Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU • COM:ANI

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
Vandalism ^{[new section]}	User problems ^{[new section]}	Blocks and protections ^{[new section]}	Other ^{[new section]}
Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.	Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.	Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.	Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.
Archives
30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	133, 132, 131, 130, 129, 128, 127, 126, 125, 124, 123, 122, 121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

^{Translate this page}

Note

Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; Please try to remain civil with your comments.
Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Conduct concerns regarding User:Pelikana

Latest comment: 1 day ago9 comments3 people in discussion

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

(Added TLDR: (1) Peli has repeatedly made serious allegations about me without evidence (COM:NPA). (2) Peli frequently fragments discussions onto multiple other pages or sections (nullifying thread subscriptions and watchlist notifications, and without pinging participants) making collaboration and following conversations impossible. —added 22:35, 6 September 2026 (UTC))

I am requesting administrator attention regarding a pattern of conduct by User:Pelikana (aka Peli) that is making normal category work difficult in the topic area of horse-drawn vehicles and their subcategories.

The issue is not the content disputes themselves, but the behavior in how those disputes unfold: circular argumentation, use of insults and personal attacks, reframing my points to misrepresent what I wrote, refusal to acknowledge published carriage scholarship, repeated insistence that file-uploader captions outweigh expert sources, venue-splitting (dragging conversations across multiple pages), mixing unrelated discussions together, and confusing discussions where each reply is another "yeah, but" escalation.

Discussions never resolve. They only repeat, or go silent.

I have been dealing with this for the last two months. Two days ago, Peli posted (diff-nl) unsubstantiated and false accusations about me on Commons' Dutch-language Village Pump (Commons:De Kroeg), and two days earlier posted (diff-en) a hostile personal attack on his user talk page. These two egregious acts in quick succession crossed a threshold that compels me to bring the matter here to AN/U.

I apologize in advance if my examples go in circles, but that's how the discussions have been going.... in circles. For TLDR, just skim or skip the bullet points.

Details/examples/diffs

False accusations: In a post (diff-nl) at the Dutch-language Village Pump (Commons:De Kroeg), Peli accused me of: stalking, obstruction, fallacies, insulting sneers, edit wars, destroying categories, taking categories out of use, and reverting one of his edits on his own talk page. None of these claims were accompanied by diffs or evidence. The accusations are serious and presented as fact, but Peli has not supported them. These are false accusations. The Village Pump post presents a one-sided narrative in a venue where I was not notified, am not present, don't speak the language, and where no diffs were provided.
Talk‑page misconduct, insults: About Peli's accusation that I reverted on his user talk page: I posted a short instructional one-liner on his user talk page to explain why I removed 3 files from a category he had put them in, in the hopes he would not continue to miscategorize them. Peli posts directly above my thread a picture of a horse pissing; no edit summary. It was an irrelevant and irreverent image in response to my thread post (and should have been placed below, per talk page norms). Minutes later, Peli replaces the image with a photograph with the edit summary acting as his caption: "on the picture above you see...". I revert it with the edit summary "There are no "traps" in this image. Reverting to CORRECT [this] taxonomy". Note that by then we had been 'discussing' (unproductively) the use or scope of "trap" for days. He immediately restores the image, writes an actual caption below the image that re-asserts his argument, posts (diff-en) an insulting screed directed at me, and deletes it 3 minutes later. He then posts another screed, which I don't even notice for 2 days because I don't watchlist his page, he didn't ping me, he uses the minor-edit marker, and he edited the whole page (not the subscribed section), and created a new section so the old subscribe-ping wasn't activated. This sort of non-notification from Peli is common.
Discussion fragmentation: Peli frequently continues ongoing discussions across multiple pages (without pinging me), including category talk pages, category pages, file talk pages, his user talk page, my user talk page, and now the Dutch-language Village Pump. This fragmentation makes discussion difficult and prevents consensus-building.
Contradictory behavior: When Peli venue-switches mid-discussion, he sometimes writes escalatory screeds "for" me (without pinging me), and then scolds me if I respond to his post with accusatory "I told you not to ping me" type language—even if I don't explicitly ping him.
Misrepresentation: Peli frequently reframes my arguments as something I didn't write. For example, I consistently argue that "trap" isn't useful as a category because it is predominantly slang, and was used for 3 separate and unrelated vehicle types, therefore the category (as named) would be unable to represent a coherent group or family of carriages. Peli interprets this in several incorrect ways: that I'm saying we should have multiple categories instead of one (diff1), or I want to turn them into a "hard redirect" or delete the categories that he recently created (diff2), then goes on to propose multiple other "trap" categories and a disambiguation page (diff3).
Refusing reliable sources (IDHT): Peli repeatedly ignores standard carriage historians, scholarship, and sources in favor of his own interpretations and slang terms used by file uploaders who don't know what they have photographed, and endlessly argues on talk page in favor of anything but what reliable sources say... all without providing any sources at all to bolster his arguments. See the discussions at Category talk:Pony traps where I refer to the carriage sources, then paraphrase then, and finally have to quote the carriage experts, but to no avail, while he posts that because some image has a caption saying this or that, that it should be an actual category. He scoffs at standard carriage taxonomy from carriage historians as "using fashionable names", and calls their published books "dictionaries" (diff-nl).
Multi-venues, same dispute: The discussions about "traps" have now spread from Category talk:Pony traps to Category talk:Trap carriages, then to Category:Trap carriages, then to his user talk page, then back to Category talk:Pony traps, then to his complaint on Commons:De Kroeg.
Misrepresentation #2: I created a post on a category TALK page, and Peli copied part of it and posted it on the actual category page, continuing his argument there by placing a contradicting level-2 heading above my content.
False claims: Peli falsely accused me of not giving good edit summaries where he asserts (without diffs) "There is not much text or explanation, only 'NOT a trap, away with it'." (diff-nl) However he's referring to two edits where I gave specific edit summaries: "removed factually incorrect and invented information; this is a governess cart, not a trap" and "removed factually incorrect categorization; not a trap". He reverted both edits, and his second revert edit summary indicates he knows that "pony trap" isn't a real designation, but plans on using it anyway—which circles back to his choice to ignore carriage scholarship.
Burying files: Peli constantly moves files out of their correct main categories and buries them at least two layers deep in newly created "by country" subcategories. For example, instead of placing an image of a Berline in "Category:Berline carriages", he moves it into "Berline carriages in France" under "Berline carriages by country". Over time, this results in the main category containing only a small handful of files (today=7 files) while hundreds are hidden in country-specific subcats that casual users will never find (today=674 files). For quite a while, I didn't realize that the majority of images were under a subcat of "Berline carriages by country". This pattern makes images effectively undiscoverable, destabilizes category structure, and causes confusion... including Peli accusing me of "losing" his files when he probably just moved them into increasingly narrow or inaccurate subcategories.
Contradictory messaging: My final example shows Peli switching rapidly from accusatory ranting to praise to excoriating complaint—in succession, with no responses from me in between (got no pings!). Peli posts an accusatory, inflammatory response, then he constructs a lengthy proposal for the two of us to co-create a carriage glossary in Commons, framed on his viewpoints. He praises me as someone who has "deep expertise in the literature" and says he "wants to collaborate on this". Immediately after that, he posts his diff-less complaint against me at the Dutch-language Village Pump (diff-nl).

Peli creates many contextual and regional subcategories daily, to which I rarely object. However, a bright line for me is the creation of categories for carriage types that do not exist, and elevating these pseudo-carriage-types to the level of formal carriage taxonomy based solely on slang usage. This week's confusingly circular discussions revolved around Peli's insistence on creating and expanding categories for "traps" (a slang term; not a coherent carriage type) while ignoring every published carriage expert I presented. Peli provided no sources, and his justifications boiled down to: "But so many people upload images calling them traps!" Yeah... still slang, and not a recognized carriage class. Peli's refusal to acknowledge published carriage scholarship in favor of slang usage without providing any sources to back him up, results in miscategorization, unnecessary cleanup work, and prolonged discussions driven by his personal insistence. Earlier similar disputes-with-discussions were also unproductive, and related to regional or foreign words that already had established English-equivalent categories, and centered around Peli's desire to create duplicate categories using those foreign or almost-identical carriage names—such as the earlier victoria v. milord and barouche v. caleche discussions.

I am requesting admin review of these conduct patterns. Repeated IDHT behavior, hostility, accusations, and circular discussions across multiple pages have made normal collaboration unworkable in the topic area where our work overlaps (horse-drawn vehicles). Administrative intervention is needed to contain these behaviors and prevent recurrence.

▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:43, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'll admit I didn't read through all of that. Two things do strike me, though and (@Grorp) you may want to strike through some of what you wrote above on at least the first of these two counts:

This is not a place to carry over conflict from the Dutch-language Village pump. If his complaints on the Dutch-language Village pump are about your actions on Commons, you should ask there for them to be dismissed summarily on the basis of importing drama from another Wiki. I Pelikana wants to raise issue about your behavior on Commons, he should bring it here. If his complaints on the Dutch-language Village pump are not about your actions on Commons, then you are the one who is importing drama fron another wiki.
"By country" categories are pretty normal. I would say that of all the dimensions along which one might split a large category, that is the least controversial.

Jmabel ! talk

To clarify, the Dutch-language Village Pump I referred to is on Commons itself, COM:De Kroeg, not on nl.wikipedia.org (I don't participate at nlwiki). He did not post it here at AN/U.

I'm not trying to defend myself here for what Peli accused me of on COM:De Kroeg, I mentioned that post only because it illustrates the conduct patterns relevant to this AN/U report. While he was posting a very flattering, collaborative message to me on a Commons cat-talk page, he simultaneously posted his accusations about me in Dutch, in a Commons venue I do not watch, and was not notified about. Since he provided no diffs or evidence or specifics (as required for such accusations, lest they be interpreted as personal attacks per COM:NPA#WHATIS) I could see no constructive way to respond to it, and so I didn't.

I would not have discovered it at all if I hadn't been checking his Commons edit history related to the flattery post, and discovered the COM:De Kroeg post was posted in the middle of it. The five-minute gap between posting praise and complaint in two separate locations shows contradictory messaging and venue-splitting, which is part of the conduct issues I'm asking admins to review. I'm not asking AN/U to adjudicate the Dutch post itself—only to consider the behavioral pattern it demonstrates. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:57, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Grorp: thanks, much clearer, including your rewording above; I presume you can see how I misread your original wording. - Jmabel ! talk 05:54, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Indeed I can. It took me a moment to pinpoint where the misunderstanding came from, but "from another wiki" was the clue. I've now clarified the first occurrence of Commons:De Kroeg in my post (removing the piped English title) so future editors reading this thread won't run into the same ambiguity. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:17, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Pelikana has not edited since this was posted. I hope they will will respond here when they are back. - Jmabel ! talk 01:03, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thank you JMabel, I am complaining about a user producing an almost continuous stream of unexpected reverts, emptied categories, subtle- and grotesque manipulative personal attacks, harassment, hounding and belitteling as expressed right here on this page in this *self portrait in disguise*. The attacks are especially clear here in #10, the random rant about the (i.m.o. well done) subcategories of 'Berline carriages' (for which he produced one himself in sept 2024 Berline carriages in Portugal), followed by the wild assumption without any proof or relation to the context: (...) "he probably just moved them into increasingly narrow or inaccurate subcategories". Many times he made further discussions impossible by the use of belitteling PA's to discredit the opponent and their arguements, like the example he gives here on this page.
I am also very worried about - and protesting against edits which do place own visual POV interpretations above respecting original naming and cultural backgrounds as truely as they are printed on (or right next to) works, and which routinely doubts and disregards original titles and names by original coachmakers and art hisoricians from the best museum- and library collections. Adding lists of sources to discussions does not automatically grant that they are correctly represented. In some case they are used very much out of context like we can see on Commons where the Friesian sjees has become the only type of sjees in the Netherlands due to a redirect in a carriage book saying: "Sjees, see Friesian sjees", and skipping "Friesian" from the original lemma title of it. Experts in the Netherlands know many more Dutch types of regional chaises which are not mentioned or recognized yet on Commons. Yet presenting "the sjees" as always Friesian and the only sjees type of the Netherlands is a significant systemic error solely based on sloppy research and unfaithful quoting. The sudden removal of all available Kentucky breaking carts from Breaking carts in the United States speaks bookparts. Peli (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Much of Peli's post repeats the pattern described in my point #1: broad and serious behavioral accusations presented without diffs or examples. He does not address any of points #1-#11 except for #10, a point that admittedly straddles the conduct/content line for AN/U.

Re sjees: That complaint sounds like a content dispute—except that no discussions, disputes, or edit warring has occurred between us on that topic. Pelikana created Category:Friese sjees in 2022.

Re "wild assumption": This was a reasonable inference based on Peli's De Kroeg post (diff-nl), specifically the sentence beginning "Verscheidene bestanden..." in which he wrote that files he "remembered" had become "unfindable"; Peli provided no diffs.

I will not respond to accusations that are not supported by diffs. My original report is based on specific conduct patterns documented with evidence, and my understanding is that AN/U is about conduct, not content disagreements. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:30, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel: Pelikana has published a 14,000-character personal-attack statement about me on his user talk page beginning with § Statement regarding the dispute (archived version), rather than here in this AN/U thread. This continues the venue-splitting pattern described in my point #3 and the false-accusation pattern in point #1. The only diffs Peli provided relate to content disputes (second half), while his conduct allegations section (the first half) has no diffs to back up his serious accusations. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:24, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm out of my depth here. I have no significant knowledge of the subject matter, not even of what would be considered the established sources in the field, so on the substantive side I can't spot bullshit when I see it. Both of you seem to be approaching this with a "don't use one word when ten will do" approach, which honestly drives me up a wall. I had minimal involvement in this thread, simply hoping to turn it into a useful discussion, but I obviously failed. If some other administrator thinks they can be useful here, please do so. - Jmabel ! talk

I have raised conduct issues with diffs. Peli's writings mix conduct claims without diffs, content disputes with some diffs, has not yet responded to any of my original ANU claims, and continues repeating the behavior. The content side isn't relevant to AN/U, so no subject-matter expertise is needed here; pick out the conduct issues (ANU-specific) and ignore the content ones (noise).

TLDR: (1) Peli has repeatedly made serious allegations about me without evidence (COM:NPA). (2) Peli frequently fragments discussions onto multiple other pages or sections (nullifying thread subscriptions and watchlist notifications, and without pinging participants) making collaboration and following conversations impossible. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:35, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

AidansStuff copyright violations

Latest comment: 4 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

User talk:AidansStuff shows around 25 copyright violation warnings etc. ; AidansStuff is clearly unconcerned with copyright law as they continue to upload copyvio images of living people. Despite a personal non-template discussion with them in early July, where I advised them to ask for advice at the Village pump rather than guessing an images copyright status (which is what they said they were doing), they continue to upload. Aesurias (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Aesurias: Hi, I don't see any current copyright violation. I still sent a strong warning for past violations. Yann (talk) 09:23, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Yes, no current ones, because they're being continually taken down.

Is this kind of chronic rule-breaking (law-breaking, technically) unactionable on Commons unless there is an active copyright violation, even if there's been 25+ previous ones with zero changes or improvements? I ask this genuinely as I am nowhere near as familiar with Commons as I am with enwiki. Aesurias (talk) 10:18, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

There aren't 25 copyright violations, only 12. AidansStuff got a warning, hopefully they will care. If any new copyright violation occurs, they could be blocked. Blocks here are not punitive, but preventive. Yann (talk) 10:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Not done No edit after warning. Yann (talk) 15:21, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Eduardo Gabriel569

Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Eduardo Gabriel569 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Continuous copyright violations (log). Uploaded image at 18:26, 2 September 2026 (UTC) with the {{CC0}} template and without a source; final warning was given at 2:44, 2 September 2026. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:33, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:20, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Huihuangdesuiyue

Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Huihuangdesuiyue (talk · contribs) has been blocked due to sockpuppetry, however I'd like to ask for a review about their uploads, such as File:The symbol of China — Hanfu.png File:China's symbol – Han clothing (Hanfu).png, looks like something that F10 but I'm not very sure. Lemonaka (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done. I mass deleted all uploads as copyright violations. This user is a sockpuppet and (s)he is not trusted at all. Taivo (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Babitukly

Latest comment: 1 day ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Babitukly (talk · contribs) still uploading non useful logo images which purpose for advertisiment after the warning. --Satirdan kahraman (talk) 11:34, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Comment When I click on the supposed source of File:Kktc-araba.png, it shows a cat wagging its tail and "pegs" my browser (more load than it can usefully handle). If that logo is on that site, I cannot get that far. - Jmabel ! talk 02:12, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done I've indeffed; >50 uploads and not a single one both in scope and properly licensed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:48, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Pi.1415926535, The user appared again with a another but similar username: User:Barbiturk. He/She using the same way. Satirdan kahraman (talk) 15:47, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done Sock blocked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:00, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hllywd415

Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Hllywd415 (talk · contribs) is uploading multiple images that they claim to be their own work, but seemingly are not their own work and likely need to be deleted. Not sure if this is the right place to report this/how I should go about requesting help regarding their upload files, so apologies if that is the case at all. Magitroopa (talk) 18:28, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done. I mass deleted all his/her uploads and warned the user. Taivo (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

That is a mistake, what evidence do you need of copyright when once own the intellectual property? Hllywd415 (talk) 20:01, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Name one, because Edith Barr, we took the photo, also the photos in the others we own the photos, we took the photos with my own camera. What photo are you implying? Hllywd415 (talk) 20:00, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Mostly the photos were small and without camera data in EXIF. Multiple had "Screenshot" in EXIF, the last (file:Jose Jose in Peru, circa 1999.jpg) was obvious TV screenshot – in addition to typical TV screenshot quality this was written into file description. Taivo (talk) 20:50, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hllywd415: Kindly review COM:DW. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:54, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Hllywd415: I could easily believe File:Edith Barr en su Peña & Restaurante "en "La Casa de Edith".jpg is your own work, but you poisoned the well by uploading other images that clearly are not. At this point, the only way to get File:Edith Barr en su Peña & Restaurante "en "La Casa de Edith".jpg restored is to go through the process at COM:VRT (or COM:VRT/es, in Spanish). - Jmabel ! talk 02:20, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

User Agentmoments

Latest comment: 15 hours ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Moved from Commons:Help desk § User Agentmoments

I believe @Agentmoments is a secondary account of @Ym9837054 as Agentmoments has uploaded a file (which was later deleted) with the same name of the file uploaded by Ym9837054. On their contributions, the only live edit is a photo of Lavrutov (which is YM as seen here that was uploaded and the user has many more deleted ones. Furthermore, Ym9837054 was cross wiki spamming Wobs100 (talk) 11:30, 4 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Can we get Category:Dmitrii Lavrutov on the chopping board? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 03:41, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ping me when the ja.wikipedia article gets deleted. Once that happens I can delete the Wikidata item, and once that happens, I can delete the Commons files. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:54, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Sure. Check out ja:Wikipedia:削除依頼/ドミトリー・ラヴルトフ I guess. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 11:06, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Here is a mass deletion request with some of the files the user wants to delete Wobs100 (talk) 12:48, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Draft:Dmitrii Lavrutov and here is the declined draft if you want to delete it. Wobs100 (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I do got a question: does Agentmoments fall under sock puppetry? Wobs100 (talk) 21:35, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Classyonur

Latest comment: 2 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The user again uploaded again F10 photos of himself purpose of PR after admins deleted photos before couple months ago. The same user have a block on Wikidata. --Satirdan kahraman (talk) 00:53, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Incivility and copyvio

Latest comment: 16 hours ago24 comments7 people in discussion

Hi, there are several issues with User:咽頭べさ. I saw their userpage at metawiki and found out, that their picture was uploaded as own work. I marked it as a clear case of a copyvio, which is a quite usual thing for me here. On their talkpage they started a discussion about my behavior and why I am tagging this copyvio as such. By checking their uploads and the notifications on the talkpage, it may be quite clear, that there are many issues with copyvios and out of scope uploads. As the user called me several things, "inhumane" should be enough for me, to seek administrators attention for this case here. NDG (talk) 09:48, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

If you have evidence, why don't you show it? Why accuse me without reason? If you think it's copyright infringement, why don't you show the evidence? This is clearly bullying me, I knew you'd accuse me like this again. This clearly shows your true nature. If I violated copyright, why can't you show me the evidence? Everything is mine, can't you see? Why are you accusing me without reason? 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 10:02, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

What ist my true nature and why are you talking about my true nature at the administrators' noticeboard? I think you should not personally attack users doing just their work. NDG (talk) 10:09, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

So, do you have the right to abuse your admin rights and falsely accuse others? If my file are copyvio infringement, why don't you provide solid evidence? You keep making accusations without any reason, Is that the action of a fair admin? or are these the actions of a humane admin? Do we no longer have the right to say that an admin's actions are wrong? We are protesting because your actions are completely unjust, we don't have time to harass others like you. If your actions are fair and correct, we have nothing to say. It is now clear that your actions are extremely unjust and an act of oppression and violence against us. 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 11:11, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

NDG is not an admin. You have a history of ignoring our policies and warnings. Please remain civil or you may be blocked. Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:33, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Is this the method you're going to use? I am being bullied for no reason, you are not helping me in any way. What is justice? If I'm infringing copyvio as he says, then in fairness, why don't you show me solid evidence? Let me ask you frankly, when will you ever stop bullying me like this in the name of justice? I have been falsely accused without any basis do I no longer even have the right to defend myself? 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 12:50, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@咽頭べさ: Who is "We"? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:53, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

May I assume this is about File:Pail-သိရိကိတ္တိဒေဝဳ ရာဇာဓိရာဇိနဳမာတာ.jpg? @咽頭べさ: in all of your expression of indignation about lack of evidence, I haven't heard you say outright, "Yes, this file is legitimately my own work, and I own all relevant copyrights. I took the photo [or photos, it's hard to tell if the background came from the same photo as the woman], and I did the collage work." - Jmabel ! talk 17:50, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel the image File:Intobesa.jpg is meant. The uploader is pictured. NDG (talk) 17:59, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Your complaint would carry more weight if you hadn't gone to one of the uploader's images and tried to delete it on the grounds that it was a selfie. (Hint: that is a very long way away from any applicable policy we have, even with the most stringent application of COM:THIRD) Even then, you tried to speedy delete it, which indicates a thorough lack of understanding of speedy deletion and its justifiability. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:24, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
I marked them file as copyvio, as everything indicates, that this file was made by someone else as the uploader. Please keep this decision to an admin and please also don't excuse someone elses incivility. Thanks NDG (talk) 18:31, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
So let me ask you, you accused others of being completely unfounded. Is that what you call politeness? That's me in the picture, to provide evidence, why don't you video call me? The person in the picture is me, and the camera is mine, is this still considered copyvio infringement? I don't know you and have never argued with you, so why are you trying to get others to block my account and trying to bully me? Is this what you call justice? In that image file, if you have solid evidence, I have nothing to say. even though I am the owner and it's very clear, you're still accusing me of copyvio infringement, Is this your politeness? In the Wiki project, if it weren't for the Mon language, I wouldn't be working here. There's no fairness in this situation, constantly staring and trying to bully others for no reason. 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 19:01, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I agree this should not have been a speedy, but my basic question still applies (though not the collaging aspect). 咽頭べさ are you asking us to believe that you took a picture of yourself at some 10-20 meters and manually operated the shutter? From the EXIF: "Exposure Program: Manual" "Exposure mode: Manual exposure"? I presume you are not capable of bilocation, so how do you claim to have done that? - Jmabel ! talk 18:35, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

"operated the shutter"

Why not? It's 2026. This is standard technology in many people's pockets these days. Or a self-timer (a century old). Or (as I spent a chunk of this Summer doing), my 20' long, 60 year old rubber bulb and hosepipe release (and glass slides).

Or, which might be the case here, you get someone else to press the shutter and that still doesn't matter.

For licensed photographs on Commons, we don't even care who the photographer is. We just don't care. We don't need to know. We care who the rights holder is, because that's who issues the licence. If a subject and photographer have struck some informal deal to take a snapshot such as this, it's up to them who is going to retain the rights to it (and under EU law a good case can be made that the default becomes the person commissioning the photo, not the one pressing the button). We have never required formal statements of this, no more than we have required formal model release forms. And we're not going to start by sneaking such a policy change in through a speedy! Andy Dingley (talk) 19:15, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Andy Dingley: I began my remark with "I agree this should not have been a speedy" and you end by accusing me of "sneaking … a policy change in through a speedy". Are you just trying to pick a fight, or what?

I'll address the rest of what you wrote after you respond to that. - Jmabel ! talk 21:02, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Did you post a speedy here? No. Then get over yourself. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:11, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I support what @User:Andy Dingley said. Actually, when I travel, I use a camera tripod, carefully set the camera where I need it, set a ten second timer, and then stand in my designated spot to have my photo taken. I've been doing this since I was 16 years old up to my current age of 38 and it has become a habit. Sometimes, I do ask a passerby to press the button for me, but that's not always the case, I only do that when there's no suitable space to place the camera. If you look closely at the current photo, the area is wide and there is plenty of open space, so would it make sense to ask someone else to take the picture? you can think about that carefully. In a place like this where there are so many people, it's hard to find someone trustworthy. Otherwise, i have to worry about someone snatching my camera and running away with it. I no longer have that camera, it was stolen while I was traveling in Nakhon Pathom. The only reason I am defending myself like this is because he is groundlessly accusing me of a copyright violation copyvio. I am not a person with free time, I have many daily tasks, and I also have heavy responsibilities for the preservation of Mon literature. This current action is completely unfair, which is why I am speaking out in response. He says I am rude, but the one who is truly rude is not me (it is him). If he were truly a genuine and civilized person, he wouldn't go around groundlessly accusing others of copyvio violations and acting the way he does. 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 11:43, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@咽頭べさ: For File:Intobesa.jpg, no timer is indicated in the Metadata display here on Commons, or revealed by the file's properties in Windows Explorer. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:26, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jeff G. I'm not very good at using Wiki yet, and you still couldn't notice that? if you have any kindness, instead of talking to me like this, could you please fix that file yourself out of pure kindness? 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 15:43, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@咽頭べさ: I don't have the necessary expertise. Perhaps if you could point to a direct-from-camera upload indicating your timer use without Photoshop? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:33, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Look closely at that photograph, it's obvious it was taken in the blazing sun. Naturally, a photo of someone standing out in the harsh sunlight is bound to look unflattering, so it's only right that the photo needs a bit of touchup using Photoshop to make it look decent. Are you trying to find fault with even that? Judging by your attitude, it feels like you're just intentionally picking all sorts of quarrels with me. all you really wanted to know was who the owner of the photograph is right? well, if you don't want to make a video call with me, you can just compare it with the person in this video. for you to say all sorts of things like this without offering me any help at all isn't a good situation, is it? doesn't it seem like you're just hunting for flaws and picking a fight with the other person? 𝓓𝓻.𝓘𝓷𝓽𝓸𝓫𝓮𝓼𝓪|𝒯𝒶𝓁𝓀 18:04, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@咽頭べさ: No, I want something to point to that will back up your claim of using a timer. Commons' metadata display doesn't seem to be able to do that, as far as I've seen. Perhaps Photoshop stripped that data. Access to the original metadata would be able to show whether or not that happened. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:21, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Jeff G.: FYI, I checked one of my own private images that I knew where shot using the camera timer (on my old Canon EOS 500D). The EXIF viewed through IrfanView contain the line "Sequence mode - Single or Timer"; it fits the camera setup. I downloaded File:Intobesa.jpg and did the same. There's no hint at at timer in it. Neither does something similar appear when looking into the data with EXIFTool; and I got the feeling that Commons more or less displays the full set of EXIF values. Photoshop does not selectively strip this kind of data, it removes either ALL EXIF and/or the IPTC values, but it's not straightforward to selectively remove only one value (in fact, I just checked and I can't edit the EXIF at all in PS). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 18:41, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Grand-Duc and @咽頭べさ: I explored the timer showing up on wiki issue in phab:T187322 back in 2018 based on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joxemai mulisko gaina 2016.JPG. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:16, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

A lot of useless edits by Soerirukz

Latest comment: 19 hours ago15 comments8 people in discussion

Prior relevant discussion at Special:PermanentLink/1273240885#Soerirukz. Jmabel ! talk 18:46, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'm really sorry to have to make this post. In the past, I've occasionally had problems with users who accumulate edits—for money or access. In this case, a huge number of SDC entries are being unnecessarily changed from “normal” to “preferred.” Unfortunately, speaking to them directly didn't help. -- XRay 💬 18:31, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@XRay: you should also have done this, but I did it on your behalf. - Jmabel ! talk 18:44, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Thanks! This just goes to show that I'm rarely here and lack any experience. I also hope I won't have to post another message here. -- XRay 💬 19:01, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I don't know why they might be doing this, but it is certainly not constructive. Seemingly random photographs, nearly all edits marking various SDC entries to preferred, usually the checksum and media type of all things. They've previously been blocked for this behaviour, and yet they haven't changed. They need to provide a good rationale for their edits at this point. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:46, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

jsyk my edits here are all in good faith i don’t mean to harm anyone or disturb the whole community if i’m doing something wrong by tagging images with missing categories i’d prefer you let me know so i can help better Soerirukz (talk) 20:04, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Soerirukz: You have been told by several people, including myself, that in the structured data for files (SDC) you are misusing "Mark as prominent"/"preferred rank". There are almost no cases where this should be used for any SDC property other than "depicts" (to indicate that something is prominently featured in the picture or other media file), but you continue to use it on things like geographical coordinates or even a checksum. There are some edge cases where "preferred rank" applies outside of depicts, but as far as I can tell none of your edits are examples of those: they are simply edits that run against the prevailing consensus on Commons of how to use these properties.

So I'll say it one last time: if you are here to make constructive contributions to Commons, great, get on with those, and this will recede into the past and won't matter. But if you persist in making these counterproductive edits, I will block your account (if someone else doesn't get there first). - Jmabel ! talk 21:27, 6 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Support block. Clearly discussion-resistant. --A.Savin 16:42, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
but why i’m only trying to help Soerirukz (talk) 17:19, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
You disclosed that you're apparently more proficient in French on your user page, Soerirukz. So, I'll try French.

Tes contributions ne sont pas utiles et n'aident pas. La propriété du rang des SDC est destinée presque exclusivement à la catégorie p180 ( "depicts" ), rien d'autre, et certainement pas à des choses comme des checksumsou des coordonnées. Ce fait a déjà été expliqué auparavant. Si tu ne suis pas ces explications et recommandations et évite l'abus des rangs des SDC, ton compte va être bloqué, parce que ce genre de contributions est un net négatif. Si tu as besoin d'exemples de contributions vraiment utiles: utilises tes connaissances linguistiques pour ajouter des descriptions d'images en Français et Espagnol dans des descriptions où celles-ci ne sont pas fournies. Salutations, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:34, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Done blocked for continuing with the nonsense edits while writing on this board that she makes useful edits. GPSLeo (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@XRay: FYI. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:30, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

@GPSLeo: mind reconsider that block for now and give a last chance to interact better here? I wonder if there's absolutely no chance to get through to her, considering the contents of the short description on her user page. Your block and my message crossed each other. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:39, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

I did not block talk page access. GPSLeo (talk) 17:41, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Ah yes, I did not check that, I'll copy my posting over. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

FoldedFoto

Latest comment: 13 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion

FoldedFoto (talk · contribs) uploaded lots of nudity, but nearly all of them are not in use, which doesn't seem too educational. Lemonaka (talk) 22:56, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Many are their uploads are of participants in Fantasy Fest and are in scope. The oldest and newest uploads of random models, not so much. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:26, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

IFixAndRepair

Latest comment: 9 hours ago4 comments3 people in discussion

IFixAndRepair (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) nothing specific here, but very odd edits from a supposedly new user. First two edits tried to get other (blocked) users' talk pages speedy deleted (one of these edits mentioned my account name which is part of why this drew my notice); a bunch of strange but possibly in-scope uploads; very odd use of own user talk page. Normally I would engage myself, but the next couple of days my own availability may be very limited so I'm raising it here. - Jmabel ! talk 23:25, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Just to be clear: I am not asking for a block, just that someone engage with this particular new user. - Jmabel ! talk 23:27, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Well, I've blocked. They're obviously somebody's sock. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:32, 7 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Boszyna maybe, see User talk:IFixAndRepair#User talk:Now i am Going to Create Another Account and COM:ANV. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 04:04, 8 September 2026 (UTC)Reply