted that this subject has had multiple photos uploaded here and added to the article on enwiki that were deleted as copyvios and that there is currently another photo of the subject under discussion on the article's talk page for use. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 06:45, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Think is more about flicker copyright ....but looking at the user talk page wondering why they were not banned long ago Moxy (talk) 06:56, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. Image was uploaded on 20th of May 2014, when it had free license. Now the file is correctly marked with {{Change-of-license}}, which says: "Creative Commons licenses cannot be revoked in this manner". Requests to delete the file are baseless. Tholden has really uploaded a lot of copyvios without ever getting blocked, but as (s)he has not uploaded copyvios for 21 months, blocking him/her now has no sense. Taivo (talk) 12:33, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank You!@Taivo: Moxy (talk) 17:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@Taivo: I gave the user a final warning, though.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:07, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Please block and revdel

Special:Contributions/2603:7081:3800:126:DDB6:5B53:629A:CCF. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 14:08, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Hope this IP gets global-locked soon, as his amok-run opn :en was even more severe. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

@Koavf: Thanks for reporting! @Túrelio: Thanks for blocking this IP! @Hasley: Thanks for globally blocking 2603:7081:3800:126::/64!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 16:05, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

User:Johnj1995 (User talk:Johnj1995)

The users seems to edit other peoples deletion requests in problematic ways. See comments by myself and @Poudou99 at User_talk:Johnj1995#Deletion_of_explanation_for_deletion_request.

It continued since, see [3] where an ordinary deletion request was converted to a speedy request. Enhancing999 (talk) 13:15, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Pinging Yann who already issued a "last warning" in September. De728631 (talk) 13:23, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello, that "last warning" was for tagging files with invalid speedy deletion tags and is not related to the current issue. Johnj1995 (talk) 16:47, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Google play services logo.svg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --94.42.61.95 17:58, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Kadı Message 18:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

File:Flag of Taipei City.svg

The file history was messed up. Given that the original file had been re-uploaded under a new filename, please delete all the previous versions.--Larryasou (talk) 15:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I cleaned file history, but in my opinion deleting all previous versions is not needed for sake of history. Taivo (talk) 08:38, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

suggestion

For convinience, should we transclude {{Edit request/List}} to the header of thie page? thanks 163.116.130.27 15:53, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Edit request numbers are already shown in the admin backlog. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:42, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757: can we at least link to the backlog category in the header for easier access? I'm not seeing much progress in the backlog. Thanks. 163.116.130.27 15:38, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

user:Godofwarfan333

Constant uploads of Copyrighted material, repeated attempts to pass off as own work. Latest at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Al Rihla.png. Could someone do me an investigation, please? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:18, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

lol go ahead Godofwarfan333 (talk) 15:20, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

@Godofwarfan333: Please take this week to fully understand our policies and guidelines, starting with COM:L.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 19:01, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

If we assume good faith (and we should), the continued mistakes and issues would bring up the issue of Commons:Competence is required. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 15:54, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

•  Done - Blocked one week - at a minimum, uploading blatant NETCOPYVIOs (e.g., File:Al Rihla.png from here) after final warning. Эlcobbola _talk 17:14, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Search results

Your search engine is not operating properly. Searched for "boxes" and got drawing of naked man emptying a bucket. Searched for heart and got photos of scarabs. 184.14.205.180 15:42, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

 Not done. I do not understand you. I opened category:Boxes, Heart and category:Hearts. Everything works correctly. Anyway, here's nothing that administrator can do. Taivo (talk) 10:26, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

I don't see any issue with search for "boxes" or search for "heart". Yann (talk) 11:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Request block for vandal

Tellisavas (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reason: Constantly uploaded the Copyrighted contents from random websites and vandalizing cross-wiki related to uploaded media. (Truth and Copyrights (talk) 09:55, 30 November 2022 (UTC))

User has been warned today by colleague Taivo. --Túrelio (talk) 10:08, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Hello, thank you for your help, but I just recently found that all medias uploaded by him/her are all subject of copyrights violation (one of examples is, he/she uploaded the copyrighted media of File:Umbang.jpg with clear trademark of Muzium Terengganu). He/she's been doing this for months, I hope serious block action will be applied for this long-term abuse user, and anyways I've already put new tags on all respective medias. (Truth and Copyrights (talk) 10:17, 30 November 2022 (UTC))

Sure. But he had been warned only recently, not after the first uploads. If he continues with that, he will get blocked. --Túrelio (talk) 10:25, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Okay, thanks for your explanation. But may I know how about the articles that also vandalized by him/her on Wikipedia? I mean, is it okay to revert it or do I need to make report first about his/her cross-wiki vandalism on each Wikipedias? I'm trying to report him/her on Meta-Wiki to request global blocks but I can't do it since the Admin's noticeboard is locked there (I think only another admins that can report there). (Truth and Copyrights (talk) 10:44, 30 November 2022 (UTC))

Alleged vandalism should ideally be dealt with on the project where it happened.--Túrelio (talk) 11:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Filedelinkerbot leaves corrupted templates

When Filedelinkerbot removes images, it leaves sometimes corrupted templates without closing curly brackets — see this edit. Please fix that issue! --GünniX (talk) 12:48, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Wikimail limit

Dear Commons-Administrators,

I need to send out a bunch of wikimails and after the 21st my limit has been exceeded. I need to send out wikimails only on few occasions, such as personal notices after photography contest. I use my account only for work purposes as an employee of Wikimedia Austria. It would make my work much smoother if I were permitted a higher limit! Thank you very much, --Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT) (talk) 12:36, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Annemarie Buchmann (WMAT),

from what I found out you would need to be an account creator for that. Per that help page, the Commons:Bureaucrats' noticeboard is the place to ask for that. Or perhaps there is another solution I don't know. Regards --Rosenzweig τ 18:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Help request

I have a problem with deleting the files that I uploaded. I want them both to be deleted, but I can't do it myself. Iryna Hulevata (talk) 13:09, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Both already deleted. Ymblanter (talk) 17:07, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Wikimedia Conference 2016 - 165.jpg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --94.42.41.73 02:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done protected indef against ip users Gbawden (talk) 06:23, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Release Right

Hello

All the files i uploaded has been deleted and some will still be deleted, i dont know the reason for that and what to do about it

i am new to wikicommon and seems i dont know my way around it, kindly help me, Thanks Afolabi bisola (talk) 21:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

• @Afolabi bisola: have you read Commons:Copyright, as you were already told to do on the Village pump/Copyright page? - Jmabel ! talk 22:02, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  I have been going through it since morning but i dont seems to understand it Afolabi bisola (talk) 22:09, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

• Also see COM:SCOPE.
• As far as I can see, when your photos have been nominated for deletion, you have always been informed on your User Talk page, but have never participated in the deletion discussion.
• I don't see any administrative issue here. If you want help with something in particular, the help desk is a much better place to ask than here. - Jmabel ! talk 22:08, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

  fr? I dont know about that Afolabi bisola (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Same discussion at Commons:Help_desk#File_Deletion_and_Issues. --Túrelio (talk) 22:16, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Afolabi Bisola is indefinitely blocked and globally locked, all uploads are deleted as copyvios and/or out of scope. Taivo (talk) 10:41, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Mateus2019

The user appears to be caught in an IP block. Please consider granting him the IPBE (IP Block Exempt) right.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:55, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 13:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Achim55: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 14:15, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Please remove rights from globally banned/locked users

• Александр Мотин (talk · contribs)
• PlanespotterA320 (talk · contribs)

Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 13:23, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@AlPaD,  Done by @Túrelio. Kadı Message 14:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kadı: , @Túrelio: Hello! Could you please delete the permissions of PlanespotterA320 which is also locked? Thanks again! AlPaD (talk) 17:31, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@AlPaD,  Done Kadı Message 17:33, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Category for uploads by institutional staff

I have been loading images from the collections of Te Papa (national museum of New Zealand, my employer). We used Category:Uploaded by Te Papa staff, a subcategory of Category:Collections of Te Papa to track the images that we uploaded ourselves, as opposed to material from our collections that members of the public loaded.

The category was recently redirected to the parent category, and all contents shifted up to it as well. As those images are already contained in another subcategory (mainly Category:Botany in Te Papa) this seems particularly odd.

This category was useful for us, as it let us easily track the usage of what we've contributed compared to the full body of media and ensure our staff are sticking to standards. It also generally useful as it provides an indication that the image is the best available and has a minimum threshold of up to date data.

Can we get the Uploaded by Te Papa staff category reinstated as a child of Collections of Te Papa, and the images shifted back?

You can see the background for this work here:

• Project blog post on Te Papa's site
• Te Papa project documentation

Thanks heaps! Avocadobabygirl (talk) 00:22, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Avocadobabygirl:  Done. All of the problems stem from your use of curly braces rather than square brackets around "Category:Collections of Te Papa Tongarewa" in this edit, creating a category redirect. I found this edit by Wieralee implementing the category redirect using Cat-a-lot, along with 356 others, 14:05, 12 November 2022. See my last 357 filespace edits putting 357 files back into Category:Uploaded by Te Papa staff.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 01:38, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you @Jeff G.! That's a really helpful explanation. Avocadobabygirl (talk) 20:31, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

@Avocadobabygirl: You're welcome!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:12, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

Report 白布街藝興大廈某個住戶, MOBA，multiplayer online battle arena, Sankatic, AXXXXK

白布街藝興大廈某個住戶, MOBA，multiplayer online battle arena, Sankatic, same user of Cheng123xx.

AXXXXK, abuse sock Cheng123xx, 藝興大廈1314, NgaiHing1612, 藝興大廈1612, Sorcerex, Foundation Mathematics IVE, NgaiHingMansion, AXBXABX123, 藝興大廈1314, Hmtvie.

Above, also see [4], [5] and [6].--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

All admin, please be careful, this LTA can self-edited and directed.

(Sorcerex and Hmtvie said some sock is the sock puppets of Cheng123xx, but zh.wiki admin confirmed bo th are Cheng123xx).--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:56, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

• Ping Ikan Kekek and Yann, this LTA is disruptive report yours in cross-wiki, and have many sockpuppet.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 13:53, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

16 users banned

Yesterday 16 users were banned by WMF, including our fellow administraor 4nn1l2, as you can see in meta:WMF Global Ban Policy/List. 10 of them were active in Arabic Wikipedia and 7 in Persian Wikipedia. As much as I understood, they had connections with security forces of autocratic regimes, at least WMF was afraid of security/privacy of other users. Also I can point en:Armita Abbasi, which 4nn1l2 tried to delete (en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Armita Abbasi). You can read more (but not more actually) in Arabic Wikipedia. Taivo (talk) 11:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Please remove rights from WMF globally banned users

• FShbib (talk · contribs)
• 4nn1l2bot (talk · contribs)

Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 12:00, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 12:20, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Enevn

Enevn (talk · contribs) This user is making a bunch of vandalism edits at multiple categories. Likely a sock of Đăng Đàn Cung (talk · contribs) (with exact same edit patterns). Đại Việt quốc (talk) 19:34, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done - Confirmed to Vitiek and Nurlac. Эlcobbola _talk 20:08, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Đại Việt quốc

Đại Việt quốc (talk · contribs)

• This user is making a bunch of vandalism edits at multiple categories. Likely a sock of Trieu Thuan Son (talk · contribs) (with exact same edit patterns) (Enevn (talk) 19:36, 7 December 2022 (UTC))

@Enevn: Watch out for that boomerang, now!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 19:56, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

• So you protect user "dvq" to demonstrate your racism and anti-Vietnam as slavery animals ? (Enevn (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2022 (UTC))

 Not done - LTA nonsense. Эlcobbola _talk 20:09, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

Modify a protected file (The C Programming Language logo.svg)

Hello,
I can't edit File:The C Programming Language logo.svg. When I try, I see the message "This page is currently protected, and can be edited only by administrators. This page is currently protected from editing because it is transcluded in the following page, which is protected with the cascading option enabled: Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/pl.
So, could you revert the recent edits by IP users? (IP users can edit this file, but I can't...) I think that the last correct version was done on 13:35, 2 August 2022‎.
Regards NicoScribe (talk) 17:01, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@NicoScribe  Done. Kadı Message 18:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Kadı but you have restored the version "06:17, 26 November 2022‎", whereas you should have restored the version "13:35, 2 August 2022". --NicoScribe (talk) 18:26, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@NicoScribe, please check again. Kadı Message 18:28, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kadı perfect! Thank you very much! --NicoScribe (talk) 18:31, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

@NicoScribe, De rien :) Kadı Message 18:32, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

Blacklist Flickr user Ali Ram

With reference to File:Mohsen Shekari.jpg, File:Farjad Darvishi.jpg and (most probably) File:کیان پیرفلک.jpg (uploaded by Rosebreakly) from Flickr user Ali Ram (196531386@N05), these files are actually copied from various external sources and constitutes Flickrwashing. The Flickr user should therefore be blacklisted at COM:QFI, many thanks!廣九直通車 (talk) 05:14, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I get an error while trying to add this ID. Yann (talk) 10:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Could a sysop review some requests for rights?

Could a sysop review some requests for rights at COM:RFR? Thanks, --Matr1x-101 {_{user page} - ^{talk with me :)} - _contribs!} 14:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

Keep an eye out for IPs removing structured data

I've noticed a couple of IPs removing structured data from images of female celebrities (User:41.116.53.103 and User:41.116.8.74). The fact that it has been multiple IPs with similar numbers doing the same thing, makes me think that there might be more of this out there that hasn't been noticed yet. The tricky thing is that User:BotMultichillT comes along and re-adds most of the structured data back. This leads to an unsuspicious entry in a watchlist. Of course BotMultichillT hasn't added everything back because some structured data gets added by others. BotMultichillT has only added back the things that it typically adds. I would suggest keeping an eye out for BotMultichillT edits that occur on files we've had up for a while, particularly those of celebrities. @Multichill: just wanted to ping you because it involved your bot. I don't think that BotMultichillT should necessarily be doing anything different though. IronGargoyle (talk) 00:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Been going on for months, and not just of files related to female celebrities. Many anon IPs also doing minor vandalism by reversing language captions. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:18, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

It would be great if POPUPS displayed structured-data changes. It's a useful tool for seeing each successive specific edits, or the net effect of a recent sequence of edits from watchlist. But it only seems to work on the file-description page (as with any "regular" type of wiki page). DMacks (talk) 04:23, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done for now. I blocked 41.116.0.0/17 for 2 months. Let's see what happens. --Achim55 (talk) 16:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

In May I created an AbuseFilter for monitoring this. Since then the filter got 8600 hits. Special:AbuseFilter/265 --GPSLeo (talk) 16:24, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Copy wirght violation and afake license

جاوید بشیری (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/%D8%AC%D8%A7%D9%88%DB%8C%D8%AF_%D8%A8%D8%B4%DB%8C%D8%B1%DB%8C

all of the uploads of user: جاوید بشیری is under fake license and all copyright violation and non of them is own work and all taken from google image

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 05:35, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I warned the user and deleted all his/her uploads as copyvios. @Modern Sciences: please use speller in the future. Taivo (talk) 09:05, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Google play services logo.svg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. And please avoid childish protection periods such as a week when the history clearly shows that such short periods do not make sense. --94.42.57.50 15:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Semiprotected for 6 months as it is the 3rd protection. --Achim55 (talk) 15:56, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

User seems very confused

I think an admin should take a look at Mohamed bakrey (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user, who seems to be having a hard time with licensing, etc. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:26, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Justin: I gave them 3 forms of instruction, and I thank Pi.1415926535 for deleting their four uploads.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 02:59, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Reset Password when E-Mail is not operational anymore

Good afternoon. I have an account on commons and I made some contributions a few years ago. Today I noticed that the address that I mentioned in the User page is an old one, as well as the Mailaddress. Unfortunately I am not able to log in because what I supposed to be the password is not recognized. A reset is not possible because the E-Mail I used at that time was of the ISP that used, which is no longer valid anymore. Is there a way to get access again under these conditions? Meanwhile I created this new account, but all my previous contributions (charles.clavadetscher) are obviously unlinked. Charles.Foz (talk) 09:04, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Good morning (it's morning where I live). I see, that you have created a new account. Now please open meta:Steward requests/Username changes and look last section "Requests involving merges, usurps or other complications". Please explain the situation and request merging the accounts. Old account has only 8 uploads in Commons, all over 10 years old (I did not look other projects), so I hope, that the merge will be granted. Taivo (talk) 09:16, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I did that and wait now for the answer. Charles.Foz (talk) 12:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

@Charles.Foz: Your edits were reverted, because you were logged out when editing meta. Please log in and try again. Taivo (talk) 09:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Creation of "openrefine-3.8" tag

Hello Commons admins, Following the release of OpenRefine 3.7-beta2 we would need to create a tag openrefine-3.8 to track edits for the next version (similar to the existing openrefine-3.6 and openrefine-3.7 tags). Could you please do that? Thanks! − Pintoch (talk) 14:26, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Copyright violation

Hi. Block User:Scelite's editing access. Thanks Cgl02 (talk) 22:00, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Warned. Kadı Message 07:22, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Copy wirght violation and afake license

4654mm (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/4654mm

all of the uploads of user:4654mm is under fake license and all copyright violation and non of them is own work and taken from google image

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 06:53, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I warned the user and will delete the last remaining copyvios (posters). Taivo (talk) 09:31, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

the user even by receiving a warning still adds more Copy right file [7]

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 02:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Copyright and blocking

Since I couldn't find anywhere else to ask and because the user talk page of Yann and blocks and protections is under protection, I ask my question here. As a premise I would like to clarify that I have nothing personal against any user, but I noticed that there are some blatant violations of copyright and I promptly reported it https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/5.91.117.172 and adequately motivated with links and sources of the original origin of the photos, but i was inexplicably and unexpectedly stuck with my cascading undo changes without giving a valid reason. If you do a thorough check you will discover that I am right. I find it inexplicable and strange that those who report copyright infringement are blocked and not those who do it by uploading images that do not have a free license. Example: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZNEN_Veracruz.jpg this is a copyright violation of that https://www.carousell.com.hk/p/znen-veracruz-1138833991/ the second picture https://media.karousell.com/media/photos/products/2022/1/21/znen_veracruz_1642750798_25e63c88_progressive.jpg or this https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Malaguti_Drakon_125.jpg from that https://www.ebay-kleinanzeigen.de/s-anzeige/malaguti-drakon-125-b196-abs-malaguti-angebot-auf-lager-b-m/2146734064-305-2694 the 15th image https://img.ebay-kleinanzeigen.de/api/v1/prod-ads/images/d1/d1eb9f53-425c-4dfb-b9e6-fee7c06ab24f?rule=$_59.JPG https://www.google.com/search?tbs=sbi:AMhZZismUl4_1_1GWmSe5MHEJZyxwwrnDmwKIL1WV-U5QP_1trzlE7nwjXjZqaI8_1mCzsqWx4l9ji38lqKekaD72WQLb65e6iCy1YISSlraH1je2E0IUm0I0gQjlXN0V5jnCS0cpeiraHjZ1EIwmUvv8asIGag0GCwQgPz3vdymXG-_1648BwYpzLBOR9WJA88V-fHWSNvkhOh4DF4Fg26zZDWvNWtIIP_1OxH66JI2TMAEyutE1k0oMUNFcQoavaw-2Jtw3cqg23XdybrPE5l_1Vh165foFlFckyWGnGwjlr3Q2CbmCaXjE7i2YcdEZXGnLNUrqur1_1JBbdfJvrlmuc56YAvyhlgNodjqncIizLPmi3MbEfPNgELdhYn1Kd6Wqt2GRL1zSVQacsDa67ax6XOFK-DbhQ9LeixhOg . Therefore I ask for a review and a re-control of the actions and perpetuated against me, as well as a re-evaluation and check on the veracity of the copyrights reported by me as well. I know that blocks are respected even if they are unfair, but there is a clear error of judgment here, as well as various copyright violations. 5.91.177.34 12:50, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, this does look like a case for flickr washing to me, given these examples. We cannot know which, if any, of the pictures are legit. I think these images should be nominated for deletion in a mass deletion request, so that the merit of the flickr account can be discussed. --rimshot^talk 14:10, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Save and thanks for replying rimshot^talk. I don't know the technical mechanisms, but I am interested in what is done and not who does it or who does what. I lost more than an hour against control these images, which in my view are only clear violations of copyright and must be eliminated immediately and as soon as possible because they represent a serious violation of the law. Can you do it or where to go to reset the "speed delete" warning banner? 5.91.127.154 15:52, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

I've done the nomination using an automated tool, the nomination can be found at Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Laura Buononome. --rimshot^talk 21:05, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Android logo 2019 (stacked).svg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --94.42.59.47 16:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done: Semi-protected for 1 year. --Achim55 (talk) 17:07, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Category move request

Hi, Could someone please move:

• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2006–2013) buses to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2006) buses
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014)
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) buses to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) buses
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter City 77 (2013–2018) to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter City 77 (2014)
• Category:4WD Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018)‎ to Category:4WD Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014)‎
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) ambulances‎ to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) ambulances‎
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) fire engines to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) fire engines
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) in military service‎ to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) in military service‎
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) in police service‎ to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) in police service‎
• Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2013–2018) in Hong Kong Police Force service‎ to Category:Mercedes-Benz Sprinter (2014) in Hong Kong Police Force service

These were all without consensus and this new naming style (2013–2018) isn't used here, Many Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 15:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

For transparency I've CSD'd the second categories

It's complicated but for once in my life I know what I'm doing - once the (2006-2013) categories get moved back to (2006) the history will have been preserved and everything will be back to how they were before they were messed around with. –Davey2010^Talk 00:09, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done - @Mdaniels5757 had very kindly deleted all categories so I've moved everything back - Many thanks Mdaniels your help is always greatly appreciated,

Whilst some may see this as being pointless I personally don't agree with losing the page history of all these categories and plus simply deleting and recreating them would give the illusion they were all were created on 18 December 2022 which obviously wouldn't be true if that makes sense.

@MB-one, Again you're more than welcome to seek consensus for this new naming style you've invented but until then the current naming convention should and will stay, If you don't like it again seek consensus for a change. Thanks. –Davey2010^Talk 02:27, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Category talk:Joseph Stalin

Please semi-protect it immediately and permanently – it is a target of an LTA. And possibly please also clean its history. 157.25.191.34 01:52, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done by Teles. Yann (talk) 11:57, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Overwritten file

Would an admin please take a look at File:Alberto Fernández.png? The original and current version seem are the same, but someone else tried to overwrite the file before it was reverted back. The current version might be the only one covered by the source and license, and it's unclear where the other versions came from. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done I deleted these versions, and warned the uploader. Yann (talk) 11:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Yann. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Closure request for Commons:License review/Requests#Kaganer

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Commons:License review/Requests#Kaganer that has been archived twice twice by a bot without being given a formal closure. I am writing here to request that an uninvolved administrator or license reviewer to read the the discussion and make a formal closure with the result of the discussion.

Thank you in advance for your help.

— Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Red-tailed hawk,  Done Kadı Message 18:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

 Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 19:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

review

Hello Please review the File:Pushkar Priyadarshi selfie.jpg. Thanks. Pp01902 (talk) 12:12, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Also Please review this File:Pushkar Priyadarshi shooting with Sachin Shroff.JPG. Thanks.--Pp01902 (talk) 11:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Viona Ielegems at the victorian picnic 2009.jpg

This discussion has really gone off the rails, with SinghIsFxing making all sorts of wild claims about copyright and GDPR, and encouraging the subject of the nominated image to engage a legal professional. I have warned that user about Commons:Harassment#Perceived legal threats, though that user denies making legal threats.

In any case, this should be a simple DR but has now been open for more than 58 days. Can someone close this DR? Brianjd (talk) 13:20, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It is a simple DR (conducted very civilly with multiple voices on both sides) which could have been closed easily within a Day or 2 under the GDPR exceptions which the nominator has expressed very succintly "I don't want this snapshot of me being published on Wikimedia Commons or Wikipedia. It's a part of my past and I do not with it to be public domain. It is harmful for my current personal life and reputation. I am not active as a gothic photographer since many years. Thank you very much for your cooperation.". Everything about this matter is covered under applicable EU law which the nominator is entitled to as of right. The photo was obviously taken without her consent by some anonymous papparazzi who uploaded it to Commons by giving a false assignment of commercial rights which he had no right to do. Even the papparazzi uploader has acknowledged their error and sought deletion. Nothing survives except the desire of some misinformed Commons regulars to turn this into another Monkey selfie case with inapplicable COM guidelines. Accordingly, will somebody close this DR and put the victim out of her misery ? SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

(user also reported at COM:ANU#SinghIsFxing for different issues) Brianjd (talk) 13:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Does not deserve a reply. However, I am ready to do so if requested by an uninvolved 3rd person. SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:35, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

There is no question of my making any legal "threats". As an EU resident the nominator is additionally entitled to certain rights which the WMF (as an intermediary) specifically acknowledges and acts upon. If this volunteer community cannot decide GDPR removal requests promptly then the WMF is obviously the apprppriate next stop for the victim. GDPR is a procedural matter, non-adverserial and so not a legal proceeding which could cause harm to the project or WMF. SinghIsFxing (talk) 13:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you send the original agreement for the original publishing of the photo to COM:VRT. If you agreed to publish the photo without additional limitations there is no way to revoke this. If the agreement included that you have the right to withdraw the permission the file never complied with the Commons guidelines. GPSLeo (talk) 14:01, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Who exactly is this addressed to for the action suggested to be taken ? This is a COM:CSCR matter for Germany / Belgium. SinghIsFxing (talk) 14:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

The question is what was the agreement you made with the photographer for publishing the photo. Or if there was no individual agreement what was the photo policy of the event the photo was taken. The point is that if you never explicitly agreed to publish the photo and you just did not act against the publishing it is easier to say that you want to have the photo deleted. If you explicitly signed an agreement that the photo can be published you will need very good arguments to withdraw this. GPSLeo (talk) 15:31, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

There is no known agreement, no relase and no consent for any kind of publication. The uploader also wants the image deleted. Please read the arguments at the Deletion discussion. SinghIsFxing (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

In the hole discussion there you never explained the conditions the photo was taken. Was it a public performance? And why you want the file deleted now more then ten years later. Did you not know about the photo until now? As you did not answer these questions I assumed that you do not want to explain this publicly and suggested to write to COM:VRT. GPSLeo (talk) 16:42, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

I have 1 and only 1 counter question to put to you. Is the Commons volunteer community authorised by WMF to do GDPR deletions on behalf of WMF ? Otherwise please read the Deletion discussions and figure out who the parties are. Any FYI, the burden of proof to retain the image is on whoever wants to retain it and is not on the nomimator who wants it deleted. SinghIsFxing (talk) 16:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

If the WMF legal team thinks that a file has to be deleted they do this on their own. This happens very rarely most cases are solved with regular deletion requests or with the COM:VRT. If you come around short after the file is uploaded and complain about the photo this would be different, but this file was here more than ten years. As suggested please just write an explanation of what happened 2009 and why you want the file deleted now and send this together with some kind of proof that you are the person on the photo to COM:VRT and they will decide. GPSLeo (talk) 17:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Firstly, I am not the nominator asking for the deletion. Secondly, There does not seem to be any specific COM policy or procedure for handling GDPR type removal requests. Thirdly, it is not clear if COM:VRT is authorised by the data controller to process GDPR requests considering that VRT volunteers are not employees of the hosting entitity. Fourthly, it is not clear why the COM:DR process has taken 59 days without a conclusive result when the prescribed time is 30 days for removal requests from EU citizens. Fifthly, it is very strange that so far nobody has required the nominator to prove her identity. All these circumstances and lapses on part of COM volunteers now call for a prompt delete of the image by somebody. SinghIsFxing (talk) 22:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Please look at the official contact information page at Commons:Contact us/Problems "Images of yourself". If you do not agree with the decisions of the volunteer team after your request you can contact the WMF trust and safety team m:Trust and Safety. If you want to make an official GDPR data deletion request send a mail to the contact given at foundation:Privacy policy also linked at the bottom of every page. GPSLeo (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

GPSLeo Please don't address this as a reply to me. Instead kindly address it to the user who had nominated it for deletion as that will avoid any confusion. Thanks. SinghIsFxing (talk) 11:37, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

For once I agree: this discussion reads as if SinghIsFxing is the subject, uploader or nominator, when SinghIsFxing is actually none of these people. Brianjd (talk) 11:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Maybe I got totally wrong but for me it looked like User:Viona.ielegems and User:SinghIsFxing would be the same person. It is very common that new users loose their password and instead of resetting the password they create a new account. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

• I don't think it make sense to speculate and guess about sockpuppetry. If the user is a sock of someone, have someone here research it. Either way, SinghIsFxing's style of arguing is counterproductive at the very least. These kinds of third-party "Wikimedia could get sued!" are precisely what NLT is about - it's impossible to have an intelligent discussion when one side is allegedly preventing everyone from getting sued. It's a stupid trump card. I made a !vote based separately from the GDPR issue and I'm aware I may be in the minority there. If there is a larger GDPR principle that someone sees, there are proper places to bring it up than lengthy fighting at a single DR. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

  Where, precisely, have I based my deletion comments on the basis "Wikimedia could get sued" or made any legal threats ? It is quite immaterial to me if WMF gets sued or not. As far as I can see there is no COM policy on GDPR anywhere. SinghIsFxing (talk) 03:38, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  The data protection policy is linked in the footer of every page. Commons does not have an own policy because the GDPR does not apply for any kind of press publications. We have to respect the personality rights and there is a page COM:IDENT for this, but the more specific regulations do not apply here. GPSLeo (talk) 06:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  How is WM Commons a press publication ? COM:IDENT policy is misleadingly written. People who are not native English speakers will easily misinterpret it. SinghIsFxing (talk) 09:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  @SinghIsFxing That’s why we have translations, although I agree that the page is poorly written. Brianjd (talk) 09:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  @GPSLeo I share that question: How is Commons a press publication? Brianjd (talk) 09:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  I wrote "kind of", because I do not know a proper English (and not even a good German word) for what we are. We definitely fall under Article 85 GDPR. If not we would have to ask every person depicted if they agree. This does not mean that people can not request deletion of photos depicting them. This only means that we have to assess whether the personality rights of the person or the public interest of having the photo public is more important. GPSLeo (talk) 19:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  @GPSLeo In this context, ‘kind of’ sounds like ‘type of’. You should have written something like the GDPR does not apply to things like press publications.

  Even better, quote the actual words used in GDPR Article 85, which protects the right to freedom of expression and information, including processing for journalistic purposes and the purposes of academic, artistic or literary expression. Brianjd (talk) 08:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

  Also see: https://law.stackexchange.com/questions/37355/if-photos-are-pii-under-gdpr-how-are-most-photos-on-the-web-legal Brianjd (talk) 08:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cjmodica

Would an an admin mind taking a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cjmodica? Four file were originally nominated for deletion. File:Daytona Monument Wall.jpg has already been deleted, while File:Tommy Byars -63.jpg and File:1952 Tommy Byars.jpg have been verified by VRT. That means only File:Byars Harley Davidson Dealership.jpg still needs to be dealt with. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:01, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I closed the DR with 2 kept and 2 deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Taivo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:31, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Redirect my old user page to my new user page

Please redirect my old user page User:P.T.Đ to my new user page User:Plantaest, I can't create this redirect page because of a filter. Many thanks! Plantaest (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Plantaest:  Done, but how many usernames do you need?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: I have two old usernames after changing username twice on Meta: User:P.T.Đ and User:Phac. Because of lack of thought, I had to change my username twice. Plantaest (talk) 12:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The page User:Phac is not used on any other places, except the archive page of my user talk and this current page I'm editing, so I think there is no need to create the redirect for this page. Plantaest (talk) 12:38, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

amusing neighborhood meeting

please see file:Mains of Balhaldie Farm - geograph.org.uk - 488607.jpg and its history. Shivanarayana (talk) 21:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Shivanarayana Not sure what’s amusing about it. I see profanity and a lot of reversions (looks like more are needed, perhaps accompanied by a block). Brianjd (talk) 05:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Brianjd as you can see I did some rollbacks but I got tired of emptying the sea with a spoon so I asked for some help (with a bit of irony)--Shivanarayana (talk) 11:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I cleaned file history, blocked one IP and protected the target file, because it was often vandalized. Taivo (talk) 12:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

File:ArtAndFeminism 2017 Livrustkammaren 06.jpg

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --157.25.185.43 21:48, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Semi-protected. Yann (talk) 21:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Block User:Ellasia and remove uploads

According to her profile she's a student and she has uploaded photos of other students from Snapchat (i.e. possibly without consent, without proper license). The uploaded private photos should be deleted and the account possibly blocked with giving an explanation. Pyfisch (talk) 22:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I deleted all his/her uploads as out of scope, but block is not needed. Instead, I warned him/her. Taivo (talk) 09:37, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Category:"Text-to-speech for Odia language" project

It is constantly vandalized by IP scum. --94.42.57.205 01:24, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 01:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

The main page

I am in the admin notice board. The main page can only be edited by admins. But why is the picture of the year 2021 still, although it has been long gone? WPchanger2011 (talk) 19:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

This is our best photo from 2021. Currently best photos from 2022 are elected. If we know best photo from 2022, then we can change it in main page. Taivo (talk) 09:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

oh ok WPchanger2011 (talk) 21:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Sock puppetry

Hi admins, There is currently a sockpuppetry investigation on enwiki for User:Fenrk and associated accounts.

1. User:Oytrfu
2. User:Ls8anonymous
3. User:UserLs08
4. User:Pandaroid
5. User:Fenrky
6. User:LendreyL8

Many seem busy here on Commons, uploading images of questionable provenance. Is a CheckUser in order here? Elizium23 (talk) 14:18, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Krd Kadı Message 15:27, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Review

Heloo,Please review this Picture File:Anu Aggrawal (selfie).jpg File:Pushkar Priyadarshi shooting with Sachin Shroff.JPG Thanks & Regards. Pp01902 (talk) 10:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Science Photo Competition in Ukraine: Request for MassMessage

Hi! I have a quick request from the Ukrainian Science Photo Competition team. We'd like to send a survey to participants of the 2022 contest. Here's text of the message, and here's the list of receivers. Thanks! AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@AntonProtsiuk (WMUA): Just to make it clear: In the text of the message file, the first line would be the subject, and the rest would be the message proper, correct? --Ymblanter (talk) 10:32, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

And an additional question is whether it would be ok for me to send the message, or we would need to wait for another administrator? I am fine with both. Ymblanter (talk) 10:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Ymblanter, yes, that's right. “Конкурс наукових фотографій 2022: дякуємо за участь + опитування + сертифікати” is the subject line, everything else is the message itself. As to the second question, I'm not deeply versed in Commons rules, but from what I know one administrator is enough. Thanks. AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) (talk) 10:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I think this is fine. But I also found one thing: There is an ~~~~ in the message. I think you want to have AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) there? Then you need to write this in there. The ~~~~ would become replaced with MediaWiki message delivery. GPSLeo (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, we just crossed. If you think it is important I can manually replace it. The message is signed by the Organizing Committee, which, I hope, is good enough though. Ymblanter (talk) 10:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done, thanks for running the competition. Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! The signature is correct: the organizing team signature + five tildes (not four), which produced a timestamp. AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) (talk) 10:37, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

False description of an image?

The file description of File:Snow Storm in Detroit, 24.12.2022.jpg says "Snow Falling in the early hours of 24.12.2022, taken from a CCTV camera in Detroit". However the metadata shows that this image was taken at 12:17, 28 December 2022 by w:ONEPLUS A5000 smart phone and coordinates was 50°51′9.86″N 0°23′53.26″W which is w:Findon Valley, England. I am not sure what to do with this image.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 03:19, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I would suggest nominate for deletion unless the uploader, Oliver Mansell can give an acceptable explanation soon. Ellywa (talk) 04:57, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

I too was just about to make a deletion request (rationale: "not educational useful" / COM:EDUSE ), but while thinking about a good wording for this purpose, a possible explanation came up to me. It's quite plausible that there's a real estate owner with a property in Detroit who uses a smart CCTV device, streaming its images through the Internet. If the owner or any other people with access to this data stream viewed a snow storm in Detroit while residing in England and captured the image with his smartphone, we'll exactly get this kind of EXIF. Furthermore, w:Detroit is at UTC-5, hence 12:17 PM - 5h becomes 7:17 AM for the local time, easily understandable as "early hours" of a day. This image looks factually OK after a bit of thinking. Well, we could still delete it on grounds of bad quality. But a rationale based on bogus descriptions won't be really fitting. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 05:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

That’s interesting, and plausible. The image does indeed look like a photo of a screen. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 07:42, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

hide my Leaked IP address

Hello. please hide my leaked ip address: <redacted> NameGame (talk) 10:18, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done by Túrelio and myself Ymblanter (talk) 10:55, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

thank you. would you also hide my ip from my edit in here, please. NameGame (talk) 11:41, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Ymblanter (talk) 12:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

unfortunately my ip also is visible in here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/File:%D9%85%D8%AA%DB%8C%D9%86_%D9%86%D8%A7%D8%B5%D8%B1%DB%8C.png&diff=prev&oldid=721080431

I just didn't notice that I am not logged in, I was logged in to Wikipedia but here. I thought I would be logged in automatically. NameGame (talk) 01:22, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done Ymblanter (talk) 10:49, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Polavaram.jpg

The description on File:Polavaram.jpg is copied from here. Should the content be removed and revdel'd for copyright violation? I don't know if it works the same way as EN wiki. Please take necessary action. Thanks -- DaxServer (talk) 11:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible mass copyvio

Can someone a bit more experienced here please take a look at Pravin123tho456 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)?

They seem to be uploading a lot of images that are not full resolution, (i.e. probably pulled from a website), adding useless captions to them, and generally compiling a personal photo gallery from possibly non-free content. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 13:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a day (no previous warning, but a large number of files), all files deleted. Yann (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Misplaced Spam.jpg

The first revision here may be a copyright violation (see the file’s talk page). Please perform revision deletion if so, revert otherwise. Brianjd (talk) 13:58, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 14:14, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

RevDel oldid 711460089

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File_talk:3191_Berlin.jpg&oldid=711460089 (first version of page) contains tracking info in external link and needs a revdel. C.Suthorn (talk) 16:08, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate categories with Greek alphabets

Recently a number of users created duplicate categories with Greek alphabets (note the alphabets "Η" and "Κ" in "Ηong Κong") under Category:November 2022 Hong Kong photographs and Category:December 2022 Hong Kong photographs, and moved some of the images to these categories. (For example, Special:Diff/719348191)

Attempts to fix these problems were reverted. (Category:Ηong Κong photographs taken on 2022-12-08, Special:Diff/718715235 and Special:Diff/712336017 are some of the examples). Can anyone help to move the images back and delete these duplicate categories?

14.0.180.241 02:58, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Sneaky, but #bodyContent a[href^="/wiki/Category:%CE%97ong_%CE%9Aong"] {background-color: #FFDDFF;} made it visible. Files moved, cats deleted, "Ηong Κong" added to titleblacklist. --Achim55 (talk) 18:59, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

It happened again. Therefore I blocked 218.102.0.123 for 1 month. --Achim55 (talk) 08:54, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Shouldn't Ηong and Κong be added separately to the titleblacklist? There should be some sort of flag for mixed scripts...--Prosfilaes (talk) 23:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

G6zLZz2cEPKdEXB

G6zLZz2cEPKdEXB (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

d:Special:Contributions/218.102.0.123 the ip created lots of items for commons-only cats (example: d:Q115937505 for Category:User talk pages where template include size is exceeded). (only wd sysops can see them now. they have been deleted after report d:special:permalink/1799232596#IP_user_creating_lots_of_items_for_commons-only_cats.) correspondingly, G6zLZz2cEPKdEXB added {{Wikidata Infobox}} to a lot of cats here.

these edits need to be rolled back. also, i would suggest blocking this user indef.--RZuo (talk) 10:41, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

Public domain day

We need to empty this category. Please do not forget to recategorize to Category:Undeleted in 2023 when applicable, and also remember about the URAA restoration date, which would push the restoration of many items created at an unknown date to 2048. Ymblanter (talk) 08:55, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

There are many paintings in Category:Frank Moss Bennett which need further research to get the date. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:39, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

I've found the titles and the dates for all three Bennett paintings that you undeleted. One was from 1921, the other two from the early 1930s. I could research other ones if they are undeleted. Abzeronow (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Typo in protected page

Hi all! There's a typo in the english caption of today's homepage featured picture; devoring instead of devouring, here and here. Both pages are protected. Thanks, Syrio posso aiutare? 12:07, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@Syrio,  Done. Kadı Message 15:00, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

UhLukas

Can someone delete the userpage as it's cross-wiki spam. Thanks --Nintendofan885^{T&Cs apply} 17:46, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

please delete the following user pages (not of use)

User:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013User:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013aUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013bUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013cUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013dUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013eUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013fUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013gUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013hUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013iUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013jUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013kUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013lUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013mUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013nUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013oUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013pUser:Mattes/Contributions/Gallery of data/013q. These were created by my former acct. name Mattes. Thanks and have a happy 2023, --Mateus2019 (talk) 18:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Spurs.svg

I had a few problems here, [8], the delete discussion is about a vector graphic. I wanted it to be transferred to wikipedia, also it's a trademark that expires in 2027, (unless the club decide to renew). Can it not be restored and transferred to wikipedia? Tottenham Hotspur didn't have a problem with wikipedia using it otherwise they may have told me. As I've been emailed several times before about past content, one being when they emailed me in the past to update the club emblem which I did, [9], which was modified down. So is it possible for an admin to restore and transfer it over? Regards Govvy (talk) 15:07, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

It already exists on Wikipedia: w:File:Tottenham Hotspur.svg. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

No it doesn't, that's a different image. Regards, Govvy (talk) 19:01, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry about that, you're right. Which Wikipedia article(s) do you intend to use it on? In order to host a fair-use image on Wikipedia, it must be used on at least one article. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:17, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: I only wanted to use it on the main Tottenham Hotspur F.C. article. Regards. Govvy (talk) 14:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

But the main Tottenham Hotspur article already has a fair-use logo, the one I mentioned above. In general, we only allow one fair-use logo per article, per the mandate to minimize our use of non-free content. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:01, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@King of Hearts: Well in the text in the article it says; The club badge on the shirt used in 1921 featured a cockerel within a shield, but it was changed to a cockerel sitting on a ball in the late 1960s. then In 2006, in order to rebrand and modernise the club's image, the club badge and coat of arms were replaced by a professionally designed logo/emblem and again In 2017, Spurs added a shield around the cockerel logo on the shirts similar to the 1950s badge, but with the cockerel of modern design. So, effectively what the image actually was, was one of two things, the historic club emblem which was used before the (File:Tottenham Hotspur old logo.png) was used, and what was used again in 2017. I truly hope this helps you understand what has just been removed. Regards. Govvy (talk) 22:54, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@Govvy: I see, so there is critical commentary of the crest in the article. Very well then, I've temporarily restored it so that you can transfer it to Wikipedia as fair use. Please let me know when you have completed the transfer. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

User:AMMasnou

User:AMMasnou appears to be the organisational account of El Masnou Municipal Archives in Catalonia (their user page links to [10]) and has uploaded a number of works, dating back as far as 1933, as "own work", with no credit to the original photographer, and without either evidence of permission or explanation of why they might be PD. Absent clariification of thse matetrs, they will need to be reviewed and, sadly, deleted.

Perhaps User:Kippelboy or a colleague from Wikimedia Catalonia can offer them support and advice? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:30, 31 December 2022 (UTC)

I upload ancient photos of places and people from my village and I have the rights to publish them because I own the photos and they are ancient. Most of the time I don't know who the photographer is because they are ancient photos. I don't know what's the meaning of "PD" that you say, sorry. I'm not used to Wikimedia Commons vocabulary. If I can do something to fix the photos description, tell me, please. AMMasnou (talk) 08:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

please delete this file ASAP

Someone complains via (VRT) that this file violates his privacy and he request delete it immediately. Ibrahim.ID ✪ 09:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done; likely also a copyvio. --Túrelio (talk) 09:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Footballfan458 Another sockpuppet vandalism reverting all the improvements made for election maps Putitonamap98 (talk) 22:58, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Another account

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/HoustonFootball Putitonamap98 (talk) 01:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see this rapid-fire LTA sockpuppetry issue: User talk:Huntster#Sockpuppet. If other admins could offer potential solutions to this issue, it would be appreciated (both for the LTA and for undoing their nonsense). This really isn't my area of knowledge, and I'm just playing whack-a-mole at this point. — Huntster (t @ c) 03:13, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

The most likely solution would be an edit filter since it's a very distinctive behavior pattern. I'm not terribly adept with them; @Elcobbola and AntiCompositeNumber: would either of you be able to help? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure. I haven't been following this LTA, so someone just let me know the distinctive behaviour/characteristics/etc (perhaps by email per BEANS). Эlcobbola _talk 16:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Steiner um 1905.jpg

Excessive vandalism. --94.42.32.187 20:13, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

 Fully protected for 1 year. --Túrelio (talk) 20:16, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

@Túrelio: Also File:Independence - RLDS Temple 01.jpg, File:Independence - RLDS Temple 02.jpg and File:Logo ROC.png. --94.42.32.187 20:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

 Fully protected for 3 resp. 6 months.--Túrelio (talk) 20:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

JuTa inactivity

These cat undeletion requests remain unattended in JuTa’s talk page:

• Category:1907 in transport in Portugal (req. on 15:55, 5 April 2022: «has been not empty since 2017-02-21 21:32:46, less than 10 days after you deleted it, more than five years ago»)
• Category:Number 979 on trams (req. on 02:22, 9 November 2022)

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:41, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The cateogories should be restored then. De728631 (talk) 22:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Strakhov (talk) 23:34, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Restoration of an image

Hi, This image was cropped a few years ago with the result overwriting the original. Can someone please restore it under its original location: File:Map of Persia by Charles Smith.jpg? Thanks in advance. --Enyavar (talk) 01:34, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 12:27, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Tern-Ost (talk · contribs) and AndriiDydiuk (talk · contribs) is the same user.

Compare downloaded files, examle

1) File:Моя Тернопільщина Місто349.jpg and File:Пам'ятний знак (хрест) «За тверезість», смт Великі Бірки.jpg

2) File:Моя Тернопільщина Місто348.jpg and File:Пам'ятний знак (хрест) «За тверезість», смт Великі Бірки, вул. Шевченка.jpg.

Please verify and create Category:Sockpuppets for this profiles. Микола Василечко (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Same location, same time & date, same equipment, obviously the same user but no abuse. Tern-Ost started editing when AndriiDydiuk stopped to do so. --Achim55 (talk) 21:35, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

File talk:File talk:Flag of France (1794–1815, 1830–1974, 2020–present).svg

Please move it to File talk:Flag of France (1794–1815, 1830–1974, 2020–present).svg without leaving a redirection, obviously a typo. And is there a formal way to request move for the file talkpage itself though? Move other template doesn't work. —— Eric Liu_（Talk） 23:11, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Eric, I think Shift-Alt-m should do. --Achim55 (talk) 12:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Filter stopping me from tagging a spam userpage for speedy

The filter has decided to allow me to incorrectly place a "delete" template on a spam userpage, but then won't let me change it to the correct template, or remove the original delete template. Can someone do a spamublock on the user CAMPUSDEAN erp software (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) and delete their userpage? Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 06:17, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Problem with PD-US-architecture template

I uploaded my first photo to Wikimedia yesterday and the applicable template for buildings in the US that were completed before 1990 is Template:PD-US-architecture. That template simply says that United States copyright law does not protect architectural works before 1 December 1990. However if I add that template to my photo, the photo itself suddenly is attributed as public domain in the "Use this file" popup, although I had uploaded it under a CC license. When I removed that template, the "Use this file" popup showed the CC license. So there must be a bug in the "PD-US-architecture" template, as PHOTOS of buildings completed before 1990 is not what the template is about. Skyscraperfan (talk) 16:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Feodor Chaliapin's categories

Hello!
I was standardizing on Feodor Chaliapin's categories, but I noticed that only the main category and two others used his full name. All others just use "Feodor Chaliapin" instead of "Feodor Ivanovich Chaliapin". So please:

• Move back Category:Feodor Ivanovich Chaliapin by year to Category:Feodor Chaliapin by year.
• Move Category:Feodor Ivanovich Chaliapin to Category:Feodor Chaliapin.

Minerva97 (talk) 22:34, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I moved these categories back. Taivo (talk) 20:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Role account

This is a role account. --Svila i dzvezdi 1 (talk) 17:49, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

This statement seems to be meant as a disclosure. --Túrelio (talk) 16:58, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

personal attack

Hi Dear Admin,

personal attack by HeminKurdistan

see more details Here

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Where is the "personal attack"? HeminKurdistan (talk) 16:30, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

• Disagreement is not a personal attack. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley: this sentence " We are (unfortunately) witnessing a lot of politically-motivated nominations from Persian Wikipedia users these days and this one appears to be one of them" is clearly personal attack not a disagreement [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 16:59, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Not really, see Commons:No personal attacks. The cited expression might not fully conform with AGF. However, when one observes a repeated pattern of questionable edit-activity, it is o.k. to voice a suspicion (appears to be) about that. It was a judgment on the edit, not about you. --Túrelio (talk) 17:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Change picture

I noticed that the picture of Jean-Marie Roland had been replaced by a picture of Spanish singer David Bustamante in his Norwegian article, and some other articles, due to a change in his wikidata page. I changed it on the wikidata page, but the wrong picture is still up in the infobox on his Wikimedia Commons category, and I'm not sure how to change that. Category:Jean-Marie Roland de la Platière. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arildto (talk • contribs) 15:03, 10 January 2023 (UTC) (UTC)

• Signing your posts is required on talk pages and it is a Commons policy to sign your posts on 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 a timestamp will then automatically be added 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.

@Arildto: This is probably a cache issue. I don't see any problem. Yann (talk) 15:03, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

• Someone messed with the picture at WikiData and it was just fixed. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Zoophilia Picture of the Day

I must utter my disgust with the Picture of the Day on 1/11/2023 - 1/12/2023 - "Zoophilia from the base of Lakshmana Temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh, India" Sorry, but there's no reason to put that on the opening page of Wikipedia. 2601:8C0:D01:E30:8183:6ACE:80CE:FFA5 18:01, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

 Not done COM:NOTCENSORED and it's obviously an artwork, even as part of a World Heritage Site. Perhaps this would have been non-ethic to present the picture as POTD on the World Animal Day, however today isn't 4 Oct; so there's nothing to be done here. --A.Savin 18:39, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

This refers to File:20120303 zoophilia Lakshmana Temple Khajuraho India (panoramic version).jpg.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 20:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Images of zoophilia are illegal in the United States if not other countries, and that often covers illustrations. While I think there's a fair argument to be made for Commons hosting such files, it's a completely different thing to force everyone who visits the front page to view the image and load it into their browser. Just like there's probably a case to made for hosting obviously educational images of children that feature some form of nudity. I don't think it would be right to force everyone who visits the site to look at or download the images though. Personally, I don't want to see images of people shagging animals anymore then I do nude children. I don't think COM:NOTCENSORED is a legitimate reason to force me or anyone else into viewing such images either. Especially considering the potential legal risks. --Adamant1 (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

You really have a poor understanding of a lot of things. This image is a Quality Image and a Featured Image, and represents a temple from en:Khajuraho Group of Monuments (between 885 AD and 1000 AD). I suggest you read this article before writing any stupid analogy with nude children. Yann (talk) 20:10, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't really feel like getting into a super pedantic discussion about it since your clearly being bad faithed. That said, I have a background in religious studies, which includes Hinduism and Jainism. So it isn't something that I'm at all ignorant about. In this case, the statues were created specifically with the intent of being erotic. Which means they were specifically created for the purposes of sexually stimulating the temples parishioners. That's fine, the norms around zoophilia were obviously different at the time, but it doesn't negate the fact that the statues are erotic images of people having sex with animals. No one at the time would have denied it, and no today does either. Let alone does English common law usually distinguish between images of statues doing otherwise illegal sex acts from "real" images.

So the question then becomes is it OK/acceptable for Wikimedia Commons to use their front page to display erotic images of people doing illegal sex acts with animals. IMO it isn't. I don't really care if it's a quality image or whatever. It's still an image of people doing illegal sex acts with animals and I still don't think it's appropriate to display on the front page for that reason. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

By the way, even an image of nude children isn't per se illegal, non-ethic, disgusting,... etc.pp. --A.Savin 03:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure, there's lots of grey areas. The United States is pretty strict though and that's where a lot of the legal precedent on Commons comes from. Parents in the United States have been arrested for taking pictures of their children playing nude in the bath tub. So is that something Commons really wants to force visitors of the main page to role the dice on? Probably not. It's at least optically bad if nothing else. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

• I don't think you even looked at the image. It is a thousand year old stone carving on a temple in India that is at best vague and not particularly graphic (compared to what we do have). You want that deleted from Commons as offensive? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 22:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm going to assume your just being bad faithed and get the deference between not displaying an image on the front page versus deleting it from Commons. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Massive copyvio

by user Joycexxxi (talk · contribs). Uploaded lots of copyrighted songs. Check the contributions. Thanks, Tufor (talk) 19:58, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I see that User:Túrelio started the discussion about files uploaded by this user: Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Eraserheads Nonstop Songs - Best OPM Tagalog Love Songs Playlist.ogg. Clear case for me, but whatever. Tufor (talk) 20:33, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Can we block this user? These are obvious copyvios, i.e. File:GORILLAZ.ogg. See also deleted contributions.

Yesterday I uncovered Mar252525 (talk · contribs) who is doing very similar activity. That user also needs to be blocked. — MusikAnimal ^talk 20:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done I blocked Mar252525 for a week. Joycexxxi is warned, but last edit is more than 2 weeks old, so no need for a block now. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 21:00, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Pelz

Sadly this user deceased. Please remove file mover right from this account. Tryvix1509 (talk) 10:14, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 11:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

@Túrelio Please add {{Deceased Wikimedian}} to his user page. Thanks! Tryvix1509 (talk) 12:09, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Update requested for protected file: File:Flag of Belarus.svg

Please complete my request at File_talk:Flag_of_Belarus.svg#please_replace_file. FYI: I added an entry to Commons:Requested updates to protected images a week ago but I don't think anybody monitors that page anymore. MapGrid (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

high-profile Getty-Images-shot gone unnoticed since 1 year

I am frustrated. This image of w:Klaus Schwab (WEF) File:Herr Schwab.jpg had been on Commons since nearly 1 year, claimed to be own work by uploader (their only edit) and under a free license, when in reality it is a professional shot from 2014 and marketed[11] by Getty Images, who are known for very high claims for damages for unauthorized use of images. Hell, how could this not have been noticed earlier? --Túrelio (talk) 09:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

at least 1 user saw it before you but didnt report copyvio.

if User:OgreBot/Uploads by new users can be rebooted... RZuo (talk) 10:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

We currently have a backlog of one million unpatrolled edits and this only includes edits from the last 30 days. But how can we get more people doing maintenance stuff like this? GPSLeo (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Maybe we should get a list of unpatrolled edits for files in use. That would be probably be about the same as most one-time editors I see upload an image here to use on their home wiki. Also, searching to see if the same image by reverse image search/is on Getty images is not something I would think to do immediately. It's a hard copyright to catch. Ricky81682 (talk) 20:39, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio in file history

Hi. Could an admin please remove the 23:13, 15 January 2023 version of Audtor General report Canada1946.pdf from the history. It's an obvious copyright violation, which was reverted by the uploader with the comment "wrong file". TilmannR (talk) 13:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

@Túrelio can you please look into this again and do the needful. Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 17:45, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

C1K98V, could you check whether this is still necessary. When trying to revert the current to the 2nd fileversion, the system tells me they are identical, and the page-history seems to show that "Zindra Lord" reverted his own new upload. --Túrelio (talk) 19:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Affuploadsimage and User:AFFAFCUploadsFootball

The following users are clearly sockpuppet/puppetmaster, as the names are similar and they're uploading similar content, so I don't think we need a checkuser:

• Affuploadsimage (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• AFFAFCUploadsFootball (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:11, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Sock blocked indef., all files deleted. The main account didn't upload anything new, so warning only for now. Yann (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Move protected file

I can't request the move of a protected file. Can someone rename File:20220511082800 IMG 1681 (2).jpg to File:Yeti Airlines ATR-72 9N-ANC.jpg Reason number 2 (meaningless name). Mbch331 (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Gbawden (talk) 15:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

AI upscaling by RaphaelQS

User:RaphaelQS has recently uploaded new versions of images that have been run through a 2x upscaling AI that also denoises and sharpens images. We had a discussion on their talk page where I pointed out numerous issues with this. These include: turning a subject's eyes green, a subject's left eye getting warped, and introducing lip coloring to monochrome photos (example 1, example 2). Some are more subtle, such as introducing artifacts around the subject's shirt and tie. I'm sure if I took the time to examine each, I'd find artifacts that have been introduced, but the crux of the matter is that these higher resolutions are not based off better scans of the original physical medium. Rather, an AI is interpreting these images, which also can't be compared to a human manually restoring an image using proper judgement. The user has also overwritten featured pictures that have been manually restored (example 1, example 2). I request that this user's recent uploads be mass-reverted, and a moratorium issued on any further replacement of images with AI upscaled versions. Opencooper (talk) 18:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Just for the record, I have asked for instances where there were issues with the images I restored and I offered to revert back to a previous version, some glitches may have escaped me and I'm not perfect (see the conversation with this user on my talk page). Also if there is a policy against using tools like this then I will obviously abide by it. --RaphaelQS (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@RaphaelQS: Do not do that again, or you will be blocked. All reverted. Yann (talk) 19:03, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Why is that? Please tell me which policy is being infringed, I can give a lot of examples of files that are substituted by higher resolution versions from a restoration process so the very principle isn't in question I suspect, isn't it? So what is the problem, the use of the tool itself? Try to be somewhat specific if possible to avoid any potential misunderstanding, thank you. --RaphaelQS (talk) 19:17, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@RaphaelQS: Those overwrites violate COM:OW guideline and COM:EVID policy.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 19:34, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

copy right viloations

"President.az" is not " Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International "

2010-2023 Official web-site of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. All rights reserved. This website is managed by Press Service of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan and Work and Communication with NGOs Department of the Administration of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan. [12]

all these files and more must be speedy delete: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/File:The_Presidential_Press_and_Information_Office%27s_of_Azerbaijan_(Official_logo).png&limit=500

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 01:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Did you see that there´s a template in the file description pages, linking to this page which says "All materials on the website are available under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license"? Rudolph Buch (talk) 05:34, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

LTA, copyvio and out of project scope

• Users:

Pedro Renteria (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Osmoniopreda (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Salvadormedia1 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

PeliculasTT2023 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

• Reasons for reporting: Sockpuppets for filmmaker Ricardo Tavera and Glat Entertainment. All have used the project to store a promotional gallery. Together, they’ve uploaded around 120 files, all production pictures, promotional sessions and PR (red carpet, awards, etc).

MexTDT (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@MexTDT: This was aready reported and taken care on another board. No need to do it again. Yann (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Yann This was not to report the users but to delete all the files. I’m sorry for not being more specific. Is this the right board to suggest a mass deletion or do I need to do it in some other way? As far as I know, these files have no usage on sister projects, especially in eswiki, which is their main target.--MexTDT (talk) 00:47, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@MexTDT: The proper way is to create a deletion request. Thanks, Yann (talk) 08:26, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: But there are dozens of them, do I have to do it for each? MexTDT (talk) 08:37, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

No, you can create a mass DR with VisualFileChange. Yann (talk) 08:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@MexTDT: See also Commons:Deletion requests/Mass deletion request.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 08:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Fast revert of unfounded mass deletion request

Hello, see Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with "maps-for-free.com". There are thousands of {{Delete}} templates to remove from file pages per the proposal's closing. Jeff G. appears to not be available to undo it right now. If there is an efficient way to remove all the templates at once, doing it would be appreciated. Jeff G.'s edits on files from 10:10 to 10:13 today have to be reverted. GrandEscogriffe (talk) 15:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

In the absence of a response from the admins, I assume that using VisualFileChange to remove the templates is the way to go. I'll just have to be a bit slower, so the rate-limiting of the server API doesn't interrupt me. TilmannR (talk) 18:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh no. When I ask VisualFileChange to search for "maps-for-free.com", it doesn't show exactly the same results each time. Therefore I can't guarantee that all 1476 files have been untagged, but nearly all of them. TilmannR (talk) 19:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@TilmannR: you could use vfc on Category:Deletion requests January 2023 instead. i think that's more reliable than searching keywords.--RZuo (talk) 19:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. It seems to be more reliable indeed. Thank you for the advice! TilmannR (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

(I feel like I should mention that I didn't do it all by myself. @Julo deleted 839 of the templates before I even started. I did only 611. @Lesless did 9. I assume the remaining 17 were deleted by someone else. I just don't know an efficient way to figure out who.) TilmannR (talk) 20:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

kudos to all of you. i had wanted to do it with vfc in the morning but i wanted to mark those edits as minor. vfc doesnt support that and i dont have a bot account, so i gave up.

i just want to leave on the record that i think this kind of reckless DR is akin to vandalism. that user creating a huge mess and then running away is unacceptable. RZuo (talk) 20:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it was completely obvious, that Jeff G.s claims had no base at all, there always was a free licence at the source page for the uploads. So the whole action was nothing else but plain vandalism, and instead of reverting this vandalism, he simply ducked and covered and did nothing to set this straight.

And thank you very much. TilmannR for the quick resolve, that would have been Jeffs duty to do. Grüße vom Sänger ♫ ^(talk) 21:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all! GrandEscogriffe (talk) 21:48, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@GrandEscogriffe, Julo, Lesless, RZuo, Sänger, and TilmannR: I'm sorry about that. I should have looked more closely for a free license. Thanks for removing the delete tags, which I did not have time to do yesterday. I marked all the file talk pages as kept today (again, no time yesterday).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 12:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

lolz i dont see any need in creating another 1400+ file talk pages only to link to one user's nonsensical DR that's not worth mentioning at all. thx for creating so much junk.--RZuo (talk) 12:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I already deletes the vandalism with that unfounded red box, no need for the new template on the talk page, as the deletion spree was without any merit from the beginning. Wha spam all those pages with a hint to this completely nonsensical, stupid and utterly unwikimedian deletion request? Grüße vom Sänger ♫ ^(talk) 12:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC) I asked for a speedy deletion of that junk.

2A02:8109:9CC0:2F94::/64

I just noticed that since one week a (probably German) IP Special:Contributions/2A02:8109:9CC0:2F94:0:0:0:0/64 fiddles around with Russia-related images. Can someone have a look, please? I'm lacking the time... Cheers, Achim55 (talk) 09:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, edits need to be checked. 10:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yann (talk • contribs)

Update categories

Can someone please update the categories on this page? Page is currently locked due to presentation on the main de-WP page tomorrow.

remove Category:Christopher Polhem

add Category:Christopher Polhems mechanical alphabet

Thx! Psittacuso (talk) 19:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 19:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion request, but suspected copyright violation

There are certainly more open deletion requests, but this one is also a copyvio suspect, hence a faster decision would be great, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Revierkarte Helmstedter Revier.png.

Ein Admin, der Deutsch beherrscht, wäre von Vorteil. — Speravir – 22:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Profile File:하트입니다.png

I have a question about this file. The content uploaded by this youtube account is from the official IG account of Korean celebrity, and it does not have permission to authorize CC. However, this file has been reviewed and approved. Can the administrator re-examine this file? Tychou12 (talk) 06:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Personally I fail to see why that file is within scope. Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Round-robin swap needed

• File:BSicon_vNUL1@f.svg should be named File:BSicon_vNUL1@g.svg and vice-versa;
• File:BSicon_vNUL4@f.svg should be named File:BSicon_vNUL4@g.svg and vice-versa.

Thank you in advance. Useddenim (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

 Doing… —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Useddenim:  Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757: Thank you very much! Useddenim (talk) 04:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Opinions welcome...

I just discovered the category Category:Curricula Vitae. I certainly wouldn't suggest that we shouldn't have that and particularly for notable/historical people. However a fair number of those present seem far more like current CVs of people seeking work. To me this is simply a variation of "personal images of non contributors". It's not even something I have seen used on a user page never mind in the project more widely. Opinions would be interesting. Cheers Herby ^{talk thyme} 09:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I will got through the cat and f10/DR as necessary Gbawden (talk) 10:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, we shouldn't have CV of living people. Yann (talk) 10:29, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Why not? We shouldn't breach the privacy of living people, but I'd love to see something like Barack Obama's CV applying for a job in the past, if that had been appropriately licensed. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes - I would suggest there is a big difference between a Barack Obama CV and the random drive by ones who are not at all notable that I am seeing there. Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I deleted real recent CVs which are not used. IMO there should be some cleaning on Wikipedia side. A real CV shouldn't be used on Wikipedia articles about CV. Yann (talk) 10:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Problem is this is always going to be a repeated problem irrespective of what we do, I did have a few ideas in my head such as "disallow CV filenames" or as a last resort "rename the CV category" but to be blunt We cannot fix stupid - People will find ways of uploading CVs no matter what restrictions we put in place, Sucks but it's the world we live in. –Davey2010^Talk 18:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Overwriting with a duplicate

File:Spaghetti with fresh sauce of coppery tomatoes with cuttlefish 2020.webm

i believe my version had no audio.

if so, my version should not be deleted.--RZuo (talk) 09:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Remove all my rights

I would like to have all my rights removed as I am no longer active on commons. Thanks all. ⁂๖ۣۜJon ♥ ๖ۣۜDaenerys໖ 14:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

For now I've removed filemover and patroler rights. --Túrelio (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Move Category:Political parties in Republic of China

please move Category:Political parties in Republic of China to Category:Political parties in the Republic of China (1912–1949), in order to preserve page history. (i had wanted to move but created the new cat by mistake.)

you dont need to leave a redirect behind because it's useless.

you can write "separate Republic of China (1912–1949) and Taiwan" as the reason for moving. thx! RZuo (talk) 15:28, 14 January 2023 (UTC)--RZuo (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Useful image?

Hi, Asking here as I believe admins to be more knowledgable - Is this image of any use or should I DR it?, Even if I added English titles I don't see how or where this could really be used ?, I do and don't see uses for this and it's been bugging me for the last 3 days as to what I should do (if I should even do anything!), Thanks –Davey2010^Talk 18:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I'd say it's typically the type of image we should have more of. It provides an overview of variations of an object. Obviously, one could argue it should be 10 separate ones, but if needed, one can crop that. It could be used in an article about that object or about the company building it. OTH, I'm not an admin ;) Enhancing999 (talk) 20:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree. Main problem is that the text is in German, but anyone can make a version for another language, translating the text. Taivo (talk) 09:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for your insightful comments @Enhancing999 and @Taivo, That was my exact thinking 10 images is better than one image with 10 images in, I'll create an image with English titles, Thanks again E999 and Taivo, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 19:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

File:Navya Nair In 2012.jpg

Is it possible for an admin to verify for me whether File:Navya Nair In 2012.jpg is a reupload of the file of the same name that was deleted in December 2021? Thanks. Belbury (talk) 10:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Sure. It is totally different image. --Túrelio (talk) 10:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I nominated it for regular deletion. Taivo (talk) 09:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Cleaning up Napoleon's spam

Hi. Could an admin please delete all the files created by sockpuppets of Pswank91? It's literally hundreds of "own work" PNGs, which are minor variations of various SVGs that actually require attribution. Making a deletion request of that size seems quite inconvenient. TilmannR (talk) 13:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done Mostly done, except Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Charles II, King of Great Britain and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joseph Karl Stieler - King Ludwig I of Bavaria in Coronation Regalia.jpg‎, which in use. Yann (talk) 16:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Thanks! Could you please take another look at Napoleon I, Emperor of the French? TilmannR (talk) 20:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah yes,  Done now. Yann (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Update requested for protected file: File:Flag of Belarus.svg

Please complete my request at File_talk:Flag_of_Belarus.svg#please_replace_file. FYI: I added an entry to Commons:Requested updates to protected images a few weeks ago but clearly nobody monitors that page anymore. This is my 2nd attempt to try and get help with this request at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard; last time nobody responded and the request rolled into the archives. Am I better of just asking to have the protection removed at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections? MapGrid (talk) 05:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Category:SpaceX Starship

Someone uploaded a ton of Flickr copyvio to this category, e.g. File:SpaceX Starship from above.jpg. SpaceX's Flickr page explicitly said that the photos are licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0, which is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:16, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Uploading file on commons

Hi I don't know if this is the most suitable place but I didn't know and couldn't find anywhere else to ask. I wanted to ask if any of you could do the courtesy of uploading this image to commons from the English wiki, as it is useful for inclusion in entries on other Wikipedias including the Italian one. I'm not familiar with these things and I don't know how to do it, if some of you kindly administrators in a minute the charge would be very useful. Superficially, the licenses of the file should allow it to be uploaded legally here on commons. You would do me a great and immersed courtesy because you would give me a collaborative help, because I need this photo to insert on an entry on the Italian Wikipedia to illustrate a page and this is the only freely licensed image available of this motorcycle. This is the file to uploaded. en:File:Honda_Hornet_250_a.k.a._CB250f_.jpg Thanks for all.5.91.60.174 16:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done See File:Honda Hornet 250 a.k.a. CB250f.jpg. Yann (talk) 17:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Page Protection request

Dear Admins, As Wiki Loves Folklore 2023 contest has started and the Central Notice is targeting to the page on commons, requesting you to kindly protect the page Commons:Wiki Loves Folklore 2023. Thanks --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०^{†ลℓк †๏ мэ} 05:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Limited to template editors and admins for 3 months. let us know if anything changes Gbawden (talk) 07:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Move Category:Bun

please move Category:Bun to Category:Buns, in order to preserve page history. bun should be plural and it does refer to breads primarily. ( https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/bun https://www.google.com/search?q=buns&tbm=isch ) thx.--RZuo (talk) 00:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I renamed the category. Taivo (talk) 14:42, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

m:Special:CentralAuth/Kolega2357

Please replace content on User:Kolega2357 with {{WMF-legal banned user}}, according to CentralAuth - Global ban by WMF. – Tryvix1509 (talk) 04:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 14:40, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Same files repeatedly uploaded as own work from multiple accounts

Most recent account is Sciunivi. In the past, at least Soares de Andrade and Righterwrong. I first noticed it with the second account (Soares), because the images appeared to be Flickrwashing (see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Vinicius Soares de Andrade). Not sure what the best approach is here (block, delete, and wait for the next account?). — Rhododendrites ^talk |  17:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Problems with file upload

Hello, kindly asking for your help with uploading an updated version of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Brillouin_Zone_(1st,_FCC).svg The first upload seems to have ingored or omitted the changes? Another upload seems impossible "exact same svn" (but axis label were changed). Kind regards 17387349L8764 (talk) 11:35, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@Inductiveload: Your opinion? Yann (talk) 13:01, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@17387349L8764: When you overwrite a file, you need to make sure that it doesn't break any of the articles, in which it is used. E.g. de:Brillouin-Zone explicitly mentions "Koordinatensystem (x,y,z)" and not (kx, ky, kz). See Commons:Overwriting existing files.

I'm guessing the problem you're experiencing is that your browser shows a cached version of the image. I recommend refreshing the page without caching (typically Ctrl+F5 or Ctrl+⇧ Shift+R). TilmannR (talk) 15:39, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

@TilmannR + all: That worked! Sorry, the caching-issue is very unusual on my side. Yes, coordinates will be changed accordingly. 17387349L8764 (talk) 15:44, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Please delete Category:IMO 02330241 as accidentally made in error

Some Admin help is needed here.

Back in 2019, a User made a mistake and created Category:IMO 02330241.IMO numbers are always 7 digits, not 8. I believe this user intended to create Category:ENI 02330241 which is correct and does exist for the ship Category:Paul Delvaux (ship, 2008).

Please delete Category:IMO 02330241 which appears to be a redundant error and has no images associated with it. GRDN711 (talk) 17:22, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. — Huntster (t @ c) 17:59, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Bad block on Davey2010

Everybody has said, what (s)he has to say. The block is expired. Taivo (talk) 09:50, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Spurred by Commons talk:Abuse filter#Report by Davey2010, specifically [13], Davey2010 (talk · contribs) is now blocked.

This is a bad block. Textbook INVOLVED for Elcobbola to respond to a pretty mild bit of invective aimed at them by then being the admin to do the blocking. It's a simple lèse-majesté block for being Insufficiently Humble to an admin.

Also Davey then withdrew the comment, only to have Elcobbola restore it. OK, they were also reverting a close, which might have been premature, but if a comment is so bad as to be an immediate block, then WTF restore it?

The block came with the message "Incivility after warnings". But I see no warnings here.

Blocks are preventative [sic]. But this was a block on a user who was already (not unreasonably) annoyed by some automated process acting against them, and its immediate effect was to annoy them even further. There's an uncivil edit summary straight after, so I expect the excuse will now be, "Oh, Davey shouldn't have been blocked for the first one, but now they definitely should be!" But that's just deliberately provoking someone into a blockworthy act, which is more bad adminship. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

This is the Commons, not en.wiki; while w:WP:INVOLVED is not Commons policy, it is good practice and thus, even if it were: it provides "editors should not act as administrators in disputes in which they have been involved". This was not a dispute. Davey2010 posted a comment to Commons talk:Abuse filter and I responded ([14][15]) without antagonism, without sarcasm, and without "bullshit". Nevertheless, this engendered an uncivil attack, something of which Davey2010 has been warned innumerable times before (and indeed blocked on sister projects) and for with they are indeed a frequent fixture here at ANU. In no universe is an uncivil attack to a user who happens to be an admin a magical loophole or "get out jail free" card shielding a response from that admin. Verily, even w:WP:INVOLVED sets forth "In straightforward cases [...] the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion." I do not consider, nor would any reasonable or competent editor, "your sarcastic bullshit" or indeed "Fucking pathetic cunt" and "Pathetic cunt" to be anything but straightforward. Andy, of course, cherry-picks and materially omits the entire sentence from COM:BP, which incudes "As blocks are preventative rather than punitive, use a block duration that is proportional to the time likely needed for the user to familiarize themselves with relevant policies and adjust their behaviour. Given that Davey2010 has failed to familiarise themselves with civility since at least 2018, a 3 day block, if anything, is much too short. This is nothing but disingenuous, bad-faith nonsense--per usual. Эlcobbola _talk 20:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

• shielding a response from that admin. Yes it is. That's the point of INVOLVED. If it's that bad that it's block-worthy, there are other admins who will see it and respond. But when you responded, the outcome of that was to escalate it, such that someone's now calling for it to be a 2 week block. I've far less exception to the block or its length than the fact that it was you who issued it.

I did not "cherry pick" a sentence from BP. My point there is that if this was a preventative block (else why else?), what was it preventing? An escalation? Well that totally failed.

As to 2021 (which I certainly didn't remember posting), if your actions in hounding editors off the project are becoming so regular, then the fault is not with those who are calling you out over it.

Overall, this is just yet another example of, "All admins are perfect, and anyone who says different is getting blocked." Andy Dingley (talk) 22:20, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I see no escalation, nor do I see that you've even read, or understood, the sister project guidance you purport has been breeched (again, "In straightforward cases [...] the community has historically endorsed the obvious action of any administrator – even if involved – on the basis that any reasonable administrator would have probably come to the same conclusion.") I have no dispute or history with Davey2010--I'm a legend, afterall. To think I would not have made the same block if that comment was made to any other editor is delusion--a theme. Эlcobbola _talk 22:29, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

nah, if i was Elcobbola, i'd up it to 2 weeks for swearing at him after the fact....we can't always blame admins for overreacting... one of the pillars of wiki(p/m)edia is civility, heck its also one of the wikimedia's Terms of Use...maybe users here should learn to not get too hot-headed and confrontational .. Stemoc 21:05, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't see merit in this filing. On an international project where back-room discussions often veer towards the technical, some amount of patience is just required when talking with people. Some discussions will be frustrating; that's not an excuse to start lashing out at people. Was Davey's "sarcastic bullshit" comment egregious? No, but it was inappropriate and a short block seems within admin discretion. The subsequent "Fucking pathetic cunt" was beyond the pale, however. I don't think the block was a big problem insofar as "involved" is concerned, but if anyone's going to escalate at this point it's probably best left to someone else.

The most incredible part of this report, and Davey's unblock request, is the idea that he needs an umpteenth warning about civility for a short-term block to be issued. All those past warnings mean, if anything, that Davey should expect to be cut less slack and to receive fewer warnings than others moving forward. For what it's worth, it seems like Davey has a bit of a temper, but from what I recall, he does tend to come back and apologize/acknowledge the mistake later. That doesn't negate the hurt that lashing out at people does, but it does help, and I suspect it's a big part of why he hasn't been indeffed thus far. I'd encourage him to rework the existing unblock request, though (or just ride out the three days), because it still seems like he's blaming elcobbola for his own actions. FWIW. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  21:58, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Revdel request

Hi, Could someone please revdel this, this and this please?,

Not my finest hour on Commons but the damage has been done and I regret saying what I did.
(For any admins not up to scratch I made a silly comment calling someone's replies "sarcastic rubbish" ((but rubbish with another word), got blocked, made the comment linked above, got requested to be unblocked at AN[16] which was refused by consensus due to said comment linked above so I was sanctioned for it - Could be wrong but I feel I may of been unblocked had I not made that second comment), Just wanted to quickly explain before anyone believes I only just made it or something,
Right I'll shut up now, Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 12:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 13:08, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Brilliant thank you so much Yann, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 13:43, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

User:GlandagBot

Hello. Could you please review and delete the uploads of Special:Contribs/GlandagBot? It's a cross-wiki vandal account pretending to be a bot and uploading copyright infringements. Account is now globally locked. Thank you. Sincerely, —MarcoAurelio 22:13, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Uploads nuked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Interface Administrators attention please

Hi. Since we don't yet have a Commons:Interface Administrators' noticeboard (which I suggest be created and watched), I am writing here. The main script we use for tagging multiple files for deletion (and for other helpful tasks), VFC, sorely needs attention from Interface Administrators, the only people allowed to edit it. Bug reports and edit requests from as far back as 2011 are languishing in MediaWiki talk:Gadget-VisualFileChange.js.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:46, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Interface administrators don't write code, they modify pages. Yet at least half of the edit requests on that page seem to be attention beacons instead of "please change this specific text to this other text". So those would/should be rejected anyway. If there is something actionable, you might be better of reaching out to specific interface admins who have recently been active. But things just get difficult if a tool no longer has a maintainer and therefor the best long term approach is to find an editor with sufficient JS development skills to take over the responsibility for the tool. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 15:25, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Delete category Valentina Greggi

Please delete categori Valentina Greggi, created by mistake. Thanks --Luigi.tuby (talk) 07:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. @Luigi.tuby: In the future, please do not complain here, but add {{Bad name|New name}} or {{speedydelete|reason for deletion}} in beginning of the category. Taivo (talk) 13:30, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

VRT request

Hello! Per ticket:2023020910009624, please delete the original version of File:Torii of Hie-jinja Shrine, Komae.jpg because the photographer is visible in the mirror. Thank you! Bencemac (talk) 15:03, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

•  Done - Jmabel ! talk 15:43, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you! Bencemac (talk) 15:49, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion request for MediaWiki:Metadata-fields

Following some concerted action on Commons and in MediaWiki core (h/t Bawolff and Umherirrender), this local interface message is now identical to the software version. (I haven’t seen any complaints about the additional metadata fields shown, neither on the regular nor the technical village pump.) Therefore, the local page can now be deleted, so that future improvements to the MediaWiki version will also apply to Commons automatically. (From the deletion log, which points at previous requests, I gather that the AN is the right place to request deletion of NS_MEDIAWIKI pages – apologies if that’s not correct.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Raymond 20:03, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Redirect deletion nomination

Hi, I've closed Commons:Deletion requests/File:Blason famille fr LE GRAS DU LUART.svg as Kept as it was a nomination of a Redirect but can redirects been listed at DR ?, COM:RFD goes to DR and the DR page doesn't mention redirects,
My assumption has been that AN is the equivalent to en:WP:RFD as no RFD board exists here,

Was my closure correct? and should the RFD target point back to AN for simplicity ?, If anyone disagrees with my interpretation of DR then i'll happily reopen the DR, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 17:15, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010: We have COM:CSD#G2 "Unused and implausible, or broken redirect". TilmannR (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@TilmannR the redirect isn't implausible or a broken redirect.... –Davey2010^Talk 18:44, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010: It's not broken, but isn't it unused and implausible? @Kontributor 2K said that it's not the COA of Gras du Luart. TilmannR (talk) 19:12, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Fair point however the file was originally uploaded in 2016 so it may well be linked off-wiki, I didn't think we ever changed redirects but I may be mistaken, –Davey2010^Talk 19:21, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

If the timing is relevant, then I would prefer if the G2 criterion was more explicit about that. I guess G7 does care about external websites, but that's without the assumption of incorrectness. TilmannR (talk) 19:33, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Davey, deletion requests should be closed by uninvolved person. You created the redirect less than week ago, so you are involved person. You should only comment the DR, not close it. No punishment will follow, because I personally think, that the redirect is useful, but be warned and do not close DR-s against your own created redirects in the future. COM:DR says: "Non-admins may close a deletion request as keep if they have a good understanding of the process, and provided the closure is not controversial." But file:Blason famille fr LE GRAS DU LUART.svg still has deletion template, please remove it and the case is closed.

Also I must say: criterion G7 does not apply, because nominator for deletion (Kontributor) was neither redirect creator (this was Davey) nor file creator (this was Elolo). Taivo (talk) 09:16, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Taivo, TilmannR, Davey2010,

I ensure you that I have eventually absolutely no consideration for the consistency of the search results on commons, or anything, by the way, regarding file management or even just logic. These are not my cross to bear down on this piece of stone. And most of all, I like to leave waste on my way. That's why I won't insist anymore on this misleading redirect.

On another note, my english not being so good, please could someone explain me what means the word anal ? seen there :

« Sorry to be anal » (emphasis mine)

Is it an acronym or something similar ?

Regards, --Kontributor 2K (talk) 11:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

@Kontributor 2K: In this context it's definition number 3 on wiktionary:anal#Adjective: "obsessed with neatness and accuracy". TilmannR (talk) 11:17, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you TilmannR,

Well, anal is indeed what that I'm not, as I really love to leave misleading (and uncorrectable) redirects on my way. In the end.

Regards, --Kontributor 2K (talk) 11:26, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Kontributor 2K, In this context I was apologising for being TOO stubborn or being TOO accurate, Generally speaking I'm a relaxed person here and in real life - I don't follow EVERY letter to a rule and me being insistent with this redirect could be misconstrued as "following a rule to the letter" if that makes sense, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:07, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Davey2010,

Thanks for your answer.

As I said, this is not my problem anymore. Besides, it seems that it's not a problem at all.

Regards, --Kontributor 2K (talk) 18:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Kontributor 2K, You're welcome, I'm just sorry this end up going unanswered, We tried. –Davey2010^Talk 18:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Arya Diwaker tempel

The Arya Diwaker tempel in Suriname discovered that the name should be with an i and not an e (see this article in Dutch language), and they decided in 2022 to change the name statutorily. I have corrected the name yet on Wikpedia (nl:, en:, and es:) and also changed the category name here on Commons. Could an administrator please do the remaining part that I cannot do? That is:

• Change al the titles of the files in the Category:Arya Diwaker tempel from "Dewaker" into "Diwaker".
  • And have the names on Wikipedia corrected by a bot as well
• Delete the left over of the old category name Category:Arya Dewaker tempel.

Thank you in advance! Ymnes (talk) 16:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Have we considered also spelling "temple" properly and consistently, while we're at it? Elizium23 (talk) 16:51, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

"Tempel" is Dutch language. So feel free to translate that to temple indeed! So: "Arya Dewaker (tempel)" into "Arya Diwaker (temple)". Thank you. Ymnes (talk) 17:52, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

According to a machine translation of the article you've cited, an editor's note claims that the spelling you've proposed is "still wrong", because a more faithful spelling involves two accented characters. I don't know how we feel on Commons about diacritics in general, or whether this collection should be named in English, Dutch, or both, but perhaps we should consider how the editor feels about the need for diacritics so that we don't merely change the name to something that's "less wrong than before". Elizium23 (talk) 18:14, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Whether diacritics should be upheld, I think, depends on how one generally does this on Commons. Today I wrote an article where the diacritics in Kártárám are left away in the official name of w:nl:Kartaramstraat (Kartaram Street). Ymnes (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

So, does someone know what the Commons standard in English is? Ymnes (talk) 19:29, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

In anyway, without diacritics is the name statutorily. Ymnes (talk) 13:41, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what policy is on Commons, but where I come from on enwiki, we name things after the "Common Name" of the topic, which will not necessarily match the "statutory" or "official" name, but rather the name that is most found in the majority of reliable, secondary sources. So if the temple has only recently changed its statutory, official name to something else, it is extremely likely that many, many English (and Dutch etc.) sources still cover it under the old name, and we should seriously consider whether we are jumping the gun on the whole thing. Elizium23 (talk) 19:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't even understand the "have the names on Wikipedia" changed by coming to the Commons admin board part of this. I assume Ymnes means English Wikipedia but perhaps this is a request for something else. This feels like someone who wants "an admin" to use their 'power' to make sure everything is the way they want without having to convince anyone of anything other than doing the bare minimum of making a post here. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

• I think this is better for a CFD than here. Commons:Language policy says to follow English convention with redirects to the page (and maybe even the category) to whatever we pick. For the file names, Commons:File renaming is stricter and I think renaming file names is unnecessary and more headaches as there will be problems with usages on other projects. This is all comical in a sense given that this same temple is known as d:Q2717827 because Wikidata uses a more computer-oriented system. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:52, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

  There is a reliable source given, and if there's need for an extra one, please ask. But if content changes IRL, we follow. Ymnes (talk) 19:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

  There are no images left at the old category and the category has been renamed. What are you asking an admin to do here? Are you asking for an admin here to make a series of change of each Wikipedia page that references this temple? Why? For the file renames, this isn't an admin task as any filemover can do that (I have that right). But I am not in the mood to rename files like File:Arya Dewaker Mandir (14143139219).jpg, taken in 2014 and uploaded in 2018 and used at ES, because someone in 2022 renamed the article and have to hunt down and fix the image at the wiki afterwards or File:P1060656a.jpg where the name isn't used. It's a lot of work you are asking people to do when it seems to violate COM:FRNOT because it's more 'correct' rather than it's an obvious error. Still, it's 32 images so feel free to follow the instructions at Commons:File_renaming#How_to_rename_a_file and a file mover can do the task if they feel like it's appropriate. Ricky81682 (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Emergency: Please check immediately this fake pic

https://www.infobae.com/new-resizer/dgld58y9fgwuWT68Tp92Rl2l7eQ=/768x432/filters:format(webp):quality(85)/arc-anglerfish-arc2-prod-infobae.s3.amazonaws.com/public/VDSZBDJLLVDPRFCZMVQ7UDQVEQ versus File:FloresVenezolanas.png

thanks + best regards 92.210.114.145 16:37, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done, image deleted as copyvio and manipulated attack-image; uploader Dictaduranazista (talk · contribs) indef-blocked. --Túrelio (talk) 16:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2023

FYI. -- CptViraj (talk) 18:36, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Removal of rollbacker permission

Bradford (talk · contribs): globally banned user, compromised account. Ruy (talk) 23:09, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Gbawden (talk) 05:47, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald Walter Cameron of Lochiel, 25th Chief 2.jpg

At Commons:Deletion requests/File:Donald Walter Cameron of Lochiel, 25th Chief 2.jpg the nominator is going for a third attempt at deletion of the same image with the same nonsensical rationale about it being a derivative work. I think the nomination should be closed and the nominator warned about disruption. RAN (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! --RAN (talk) 21:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Two additional speedy deletions were also denied for a total of 3 speedies, the first speedy was turned into the original deletion nomination. --RAN (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 21:50, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems a bit unfair when the nominator was told to renominate the image although I admit that the actual nominations are terrible. @Neveselbert: , seriously, spend like a minute and give a explanation that is more than a sentence for a third nomination. It sounds like your complaint is "I don't think it was taken in 1905" and "it's a scan" but a scan doesn't make it a DW and the other part is just a guess which gets pretty tiring when you aren't spending more than ten seconds on the thing. Ricky81682 (talk) 00:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

From Hill To Shore gave an extremely detailed reply as to why the image should be deleted. A scan would make it a DW in the sense that the scan is derived from the original work, hence "Scan from the original work". The other part is a guess yes, but I thought we operated on the precautionary principle on Commons? Neveselbert (talk) 18:31, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I gave a detailed rationale as to why I think the image should be deleted but it boils down to I think the uploader (who remains an active user) should tell us where they found it. However, we have to respect community consensus and the judgement of the closing admin (you can dispute the case a few times but there will come a point where other users see the continued dispute as disruptive). To resolve this, what would satisfy you if the deletion discussion was allowed to continue? If consensus again forms to keep the file, would you be willing to remove your dispute of the licence? Note: I have no authority here, so I am just trying to explore ways to resolve the dispute (other editors may not agree that reopening the discussion is appropriate). From Hill To Shore (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I would rather there was a more thorough review of the copyright status of the file, which is why I think the DR should never have been closed by Infrogmation in the first place, who gave a frankly lackadaisical reason for keeping the image. Deletion discussions on Commons usually go on for a long while anyway, so I'm not sure why this one was closed only after a week or so. Neveselbert (talk) 19:46, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): it's obviously a derivative work. Obviously you don't believe the uploader took the photograph in 1905. Neveselbert (talk) 18:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

• Instead of just writing the word "derivative work" over and over, please explain why the image is not in the public domain. Everyone who scans or rephotographs a 2D artwork or a photograph, creates a derivative work, but that doesn't restart the copyright clock or transfer the original copyright to them. We house >100,000 scanned images of public domain works, explain how this one is different without using the term "derivative work". The explanations of why it should be housed here are cogently written. --RAN (talk) 18:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

  Because we don't have any evidence of the image being in the public domain, that's why. There's no evidence it's from 1905, it's all guesswork. The uploader refuses to communicate to clarify anything. Neveselbert (talk) 18:56, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

  Do you believe the image of Donald Walter Cameron of Lochiel (1876-1951) was taken post mortem after 1953? Did they collect his bones and cover him in wax then take a photograph? What is your estimate of the year the image was taken? Haven't we discussed this multiple times already? --RAN (talk) 18:59, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

  Don't be ridiculous. Anyway, it's when the photograph was published that is the issue, not necessarily when it was taken. Maybe it was first published after 1953, who knows? Neveselbert (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Neveselbert: I'm confused by your statement that a scan makes this a derivative work. Accurate reproduction of a 2D work does not normally create any new intellectual property rights. If it did, then every image here that was not a digital file at creation -- e.g., every painting, every analogue photo, etc. -- would have a copyright date (and ownership) based on the date of digitization rather than the date of initial creation. - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The laws are a bit different in the UK as it relates to sweat of the brow, but the point I was getting at was that the image is not an original work by the uploader, it's derived from somebody else's work. Neveselbert (talk) 19:41, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

There is a published photo of him as a boy here, published in 1898 and apparently a few years old at the time. This one... seems likely that it was made after his father died and he inherited the title, which I think was in 1905 or 1906. At the time, copyright lasted 50 years from creation. The 1996 law for anonymous works changed to 70 years from "making available to the public", which includes public display (did not require it being in a printed work). Or if it was not made available within 70 years of creation, it became PD then. The standard here, COM:PRP, is that we need to show that a work is public domain beyond a significant doubt. There are always theoretical doubts -- for example maybe it was first published in Spain instead of the UK, so even determining the country of origin involves an assumption most of the time. Publication is another one of those areas -- it is quite rare for works to remain unpublished for decades. In the end, it's a judgement whether that doubt is a very unlikely theoretical doubt, or if it rises to a significant doubt. For works which come out of family archives, or negatives from a photographer, the chances of long-unpublished works go up quite a bit, so those take more scrutiny. In this case... seems pretty clear it was created around that time, and it was a portrait style from a family where similar ones were published pretty regularly (see the link above). Given the nature of this specific work, I'd guess that the chances of it remaining unpublished (let alone not "made available to the public") are rather small. So to me, that is not enough of a doubt for me to be a problem. The other question of course is if the author was named, in which case the 70 year from publication thing does not hold. That is harder for me to assume, but the photos in the link above are uncredited, and this photo would be within 2-3 years of {{PD-old-assumed}} status anyways. Agreed that claiming "own work" is bogus -- it's not even a derivative work probably, just a straight-up copy. It is always helpful to include the source where found, for sure, though not even that can always answer the important questions. But if there is enough information available for us to think that COM:PRP is satisfied, then we can keep it. To me, this one seems virtually certain to be OK, but the situation for each work could be different. Carl Lindberg (talk) 20:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia Colombia

Wikimedia Colombia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

This user has uploaded lots of images recently for use in pages about a wikiconference. Every one that I've checked so far is a copyright violation. I've tagged quite a few but I think that they all nearly all need to go e.g. the logos like File:Iberoconf-electricidad.png are copied from e.g. Adobe but claimed as their own work. Smartse (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

If this account belongs to a Wikimedia Chapter or User Group this should also be addressed on Meta. If this account does not belong to an official group this account also needs to be renamed. GPSLeo (talk) 17:55, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Smartse and GPSLeo . I am part of the board and vice president of Wikimedia Colombia [17] [18] and I certify that this account is used by the wikimedia chapter [19] solely for the creation of this type of event and to send invitations. The mistakes made have already been understood and we will repair them as soon as possible. My sincere apologies for all the hassle. Sincerely, JOAN ~ ^(Questions?) 00:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done All copyvios from Photoshop deleted, the pictures that are derivative of another pictures must be fixed the sources. Furthermore I speak via Telegram with the people of the chapter, Wikimedia Colombia is the official account of them Ezarateesteban 00:43, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

File:Singer-Siddur-1915-AI.pdf

I need some assistance. There seem to be 2 versions, in the history, thanks to a good faith upload by myself.

I've checked carefully and neither would based on internal details seem to be the Second Edition of 1962 which would be unsuitable for Commons (potentially still in copyright). The copyright date given in both versions on Commons is 1915, However the imprint date differs. The original upload is a 1958 printing which has missing pages, and a 1960 printing which appears to be complete.

Can a Commons administrator do some kind of side by side comparison, and retain an intact printing, or alternatively do a history split? Thanks. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

And currently neither PDF displays, suggesting that when the new version was uploaded , it broke something, and despite the revert back, the old size data didn't restore properly. It's a shame that what should have been a SIMPLE replacement upload, seems to have broken display of the original as well. I am also disappointed at the lack of response here. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 20:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, That's a known bug: phab:T297942. I first reported this in December 2021, but noboby in the developer team seems to care. The bug has still "Needs Triage"... :((( Ping the WMF for serious consideration about Commons. Now I succeeded sometimes to get a working PDF using a bit of magic (reuploading a very slightly different version, etc.), but I don't have a definitive solution. Yann (talk) 21:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I also uploaded a Djvu of the 1960 printing. (check my contribs), which has a misaligned text layer, due to another long-standing bug in IA-upload. I nominated it for deletion Commons:Deletion requests/File:The Authorized Daily Prayer Book (Singer 1915).djvu on the grounds of it being a 'duplicate' edition to the PDF I attempted to upload.

I don't mind which version get's kept as long as it's an intact one!

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:49, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

COM:LR

This page should be protected to avoid vandalism in future and edits such as this should be rev-del'ed. There has been much vandalism and disruptive editing on this page over a good period of time and it warrants protection. Best, ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:07, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:44, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

User:隐世高人

This uses makes constant edit war. We need someone who can explain him the rules in his own language, I think. Thanks in advance, Wieralee (talk) 05:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The romanization writing system for the Japanese word 鳥海 comprises two accurate and one inaccurate in terms of the Japanese language pronunciation. The inaccurate one is Chokai, while the two accurate ones are Chōkai and Choukai. but Choukai, in the practical use of the word's romanization, is the most infrequently used (or the most uncommon) of the above three, and therefore I believe that Chōkai is the best romanization option. Other Japanese words with macrons after romanization have the same three writing ways as those words in the romanization of the Japanese language, such as 扶桑 (Fusō), 金剛 (Kongō) and 大淀 (Ōyodo). 隐世高人 (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Commons is a consensus-based community, which means you should not perform category moves/reverts without consensus, even if you think you are right. Read Commons:Rename a category and follow the instructions; otherwise you might be reported here again. (And JFYI, Chokai is indeed the accurate romanisation of 鳥海: according to the regulation on the Japanese place names adopted by the Government of Japan, place names are to be written in non-macron form of romaji.) Yasu (talk) 15:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

there's always this problem with the o vs ō in japanese transliteration.

i think this problem is best handled thru a broad discussion (like an RFC) by the japanese commons users or the japanese wiki community. they should decide which transliteration system commons should use.

other than that there's not much we can do. they are different systems of transliteration instead of outright errors. RZuo (talk) 18:12, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@RZuo, 隐世高人, and Wieralee: Japanese speakers appear to discuss on Commons at Village pump Commons:井戸端 and Help desk Commons:ヘルプデスク.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 11:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

so? RZuo (talk) 13:47, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Copyright_violations: Help needed

The category is currently very full, help is needed to work through it. --Polarlys (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

I've made a good dent, but still ~200 files. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Urgent: Template:Motd/2023-02-18 (en)

please change the link from "China–United States relations" (referring to the china after 1949 only) to "History of China–United States relations" in Template:Motd/2023-02-18 (en). RZuo (talk) 08:08, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done @RZuo: Please double check Gbawden (talk) 08:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

legal-reports@wikimedia.org

I sent a report in to legal-reports@wikimedia.org per the note at the top of this page, more than 24 hours ago. Result? Crickets. That seems hugely problematic as well as disgraceful. Who is responsible for monitoring that email account? --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:37, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) @Tagishsimon: Wikimedia Foundation Legal department ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:06, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

The note should be amended and rephrased to: e-mail Wikimedia's legal department because general VRT agents don't have access to this queue and it is not operated through VRTS either. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 15:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

I think the Mail address for very urgent cases is emergency@wikimedia.org. But I also thought the response for the not so urgent cases would be faster. At least if the case is obvious. If the case is not obvious it can take a while. You can also send a mail to any administrator to perform a regular deletion until the WMF goes into this case. GPSLeo (talk) 17:00, 16 February 2023 (UTC)

56 hours on, still no response (bar the automated receipt-of-email notification), still no action. I think we can now take it that Commons / Wikimedia's illegal content response system is broken. I note the suggestion that I email an admin to have them delete the images, but I'm loathed, because of the content involved, to go outside the mandated path for handling such content. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) @Tagishsimon: I understand your emotions and I'm sorry but Commons VRT volunteers don't monitor that email. This email is completely handled by Wikimedia Foundation legal department and Commons "unpaid volunteers" must not be blamed for "not responding to an email that they cannot even see". Please. If you want to hear response from Commons VRT agents, you can send an email at any such queue, for example, as guided on Commons:Contact us/Problems. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 07:58, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm not blaming anyone here; nothing I have written suggests I am, and 'emotion' is not involved. I understand it's WMF's responsibility, one they're failed. It's well worth people on this board knowing that WMF are failing to act in a situation in which we rely on them. This platform should be demanding to know why. The images in question have now been deleted, albeit it took the intervention of a WMF Trustee to make it so. The user account does not appear to have been blocked, however. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon, clearly you're unable to divulge much about the details of your legal request, although it appears to be a deletion request and abusive user you're involved in. Legal matters often concern confidentiality of communications, and email is anything but confidential. Perhaps the legal department was unable to reach you via a secure channel? Perhaps they were unwilling to discuss legal matters with a non-admin? (You do not appear to be an administrator of any kind on any project...) so perhaps you do not have standing or privilege to continue communications in any sort of legal proceeding they may anticipate.

I've known people who often respond in a different mode of communication, such as in-person, after receiving an email, because it is more personal and more confidential. But we have no idea of the details of your case, and we're unable to mind-read WMF attorneys, so I'm honestly not sure why you're bringing this issue for administrator scrutiny, as sysops can't do any of that, either. Elizium23 (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon I've experienced a lack of response from the WMF after reporting child pornography as well. I'll email and ask them about it.

In the meantime, please email me (Special:EmailUser/Mdaniels5757) with a link to the file page so I can revdel it immediately and also email oversight-commons@lists.wikimedia.org the link so it can be hidden from admins. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:52, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Carl Franz Bally & Peter Bally

Recently, File:Carl Franz Bally.JPG was renamed to File:Peter Bally.jpg. They are different people, so the redirect should be removed. Also, the talk page got moved to File talk:Peter Bally.JPG, please move this to File talk:Peter Bally.jpg. bdijkstra (overleg) 17:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

The current state is: Yann deleted File:Carl Franz Bally.JPG. Mdaniels5757 deleted Commons:Peter Bally.jpg. File talk:Peter Bally.jpg is currently tagged for speedy deletion (to make space for moving File talk:Peter Bally.JPG there). I also tagged Commons:Peter Bally.JPG for speedy deletion. TilmannR (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

@Gbawden: please undelete File talk:Peter Bally.JPG and move it to File talk:Peter Bally.jpg. bdijkstra (overleg) 12:21, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done - thanks to all involved. --bdijkstra (overleg) 16:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

please delete File talk:Peter Bally.JPG because it has no base page. The redirect serves no purpose. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 18:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

File merge request

Could someone overwrite/merge File:Farmer meme with apostrophe.jpg to File:Farmer meme.jpg? The former is a typo-fixed version of the latter, created by another user at my request. IMO there's no value in keeping both since they're basically the same file. --Veikk0.ma (talk) 08:49, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Veikk0.ma, please copy your request onto Commons:History merging and splitting/Requests, thanks Ellywa (talk) 10:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. No action here. Ellywa (talk) 10:07, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

File:Meteran listrik Indonesia.jpg

On behalf of the author of this image, I'm asking the administrators for help in removing the old version of this image. That version includes the customer's data, which allows others to use it for accessing personal data. I appreciate your help. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 13:56, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. The file is nominated for regular deletion, discussion is going. AN does not need to be notified. Taivo (talk) 14:15, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Understood. So sorry for my confusion. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 19:06, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Image

Hello! Is there a chance for this image to remain on Wikimedia Commons? Thank you! Maks (talk) 05:11, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

(non-admin comment) @Максим Огородник: If the source and license is identified, and if those are compatible with Wikimedia Commons, I would say, yes, otherwise no. What is the source of this work? The image that is in the background, is it freely licensed or does it possibly come under the freedom of panorama? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

and unfortunately, the blur image is out of scope in my opinion. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:20, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, no. So I put a blur on it. Maks (talk) 05:26, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

The photo was taken in Ukraine, where there is no freedom of panorama. Maks (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Steam narrowboat President

Can someone please move Category:President (ship, 1909) back to Category:Steam narrowboat President? This is no more a ship than I'm a mermaid. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done, you're welcome. Achim55 (talk) 20:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. It's worse than that. User:Blue Elf has (re-)named a bunch of categories about similar narrowboats, (see Narrowboat) using "ship" in the name. These can be seen in Category:Narrowboats by name and all need to be fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It may have happened, but I don't remember renaming any other categories about narrowboats to ship. But the naming convention is that almost all categories for watercraft use ship. The only exceptions I can remember right now are tugboats, submarines and maybe drilling rigs. So undoing that renaming goes against the naming convention as it is for now. Blue Elf (talk) 21:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

I dispute that that is the convention, but if it were it would be in error and would require correction. Where is this supposed convention documented? Category:Steam narrowboat President has been so named since 2010; Category:Spey (narrowboat) has had its name since 2014; Category:Bluebell (narrowboat) and Category:Redshank (narrowboat, 1936) since 2016 Category:Narrowboat The Lady Edwina, 2019 - some convention! Tugboats and drilling rigs are seagoing; narrowboats are (rare exceptions for television) not. Narrowboats are not ships. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:24, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Category:Ships has the naming conventions (see "How to name the category"). I'm sure many long-standing categories don't follow that format, but from what I've seen it's pretty universal. Most of Category:Narrowboats by name follows that format. Looks like that was being formalized in 2011 (the instructions are transcluded from Commons:Categories/editintro/ships) which has only been slightly tweaked since 2011). You may disagree, but I tend to follow that format too, and I don't find it at all problematic, and it's certainly not "wrong". Carl Lindberg (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Whatever Category:Ships says is irrelevant, because narrowboats are not ships (in any case, it says nothing about categorising narrowboats; and neither does the 2011 discussion). If most of Category:Narrowboats by name follows that format, it's because of recent - and fallacious - creations by Blue Elf. It is utterly and completely wrong to refer to narrowboats as ships. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:51, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It's pretty much the convention for any named-watercraft category as far as I've seen, as they end up in Category:Ships by name. The definition of "ship" vs "boat" is pretty nebulous; there are about as many definitions as you find sites that try to define them. Narrowboats seem to be about the largest ships possible to navigate those canals; I can see them being called "ships" under many definitions (especially back in their cargo days). Of the ones in Category:Narrowboats by name, most are certainly not recent, and while Blue Elf is probably the second-most prolific category creator there, it is a very distant second. There are only a handful which do not follow that pattern, though of course that does happen sometimes. Is there a particular naming pattern on external sites for those vessels? Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

• It has been the convention for a long time – but it's a bad and incorrect one. See Commons:Categories for discussion/2017/04/Category:Juno, Light Vessel 72 (ship, 1903) Andy Dingley (talk) 22:10, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Basically, ship in this way works as a marker for categories for (most) watercraft. We could have used watercraft for this, but ship is shorter and easier, and even though it clearly isn't 100 % correct, I believe it is the preferrable word to use as such a marker. Blue Elf (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

• What does "marker for categories" mean? MediaWiki has no such thing.

The vessel-specific category has [[Category:...]] markup added to it. That puts it into a category. Nothing parses the name and looks for a string match as "ship". Andy Dingley (talk) 20:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems perfectly fine as a convention to me. The example above is a lightship, which is still a ship. If there is a particular pattern in use externally for a type of ship (naval ships often do have different naming patterns, and maybe that particular type does too), then follow that but change DEFAULTSORT to use our conventional name so they sort correctly. I still don't understand why you think it's bad and/or incorrect, and it's also been pretty consistent for over 11 years now. I've seen pretty much most experienced editors use it. It gives a consistent format so that sorting happens by name and then build year when inside other categories, helps distinguish ships named after people from categories on that person, etc. It does help visually to know instantly that something is a ship category when you see it. I don't see a good reason to not use it, really. Machines may not parse it, but humans do. I think the decision was to not have many different ship types there -- arguments over what is a boat vs a ship vs a specific type of ship etc. If they are all just "ship", it calls it out pretty specifically. Otherwise, ships are often named the same as other people, or concepts, which already have their own category names, and it probably reduces the chances of miscategorization. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

• But light vessels aren't "lightships", they're light vessels (only a handful were ships). Ships have propulsion, light vessels (almost all of them) don't, they're moored statically and moved by tugs when needed.

Distinctions of boats and barges can be even more obvious. Calling narrowboats "ships" is ridiculous.

Why is Commons so regularly antithetical to basic accuracy? Even when there's no downside to doing it right. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah, so it's simply about what the definition of ship vs boat is. By many definitions I see, narrowboats could qualify. By other definitions, probably not. In any event, by the wording of the guidelines, the idea was to remove any debate about ship vs boat vs barge vs whatever from the category name, and use a generic catch-all term for all of them, with the actual vessel types being defined via category inclusion instead. "Ship" has the benefit of being short, so it appears that was the word settled on, despite any questions of accuracy. If there are any new definitions of vessel type made, or splitting up a category into more specific subcategories, such changes are then just category changes not needing renames. I tend to agree it's better to have explicit ship type done that way, and am fine with the settled term of "ship" used generically in the category titles, especially given the thousands of categories that use it by this point. The contained categories are where the accuracy goes, to me, as they could in theory get more accurate or more specific over time. Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:10, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd prefer the general pattern Name (type[, year]) like Mars (tugboat, 1982) or America (ship, 1995) or Spey (narrowboat). --Achim55 (talk) 07:16, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

The wording on the guideline seemed to prefer to move more specific types down to categories, presumably so that changes (or identifying more specific types) don't end up requiring category name moves, but a simple recategorization instead. I guess "tugboat" and "submarine" were grandfathered in, but the guideline does specify that anything more specific should be in categories instead. 4. Submarines use "<name> (submarine, <year>)" and tugs/towboats use "<name> (tugboat, <year>)". All other types are identified by category:Ships by type. Carl Lindberg (talk) 12:40, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

"The wording on the guideline" Which "guideline"? if you're referring to the wording on Category:Ships, then your argument is circular, and the wording irrelevant, since narrowboats are not ships, and nothing written on that page - apparently without wider discussion - binds categories about narrowboats. That "guideline" is also contradicted by the wording at Category:Boats, the existence of which, along with a set of subcategories such as Category:Boats by name (which, contrary to the assertion above, is not in Category:Ships by name), shows that there is precedence and plenty of scope for dealing with narrowboats without misdescribing them as ships. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

There are some more narrowboats that I would like to categorize. Would it be okay to do that for now, and then continue the discussion about the naming of these categories later? Blue Elf (talk) 14:26, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

It will never be OK to categorise narrowboats as ships. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:19, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Of the 76 subcategories of Category:Narrowboats by name 62 wrongly have "ship" in the name; a further three wrongly have "tugboat". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

For the three that have "tugboat" in the name, two are classified as Vessel type "tug" on their pages at National Historic Ships. [20] [21] The third one has nothing at Vessel type, but Subfunction "tug". [22] Blue Elf (talk) 16:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Possible Gejzir.owski sock

• Jackerbox cult (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Jackerbox openly claims to be reuploading images by blocked user PolishBoyInUK (talk · contribs), who was blocked for uploading misidentified hoax images and being a sock of Gejzir.owski (talk · contribs).

Jackerbox's File:Hel Skyline Poland.jpg had a long description about how they were reuploading PolishBoyInUK's image and hoped they wouldn't get into trouble, File:Jastrzebia Gora.jpg just credits PolishBoyInUK as the creator (it also appears to be a misidentified photo of Rotmanka, rather than Jastrzebia Gora, as well as being a copyvio). Belbury (talk) 14:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

(non-admin comment): @Belbury: COM:RFCU is the right venue to file such requests that are related to sockpupptery. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 14:35, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@TheAafi: That page says that Checkuser is a last resort for difficult cases; pursue other options first, such as posting on the administrator's noticeboard and is what led me to post here. A user openly announcing their reuploads of a blocked user's hoaxes doesn't strike me as a very difficult case. Belbury (talk) 14:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@Belbury, cool, okay! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 14:42, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done: Blocked indef. On my screen for more than a year. Thanks for notifying! Achim55 (talk) 19:46, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi--need someone to take care of File:Gordon love durham university improved.jpg. Vandals already blocked on en-wiki. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 13:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Account blocked, file deleted. Yann (talk) 13:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

revdel previous revisions

Hi, can any admin please revdel previous revisions of the following files due to privacy reasons? File:A kitchen garden in Kashmir.jpg, File:Maize leaf with droplets of rain on it.jpg and File:Green leaves of a walnut tree with budding walnuts.jpg. Thank you! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 04:43, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Uploader's request on creation week. Taivo (talk) 08:30, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Another Gejzir.owski sock

• ExampleXavier (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Behavior matches Jackerbox cult (talk · contribs) three sections up. Videogame copyvios and dubious photos of Rotmanka in Poland, and Xavier's File:Waitrose, Towcester, UK.jpg matches the datestamp and EXIF of Jackerbox's File:Towcester town centre building.jpg. Belbury (talk) 10:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done: Blocked indef. Thanks for notifying! --Achim55 (talk) 13:10, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

May be sock

• 氏子 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• 寺人孟子 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

大家好，這是轉至[23]的內容，寺人孟子於此地被封鎖的兩天後，氏子建立帳號，這是氏子上傳的第一張照片 「File:桃園市立大溪木藝生態博物館藝師館內展示的古董架.jpg」，和寺人孟子上傳的最後一張照片 「File:桃園市立大溪木藝生態博物館四連棟內展示的建成商行模型.jpg」 間隔約10分鐘，比對兩個帳戶的照片數據近似，氏子或可能為傀儡帳戶，再麻煩管理員們判斷了。

此為Google翻譯：Hello everyone, this is go to the content of [24], two days after 寺人孟子 was blocked, 氏子 created an account, this is the first uploaded by 氏子 The photo File:桃園市立大溪木藝生態博物館藝師館內展示的古董架.jpg, and the last photo uploaded by the 寺人孟子 about 10 minutes apart File:桃園市立大溪木藝生態博物館四連棟內展示的建成商行模型.jpg, comparing the photo data of the two accounts is approximate , 氏子 may be a Sock account, and let the administrators judge.--Mafalda4144 (talk) 18:35, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Student project uploads

From time to time educational institutions seem to encourage their students to upload project work to Commons. Over the past few years there have been a lot on psychology and the brain. Initially these tended to be DR'd however they were always (to my knowledge) deleted and recently when similar uploads have caught my attention I have deleted them. Commons is not a web hosting platform and these have often contained images and text with copyright issues. Today there have been a number of uploads (see here). My issue with these (other than being a class project) is that some are not originally own work - the base images are essentially the same. There is no source for that and so "permission" is questionable. It would probably be good if others were aware of the situation. Thanks and comments very welcome Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for opening this discussion, @Herbythyme. I really can't understand none of the points you rise. First of all: Commons is a place to upload educational creations, education institutions should do it on a regular basis and we should be encouraging it. We need more high quality illustrations, not less. Deleting them by default is not a good practice.

Second, you claim that they are not "own work", but you don't provide what the original work is. Every student have made an illustration of a fish and a biological process, they are credited and categorized. They have an explanation. There's no single step missing. But, still, you think that they should be deleted only because... well, there's no reason other than that this is, indeed, a class project. Uploading illustrations made by artists as class project is not, in anyway, forbidden. Furthermore, contributing is encouraged in Commons and every Wikimedia project.

I visited this students yesterday, I talked to them about Copyright, best practices, Commons, why illustrations matter and why their great works should be uploaded so we can benefit from them globally. It seems that this idea was a mistake.

Sincerely, Theklan (talk) 13:18, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Herbythyme I don't think anyone has claimed it is a "web hosting platform". It is a "media file repository" with a specific scope. If an upload is within the scope, and not breaking any of our other policies, it shouldn't matter if the uploader is doing it as part of their studies or in their spare time. Class projects are welcome! Ainali (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Project Work made by Students from Educational Institutions is under scope, so it should be allowed (and encoraged!).--TaronjaSatsuma (talk) 13:37, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi again. Yes, those are my classmates' works. Each one of us were assigned a fish speces. All the illustrations we made, were made using the gouache technique. The template is the same because we made it all together with our proffesor, Izaskun Alberdi (I. Alberdi on the illustration, her name is credited just below our university's logo). However, each one of us illustrated our own fishing icons ("Método de pesca" on the file) We created the same template because these illustrations are part from a colaboration with the webpage Arrainak.eus (link) wich is a fish database made in the Basque Country. All these illustrations were uploaded at the same time because we were at university, in our class. Our professors were teaching us how to upload our works to Wikimedia Commons. All the uploaded works are listed under the category "Illustrations by Scientific Illustration master students at the University of the Basque Country in the year 2023". Every year, our Master's degree uploads students works to Wikimedia Commons.

As for the invertebrates' life cycles, we didn't use any templates as they were a free excercise to learn how to use the Inkskape program, so each one of us used our own illustrating styles to portrait several life cycles from different invertebrates. You can see that each one of those illustrations is different as the assignment was to illustrate the different life stages of each invertebrate. Not all the cycles have the same ammount of life stages as each of us drew different caracteristics of these animals. We tried to upload the .SVG files but were unable to, so we were told to upload all the illustrations on PDF format.

I hope all of this information will be of any use and clear any confussions. Thank you all. María Arenas Fernández (talk) 13:47, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to link the arrainak.eus page, here you have the link: https://arrainak.eus/ María Arenas Fernández (talk) 13:49, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@María Arenas Fernández: Thanks, that's an interesting project. In addition to PDF, PNG format would be useful, why you couldn't upload SVG files? To avoid any misundertanding, a mention in each of the student user page would be useful. Yann (talk) 13:58, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Yann Hello, thank you. We had this error uploading the .SVG file: "This file did not pass file verification". I'll let my classmates know. Thanks again. María Arenas Fernández (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Yann! I was there with students, and some of them had a message about not valid Svg. We tried to sanitize somehow, but couldn't find the origin of the problem. Also, not software, as some of them worked with InkScape and others with InDesign. I suggested to upload the PDF because it is still scalable, but one of our goals was to have translatable svgs which doesn't seem possible now. Theklan (talk) 14:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Theklan and María Arenas Fernández: You could ask on Commons:Graphic Lab/Illustration workshop. Probably someone can help you there. Yann (talk) 14:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for your contributions @María Arenas Fernández, @Herbythyme, @TaronjaSatsuma, @Yann, @Theklan and Ainati. I am one of the members of the academic committee of the master's degree in scientific illustration at the university of the basque country where Maria and the other students are currently training, www.ehu.eus/ilustracion-cientifica.

For years we have had this educational project coordinated by @Theklan. On our website you can see part of the collaboration, all these illustrations are uploaded on wikimedia commons [25]https://www.ehu.eus/es/web/ilustracion-cientifica/euskal-wikilarien-kultura-elkartea. This year's works are not uploaded yet on this page because I haven't had time to do it yet ;-)

In the master's degree, very good quality and scientifically rigorous works are done. Moreover, they are illustrations made specially to solve the current lack of certain topics. @Theklan coordinates this project with other researchers and educators (as @María Arenas Fernández mentioned, this year we are working with experts from https://arrainak.eus/ ) and together we choose the topics to be illustrated, so they are very valuable illustrations as there is no such content on the wikimedia commons.

This year we have made an effort not only to upload illustrations but also to upload technical data cards of the fish, where apart from the fish there is another type of information. And this information must be treated in order to be well transmitted, this has led us to work on these cards not only in the gouache subject where the fish have been created, but also in the graphic design and vector drawing subjects. They are great pieces of information that we believe wikimedia commons cannot waste.

In addition, with this project we inform our students about how Wikimedia Commons works and what it is, and we encourage them to continue collaborating once they have finished their training with us. As I said before I think this is a project where all the parts win.

Thank you for your attention, I just wanted to clarify some points.

Regards, Vega

pd: Thanks @Yannwe will try to solve this issue with the SVG Vega asensio (talk) 11:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

• It is weird to say that class projects can't be here. COM:SCOPE is explicit with that, Wikimedia Commons is a media file repository making available public domain and freely-licensed educational media content. I feel like telling you class projects are "educational media content" and thus under scope, not out of it. Copyrights is something where we can argue, what do you think is the original work, if these ones, according to you, are not "own-works"? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 11:20, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks everyone for the comments. In fact, now Im worried by the sentence when similar uploads have caught my attention I have deleted them. What has been deleted? Should we open a systematic review of this activity? Theklan (talk) 11:49, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

  Yes, if you aware of such deleted files, you can ask for undeletion. Also, to avoid any issue with licensing, a Creative Commons mention can be inserted in the files themselves, and a mention can be added in the website of the project. I don't read Spanish, but I don't see anything mentioning a free license on [26]. Yann (talk) 11:59, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

It sounds like the illustrations are the work of the uploaders, and that the instructor created the rest of the document. A simple email from the instructor to COM:VRT would address any lingering licensing issues. Kudos for assigning students to contribute good work to Commons! — Rhododendrites ^talk |  21:38, 24 February 2023 (UTC)