Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

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-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

Vandalism
[new section] 		User problems
[new section] 		Blocks and protections
[new section] 		Other
[new section]

Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.


Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.


Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.


Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.

Archives
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
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
93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)

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.

Unexpected speedy deletion by User:Ellin Beltz[edit]

Since the user's talk page is protected from editing, I'm asking here: what was the sudden reason for a speedy deletion of a file File:Черненко Константин Устинович, партийный билет.jpg while it's recently survived a regular deletion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Черненко Константин Устинович, партийный билет.jpg and has been kept by User:Yann? 188.123.231.6 18:42, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I undeleted this file. A regular deletion is needed here if there is any issue. Yann (talk) 20:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yann, thank you very much for prompt action. Ellin Beltz, making mass speedy deletions without looking at validity of nominations, you force other users to do a lot of unnecessary work: [1]. --188.123.231.6 21:38, 27 June 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would be happy to reply to a person, but yes my user page is locked to non-logged in users. I am unaware of "a lot of unnecessary work" in my years of volunteering here. Thank you, Yann. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:36, 4 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Ellin Beltz: You as an admin should try to ensure that anons who genuinely need to contact you on your talk page can do so. Such could be having a dedicated IP talk page or directing them to Meta. Fully cutting anons from communication is short-sighted at best, and might come across as an attempt to cut off communication, even though it isn't your intent to do so. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
SHB2000, it is an attempt to cut off communication, you can see this from an arrogant response without any attempt at an apology to an indication of clear admin's abuse. --188.123.231.6 06:47, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I hold no position in this specific issue. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I’m vehemently on Ellin’s side on this one. Unlogged users have no place in a long term collaborative project. Any genuine begginer just toe-dipping should consider creating an account before needing to contact someone’s talk page. There is no safety or security advantage in editing as an I.P. instead of a logged-in user. And in cases such as this one, when the I.P. knows the inner workings of the project, it’s a deliberate spanner in the works. These users should not only be ignored as such, but their exposed I.P. address be given a check and the delinquent username behind it should be sanctioned for abuse of multiple accounts. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 02:37, 17 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you Tuvalkin. It was done in response to prior unfriendly behavior from anon user/s. If someone wants to be in this project, they can make an account, and work on the project. I had to turn off the link from here to my email because of bot spam. There's bits more to adminning than anyone sees who doesn't do it. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Right, but my point still stands: you shouldn't entirely cut off communication from anons. SHB2000 (talk) 09:02, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
They can come here and ping her, just like this one did. - Jmabel ! talk 17:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That does not address most means of other communication that doesn't need to be taken to a drama noticeboard. SHB2000 (talk) 12:48, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fine, then ping her on your own user talk page. If your IP address isn't stable, and you don't want to log in, then you'll have to keep track of what page that is, but you know what? If you want to communicate with someone, and there is no stable presence for you, they have no way to even know that they are continuing to communicate with the same person, and there is only so much courtesy they owe someone in such a situation. - Jmabel ! talk 17:43, 1 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm one of those users who think that Wikimedia should fully ban IP editing – but the WMF will never get on board with that, and in the meantime, the current system is one that is open to abuse. How should IP editors know that to contact Ellin, they need to ping them on their talk page? --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
& how will they know that they want to contact Ellin, or that users have talk pages, or whatever? We are only talking here about people sophisticated enough about the wiki to know that they want to contact this particular admin. This is not going to be first-time editors. This is going to be people who have made the wilful choice to edit without opening an account. - Jmabel ! talk 14:39, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You don't seem to be convincible, so I'll leave it there. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
 Comment Like Ellin, I protected my talk against IP editing. Too much garbage for very little meaningful messages. People who need to contact me know how to do it. Others can just post on a board. Yann (talk) 16:34, 2 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Ydlp19 uploading copyvios[edit]

Ydlp19 keeps uploading blatant copyvios after having been warned in october last year. Jonteemil (talk) 01:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Again: User:Allforrous[edit]

I'm done with User:Allforrous. Over and over again (s)he keeps:

How can we stop this behavior? JopkeB (talk) 06:29, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The user:JopkeB is only interested in deleting the categories created and/or completed by me. The categories created by me have sufficient and authoritative references in Wikipedia and Wikidata. He takes the arguments because he tries to confuse me with the English language. Allforrous (talk) 14:08, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No Allforrous, it is the other way around: I see a category name that is not in line with Commons policies and guidelines and I start a discussion about it. Only later on, for instance when you add more subcategories and/or files to the discussed category, I see you created it. I discuss categories no matter who created them, also those that are not created by you, and I do not discuss every category you created, only the ones that are not right.
I prefer to be addressed with "she" or "her", not "he" or "him". JopkeB (talk) 03:18, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Their actions go against the spirit of the Commons project. The user:JopkeB it does not try to add work and effort. The user:JopkeB it does not try to avoid conflicts with those who collaborate and really strive. It should take care of patrolling vandalism, rather than disturbing users. --Allforrous (talk) 14:39, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The fact that a category can be objectively defined may be a necessary criterion for a Commons category, but it's not sufficient. It also has to be realistically useful for classifying media, and is pointless if no real-world user is ever likely to make use of it. Something like "environmental impact of golf courses" might make a useful gallery, but it is almost certainly not a useful Commons category. - Jmabel ! talk 15:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
+2 to Jmabel's comment. Just because something has "sufficient and authoritative references in Wikipedia and Wikidata" doesn't automatically make it appropriate as a category. The main (maybe even the only), meaningful thing here is if the category is realistically useful for classifying media and will be used for that purpose. I'd argue a good portion of the categories created by Allforrous don't meet either of those things. Let alone both of them. There's no consensus to turn Commons categories into a 1/1 recreation of how Wikipedia and/or Wikidata organize things anyway. Nor is there a reason to. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:29, 5 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Taki2006[edit]

Looks like a clear duck of Takiva (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (indef blocked for sockpuppetry) to me. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:31, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That was what I thought last May when I launched this RCU against Taki2006. The result was Inconclusive. Since, the actions performed by Taki2006 leave me no doubt. The actions of this user are still problematic and mainly concern flags of North Africa or Middle East countries, past or present days. --Poudou99 (talk) 08:41, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Their requested filemoves are also fairly problematic, too, but as if the username wasn't a clear giveaway. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dmsav[edit]

File:Герб Уфы 1839 года.gif удаляет категорию Уфы. 30 декабря 1839 года утвержден другой герб Уфы: "В верхней части щита герб Оренбургской губернии. В нижней серебряной части бегущая куница".

Использованы материалы справочника А.В.Кудина и А.Л.Цехановича "Гербы городов и областей Российской империи" цветной рисунок для "Геральдикума" подготовлен Ю.Калинкиным http://www.heraldicum.ru/russia/subjects/towns/ufa.htm http://alsugizetdinova.narod.ru/gerb.htm http://www.proher.ru/RF_Rossia/Bashkortostan_Reg/Ufa_r3.htm Барабас (talk) 15:30, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

У него явные проблемы со зрением. Герб Рязани File:Герб Рязани (1858).gif https://geraldika.ru/s/677 не может отличить от герба Рязанской губернии File:Coat of Arms of Ryazan.gif. https://geraldika.ru/s/671 Барабас (talk) 15:20, 7 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Участник, обходящий блокировку[edit]

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Валко

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия:Проверка_участников/Барабас

Обход блокировки. @Elcobbola, @Taivo. Dmsav (talk) 15:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

И где там итог??????? Барабас (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Какие то глупые заявления позволяют вам вандалить? File:Герб Уфы 1839 года.gif удаляете категорию Уфы. 30 декабря 1839 года утвержден другой герб Уфы: "В верхней части щита герб Оренбургской губернии. В нижней серебряной части бегущая куница".
Использованы материалы справочника А.В.Кудина и А.Л.Цехановича "Гербы городов и областей Российской империи"
цветной рисунок для "Геральдикума" подготовлен Ю.Калинкиным http://www.heraldicum.ru/russia/subjects/towns/ufa.htm http://alsugizetdinova.narod.ru/gerb.htm http://www.proher.ru/RF_Rossia/Bashkortostan_Reg/Ufa_r3.htm Барабас (talk) 15:49, 4 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Multiple uploads from Angel jose1247273[edit]

Hello All, The user @Angel jose1247273: is uploading the file File:Elvis boss.jpg every time it is deleted. Would it be possible to make it clear for the user that it is not acceptable, please? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 07:27, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@CoffeeEngineer, warned. Kadı Message 09:35, 6 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Kursant504[edit]

This user kept using bad or absurd reason to nominate files for deletion. Previous discussion is on Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections/Archive_32#User:Kursant504, now they are active again on Commons:Deletion requests/File:President of Ukraine met with the Ukrainian military in Bakhmut and presented state awards. (52712338472).jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maguba Syrtlanova awards (2022-03-01) 02.jpg. And this is another accusation without any evidence Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ziba Ganiyeva Colorized.jpg.

I've reported them several days ago, but no action has been taken. Considering their block history, this time ought to be a longer one.--Lemonaka (talk) 00:56, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop stalking all my edits - it's creepy. About DR foto of Ziba Ganiyeva: it literally contains a watermark of a copyright holder who does not permit commercial reuse of their work. It is a quintessential example of a copyright violation. Kursant504 (talk) 05:15, 8 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The user does not hear and present reality to the territory, copyriting law and other. Banned for life on russian Wikipedia for paid editing in favor of russian propaganda. Arxivist (talk) 19:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Lemonaka, at least this deletion request has a perfect rationale, and it’s you, who makes another accusation without any evidence. --Komarof (talk) 19:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Komarof Oh, interesting. When I first reported them here, they haven't explained why they nominate this for deletion, FWIW, Special:Diff/790841379, after this report, they added the reason. How can I be a crystal ball for this?
Interesting, baseless accusation? How many Bad DR did this user come up with? In addition to UPE. Lemonaka (talk) 22:11, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Belhasan12, more copyrighted uploads[edit]

Hello All, I would like to pinpoint the user @Belhasan12: , whose uploads have already been deleted in the past year, uploaded more probably copyrighted content this year. Could you please take action so that it does not happen again, please? CoffeeEngineer (talk) 08:09, 9 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done All files already deleted. User warned. But the issue is more out of scope files than copyvios. Yann (talk) 23:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Pi.1415926535[edit]

Hi is continuing wiki-stalking me on my user talk page. The previous issue was here here. User wrote "Please remember to use the most specific categories possible when uploading images, and do not dump large numbers of files in broad categories". I think that isn't a violation to upload some dosens high-quality photos with location category (which may be clarified, in this case, by California citizens, or by another users who may define the category better than me). Since the note I categorize my uploads more correctly. But yesterday he suddenly accused me of "Flickr2Commons misuse", "uploading poor-quality images and files with poor titles, descriptions, and categorization".

Examples (with Pi.1415926535 notes):

  1. File:Huntington Avenue in Sonw (15893346354).jpg: Misspelled title and description, no categories
  2. File:Lost (23713372054).jpg: Uselessly blurry; no useful title or description; lacking useful categories
  3. File:Herd on the march (20677798439).jpg: no useful title, description; lacking useful categories
  4. File:No unlesses (23503392795).jpg: nonsense title and description, no useful categories, and out of scope
  5. File:Why (26818683114).jpg: You added a single, overly broad category that does not actually identify what is in the image. You left a nonsense filename and useless description in place.

My explanations:

1. Title with error, agree, but it takes some seconds to rename the file, much less to write about it. As a location category exist the file will soon re-categorized in specific categories by other users who will do it better than me. Quality is high.

2. In my opinion this is a good photo of woman' silhouette. There are tons of images that have been blurred intentionally as blur sometimes can improve the image. See Category:Intentionally blurred images. I don't understang which title and description do you want to see in the file and which may be considered useful. I guess that it is itself a very simple image and no additional info helps here.

3. Appropriate title and description, not an ideal but not broad category. Quality is high.

4. Althoghts it seems that the title is nonsense, Flickr photographers very frequently name their photos after emotions and title may not be obviously match the file. I don't want to rename them in this case. Also renaming Flickr file may cause someone to upload again this file to Commons (F2C only identifies files with the exact same name). That's why I always rename Flickr files (in F2C tool) only when I can't do without it. Category 2015 in Moscow is more than appropriate in the case. Quality is quite borderline, but even lower-quality files may looks ok for somebody. The file is clearly in scope. Very good idea and composition, shoot a sunset through the trees in a cold winter forest. Looks ok in my screen.

5. It is more than absurd and stalking this your accusation. Category Nature of Queensland is not ideal, but specific. Also, I don't oblige to put all physically possible categories on this file. Plus, I don't understand why "Category Nature of Queensland" does not actually identify what is in the image. About "nonsense filename and useless description" see above.

I have uploaded more than 111,000 files in 2,5 years (currently 95-98% uploads well categorized by me and other users, the rest in my "queue" category) and I have never received any warnings about the quality of my work, except from this user (he give me final warning (!) after simple discussion in last July). Yes, I agree, rarely there are FOP violations and files with poor quality among Flickr downloads, but I check them regularly and mark them with speedy tags. I ask the admins to resolve the situation and I request to forbid Pi.1415926535 to post meaningless messages on my talk page. Thanks. Юрий Д.К 07:19, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  1. On at least two of these, I think User:Pi.1415926535 is entirely correct. It is hard to imagine an educational use for File:Lost (23713372054).jpg or File:No unlesses (23503392795).jpg, and therefore hard to see a good reason why you imported them. There is no "prize" for maximizing the number of images we import to Commons. Go slower, weed out things like this: they detract from the usefulness of the site rather than add to it. (Yes, we often leave alone low-quality images by Commons contributors because all things being equal we don't like to tell people "your photograph isn't particularly good or useful," but there is no reason to import useless third-party images.)
  2. On the other hand, for an image worth importing from Flickr, I wouldn't fault you for failing to change the (bad) title on import.
  3. All in all, though, you might consider going slower. There is far more gain to Commons in having even a half-dozen well-named, well-described. well-categorized images than 50 poorly named, poorly described, poorly categorized images. After all, if someone is going to just do some global Internet search that would turn these up, they will find them equally well on Flickr.
  4. This is not stalking. User:Pi.1415926535 is an admin. If he sees you making a number of uploads that he finds problematic, he's expected to look at more of your uploads. That is part of the role. At worst, he sampled a fair number of your uploads but might not have looked at enough to make a fair judgement of your overall work. I see that you certainly have a very large number of very good uploads. - Jmabel ! talk 16:45, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jmabel: Thank for your answer. The main problem that many Flickr authors often delete their photos and even accounts, and then free high-quality photos are lost forever without any chance to restore them. I know a lot of such cases. This is very disappointing to me. So I upload files faster, but then I have to categorize files a little worse. Therefore, I decided that I would put not an "ideal" but an "average categorization" (at least one location category, if possible). This will allow other users who are not engaged in uploading files to better categorize them. About File:Lost (23713372054).jpg and File:No unlesses (23503392795).jpg, for the 1st - I like such kind of photography so I've uploaded it. Also it looks very fine as thumbnail. For 2nd, it looks fine in my screen, and has been very fine as thumbnail in the Flickr page, so I've uploaded it. But any of them may be nominated for deletion if someone considered them useless. However such "borderline" files make up an overwhelming minority of all my downloads, no more than 50-100 of 111000+ uploads Юрий Д.К 17:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Flickr2Commons is an incredibly powerful tool, essentially a bot that can be operated without the normal bot approval process. Like any powerful tool, it has the potential to do a great deal of damage if operated improperly. Because of the rate at which it uploads files, F2C requires basic curation of files:

  • Checking to ensure all files are in scope
  • Checking to ensure files are not copyvios
  • Checking to see that all files are not duplicates. This needs to be done manually - the complaint that F2C should do this is irrelevant, as technical solutions will not detect near-identical files such as slightly different scans of the same original.
  • Adding useful filenames to all files. This means that the names are a useful indication of what is in the file (so that the file can be chosen from within a category), and are specific enough to differentiate the file from similar files. Note the guidelines at COM:FNC.
  • Adding useful descriptions to all files. This is the most basic part of uploading files: if the description is not useful, users do not know what the file depicts, and it is not possible to find it in a search. As with filenames, the text used by flickr uploaders is almost never sufficient for the purposes of Commons.
  • Adding useful categories: Again, this allows files to be found. Commons:Categories is policy.

These are the minimum requirements for using F2C. Anything less is misuse of the tool because it adds [large numbers of] improperly curated files that require work by other users to make them useful and findable. If a user is uploading a handful of files that haven't been properly curated, they can be gently reminded. If a user is uploading tens of thousands of files that haven't been properly curated, they are causing mass disruption and need to stop immediately. If uploading uncurated files is too great a temptation to resist, then revoking F2C access is a necessary measure to stop the disruption. Use of F2C is a privilege, not a right, and it is a privilege that is dependent on using it properly.

It is clear that you refuse to do even the most basic curation of your uploads. Every single file you transfer from flickr has the default filename and description from flickr. None of them have more than a single category, and many of those are either very broad categories or intersection categories that don't specifically identify the subject. It does not require scrolling past the first page of your most recent uploads to find another file with a typo in the filename (with the named subject completely out of focus, no less).

If you believe that certain files are at risk of being deleted from flickr, you can upload them into a dedicated cleanup category so that you can curate them on your own time. I do this myself with categories like Category:Causeway Street Elevated etc photos for cleanup by Pi.1415926535. But it is still your responsibility to do all of the necessary curation - that means as close to "ideal" as possible, not merely your substandard "average categorization". Any file that you permanently leave uncurated is a net negative for Commons, not a net positive.

As for your claim that I was stalking you: my attention has been drawn to your uploads previously because you have dumped them in broad categories like Category:Massachusetts on several different occasions. This time, I was alerted by another user adding File:Huntington Avenue in Sonw (15893346354).jpg to Category:Huntington Avenue (Boston) - because you did not categorize it at all. (Both of those categories are among the several thousand categories on my watchlist.) The typo in the filename and description indicated to me that you did not even check the file whatsoever before uploading it, and looking through your uploads confirmed that this was a continuing issue and not a one-off error. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:08, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Юрий Д.К.: I do want to point out that Pi.1415926535's suggestion in his next to last paragraph is a good one: one or more hidden cleanup categories, and then taking the responsibility that if these don't get curated by someone else, you will do it yourself. Otherwise, you are effectively placing other people in the position of involuntarily cleaning up after you. - Jmabel ! talk 22:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Pi.1415926535: I will not import files with bad names, descriptions and broad categories anymore. I understand that uploading files with bad names and descriptions and without specific categories causes other editors to clean up them. Sorry. Feel free to close this topic. Юрий Д.К 07:16, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Yevgen[edit]

Yevgen (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) huge amount of copyvios from various external sources after the 'last' warning. Komarof (talk) 18:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, most files deleted. Yann (talk) 23:15, 10 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Harun akbulut[edit]

Harun akbulut (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) uploads copyvios he found somewhere in the internet. Stepro (talk) 00:40, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Since 2017 again and again periods of uploading copyvios. Webfinds he labels as "own work". Stepro found this and reported his "work" at de:WP, where Harun akbulut uploaded and used the images for. As result Admin Kriddl blocked the account indefinite. Result was, that he came back as IP to insult in a way, that it needed oversight actions. I recommend after these events the blocking of the account permanently on Commons as well. I would do it, but I already deleted his uploads and would like to have a second pair of eyes. Marcus Cyron (talk) 04:40, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Notem[edit]

Notem (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) Recent blatant copyvios after a lot of warnings. Komarof (talk) 02:32, 11 August 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=792144655"