Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 83

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

VLu (talk · contribs)

They are blocked indefinitely, so their Image reviewer right should be removed. 1989 (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 22:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

DR or copyvio

File:Persons of interest Washington DC 6 January 2021.pdf is being discussed at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Persons of interest Washington DC 6 January 2021.pdf, but I think it might've be better to off tag the file with {{Copyvio}} or {{Dw no source since}} instead. It seems highly unlikely that all of the photos of the individuals (there are 26 pages of images) shown on in that PDF meet COM:L. Moreover, at least one image of a particular individual has been extracted so far, and it seems that it would be better to absolutely make sure that this can be kept by Commons before anymore images are extracted. I understand that COM:PCP matters are generally resolved per DR, but such discussions can sometimes go on for a long time before anything is settled. I think it would be better for an administrator to look at this asap since it seems to be more copyvio than not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Uploader is now requesting that the file be deleted here. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Since the file was in use in en I think that DR was a more appropriate way to move forward. In addition to that the file did come from the government site of Washington DC, so it was not a clear-cut copy from something like NYT site. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 14:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Warning message for filter 27

Hi, I'd like to see what you admins think of this warning message draft I made for filter 27. Though it's most likely that removal of all categories from a file page is vandalism, there are some cases where it is not, as evident by this report. Thanks, pandakekok9 03:54, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Also, my disallow message draft for filter 153 was ignored and archived. So please look on that too. Thanks, pandakekok9 04:01, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

About Mon files I would like to speak Thai

Note: this message had originally been posted at User talk:About Mon files I would like to speak Thai by 咽頭べさ ( 09:22, 8 January 2021 (UTC)) and was moved here by Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 06:53, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

สวัสดีเจริญพร ผมชื่อ--咽頭べさ (talk) 02:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)อินตู่แพสระหรือสิทธิศักดิ์ อุตตะมะสถิตย์ ผมอยากจะขอความช่วยเหลือจากแอดมินไทย เรื่องไฟล์นั้นผมส่งอีเมลแล้วให้ข้อมูลไปทั้งหมดแล้ว ทำไมไม่ให้อนุญาตสักทีตอนนี้ครบ ๑ เดือนแล้ว เกี่ยวกับไฟล์นี้ผมเคยพูดคุยแล้วภาษาอังกฤษซ้ำแล้วซ้ำอีก ทำไมไม่ให้อนุญาตสักทีล่ะ ไฟล์นี้ผมไม่ได้ดาวน์โหลดจากอินเทอร์เน็ตใดๆ ไฟล์นี้ผมเก็บเอาไว้ในคอมพิวเตอร์ตอนปี ๒๐๑๓ ไฟล์นี้ผมเก็บเอาไว้เพื่อวันชาติมอญ เกี่ยวข้องกับไฟล์นี้ผมเสียใจมากเลยแล้วผมไม่พอใจด้วย เพราะว่าเกี่ยวข้องกับไฟล์พม่าได้รับอนุญาต มันเกี่ยวข้องกับไฟล์มอญไม่ได้รับอนุญาต อันนี้มันหมายความว่าอะไรผมอยากทราบมากเลย สำหรับไฟล์นี้ถ้าจะเสียเงินผมพร้อมจะโอนเงิน ผมจะรอความตรวจสอบของ Admin ไม่ไหวแล้วนานเกินไป ผมจะคิดว่าความตรวจสอบนานขนาดนี้เป็นไปไม่ได้ด้วย นานขนาดประมาณ ๗ วันก็ไม่ว่าอะไรหรอก อันนี้มันครบ ๑ เดือนแล้ว ผมสังเกตว่าอันนี้มันน่าจะเป็นความโจมตีของแอดมินพม่าหรือเปล่า คืออย่างนี้แหละผมไม่อยากเขียนภาษาอังกฤษผมอยากจะเขียนภาษาไทยผมไม่อยากให้เขาอ่านออก บนวิกิพีเดียผมมีปัญหากับเขาตลอดเลย ผมอดทนไม่ไหวแล้วอันนี้มันไม่ใช่ธรรมะธัมโมแล้ว เอาละผมอยากจะสอบถาม Admin ไทยตามตรง เกี่ยวข้องกับไฟล์นี้จะให้ความช่วยเหลือผมหรือไม่ ผมอยากจะทราบความกรุณาของ Admin ไทย ผมเป็นนักเขียนหนังสือพม่าหนังสือไทยหนังสือเกาหลีหนังสือญี่ปุ่นหนังสือมอญผมเขียนได้ ตอนนี้เกี่ยวข้องกับไฟล์นี้ผมต้องการขอความช่วยเหลือจาก Admin สักคนนึงจะให้ความช่วยเหลือหรือไม่ ขอบคุณครับผมขอดีๆ ตอนนี้ผมกำลังขอความช่วยเหลืออยู่ไม่ใช่สำหรับผมสำหรับชาวมอญทุกคนช่วยสำหรับชาวมอญด้วย

About NMB48 files I would like to speak Japan

Note: this message had originally been posted at User talk:About NMB48 files I would like to speak Japan by 咽頭べさ (10:15, 8 January 2021 (UTC)) and was moved here by Ninja✮Strikers «☎» 06:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

もしもし 私の名前は--咽頭べさ (talk) 03:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)咽頭べさ又イントベサ 私はかつてNMB48タイのライターでした 私は日本の歌手が大好きです 今、私はNMB48の歌手のプロフィールを書き込もうとしていますが、すべてのNMB48の歌手のプロフィールをアップロードしたいと思います。プロフィールをアップロードするとき、ビルマの管理者にいつも問題がありました 日本の管理者に助けを求めたい NMB48プロファイルはビルマとは関係ありません、日本人関連 もし私が英語を書くとしたら、彼はそれを読むでしょう、このショットで彼に読んでほしくないので、日本語を書きました ウィキペディアを使用して、私はいつも彼と問題を抱えていました 、助けを求めたいのですが、日本の管理者が私を助けてくれますか、ありがとうございます。英語、タイ語、韓国語、日本語、中国語、ビルマ語、モン語、どちらも私を読み書きできます。私は若い頃に勉強しました 私はタイ人、モン人、日本人、韓国人がもっと好きです、ご不便をおかけして申し訳ございません。

Numerous duplicate files for deletion

User:Gone Postal has been uploading thousands images of PD postage stamps, and intends to do thousands more from colnect.net. I noticed many of their file duplicates as shown in Special:ListDuplicatedFiles. Currently of the 5,000 cached file names there, I see about 1,500 duplicates of which some have multiples up to 200 duplicates. How and who deals with these duplicates? Is there a bot to tag those file or some other method? Tagging so individually per "F8 Exact or scaled-down duplicate" for so many files would be an onerous task. I have asked them how, and if, their upload script can deal with such duplicates. Ww2censor (talk) 14:45, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Colleagues, Ww2censor's concern hasn't been addressed yet. I'm not sure of the best approach to deal with this. Perhaps @Fæ: would know? Gbawden (talk) 07:09, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
If the criteria for deciding which duplicate is the best to keep, and there is no additional value in the duplicate, like better categories or better descriptions, then they can be put in a temporary category and mass speedied. If they are digitally identical it's relatively easy to test for matches. --Fæ (talk) 10:08, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
JuTa deals with these untagged duplicates regularly and sometimes me, Minorax and Mdaniels5757. (Sorry if I forgot your name) I didn't do anything here because this is a big mess and doesn't seem to be a easy task, probably other 3 didn't do anything because of the same reason or they are busy. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:24, 8 January 2021 (UTC)`
@CptViraj, Mdaniels5757, Fæ, Minorax, and Mdaniels5757: Please excuse my pinging everyone mentioned. This issue was created by User:Gone Postal's uploads of about 20,000 stamp images over about 3 days and they intend to upload around 1 million PD postage stamp files in total from http://www.colnect.net, so this could be a future continuing problem. Their daily uploads have already caused User:OgreBot to fail in making its daily gallery for me for Jan 2 and 3 at User:Ww2censor/Recent philatelic uploads/2021 January but User:Gone Postal has suspended uploads for the moment until User:Magog the Ogre responds to the daily upload quantity issue whose limit is about 6,000 daily. It seems to me that somewhere between 5-10% of their uploads are duplicates even if not described as such on the source webpages. They all seem to be common watermarks used on several issues of stamps, so more then one example of each is unnecessary. If any of you can suggest a solution, especially at upload time, it would be great. Ww2censor (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
As I have already stated (I believe on your talk page) pretty much all the duplicates are of the backs of the stamps. For now my intention is to stop uploading backs of stamps all together until I will be able to figure out the best way to upload them and link them to all stamps that they refer to. I think that in general backs of stamps are important information, but simply leaving them for one stamp and deleting the rest is wrong, however, I am unsure how to do it correctly, thus I am not planning to do that for now. I am more than willing to listen to constructive criticism and to attempt to do the best to make my uploads useful. P.S. You are correct that I am awaiting the solution with OgreBot. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 15:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I allready processed most of them, by leaving one copy and redirecting the other dupes to the one left copy. (like normaly done for duplicates) --JuTa 16:21, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I can write an update to my bot to exclude certain users. But it's going to take me a week or two. GP can either be patient and wait for the update, or s/he can be impatient. Regardless, this issue is in the hands of the community, and there's not much else for me to do at this point. The bot cannot handle more than a few thousand uploads per day for technical reasons which are out of my hands. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:28, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for finally responding. Week or two is perfectly fine. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 00:53, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Sealle deadmin discussion

A few days ago, Russian Wikipedia checkusers found that accounts Sealle and VLu belong (to be precisely, "at least during certain time intervals" belonged) to the same person, see also Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sealle. FYI I am a native Russian speaker and do not rely on any translation. Sealle is a Commons administrator, and VLu is an active Commons user. On several occasions, Sealle acted on VLu's nominations in their administrative role. This is one example, there are more examples in the Commons CU request I linked above. This clearly constitutes serious misuse of administrator tools. (In addition, there are also accusations of impersonation against VLu, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ольга Юрьевна Васильева.jpg - these seem likely to me, but I obviously can not check them and have to rely on the users who reported them). In view of this, I would like to hear opinions why VLu should not be blocked indef, and Sealle should not be presented for the community desysop discussion. None of them edited, here or on the Russian Wikipedia, after the CU conclusion has been published.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Ymblanter and Rschen7754.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree - a desysop discussion should be started for Sealle which will allow him to answer these allegations. @Jeff G.: How do we start this process or does a crat need to start it? Gbawden (talk) 07:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Anyone can start it right now actually; it should satisfy the "consensus for a removal discussion" requirement at COM:DEADMIN. It should be created at Commons:Administrators/Requests/Sealle (de-adminship). pandakekok9 08:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • VLu is a fraud. Their Image reviewer right needs to be removed immediately. 2603:301D:22B2:4000:540:EF6A:A7F4:EBA0 09:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Another violation was also revealed. Here Sealle deleted a huge number of files by VLu request. I have doubts as to whether he really looked at all the files properly. The collaboration of two accounts with the suppression of other people's opinions is evident. I imagine we need to start making preparations to remove the status.(Translation of user Wikisaurus remarks from the Russian administrators forum with additions) --Yuri Krestinichev (talk) 09:26, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
      • I couldn't agree more. 2603:301D:22B2:4000:540:EF6A:A7F4:EBA0 09:45, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
      • While it's true on the principle, the files deleted are poorly sourced and documented, e.g. File:Nelidova-Aspiccia.jpg author "unknow" source "internet". Honestly I'm not favorable to restore such files, because they will have to be fixed by experimented users (however it should have been done by the uploaders), and some will have certainly to be nominated again for deletion. It is a lot of work for administrators and experienced users to check all these careless uploads. And as the files comes obvioulsy from the web, if they are really needed they can be uploaded again, and this time with relevant source/author/date/pd tags. Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • "This is one example, there are more examples in the Commons CU request I linked above". - There are intersections between VLu/"Лушников" + Sealle - not sure if this is an exhaustive complete list of intersections (here are 111 episodes): [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] (VLu @ Sealle), [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], [34], [35], [36], [37], [38], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [45], [46], [47], [48], [49], [50], [51], [52], [53], [54], [55], [56], [57] (VLu @ Sealle), [58], [59], [60], [61], [62], [63], [64], [65], [66], [67], [68], [69], [70], [71], [72], [73], [74], [75], [76], [77], [78], [79], [80], [81], [82], [83], [84], [85], [86], [87], [88] (@VLu: being an ambitious nominator, please take the trouble to check if among those files there are some obviously not subject to deletion. I have kept those in the public domain. Sealle (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)), [89], [90], [91], [92], [93], [94], [95], [96], [97], [98], [99], [100], [101], [102], [103], [104], [105], [106], [107], [108], [109] (Sealle – VLu – Sealle), [110], [111] (VLu – Sealle – another member). --Uchastnik1 (talk) 14:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC) P.S. Deleted 1 take. --Uchastnik1 (talk) 14:34, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • as a preface plus full disclosure I do not consider Sealle as fitting for administrative role since 2017. When he used his administrative and OTRS power here to gain a discussion advantage at ru-wiki. Against of me, later against of another ru-wiki member, even if it led to unnecessary DRs. This is what I called then to his face a disgusting action ("мерзко"), for what I was warned then temporary blocked by him - yet remained with the same strong opinion about a set of his actions. So the last option I would envisage - this sockpuppetry case and myself in a semi-advocacy role.
    main part The things above being said:
    @Yuri Krestinichev: you don't need to have "doubts as to whether he really looked at all the files properly", that would be not Sealle's regular way - to work with shooting lists as a whole. For whatever he could find a convincing to himself proof(s) that it is published (not just created) before 1917 or it has some other copyright exempt - he himself added missing info, uploaded the original and so on.
    @Christian Ferrer: right, "the files deleted are poorly sourced and documented" or some other provable defaults.
    Therefore two things I would like to see avoided in this discussion: 1) the idea that Sealle alone or coupled with his sockpuppet(s) ever systematically used his rights to keep or to add a copyright violating content to Commons and 2) the argument that coupled with his sockpuppet(s) he deleted things that should be deleted anyway so not a big deal.
    The first is not true and the second is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Sealle (by using VLu account in the disclosed way) grossly violated rules for administratorship. And for that he should be de-admined.
    It is well possible that his aims were "for the common(s) good". Thousands of suspicious uploads daily, The Thin Red Line of active admins, boring delays with all these hugely obsolete "do not close your own nominations", "wait for more opinions" etc. - when to yourself everything is already crystal clear and ready to move to the next. If such or similar thoughts ever existed - this is how the imaginary VLu might come to life, to quickly assist if necessary.
    So unless some strong contarguments follow - it should be filed for de-admin and de-admined. Any other way would send a very wrong message to Sealle, Commons administrators and to Commons contributors. As if an administrator is entitled to break any rule in any way as long as copyright violating content didn't increase. autopatroller, file mover and rollbacker can be left, OTRS member as well(?), re-apply to admin in 1 year. Something like that. --NeoLexx (talk) 17:33, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
    • I have no problem with messages to give or not to give to anyone, and I'm not trying to minimize anything, I just said that it would be inappropriate, in my opinion, to restore, just by principle, and de facto, the deleted images that are affected, as the only result for us will be more and more maintenance works for files that would have been uploaded with poor, or even without infos, in the first place, and that would have been likely deleted anyway. Of course that is not the same thing if you, or anybody else, have in view a particular file that needs to be restored because it was deleted after a deception exercised in this story, e.g. a file that would not have been deleted if another administrator would have closed a request. For that kind of individual cases I think com:UDR should be appropriate. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:26, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
      • Sorry for my misreading. Me neither, I do not expect any "All-forgiveness days" even if all involved accounts are undefed. Like all deleted by Sealle-VLu files mass-restored, undef-blocked by him - unblocked, temp-blocked - asked for forgiveness and so on. Nothing like that, just my dislike to "The end justifies the means" principle - which has no relation to the discussion, so sorry again. --NeoLexx (talk) 19:36, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • The request apparently has been opened: Commons:Administrators/Requests/Sealle (de-adminship)--Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • OTRS membership: as this de-admin issue raised a number of trust/mistrust issues, I would also like to ask about Sealle's OTRS activity. It might be a wrong place to ask so ready to move to somewhere else.
    Namely I do not understand if Sealle ever was a OTRS member. For sure he once acted like one (for instance) and he had the appropriate userbox at his page. The userbox has been replaced at November 2018 and currently he is not at the meta list.
    The thing is that I couldn't find any logs on him becoming or stopping to be an OTRS member. I asked first at ru-wiki OTRS forum but explained that some or all OTRS membership info is confidential. If indeed so then sorry for my question. --NeoLexx (talk) 16:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
    Closed issue Sorry, I keep forgetting that some rights assignments just like blocked and locked status of blocked users (one is locally registered, the other one at the meta-level only). Sealle was an OTRS member from 9 March 2016 to 1 September 2018 He is not OTRS member now, so irrelevant to the issue, so the question closed. --NeoLexx (talk) 20:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
  • More details: joint participation on the voting page regarding the candidacy of the administrator on Commons - "Лушников" asks questions of a rather negative nature, and Sealle votes "Oppose". --Uchastnik1 (talk) 09:33, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Is this a double vote or not? (VLu ("Keep") + Sealle ("On hold")). --Uchastnik1 (talk) 15:52, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Addition: [112], [113], [114], [115] ("Deleted: per Huntster, VLu. --Sealle (talk) 17:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC) "), [116]. --Uchastnik1 (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Renaming the file against the official guideline on Wikimedia Commons

I ask to revert the renaming of File:Siamion Sapieha (Sunigajła). Сямён Сапега (Сунігайла) (1709).jpg made by User:Fridolin freudenfett despite the evidence provided by me on the file talk page against the renaming request. It's quite disappointing that some file movers do renaming without even checking file history and file talk page. I believe that such practice should be stopped. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

  • I'd like to clarify the situation (maybe it will speed up the solution). The initial filename was given according to the book of art historian Dr. Maria Kałamajska-Saeed, who can be considered the undoubted expert in the study of Sapieha's family iconography. I've provided the reference to this book (Dom Sapieżyński cz. 2 Ikonografia. Warszawa, 2008. P. 19) in the file talk page and even a scan of the corresponding page. From the scan it is quite clear that the initial filename didn't contain any error at all. In contrast, no reliable source was provided to support the proposed new name. Despite this evidence, the file was renamed by User:Fridolin freudenfett who didn't explain his motivation even after my direct asking. So, the problem of the new filename is not only in its introducing against the official guideline. First, it isn't based on any reliable source. Second, it disharmonizes the set of images in the corresponding category. Third, it is used in several Wikipedia projects to describe the person who isn't even mentioned in the new file name (it means that the local communities had no problem with the initial filename, which is another indicator that there was no obvious error). I hope that now everything is completely clear in here and such an obvious situation should be resolved without unnecessary delays. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 09:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Undelete in 2021

Hi, There are still files to be undeleted. Help needed. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:46, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I already tried most of those and could not figure out why they are free. I think the 2021 undelete date might have been added before we fully realized the URAA scope--Ymblanter (talk) 16:16, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 19:18, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Rollback

Hey, I keep gathering the rollback button on my tablet, and I can't remember the last time I've used it intentionally. Can I give it up? Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Just add the follwong snippet to you Special:MyPage/common.css and you won't see those links anymore
.mw-rollback-link {
    display: none;
}
Whenever you needed the tool, you can disable or remove the snippet and you will see the rollback links again. Isn't is better than giving up the right? That being said, if you inisist on giving up the right, of course that is possible. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
That's perfect, thank you! Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Licence plate RD request

Hello! Could you please blur out the licence plate of this picture and hide the revision per ticket:2021011010002348? Thanks in advance! Best regards, Bencemac (talk) 18:45, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done -- MaxxL - talk 11:06, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks! Bencemac (talk) 12:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion request Data:Jyvaskyla/Keskustaajama.map

Hi, i created a page duplicate page Data:Jyvaskyla/Keskustaajama.map to test if the problem with map rendering was because "ä" in page title ("Jyväskylä") so I just created page with page name "Jyvaskyla". It was not the reason and page can be removed now. Problem was fixed by changing the map resolution so the problem was on random bug in rendering + caching. --Zache (talk) 09:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 10:07, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! --Zache (talk) 10:12, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Help categorize a protected file

Dear Commons admins. I wonder if you can add the following two categories 1 and 2 to this protected file. Thanks so much! --Selsharbaty (WMF) (talk) 18:49, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. @Selsharbaty (WMF): I have added both categories. De728631 (talk) 18:52, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

file:tal.jpg

Please delete this file. Because it is A redirct with no use. Thanks. בקש (talk) 11:29, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done thanx to @Geagea: בקש (talk) 11:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

deleted

I would like this phrase deleted
PhilKnight ha spostato la pagina Discussioni utente:Davide Di Marco a Discussioni utente:Davide Ceriani: :Pagina spostata automaticamente durante la rinomina dell'utente "Davide Di Marco" a "Davide Ceriani"
1
because in this way we understand that a change has been made, thanks--Kelthown (talk) 07:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
@Kelthown: Hi, and welcome. Please ask at it:Aiuto:Sportello informazioni.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 07:05, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: can't you delete this phrase?
I know you did it for another name by pulling a line ----- like this? thanks--Kelthown (talk) 11:00, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
@Kelthown: That is an Edit Summary on Italian Wikipedia, which cannot be changed or removed without the intervention of at least an Administrator on Italian Wikipedia. Why do you want it deleted? Are you Davide Di MarcoCeriani?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:32, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: it was done here for example:
Turkmen moved page User: Noël Redaelli to User: Louisette Ciliberto: Automatically moved page while renaming the user "Noël Redaelli" to "Louisette Ciliberto"
after the cancellation it is like this
1
so I wish it was done the same way
because in this way we understand that a change has been made from Davide Di Marco to Davide Ceriani--Kelthown (talk) 11:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@Kelthown: The difference is that the history for Louisette Ciliberto is here on Commons, whereas the history for Davide Ceriani you are asking about is on Italian Wikipedia. You could also ask with this link at Italian Wikipedia's Local Embassy in any language.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

My contributions

Hello. As a kid, I uploaded some graphics and now I think that thereby I might have violated some regulations. I would like to ask somebody to check my contributions from 2015 to 2017 inclusive. There is a dozen or so of TV logos.
Ambiroz (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Usually I would say that those logos are too simple for copyright, but per COM:TOO Poland, the threshold of originality in Poland is really low. So PD-textlogo might actually not work. I'd like to see some more opinions though. De728631 (talk) 00:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Ana Paula Barros

I doubt any of the files in Category:Ana Paula Barros are "own work" as declared. --E4024 (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I deleted some of them that could be found elsewhere online but others are still remaining. De728631 (talk) 22:41, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

French speaking admin help needed

Hello, User:Yvesdebxl has marked all his/her uploaded files for deletion because trouble with an other user (on fr.wiki?.) Please have a look at this. Thank you. GeorgHH • talk   22:07, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

@Yann, Nat, and Ruthven: FYI. De728631 (talk) 22:11, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I've closed all the DRs as Kept as having no valid reason for deletion. @Yvesdebxl: Malheureusement, nous ne pouvons pas supprimer les fichiers que vous avez téléversé sur Commons parce qu'il n'aucune raison valable pour la suppression. Merci de votre compréhension. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 03:05, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit wikiHow page

Hi!

My name is Marc, I'm project manager at wikiHow. I noticed that most of our translated pages about wikiHow are outdated. I would like to translate some languages from the English version some of the other languages. Is that allowed as it's a company's page? Are they some special points I need to take care about ? I'm pretty familiar with the code as at wikiHow we use the same wiki engine, but I won't use a lot of fancy stuff. Mostly text and some links, maybe 1 photo.

Thanks !

Marc — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marc wH (talk • contribs) 22:32, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, this is Wikimedia Commons where we host educational media files. We don't know anything about your company's wiki, nor are we the main Wikimedia website where the Mediawiki software is maintained. That would be mediawiki.org. I did, however, look at the Terms of Use of wikiHow wherein all users "grant to wikiHow a royalty-free, sublicensable, assignable, transferable, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide license to use, reproduce, modify, publish, list information regarding, edit, translate, distribute, syndicate, publicly perform, publicly display, and make derivative works of all such User Content ..." So yes, from all I can see, tyou can just edit any existing pages and overwrite the content like any other wiki. De728631 (talk) 22:51, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Protected file revert request

File:SARS-CoV-2 without background.png needs to be reverted to a previous version. The original created by the CDC in January 2020 is actually inaccurate (CoV-2 doesn't actually have those white blobs on it), and the CDC silently updated the file on their website (see the source link in the file description).

Various versions of this file on Commons have already been updated, including the one I linked, but it was reverted to a pre-update version for some reason (seems there was a vandalism upload at some point). The correct version would be the one uploaded by Ecklacell, timestamp 01:56, 3 March 2020. -- Veikk0.ma (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Since it's protected, this needs to be done by an administrator. TommyG (talk) 11:54, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Türbes in Bursa

Dear Admins, please move Category:Mausoleums in Bursa back to Category:Türbes in Bursa per BRD. Please see Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/01/Category:Mausoleums in Bursa that I just opened. Thanks in advance. --E4024 (talk) 01:02, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

What does BRD mean? 4nn1l2 (talk) 23:47, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
en:Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. De728631 (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Per Britannica. If türbe is simply a mausoleum, why does Britannica have a dedicated entry for that? 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
As Britannica writes, türbe is not just a mausoleum but a "form of mausoleum architecture" that became popular in the region from Iran to Anatolia. So it's notable as a distinctive historical style of mausoleum. De728631 (talk) 00:37, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I opened this thread only for the revert request. Discussion page is at Commons:Categories for discussion/2021/01/Category:Mausoleums in Bursa. I have no objection -as I had already expressed thereat- that türbes may be a subclass of mausoleums. The issues were two: 1. Imposing (by a newcomer) of an unnecessary English word instead of a specific concept already accepted in English-language literature. 2. The need for admin assistance to revert this arbitrary move. I have created, used or developed several "Mausoleums in" cats for Turkey. In the case of Turkey they would generally be only "container cats" as most mausoleums in my country are "türbe"s. Rare exceptions would be the famous "Mausoleum" of Bodrum (Halicarnassos) and of course the Anıt Kabir even though it has an Islamic concept as "kabir" in its name (Memorial Tomb). Summary: The problem is not with "mausoleums" but with some contributions that impose the general concept over the specific one. Thanks to all and this may be considered closed. --E4024 (talk) 13:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

About User:Orijentolog

Please pay attention to the contribution of User:Orijentolog, some of his edits are vandalism (for example). Please take the necessary action. --Mehman 97 21:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Mehman97, your edits are vandalism, because you're trying to enforce pan-Turkic irredentist junk as reality. Ten years ago, such garbage was deleted from Wikipedia, so your ideological buddies tried to play here on Commons. Sorry, it won't pass. Irredentist fantasies will be treated as they are. --Orijentolog (talk) 21:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
 Not done None of these are vandalism. File watched. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:58, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Orijentolog, unfortunately I do not agree with your arguments, and in general your message itself is not respect for another person. Regarding the decision on this issue, I would ask more neutral administrators to reconsider this request, since the issue concerns Iran. @Krd: please check the participant's contribution. --Mehman 97 01:13, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Since the issue concerns Iran. So what? 4nn1l2 (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: it might not be vandalism but it is disruptive. They made a bold change and it was reverted, all they should’ve done was then to add {{Disputed map}} to the file page and explain on the file talk page as to why they dispute it, rather than restoring their reverted edit. Bidgee (talk) 01:48, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
This is definitely not vandalism. I even don't call it disruptive, as disruption occurs over a relatively long time, not by a single revert. Maybe they could handle it more professionally, but their general position is right here. {{Fictitious map}} is a more reasonable notice than {{Disputed map}} here, since there is no dispute over these lands. The name "South Azerbaijan" is a fantasy too, not used even in a single reliable source. On the other hand, escalating the issue to administrators' noticeboard and calling good-faith edits of a colleague vandalism is incivility. 4nn1l2 (talk) 02:41, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
I would ask more neutral administrators to reconsider this request. Does that imply I am non-neutral? :) How does he know that? Just because I have not accepted his request. He'd better see Commons:Deletion requests/File:قزوین آزربایجان تورک.jpg before making such claims. 4nn1l2 (talk) 02:55, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Mehman97, unfortunately for you, we don't have discussion between two different opinions here, only about fact vs. fiction. The former include real countries, real borders, even real political stances of real political groups. For example, there are numerous political parties in Europe with ridiculous irredentist claims, so Commons maps about their claims are fine, under irredentist-related categories, of course. The latter includes fictional maps and flags, all self-made, which don't represent any type of reality. There are no such entities in real world, there are no such official stances in real politics, even there are no some marginal political parties or organizations which advocate it (if they do exist, sources are needed). Thus, when some single-purpose account upload such trash, without any sources, and put fake description (as if it is a reality), it is my right to correct it. Personally I made several political maps for Commons, like this one which uses eight different sources, as well as reliable literature. If dear colleague Bidgee edits it, removes all proper categories, description, sources and links, that would be either vandalism or disruptive. Therein lies the big difference.
Second thing. You are arguing that my message is "not respect for another person." Well, when I edited files, I noted in the summaries that everything is fictional. On the other hand, you didn't use the discussion, you didn't ask questions, you didn't even give a summary, you just massively removed my changes and here you tried to accuse me of vandalism, hoping to scare me. Furthermore, you are questioning the neutrality of 4nn1l2 just because he's from Iran, thus assuming bad faith, even canvassing other users. 4nn1l2 already gave his explanation, and I have my own: A few weeks ago, an anonymous editor manipulated the categories of Middle Eastern countries, opening up various irredentist categories that suggest that literally every country claims a part of the neighboring one (examples: [117][118]). It's again mixing reality and fictional/anachronistic desires. I alerted the administrators and all his weeks-long work were wiped out in a matter of minutes. In other words, neutral editors treat all irredentist fictions in the same way. If some person is e.g. from Italy, does not necessarily imply that he'll show pro-Italian bias. Yet if he is a declared fan of Mussolini, then his neutrality can easily be called into question. The same is true when someone is a declared supporter of Abulfaz Elchibey (pseudohistorian and notorious pan-Turkic fascist), highly unpopular even in his homeland.
Third and most important of all, would you please tell to me, 4nn1l2, Krd and Bidgee: are you familiar with single-purpose accounts like Qutlu (talk · contribs), NewNevix (talk · contribs) and so on? We can see that Qutlu is active for many years, but comes periodically and makes very professional edits (from the beginning). His main focus are pan-Turkic maps and flags. He uploads self-made fiction, engages in cross-wiki manipulation (largely unsuccessfully), and then disappears for a few months. He's a fan of Abulfaz Elchibey (check: [119][120]). His contributions reveal that he speaks Turkish, Azeri and Russian. Obviously, Qutlu is a sockpuppet. A sockpuppet of someone who share the same ideological views, likes the same historical political figures, speaks the same languages, and who is equally concerned that naive editors confuse his fiction with facts, therefore that his ideological propaganda spreads around. A sockpuppet of someone who has main account, who knows his political views are highly controversial, and who wouldn't like to have warnings or blocks on his talkpage. Thus, it's more preferabe for him to keep fancy user page, to use sockpuppets for uploads, then to put the same uploads on main account's watchlist, so when someone correct it that he can promptly jump in as well as start with reverts and accusations. Now the question remains, which main account is in question here? Tell us Mehman97, who would be your first pick? --Orijentolog (talk) 14:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

License review

Dear Administrators am whom it may concern,

There is a massive backlog with the licensing review of media data on Commons! Partially, there are images that really must be checked because of their questionable sources. Administrators are the perfect experts for doing this. Please get active there. Best! — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2A02:810D:4ABF:CE84:1CC1:67ED:862F:686A (talk) 14:46, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Administrators are human beings and also need help. Other areas that require review and where problematic media could be easily found are User:OgreBot/Uploads by new users, User:OgreBot/Notable uploads, Category:Media needing categories. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Unresolved deletion request

Hello together, could an admin take a look at this deletion request? Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Best regards, Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 19:52, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

If this has been suggested before, I haven't seen it. We continue to have very significant backlog on Commons Deletion Requests, with delays of 6 months or more fairly common. With many deletion requests (eg out-of-scope, insufficient photo quality, superseded, etc) delay does not cause significant problem. Not so with copyright violations; these should be identified and removed with all due speed. Perhaps it's time to split off copyright violation deletion requests from deletion requests for other reasons, so the former less often get lost amid the piles of the latter? Thoughts? -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

@Infrogmation: Theoretically, plain copyright violations are supposed to be tagged {{Copyvio}} or {{Speedy}} with a mention of copyvio, even if the files are already subject to DR (although Taivo reverted me when I did that on {{Whale}} 4 days ago). Who is making DRs for only copyvio reasons?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:31, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Go through the deletion requests backlogs, and you'll find copyright cases, many fairly clear, mixed in with the requests for other reasons. It has always been that way - although previously not nearly so horribly backlogged. (There are certainly reasons to list on del req rather than tagging as copyvio for speedy - for example not all users have become mavens of the details of copyright laws of various countries, derivative work guidelines, and FOP in various countries -- but even a casual new user user may see some copyright claim that looks wrong to them and want more expert eyes to confirm. Whatever reasons, copyright cases on deletion listings has long been fairly common here.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 05:10, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:Media requiring a split up

Does anybody know what happened to the files in this category? There were around 300 of them and they disappeared suddenly. I suspect someone ran a bot which removes {{Split}}. --jdx Re: 02:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

@Jdx: (mark the cat as watched, go to watchlist, select "category changes", then you would see what files were moved in or out of a cat.) it appears User:Sreejithk2000 finished splitting many files two weeks ago.--RZuo (talk) 11:31, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
@RZuo: Thanks for the tip. Indeed, it looks like he processed all the files. Probably New Year's challenge. @Sreejithk2000: Chapeau bas! --jdx Re: 13:19, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I made a mistake

I did a category that has no reason to exist https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:%CE%95%CE%BC%CE%BC%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%85%CE%AE%CE%BB_%CE%A4%CE%B6%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%BA%CE%AC%CE%BA%CE%B7%CF%82

Can someone delete it, and revert it back to the original with the title Emmanuel Tzanakakis? Thank you in advance Ιπποκράτης2020 (talk) 09:52, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 11:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Renommage

Bonjour !

Est-ce que quelqu’un peut renommer :

Cf. POWO sur Talipariti tiliaceum et POWO sur Hibiscus tiliaceus. TED 17:16, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Admin help needed

One user has taken prisoner the issue of Belly dance as you may see at Commons:Categories for discussion/2018/01/Category:Raqs Sharqi. Please rename that cat (Raqs Sharqi) to its common English name, i.e. Category:Belly dance as I cannot move anything because both Category:Belly dance and Category:Belly dancing have been re-directed. BTW this should not even be a subject of discussion but one user's arbitrary attitude has made it necessary and also stalled the discussion which otherwise has consensus. --E4024 (talk) 18:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

File:Roblox logo.svg

I would like an admin to please remove the versions uploaded from 21:25, 10 January 2017 to 06:51, 12 January 2017. They are violations of COM:OVERWRITE. Thank you. --Wow (talk) 22:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done per Commons:Revision_deletion#Revision_deletion_is_used_sparingly. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 04:16, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Relaxation of filter 153

Hi, I think it would be a good idea if filter 153 doesn't block the upload of audio files. MP3 uploads are already restricted to those who have autopatrol anyway, so there should be no issue of copyright violations. I asked because of this report. Thanks! pandakekok9 03:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I concur, see all four hits on filter 153 in this log.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

New version of Flag of Norway

Hello! After extensive discussion here: File talk:Flag of Norway.svg#Flag colors, User:Sauer202 and I have come to the decision to overwrite File:Flag of Norway.svg with a new version: File:Flag of Norway (ba0c2f for red & 00205b for blue).svg. However, File:Flag of Norway.svg is upload protected, so I ask that an administrator can fulfill this action. Thanks! Gutten på Hemsen (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gutten på Hemsen: Unprotected. Please ping me here when done so it can be re-protected Gbawden (talk) 15:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Gbawden: Done! I’ll take care of metadata as well as updating the colors of all related flag files for consistency. Thank you for your help! Gutten på Hemsen (talk) 16:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Re-protected Gbawden (talk) 06:16, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Problem with two files

Sorry if this is not the appropriate place but I didn't find any guidelines on how to treat this kind of problem. I've found two nsfw files (which I'm not linking here right now because of the illegal content warning) depicting a porn actor, with his face clearly swapped with another one man whose name is in the file name. Definitely needing a speedydelete but I don't know how to handle this. Thanks --93.34.236.121 21:58, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Nominate them for speedy (if they meet the criteria) and an admin will deal with them Gbawden (talk) 15:20, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks. --93.34.236.121 16:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Please close Commons:Deletion requests/File:RD Whittington with Scott Disick (2).png

I think the discussion has been long enough and there is a clear consensus to promote deletion. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 14:13, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 15:19, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Overwrite?

Can an admin take a look at File:Nur Muhammad Taraki.png? It seems to be a case of COM:OVERWRITE, but the older version is so poor that it might not matter. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Nothing should be done due to poor quality of first version. Taivo (talk) 08:07, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Socks reverting deletion request

Khojindia socks keeps removing my deletion request of File:B2B Global Marketplace of India.png. Can anyone help me out? --Trade (talk) 11:31, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. All sockpuppets are indefinitely blocked (some even globally) and tagged, the file in question is deleted. Taivo (talk) 08:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@Taivo: Which ones aren't globally locked or blocked?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:34, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Seems like Merabharatdesh (talk · contribs) is the only sock not globally locked. Taivo (talk) 21:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@Taivo: Thanks, that was reported to m:srg#Global lock for Hello2ddn sockpuppet(s) on the 18th.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Protected file revert request

File:SARS-CoV-2 without background.png needs to be reverted to a previous version. The original created by the CDC in January 2020 is actually inaccurate (CoV-2 doesn't actually have those white blobs on it), and the CDC silently updated the file on their website (see the source link in the file description).

Various versions of this file on Commons (including this one) were already updated, but it was reverted to a pre-update version for some reason (seems there was a vandalism upload at some point). The up-to-date version is the one uploaded by Ecklacell (timestamp 01:56, 3 March 2020). -- Veikk0.ma (talk) 12:49, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Confirmed and ✓ Done. --Achim (talk) 16:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks. -- Veikk0.ma (talk) 22:50, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter

last u dilete my image coz u sse in copyright first off this is not copy right image this is my own work and i have not licence and i draw this poster and also for your kind information this is upcoming movie poster so why u put in copyright. plz add return my image — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rk2515 (talk • contribs) 17:03, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

You re-uploaded the file. It was tagged as a copyright violation. I replaced the tag with a "missing evidence of permission" tag. You have 1 week to follow the instructions provided or the image will be deleted. Davidwr (talk) 17:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@Rk2515: "Return Ticket" is a 2021 movie produced in India. Per COM:India, copyright attached the moment the poster design was fixed in a tangible medium of expression because India has been a member of the Berne Convention since 1 April 1928. We need to be sure that we have permission from the appropriate party or parties for, File:Return Ticket (2021).jpg, or whatever you choose to call it. Pinging @Davidwr, Yuraily Lic, Túrelio, Oesterreicher12, EugeneZelenko, Rubin16 as fellow editors interested in this poster. See also COM:ANU#User:Rk2515.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 17:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Davidwr. Thanks for letting me know, Jeff G.. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 17:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
@Yuraily Lic: You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:01, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

British signature uploads

I nominated File:Vernon Kay's Signature.svg for deletion and I then realised the uploader has also uploaded 25 other signatures: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles/PatrickPearson123. They are marked as "own work", but these are UK celebrities so that's not possible (24 are living and two dead, I believe). They're licensed as CC-BY-SA, but usable sigs should be PD, no? However, as UK sigs these can't be tagged as PD: Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag#United Kingdom. There's also no sources given to verify that these are the signatures of the people stated. I believe they all need to be deleted. Fences and windows (talk) 16:49, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Shall I just individually nominate them all, if nobody is going to comment? Can nominations be bundled? Fences and windows (talk) 00:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleting redirects

Just want to remind all administrators that redirects have to be unused to be deleted (COM:CSD#G2). Looking through pages with broken file links on swedish Wikipedia I found several pages with broken links because of deleted redirects. Please check global usage of redirects before deleting. Also note that User:CommonsDelinker has not made any edits in other wikis since the beginning of November. So adding image replace requests at User:CommonsDelinker/commands will probably not remove any uses of redirected filenames.
Redirects also have to be implausible to be deleted. This is not as easy to determine and is much more a matter of opinions. But a filename that has existed for many years is probably not made implausable just because it is renamed to fix a minor spelling mistake or to add some extra information. Ö 08:43, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit request

Please create Category:; 

[[Category:Unicode 0370-03FF Greek and Coptic|037E]]
[[Category:Question marks]]
{{distinguish|Semicolons}}

-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 21:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Edit war about Diagrams template

Timeshifter is waging edit war for his template {{Diagrams}}, trying to pretend consensus on his opinion in Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Diagrams by subject discussion, which was not properly closed yet and didn't achieve such a consensus.

In nutshell: Commons categorization structure is consensually based on the Diagram definition of the term "diagram" as consensually presented in the last 12 years in en:Diagram#Gallery of diagram types, accepting all types of diagrams as diagrams. In Commons, "Diagram" categories were allways consensually used as umberalla categories for all types of diagrams. However, Timeshifter is fixed on his opinion that the word "Diagram" means only en:Exploded-view drawing and very aggressively tries to promote this view into the categorization structure of the Commons. To this end, he ignores arguments about the current consensus, and misinterprets the external references he makes to defend his opinion.

I ask administrators to prevent this user from pretending that there was achieved a consensus on his opinion, as he does using the template he has created. This template is confusing and disrupts the project and the existing consensus and categorization work. --ŠJů (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Agreement was reached about Template:Diagrams in August 2020 at Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Diagrams by subject. Closure about the Category:Diagrams by subject is separate from the template agreement. You initiated this edit war. The template has been around since August 2020. --Timeshifter (talk) 19:18, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Just one user agreed your template. However, neither he nor you have dealt with the fact that your opinion still contradicts how the word diagram is defined by Wikipedia and how it has long been used consensually in the Commons project. All types of diagrams are diagrams, not only exploded view drawings. That's an obvious long-term consensus. It is not acceptable to disrupt the structure of the project on the basis of a hasty opinion, which is not even accepted on Wikipedia. --ŠJů (talk) 19:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Multiple users agreed there to the template. See the version of the template before your changes today:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Diagrams&oldid=527199315
--Timeshifter (talk) 19:35, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, we can see that you was the only who created and insert the template. Without a consensus, despite the long-standing consensus and definition contained and used in all related Wikipedia articles, and Commons categorization structure. It is a hasty and ill-conceived attempt to disrupt the established and consistent structure of the Commons categorization structure. --ŠJů (talk) 19:42, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
ŠJů is now up to 3 reversions in his edit war. Please stop. Multiple people (including 2 admins) agreed with the template in August 2020. User:Themightyquill, an admin who agrees with this template, and who initiated the category discussion, no longer wants to "merge Category:Diagrams by subject with Category:Information graphics by subject." That was his initial proposal (see the original proposal at the top of the category discussion). Instead he prefers this template. As I said this template agreement is a separate agreement. So no one remains who wants the initial category proposal passed. The other admin is User:Royalbroil.
Please continue discussion at Commons:Categories for discussion/2019/09/Category:Diagrams by subject where the discussion is ongoing concerning the template. And please stop edit warring.
Here is the version of the template before ŠJů's edit war:
Note: All diagram categories should contain diagrams as defined and illustrated in the Wikidata box at Category:Diagrams: "plan, drawing, sketch or outline to show how something works or the relationships between the parts of a whole". Maps, and basic statistical tables, charts, and graphs, are not diagrams. They should be moved to subcategories of Category:Information graphics such as Maps, Charts, Statistics, etc..
--Timeshifter (talk) 13:45, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Bump. Are some administrators going to weigh in? This is the "Administrators' noticeboard".

What this comes down to is whether the Commons is going to use English definitions of English words? Or are we going to use German and other definitions of English words.

Most editors of mainstream American, British, Canadian, or Australian publications or media sites would not allow their writers to use the word "diagram" in an article to describe a basic map, or a basic statistical table, bar chart, or graph. The editor would be considered dumb. A map is a map. A table is a table. A bar chart is a bar chart. A graph is a graph.

There are specialized illustrations that are sometimes called diagrams that may have elements of tables, charts, maps, and graphs. But basic maps, tables, charts, and graphs are not called diagrams.

And the Commons category structure needs to honor these basic understandings of diagrams, maps, tables, charts, and graphs. So that it is easier to find stuff.

Basic graphs are also commonly called charts, too. So the word charts can cover basic statistical tables, bar charts, area charts, and graphs. Area charts are a combination of a graph and a densely packed bar chart. These are all common basic English definitions. All of the above in their basic formats would not normally be called diagrams. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:49, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Comment. I started this today:
--Timeshifter (talk) 13:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

"LTA vandal" abuse filter strangely blocks a good-faith revert

See this report and this diff. It's kinda strange that the filter prevented the IP from reverting their own edit. Can an admin please look on this? Thanks, pandakekok9 09:57, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

Replied at the abuse filter talk page. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:36, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleting (copyrighted) new versions of uploaded files.

I recently nominated for deletion these two files File:鷄-order.gif and File:裃-order.gif. For this reason "I only nominate for deletion the new version uploaded by the user Leonel_Sohns. Because it was taken from the website https://kakijun.jp/ , so this was not his own work, furthermore there is no proof that the author or copyright holder(kakijun.jp) agreed to license the file under the given license.", I clarify that I don't want to delete all the versions, just what is described above.
So the problem is that these two other files are in the same condition: File:攻-order.gif, File:鰯-order.gif(they have a version taken from kakijun.jp), the only difference with the other two is that I just uploaded a new version of those files.
So my question is: Is it OK, to nominate for deletion for that reason explained above?, if it is OK I please request a multiple nomination or deletion for the last two files. FanNihongo (talk) 06:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Renaming a non-sense-name-having important file

I have found a 'hidden file' (not used yet) which was uploaded last year from the Internet archive by a bot. It is an, as far as I can see, important historical document on WWII, a 72 page intelligence report of the US Army from 1945 after the liberation of the Dachau concentration camp. The problem has two parts: part 1) The file name is nonsense: File:Dachau (IA dachau00unse).pdf. Part 2: The cover was not well chosen in 1945, as it has a huge SS symbol on the cover, together with the word "Dachau". Hence, in a category, one sees an SS sign and a useless filename, making the file somewhat misleading and hidden. I would thus suggest to rename it (or to take similar action, i.e. I could load it up again with another filename) to something like "US Army Intelligence Report on Liberated Dachau Concentration Camp 1945". Please advise or take any action deemed to make sense ;-) Pittigrilli (talk) 01:15, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

No response? I make a suggestion myself: I load it up again with the correct filename (the orig. uploader was a bot) and make a redirect out of the old filename. Pittigrilli (talk) 13:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I have renamed the file according to your suggestion. For future reference, you can add a rename request on the file in question and this will normally be picked up by a file mover within a few hours. TommyG (talk) 13:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, I will do that next time. Cheers, Pittigrilli (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Amitie 10

There's an unblock request that may have been overlooked at User_talk:Amitie 10g#Merry Christmas. The original block was in April 2017. --Fæ (talk) 19:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

That's one of four pages in backlogged Category:Requests for unblock.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:56, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Uploads by Pablo Khali

I am tired of presenting Deletion requests about Uploads by Pablo Khali. As this is not a complaint about the user, but only a request of mass deletion and observation, I did not make a notification to the user. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 19:37, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked both Pablo Khali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) and Pablokhaali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) as promotional-only accounts. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Coordinates

Request to correct the coordinates of Camera Position : for https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:18_June_1815_%E2%80%93_Victory_at_Waterloo,_memorial.jpg, the correct data are (50.67375, 4.40000). You may check it on Street View. Thanks ! (I do know how to modify coordinates.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alta Falisa (talk • contribs) 13:31, 27 January 2021‎ (UTC)

@Alta Falisa: I corrected it in the wikitext here. Correcting it in the structured data is an exercise left to the reader. Please sign your posts.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion requests issue

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T189108

Hello. I have noticed an issue at Commons:Deletion requests/2020/12 where about half of the days do not display, which is apparently because mediawiki does not allow the page to be that long. This has resulted in many of the requests being invisible, with many having no comments or action as a result. Some kind of solution to the system must be made, as a whole month of requests apparently can't always be displayed on one page. Best, IWI (talk) 13:54, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

And this is an issue on Deletion requests/2021/01 as well. One possible solution could be linking to the individual day listing instead of transcluding it, until we get a more permanent solution. Perryprog (talk) 13:58, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@ImprovedWikiImprovment and Perryprog: We could also start sorting by week instead of month, or campaign to get the "Post-expand include size" limit raised from 2 MB to something more reasonable. Pinging @Steinsplitter as maintainer of the bot which manages such pages. This issue is already tracked at phab:T189108.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:42, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

I have loaded some pictures about professional career of Vandelli Roberto, an italian actor. I'm authorized directly by Vandelli Roberto since he sent to me these picture about his proper image and activity. Antipatro2000 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antipatro2000 (talk • contribs) 22:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Please open COM:OTRS page (Italian version COM:OTRS/it) and look, what kind of e-mail you should send to our permissions department at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Taivo (talk) 09:06, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Original file deletion request

Could the original version (04:46, 30 January 2021) of File:216 Sheridan Street, former Fry's Assembly Hall and later converted into TW Irwin's Garage and Hume Motors, Gundagai.jpg be deleted, was accidentally uploaded. Bidgee (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Ahmadtalk 05:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Strange block of User:Récsei93

The user has filled in unblock request, their edits have been tagged as Blocked user editing own talk page but the account is not blocked and the block history has no entries. What is going on? Did I miss something out? --jdx Re: 09:03, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I do not know, but I declined the unblock request. Taivo (talk) 10:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Aaahhh, you may be right – perhaps they use a blocked IP address (or range). --jdx Re: 11:45, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Deletion

Hello, in the last days commons is having troubles in uploading new files.

Can you please delete File:Wikipedia 20 Barnstar Classic.png so that I can upload a new version of it?

Thank you--ValeJappo (talk) 15:04, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

@ValeJappo: Any png image will look fuzzy when scaled down (due to design decisions discussed in phab:T192744) or jaggy when scaled up, so you may want to upload an svg or jpg version, and you may want to use our Upload Wizard instead of Special:Upload or overwriting to bypass that bug.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:14, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: hey, I want to overwrite it, but it does not bypass that bug--ValeJappo (talk) 15:18, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@ValeJappo: You could also try using User:Rillke/bigChunkedUpload.js to overwrite (documentation is on the talk page).   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:20, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: thank you, however this does not help me. I just have to upload a new version with right colors, and currently the only way to do that is via upload wizard, so I need this file to be deleted--ValeJappo (talk) 15:25, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@ValeJappo: I have that script installed, and I see "Upload a new version of this file (chunked upload)" at the bottom of that file description page's "File history" section. If I were to click that "(chunked upload)" link and have the replacement available, I'm sure it would work like it has in the past. Please try. Alternatively, {{G7}} might bring a faster Admin response than this section.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, now I understood!--ValeJappo (talk) 15:37, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@ValeJappo: You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@ValeJappo: Congrats on the overwrite, but what's the difference between versions?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:42, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I changed the colors: before the 3d effect was made with brown instead of black.--ValeJappo (talk) 17:02, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Request to remove edit by bot

In the village pump, I asked how to remove the location of a picture I uploaded here. I was told to upload a new picture without the EXIF data containing the location, and then to ask to remove the edit made by the bot. Here's the edit by the bot. I ask this for privacy reasons. Also, if it not asking too much, can you ping me when you do it? Thanks! Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 16:38, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Note for the admin working on this request: You will also need to delete the first image version, which contains the coordinates in the EXIF data! --Dschwen (talk) 17:14, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:24, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Strange uploads

? --E4024 (talk) 01:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@E4024: It seems like the uploader's goal was to promote Turkish websites in the description. The images look like quick random scribbles. Any idea what they signify? –Iketsi (talk) 01:46, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
To me they look like gibberish. --E4024 (talk) 01:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Who knows. They could also be tests. –Iketsi (talk) 01:50, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@E4024 and Iketsi: Me too, see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Jordans065.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 01:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Speedy deleted as per COM:CSD#G10. --jdx Re: 07:52, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Ongoing vandalism

The user:Janik98, co-working with another user from the Italian Wikipedia, is repeatedly editing a file I uploaded with my old account (user: Vicipaedianus x), ignoring the messages I left them on it.wiki and here. The file in question is File:Riconoscimento della Crimea.png, a map about the international recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, that I created in accordance with numerous sources. Even though I've listed him my sources on it.wiki, the user keeps editing the file and reverting my edits, but according to the rules (COM:OVERWRITE) he should be stopped. Est. 2021 (talk) 16:21, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

As you can read in the file discussion the map is inaccurate ad the user used unreliable sources to create it. I'm relatively new to Commons so I'm sorry if I have violated a rule, but the file is, as described by others, unreliable and misleading.--Janik98 (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. I do not consider this vandalism. This is edit war and I do not know, who is right. So I splitted the file into two versions (the other is file:Riconoscimento della Crimea 2.png). The edit war must stop, so I fully protected the current file for a year. If the situation changes, then you must request unprotection. Taivo (talk) 10:27, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Mass of copyvios

As far as I can see, all of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Kingsubash11 are copyvios. I've started deleting, but there's more than I have time to deal with. Thanks! - MPF (talk) 21:44, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment No activity for 4 months, so the situation is not critical. Please continue next day. You can also create a bulk deletion request. Taivo (talk) 10:49, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Delete older versions of files

Can someone delete copyrighted versions uploaded by User:UserNameSRB, on these files: File:Небојша Вукановић.png, File:Трново црква 1.jpg and File:Branko Oblak 1967.jpg. I have reverted to original files uploaded. --Smooth O (talk) 11:35, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done I have deleted those revisions. De728631 (talk) 16:39, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I have just seen Yuraily_Lic's two recent messages on my talk page, I must have uploaded File:Mamejor! mameshiba no taigun.jpg on the wrong copyright criterion with the new file upload format (it seems to have confused me a little) - if you could tell me what criteron I should have uploaded it under that would help a lot! Abdotorg (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

@Abdotorg: You evidently presented no clear and convincing evidence that the designer of that music artwork had released it with a free license, that the copyright had expired, or that it had somehow not qualified for copyright protection in the first place. Please read COM:L.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:04, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Is Non-free use rationale 2 still in use? The image (which I intend to re-upload in the correct way) is an album artwork "to serve as the primary means of visual identification at the top of the article dedicated to the work in question". I think the new file upload format just has me puzzled. Abdotorg (talk) 16:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Abdotorg: What you are describing is Fair Use. Sorry, we do not accept Fair Use here on Commons. The image may still be uploaded to English Wikipedia in compliance with en:WP:F   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:43, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Ohh thank you for explaining that! I usually upload to EN Wikipedia so I have no idea how I ended up here on Commons, seems as if I have gotten lost. Abdotorg (talk) 16:51, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Abdotorg: Welcome to the free media rabbit hole.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 16:57, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Categorization activity of User:Tm

User:Tm has over 3 million edits on the Commons and counting. Unfortunately, his edits are mostly harmful in the field of the categorization. Look for instance at the Category:Lisbon. Last december I tumbled on his activities there when I tried to clean up this category which then contained almost 5000 elements. He restored my vague steps to start a clean-up. I called his attention to the problem here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Tm#Categories. He simply does not understand, that an item should not be in the category of Lisbon when it is already in subordinate categories. Now thanks to his activities this category has already well over 5000 elements.

I do not like "reporting" people, I am old, well over 70 and weak for such discussions. I only wanted to call the attention of some more energetic people to this harmful acitivity of his. Maybe somebody else will be able to talk to him more successfully than I did.-Szilas (talk) 15:14, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

@Tm: These are blatant violations of COM:OVERCAT. People have been complaining about such on your user talk page for eight years now (the earliest here). When are you going to stop?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, Szilas, I also "I do not like "reporting" people", and although am much younger than you, I'm too busy and quite tired to struggle with people who make POV edits like this; I lost hope about some contributors here. They will win in the end, because we cannot cope with that attitude. We must use our time to try to develop Commons. This is the sad or happy truth. --E4024 (talk) 16:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@E4024, the mentioned POV issue has nothing to do with the overcat problem. Please do not mix both topics. --Túrelio (talk) 16:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Looks like it is high time for some sanctions. This seems pretty clear cut to me an I don't see why a lot of energy should be wasted on lengthy discussions here. --Dschwen (talk) 16:15, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
  • It seems pretty clear to me that there’s aboslutely no reason for anything other than for Szilas to learn about how categorization works and for Dschwen and E4024 to appologize for the misuse of this page. As someone who has been endlessly categorizing media that gets placed under Category:Lisbon, I can only support any edits that will keep them categorized as such until at least some basic additional categorization is added, instead of a simple dissimination down one thread only: Moving photos categorized under Category:Lisbon that show, say, a fountain in 1990, down to Category:1990 in Lisbon without adding also Category:Fountains in Lisbon doesn't help the goal of useful categorization. If me or Tm, or any of the few who work to actually reduce the (huge!) number of items categorized under Category:Lisbon, copies a few hundred of those photos down to Category:1990 in Lisbon while keeping it in Category:Lisbon it’s not because we don’t know about COM:OVERCAT or disagree with it, but because we know another of us will come over later on and will copy that one photo and a few others to Category:Fountains in Lisbon, and so on until each photo is at least categorized for time and subject, when it will finally be ready to be removed off the main cat Category:Lisbon, usually after some individual tweaking for additional categorization and any further fixes proper curation needs. And that’s what matters — one’s age or one’s grudges against other users are irrelevant. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 17:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
As E4024 said previously that he will ignore, his real intentions should be clearly marked as nothing more than an attempt to get revenge to situations like when when he tries to push a particular POV like moving Category:Armenian refugees in Ottoman Syria to Category:Displaced Armenians in Ottoman Syria with the justification that these were "Displaced within the same country, Ottoman Empire" but in the same day , added an image of muslim ottoman muslim refugees like File:Wounded Muslim refugees at the Hasankale conflict of Caucasus Campaign in WWI.jpg to Category:World War I refugees in the Ottoman Empire. What was the difference? They were ottoman subjects\citizens but of a different religion\nationality, so why one are internal displaced persons and others are refugees? And Everybody Draw Mohammed Day in case you do not know in the English Wikipedia is categorized under en:Category:Internet-based and online protests and this was a subject that is\was related with human rights, as per my revert explanation. This are just two example of why E4024 is trying to get me blocked, i.e. as nothing to do with any of this subject and in this particular subject his opinions should be given proper context of why they are biased.
About Category:Lisbon, besides what Tuvalkin explained and besides the explanations that i gave at the time and the hundreds or thousands of moves to subcategories that i made at the time, i dont see why this subject reappered now. And the accusations that are made at me that I´ve uploaded more than 50 000 images related with this category and made tens of thousands of proper categorizations, so the claim that my work is bad is clearly wrong. Tm (talk) 18:16, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
And about the complain of 2013 this banned ex-administrator complained about two images that had a vehicle category. But did he thanked the work that i (and several other users) had not a single proper vehicle category and the work that this entailed, for several months? Proper context if important to understand that to bad moves in thousands of edits are not a real motive to complain. Tm (talk) 18:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your years of volunteering Tm, and congratulations on reaching the 3 million mark for contributions. --Fæ (talk) 19:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
I still don't understand why you randomly added the October 2008 in Oxford category as a subcategory of Oxford itself. There's hundreds of images you have replaced back into the main category without any explanation. Is the problem that they weren't categorized in some way you want? So it shouldn't be moved at all until the categorization you want is done? That isn't very helpful without at least an edit summary. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Fæ, thanks for your congratulations. The same or more could be said about your contributions in volume but in particular quality, specially the ones related with cultural subjects. Ricky81682, if you still did not understood what i´ve already said in my talkpage, see above Tuvalkin said. One user moved from Oxford to 2008 in Oxford, but categories that are made to categorize when in time are not the same as categories related to where or what the image depicts and so this edits removed the location categories. Time is the fourth dimension, not the first three dimensions. Tm (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I see that you don't consider time as important as other categories or as useful. As I said, just put that it in an edit summary or better yet, add it to a subcategory of Category:Media needing categories requiring human attention Category:Unidentified locations in England or some other categorization backlog method so that the uncategorized images and the undercategorized images can be separated. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 20:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Where did i said that i "don't consider time as important as other categories or as useful"? If i had considered such thing would have moved images in "2008 in Oxford" to "Oxford", not copying them i.e instead of reverting the deletion of location categories, i would made the same mistake as other user but in the opposite direction. And these images are not images of "Unidentified locations in England" but images of Oxford, so this is would not be a proper move. Tm (talk) 20:17, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin: If you have dealt with the Category:Lisbon, perhaps you have seen this picture File:2016-10-24 Lissabon 6308 (30852216891).jpg with the following categories: * October 2016 in Lisbon * Commerce in Lisbon * Lisbon * People in Lisbon. The categories are the contributions of User:Tm. There are not hundreds, but thousands of examples of this kind of overcategorization in the activities of our Tm colleague. His diligence of making over 3 million edits is not very useful, if his work consists partly of such edits. Look at the Category:Helsinki or Category:Madrid or the categories of any other capital for better examples.-Szilas (talk) 05:51, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
First it wasn't me that added "October 2016 in Lisbon" to this image. Second, if you had any remote knowledge of Lisbon and its society you would understand why this image taken in Category:Largo Martim Moniz is properly categorized in Category:Commerce in Lisbon and Category:People in Lisbon. And given a biased sample of european categories, why not shown other examples of categories of european capitals that have more than 2000 images like Category:Edinburgh, Category:Kyiv or Category:Minsk. Tm (talk) 16:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Dear Tm! The problem was not the other categories, but the Category:Lisbon in this case, which was absolutely unnecessary, because the other categories are almost all the under-under categories of this overall category. I am glad that you have removed it, but the Category:Lisbon still counts over 5200 elements, mostly similar cases.

Of course you know much better Lisbon than me, I visited this beautiful city only a couple of times and I have only one Portugese friend with whom I worked together for many years. I am only sorry that you compare the category of your great city to those city-categories which are also in bad shape (but neither of them has over 5000 elements). If I were you I would like to present my city in the best possible way also in the field of the categorization. - Szilas (talk) 05:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I support Szilas. Over-categorization does usability and transparency of categories not good in general. Some exceptions may be okay, but they should be used very sparely. It is not a normal situation that Category:Lisbon has >5,000 files straight within. Actually it should be 0 (zero). If someone feels that certain files have to stay there temporarily for possible further diffusion at some timepoint in future, a technical maintenance category sth. like Category:Media of Lissabon needing better categorization should be used. Or, for unidentified locations, there already seems to be Category:Unidentified locations in Lisbon, with further subcats. --A.Savin 02:32, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

 Comment No statement by Tm on the issue, but this as revenge for my comment? OK. --A.Savin 13:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I´ve already said enough about this matter, and i´ve have nothing to talk to you A.Savin, to the contrary of you that still havent made a statement about my question related with your accusations of others being sockpuppets. And i´am not the administrator that is in the possible process of being desysoped for insults (like other user an idiot, and false accusations, so a vote\comment and question is not a revenge, so i could ask the same question as to why are you here. And still waiting for your statements about your baseless accusations of others being sockpuppets. But it seems that will drive the same way as accusing me and others of being corrupt or i and other user being crooks and thieves. Tm (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
.All other categories "Islands of [country] have "Landforms of [country] and islands of Greece are in the mediterraneum. Also the accusation of Wikihounding is really silly, but i could also accuse you of Wikihounding, be it by commenting on this thread, when you have zero connection to it or [some of your most recent edits. Tm (talk) 14:03, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Another recent example mistaken editing of User:Tm: [121]. This proves, that User:Tm does not understand or want to accept the guidelines of the categorizatizon. Maybe an aquaduct is not a bridge, but Category:Aqueduto das Águas Livres is already under the category of Lisbon, so adding Category:Lisbon here is a complete misunderstanding. - Szilas (talk) 05:59, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

@Szilas: What are you talking about? When you talk about something either give all the context or hold your piece, as, for whatever reason i might have, what you state above is out of context and half told. Giving partial diffs (of what happen in less then a minute) wont stop anyone os seeing i wasnt "adding Category:Lisbon", but removing this image from :Category:Architecture of Portugal and Category:Bridges in Lisbon. So either you, Szilas, give a good explanation as to why this last gross lack of context or what you have stated as no validity, again. Tm (talk) 14:38, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

OK, I see now, you have removed the Category:Lisbon from there, too. It appeared first among my messages that you restored my edit and the result was that the Category:Lisbon reappeared instead of the Category:Bridges in Lisbon. I see also, that you removed some more elements from the Category:Lisbon. There is now "only" 4974 items in that category. I wish you good work and good health. - Szilas (talk) 15:35, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

wrong deletion

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Link-troppo-piccoli.jpg was deleted because "Out of project scope" but it was actually used for explanation purposes in a Wikipedia article (that is definitely part of the scope, isn't it?). Please undelete it --Bultro (talk) 21:21, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done @Bultro: This is the wrong venue. Please submit a request at COM:UDR. Thank you for your understanding. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:16, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
Part of scope yes, but not the entirety. COM:SCOPE has four separate requirements: 1) media file, 2) allowable format, 3) free, and 4) educationally useful. A file being in use satisfies only the educationally useful test ("A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose") but not necessarily the others. Indeed, in this case, the file is not a media file (a defined term that explicitly excludes "files which are representative merely of raw text") and thus is not in scope regardless of use. Эlcobbola talk 19:33, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Mass DR

I do not know how to make mass DRs, I DR'ed several uploads by User:HusseinMutahar. Look at their TP and you will see many deletion notifications. I am already convinced none of their uploads are "own work" as claimed but swiped from the net or screenshots. Please someone who read here open a mass DR for the remaining items or an admin, while closing one of the DRs I opened, take the occasion to delete the rest also. I do not want to create more DRs at a backlogged platform. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 02:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

@E4024 and Tuvalkin: VFC may be found at COM:VFC.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Original file deletion requests

Hello, would it be possible for the original versions of the following 7 files be deleted please? They inadvertently contained personal information embedded in the EXIF information which was removed in the current versions. Files: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. Thanks in advance! Tvcameraop (talk) 12:07, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Just wanted to see if anyone had a chance to check on this? Thanks! Tvcameraop (talk) 17:06, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
First 2 done, will do the rest tomorrow Gbawden (talk) 18:44, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the first two! Tvcameraop (talk) 15:41, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 06:31, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

COM:RFR

There are currently several requests that have been open for five days without clear opposition, it seems that they can be promoted. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 12:15, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Block evasion and disruptive editing

100.14.89.197 is a confirmed sock of Taha_Khattabi (see confirmation on en.wp), who is indefed on en.wp and Commons. They have been harassing me for a while and as you can see from their edit history, they are now reverting my edits for the sake of it. M.Bitton (talk) 18:21, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Blocked for 3 days--Ymblanter (talk) 18:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Noting that I've extended to three months as abuse of this IP goes back for several months (i.e., 3 days is not adequate relative to timing of historical abuse). FWIW, 3 months also approximates the en.wiki duration. Эlcobbola talk 18:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 21:25, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Uploadiong of pictures in an article

I have tried to upload excavation photos at the webside "Grabenanlage von Herxheim" - but I can´t upload any pictures, they are always rejected with the text "Der gewählte Dateiname ist gesperrt, da er zu unspezifisch oder bedeutungslos ist. Bitte kehre zum Upload-Formular zurück und wähle einen aussagekräftigeren Namen für die Datei" (=the chosen data-name is blocked because the name is not specific enough or meaningless. Please return to the upload form and chose a more significant name for the photo). I tried lots of different names which always include the date of the photo, what is seen on the photo, where the picture was taken, etc., etc. - without any success. What can I do to be able to upload meaningful photos? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeoghost (talk • contribs) 11:15, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

@Archaeoghost: Hi, and welcome. That text is from MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-filename/de, the German translation of MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-filename. What exact filenames have failed for you so far? Please sign your posts.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

jerry Pischer - Michael Manuel

I am making changed to this site based on firsthand knowledge. I have been attempting to add the Headshot for Michael Manuel as well as a link to his award for Lead Actor LADCC and Nomination for the Ovation Award for Lead Actor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerry Pischer PI (talk • contribs) 17:36, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

@Jerry Pischer PI: Hi, and welcome. Please see COM:ANU#User:Jerry Pischer PI, User talk:Jerry Pischer PI, and en:User talk:Jerry Pischer PI.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Pregunta

Un nombre de usuari@ como Sommelierdepedos es aceptable? No estoy segur@ pero su primera upload may even be an attack page, as it was placed in cat:Sommeliers. Ojo! --E4024 (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

@E4024: I tagged the file, removed it from an article, and warned the user and address.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 20:08, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
I agree with E4024: this username ("sommelier of paedos") is inappropriate and should be globally blocked. —capmo (talk) 16:27, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Carfanatic2019

I'm not sure if this User:Carfanatic2019's voluminous uploads do violate any policy, but I find them quite invasive. Numberplates are not obscured, faces are visible, and these photos have been taken in situations where the subject would not reasonably expect such an image. The file descriptions also regularly include such personal details as 'Registered: 31 Jul 2018, V5C Issue Date: 30 Sep 2020, Registered Near: Exeter, MOT Due: 30 Jul 2019, Tax Due: 1 Sep 2022', which though publicly available could be used for nefarious reasons. The images have no aesthetic value, i.e., side or front rear shots of cars to the exclusion of background noise, and appear to be repeatedly taken while driving. Representative images [122] [123] [124] [125] No Swan So Fine (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Almost every image is poor quality, taken through a dashcam. Only 7 of their 2219 images are in use, indicating that they are not actually useful, and dozens of DRs have not changed their upload quality. Meanwhile, their complete disregard for user privacy - including putting license plate numbers in the filename - is at best incredibly creepy and at worst a crime. I am inclined to block and delete. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:17, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
@No Swan So Fine and Pi.1415926535: These uploads may be revenge or harassment by an admitted "fanatic" for perceived slights by the pictured vehicles' drivers.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:29, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both - I can well imagine the distress of one of the drivers found their car photographed like this on Commons. These are not cars of unique aesthetic, monetary or historic value, or the best images of their kind. @Jeff G.: - I've found it wise never to underestimate a Wikimedian/Flickrists's ability to collate indiscriminate images! No Swan So Fine (talk) 22:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
No Swan So Fine, Pi.1415926535 and Jeff G. - Spotted this accidentally - I came to ANI some time ago inregards to one of their files including coords where the image was taken outside that persons house - CF has since stopped including coords for images outside houses.
Personally I do find it slightly weird they include so much detail (vehicle details, numberplate etc) in the title and description but didn't really think much of it. I certainly don't mean to speculate on them but I've often wondered if they have Autism and wondered if this was a trait of that?.
Ignoring buses - I've taken images of car and vans with numberplates included as personally I don't see an issue - Unless you've been in an accident with a car then you cannot (as far as I'm aware) get personal details such as name or address ?,
That all being said I certainly agree the majority of their images are of poor quality and should be deleted. My only reasoning for not nominating all files is that some vehicles are in different colours that don't exist here but not sure if I've been OTT here. Either way certainly support deleting. –Davey2010Talk 18:13, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Forgot to add but CF isn't the driver - He takes images in the passenger seat using a phone / tablet. I also don't believe CF means any harm - No one's told him not to do it so obviously he thinks it's okay to include these details. I simply believe he likes to take images of vehicles and probably believes he's helping us out here. –Davey2010Talk 18:23, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Their neurodivergence is something I have considered and demands sensitivity; but the poor aesthetics/invasive nature of the images would demand deletion, I'm afraid. They are clearly a committed contributor to our commons. No Swan So Fine (talk) 21:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
License plates are definitely considered private personal data under the EU GDPR; the post-Brexit UK-GDPR seems to be similar. Given that this information is in both the filename and the description field, this would require over 4,400 manual revdels just to keep a collection of mediocre-to-useless files. Regardless of whether they are acting in good faith, their uploads are wholly unacceptable on Commons. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:12, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi Pi.1415926535, Ah okay I was completely unaware of that, Learn something new everyday! :),
Completely agree revdelling would be a lot of work for nothing in the end as as we've all said the images aren't that great,
Should I start a DR or were they being speedied ?, I would assume EU GDPR trumps anything here?, If not I can nominate them all, Thansk ,–Davey2010Talk 23:06, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Userpage renaming request

Please move my user page User:Capmo to User:Capmo/Old without leaving a redirect; I intend to use the global user page at Meta. The user talk page should not be moved. Thanks —capmo (talk) 16:34, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done, Apologies tho User:Capmo I originally messed the move up. Anyway all fixed and moved! :), Happy editing!. –Davey2010Talk 17:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
No problem. Thank you! —capmo (talk) 17:47, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

IPBE request

Hi, per meta request, this user Prcmise seems to need IPBE due to GFW. Could someone assist. Thanks. Camouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 17:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you CptVirajCamouflaged Mirage (talk) 17:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Πατριάρχης Δημήτριος.jpg

Good day. This file was created based on another Wikimedia file. In the photo editor, I likened the features of Patriarch Bartholomew, depicted in the original, to the features of Patriarch Demetrius. No other file is used here. I am neither the author nor the author of the original file, so I cannot respond to the template. What do you advise as an administrator? It use this File: Varfholomey (2019-01-05) 25 (cropped).jpg The close situation with this file Demetrios I of Constantinople.jpg, that was uploaded to the Wikimedia by meRC-1841 (talk) 21:44, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Both suspicious images were nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 09:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

latest version of File:AMCA model at Aero India 2013 (cropped).jpg

Administrators please delete the latest version of File:AMCA model at Aero India 2013 (cropped).jpg because it is an obvious copyright violation. Previous version should be kept. Thank you.— Vaibhavafro 💬 07:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Ämmäkosken voimalaitos pakkasaamuna.jpg

Hi, we were just informed that our Finnish WLM winner photo Ämmäkosken voimalaitos pakkasaamuna.jpg was not Ämmäkoski power plant (Q5490165) but photo of Ämmäkoski power plant (Q5490165) which is located in the same area. Would it be possible to rename the photo Ämmäkosken voimalaitos pakkasaamuna.jpg -> Koivukoski power plant on a winter morning.jpg and keep the redirect because there is links from press release to that photo?

If it is not possible to keep the redirect then i think that it would be best to duplicate the photo and delete duplicate later after a week when it is not anymore in news and rename it then. --Zache (talk) 18:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Next time, please use {{Rename}}. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:10, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! --Zache (talk) 19:44, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

File change request to a protected page

I am requesting a change on a file. On a discussion from a few years ago, it was decided to maintain the azure sky blue color of the coat of arms here [126], and it appears that the Sky blue didn't make the cut for the presidential standard and I hope to revert it to the azure sky to match the coat of arms in my edit request that has been unnoticed for a long time now. [127]. PyroFloe (talk) 05:03, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Immediate deletion needed.

For this. Possibly (talk) 20:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Regular deletion request is created. In my opinion the situation is not critical and we can discuss it for a week. Maybe open government license {{OGL}} applies. Taivo (talk) 08:50, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
You've got to be kidding me! A current passport, with identifying details? Here is the thread where the user explains they uploaded their passport for age verification. It's pretty clear they do not understand the implications. Possibly (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Deleted prior to oversight. @Possibly: , please do not report privacy problems on highly watched pages. Email COM:OS instead. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 19:01, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
thanks. Possibly (talk) 23:24, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
@Possibly: Next time please add link to the thread. You know, that all relevant information should be presented. I would delete it, if I would know the thread. Taivo (talk) 09:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

User:Etvdv

I think Etvdv is acting in Commons in a disruptive manner. I am informing them of this. As I do not like people to be barred for their mistakes, I did not want to open a complaint but only this; maybe an admin can warn them. (I also can, but if warnings are ignored then... This is why I normally do not use any warning templates.) --E4024 (talk) 15:24, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

About User:Gire_3pich2005

Hi I'm user:Gire_3pich2005. One of the admins blocked me correctly because of my insistence to upload some aviation pictures that had copyright. After that, because of my interest to commons, I've made another mistakes and made more accounts (here) and uploaded many valuable pictures and did many useful contributions lawfully. But I admit this request should have written in past and it was better to continue under law. I confess I made some mistakes but I hope you check my contributions and give me another chance to rejoin you under my original account and stop under cover edits! Good luck and thank you.86.55.39.164 19:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose second chance was given December 30 2010, and it was blown.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:01, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
 Comment (non-admin comment) The block-evasion on Commons seems to have ended in 2016, assuming all socks are in the list you provided. I also checked en-wiki. The block-evasion seems to have ended there by 2016 or 2017 as well, except for one outlier: Somehow, despite being blocked, you made this edit while logged in with a blocked account. The edit was not a bad edit, but editing while blocked is typically not allowed even if a technical glitch lets an edit get through, as it looks like was the case here. Davidwr (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 Comment (non-admin comment) If this were the English Wikipedia, I would consider allowing reinstatement under en:WP:Standard offer. I don't know if the Commons has anything similar, but if they do, that would seem to be the best route to try. I would want someone who reads Farsi to review your edit history for the last couple of years on that Wikipedia, as not all problematic editing behavior shows up in block logs. If that shows at least a year - preferably two or more years given your multi-year history of block-evasion here - of having no serious issues, very few if any minor issues, and an overall "net positive" contribution, then I would not object to reinstatement, despite that one edit on en-wiki (which should have been prevented by software) last October. Davidwr (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 Not done. I cannot be sure, that you are Gire 3pich2005. Please log in and request unblock on your user talkpage (you can write on your user talkpage). Your task to convince us, that you will be a net positive user, is an enourmously difficult, because you have been 4 times indefinitely blocked and 3 times unblockd. That means: you have got 3 last and very last chances and you have spoiled them all. Taivo (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello User:Taivo. You right about my past. But after these years, I've changed and gained more experience. I invite you to check my good edits in Farsi Wikipedia during these years. Also please look at my talk page in Commons to see my request. I won't let you (Commons) down.5.210.81.63 11:11, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
I understand. Please log in and request unblock. If you cannot log in, then unblocking your account is useless. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Vanished village pump posts

Yesterday, after 11am GMT, I posted on the VP in response to a statement by the WMF with regard to a request by a ministry of the Indian government. A couple of hours later WMF legal chose to respond. However by 9pm GMT, both our posts had vanished, neither is there any record in the log. I've left it for a day, but this does not appear to be some oversight action as nobody has contacted me.

Anyone have an explanation, or can recover those comments for all parties? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 20:26, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Did you try to contact that WMF legal spokesperson to ask for an explanation? While there might be a perfect explanation, posts shouldn't just vanish like the way you describe, so I think either your imagination was playing you parts (I don't believe so, but one can never be sure when there is no trace, right?) or else someone please give a reason for what could be an unwanted and somewhat troubling move that administrators and other users should be worried about too. Thanks, Eissink (talk) 10:00, 12 February 2021 (UTC).
Correction!
My mistake, I was confusing different discussions. Thanks for examining it. --Fæ (talk) 11:32, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

About the message I have received from Yuraily Lic‬

Hello ,

I ave received a message from Yuraily Lic‬ about alleged violation on posting not my photos on Wikimedia Commons. I am very new to it, but will try to explain.

Trabantfully is my ligin in a sandbox on Wikipedia, I used it to create an article about my own artistic work about Tomasz Matuszak. In other words, Trabantfully is Tomasz Matuszak. The article by Tomasz Matuszak exists on Wikipedia since yesterday, I'm new to Wikipedia and I don't know how to remove an article from sendbox yet, but I'll try to do it today. All photos posted on Wikimedia Commons belong to me. Domain www.tomaszmatuszak.art.pl is my official website. The domain http://www.artysci-lodzkie.pl describes my work with my consent, there are also only my photos there, the same is with the domain http://miejmiejsce.com/assets/Uploads/12-c2.jpg. All these domains hold photos that belong to me and I have the copyright to them. I do not know if I am putting this message in the right place, if I don't I am giving here my email in case of further questions: tomaszmatuszak@gmail.com

Sincerely, Tomasz Matuszak - Trabantfully — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trabantfully (talk • contribs) 09:43, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. All your uploads are deleted, because they were found outside Commons with earlier date. That case policy requires, that copyright holder must send OTRS-permission (Polish version COM:OTRS/pl). After receiving and accepting the permission the files will be restored. Taivo (talk) 10:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
@Trabantfully: I notified the user of this section for you. Please do that yourself next time, and sign your posts.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:20, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Hello, User:Trabantfully. I have written my opinion on my talk page. Please read it, @Trabantfully, Taivo, and Jeff G.: . Thank you. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi, If File:Whats the connection - Flickr - secret coach park.jpg has successfully cropped could an admin please revdel the first thumbnail as it includes a copyrighted image,
My "new" laptop has an FN key function and I have no idea how to force-refresh pages anymore so have given up trying!, Many thanks, Regards, –Davey2010Talk 21:06, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Could someone revdel first thumbnail at File:WHICH ONE FIRST - Flickr - secret coach park.jpg for the same reason, Many thanks, Regards, –Davey2010Talk 21:17, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks GreenMeansGo much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:00, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Peshawar match 1896.jpg

Can anyone please close this DR as the clear reason has been given for keeping this image now. Thank You.Wallu2 (talk) 08:52, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

  • @Wallu2: I have gone ahead and closed this request as a courtesy, given that you seem to have withdrawn the original nomination. Though in general, there isn't any special need to expedite a closure in such cases. GMGtalk 14:28, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A user is spamming my notifications!

Hello there, I have been notified that a user with the name of 'Modern Sciences' has spammed my notifications. He/She has reported neatly 20+ images that I have properly assigned the correct license with the image I have uploaded. Upon entering this user's contributions, they have used the same source (Tasnim News), to upload their work yet when the person has nominated my images they have said "tasnim/mehr news/fars is not under creative commons 4.0 yet it is!

Proof: {{Tasnim}} {{Mehrnews}} {{Fars}} {{PD-Iran}}

Images that I have uploaded with these license tags are being wrongfully nominated for deletion.

The user 'Modern Sciences' has completely ignored this, and spammed my notifications to a lot of my contributions. On the user's talk page, I have noticed the user is received notice of a possible ban from Wikimedia Commons. I ask you please you report this user, and to remove the unlawful "request for speedy deletions" associated with my work. Thank you. Ali313korosh (talk) 05:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC) Ali313korosh

All the files this users uploads on the commons are not own works of those agencies they just used those files for their news and those files are not own published this users only can upload files under creative commons which are owned by those agencies (Logo of Agency and file creator mostly bottom left comer of file) this user violated of upload files under fake license and all files must speedy deleted [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 06:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Most of images deleted. Some speedies converted to DR. Ali313korosh is asked to read fa:راهنما:انبار and Modern Sciences is suggested to read fa:راهنما:برچسب‌زنی در ویکی‌انبار. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Personal attack and Threat

This Message is and personal attack and Threat against me by user:Ali313korosh. please done an adiminstral act against this users [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 06:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 Not done We don't block users for such comments at Commons. Here is no fawiki.
@Ali313korosh: Please be careful with your choice of words. The next time you needlessly use the verb troll against a user, you may find yourself in trouble. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

End the drama please

Hi there. Dear Admins, can one of you have a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Photo of wikimedian SuperSucker SuperPark in 2013.jpg and close it the way you believe it should be? 6 weeks is a long time for this DR and the drama behind. I already repented having contributed to this without the slightest idea about the unseen part of the iceberg. Please take care of this issue. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 02:14, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm having a last warning without prior warnings

I have uploaded images from government websites to Wikimedia Commons and they got flagged for speedy deletion at the same time, I'm okay with that. But I received a "last warning" because "I have done copyright violations so despite requests from editors not to do so, and despite their instructions", I have not received any requests or instructions from anyone. I kindly want to learn why am I getting a "last warning" without prior warnings, requests or instructions from anyone? Yukon198 (talk) 12:35, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Here you got a prior warning on 20 December 2020. The notice reads " Warning: Wikimedia Commons takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing." 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:17, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
  • You had a "last warning" from one particular editor. They do this: they delete stuff and they threaten, that's what they do. Fortunately they are not an admin (and we fervently hope will never be one), so this is an empty threat. Unfortunately there are many admins here who are too reactionary and pay too little attention to background. If you do find yourself blocked (and this is sadly likely), then appeal the block and hopefully cooler heads will prevail.
Copyright is important here. But good editors also recognise that this is a complicated situation and good faith errors do happen. It's much better to show to uploaders who've made errors how they've made these errors and how to avoid them in the future - rather than throwing around these inappropriate and unsupportable threats. I suggest that you make a serious study of COM:LICENSING and see just what's acceptable here - in particular, what was wrong with your past uploads. It's complicated for content that's not your own work, or things you "find on the web". If you're interested in uploading something similar in the future, you might like to ask another editor for their advice first, giving them a link to that potential content. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Quietly investigated the most recent deletion earlier today, just before deletion. There may have been an OGL-C rationale to accept the photograph, however the source (canada.ca) appears written to obscure the government's intention to default to OGL, and instead has NC terms as their default where nothing else is stated. This was not obvious, and these considerations mean this should have been a DR, not a speedy as speedies only apply to obvious cases. As a rationale for a "final warning", this is indeed weak, but the uploader also needs to take more care with copyright claims. The recommendation would be when in any doubt (by the uploader) to escalate further speedy notifications to DRs, and ask in the DR for clarification. You don't get warnings for asking reasonable questions. --Fæ (talk) 14:28, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

John Vizaniaris / Dead Talk Live

All of Jarianz99's contributions look like clear copyright violations (taken from the IMDb gallery here) so should be deleted and blocking the account should be considered per behaviour on en.wiki (en:User talk:Jarianz99, en:User talk:Johnviz). Couple have been deleted already (File:Dead Talk Live.jpg, File:VizPoster.png). If there's a better place to report this then let me know for next time – not a Commons native so appreciate the patience. (Just a warning that you're potentially on candid camera if you reply or take action as I understand Vizaniaris has been reading out comments or something on his streams.) Bilorv (talk) 20:23, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. All his uploads are deleted as copyvios. Next time please create a regular deletion request (I have link "Nominate for deletion" on left sidebar bottom of tools). For extraordinary cases there exist speedy deletion (add {{speedy|reason for speedy deletion, "copyright violation" is not enough}} into file). Taivo (talk) 09:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

DR in queue...

... for a good two months: Commons:Deletion requests/File:ZYRA music Alex Cheatle zyra singer ZYRA 04.jpg. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 10:53, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Gbawden made a decision. Taivo (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

As everybody reads here, let me add: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Caliph Abdulmecid II of the Ottoman Empire.jpg. In more complicated cases like this one, could our admins kindly spare some time to contribute, also? Your opinions, either way, will be appreciated. Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 10:58, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I made a difficult decision. Taivo (talk) 12:29, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

question file deletion

This filehas been nominated for deletion in september last year, but no action was taken after that. Kind regards, Saschaporsche (talk) 08:52, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

@Saschaporsche: It is in line behind the members of Category:Deletion requests April 2020, and May, June, July, and August. Please be patient or elect more Admins.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:07, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, i didn't know that there was such a huge backlog... Kind regards, 09:13, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
@Saschaporsche: You're welcome.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:20, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
I see the file has been deleted. thanks @Taivo: ! kind regards, Saschaporsche (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Time for the Backlog Banner?!

Greetings Adminstrators:

Would it be possible for every administrator to take a couple of minutes a day and cruise through the big backlog of Deletion Nominations?

Some of these are simple. Some almost old enough to be walking and talking!

Could whoever puts the "We need help with the Backlog" banner up on our watchpages, please do that again? The banner mobilizes help really fast!

If you need extra encouragement don't forget there's "admins by activity" rankings & I have a pocket full of barnstars, just leave me a message on my talk page!

Thank you ever so much!

Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:29, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Talkpage of globally locked user

SuperSucker (talk · contribs) was globally locked in 2019 for cross-wiki abuse and also fully blocked on Commons. However, from November 13, 2020 on, there have been bursts of editing-activity on his talkpage by IPs and 2 accounts, User:MedicalWorker and User:NoTengoFriends, which suggested to act as his proxy, but are suspected to be SPs of SuperSucker. In some edits a potential realname was put into the posts and the edit-summaries.(history) As I never crossed path with SuperSucker, I don't know the case-history.
In order to stop the trolling-like editing on the talkpage, which unnecessarily ties up userpower, I propose to blank and fully protect the talkpage of this account. Also, his userpage should be fully-protected (currently only semi-protected). --Túrelio (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with the proposal. The global ban should be enforced - or will not be a ban after all. Érico (talk) 23:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 08:20, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
@Túrelio: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
@Érico: I agree with you, except that it is a lock, not a ban.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:39, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Mass DR

Can one of our dear admins kindly delete all spam uploaded by the visitor at Commons:Deletion requests/File:EfteniMedya Instagram Takipci Satin Al.jpg? I do not like nor know how to (the other day I looked at the templates as a cow watching a train and did not get it :) do it. I knocked Taivo's door as there was a signboard that says "Communications" there; but I guess it's his siesta time. :) Ellin, girlpower perhaps? E4024 (talk) 00:40, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done: All deleted speedily per G10. --Achim (talk) 18:51, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
@Achim: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

sorry, no idea how to handle this

This File:GP monaco 2019.jpg, i doubt if it was made by the uploader (i think it was made by a professional photographer and not by the uploader). How do i suggest to investigate/delete the file? Kind regards Saschaporsche (talk) 15:28, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

To investigate, right click and search with Google image search. If its a clear copyvio tag for speedy deletion Gbawden (talk) 15:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Already deleted. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:18, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks very much. kind regards, Saschaporsche (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

user:IamMM

IamMM (in last two months) was a regular contributor to com:FPC. Indefinite block is not fair IMO. Hanooz 22:01, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

@Mardetanha: I don't see a warning. I understand any personal attacks may have been hidden or oversighted.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:33, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
I have reinstated users' access to his talk page, we were dealing with a sock master from fawiki, who was blocked on fawiki, later he brought the same attacks to commons. Mardetanha talk

KSFB (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  has made clear, albeit frivolous, legal threats on their talk page. This user is a sockpuppet, who is blocked on Wikipedia, and their uploads on Commons have consisted of uploading fake logos and other misleading information, used to support their addition of false information/hoaxes on Wikipedia.--Tdl1060 (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Please close Aurelio de Sandoval's image-reviewer request

Thanks. (｀・ω・´) (talk) 00:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Fake maps and possible sock-puppets

I found made up election maps from User:Nnnnnnnnnnnnnkp and User:Ersatzyork, and made two mass deletion requests 1 2. I hence found more accounts posting made up election results: (there may be more)

Some maps are easy to spot, some made for the far future. Unfortunately many are hard to distinguish from real history (especially 19th century maps). Some are fully categorized and floating around in-between the real maps. I assume all those accounts are sock-puppets of the same user, but apart form the similar style of files I have no prove for that. --Jahobr (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

It may be of benefit to compare with Category:Files manipulated by sockpuppets of WorldCreaterFighter. Getting rid of anti-educational, racist, or unintelligible user created fantasy maps is incredibly difficult. Some of the example DRs have been open for more than six months, despite the cases being the work of a disruptive sockpuppeteer. --Fæ (talk) 17:03, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
I had a look, and I don't think the two cases are related beyond their focus on maps. The ones I found circle around elections and political campaigns (usually recoloring SVGs and switching names). I don't even think it is malicious, more: "alternate History" and politics "Fan-Fiction". I additionally found: (there are likely more)
--Jahobr (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Wickywackwill11. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:25, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Turns out we have a category for that Category:Maps of alternate histories. These files are less of a problem, because they are not mixed with “real history”. Still, most of this content is in my opinion “private artwork” and therefore out of scope. There are exceptions like File:Alt-1864_Union_Election.png were it visualizes the timeline in a relevant fiction book. An additional sock-puppet could be:
Greetings --Jahobr (talk) 17:50, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. I deleted 95 files and nominated 2 for regular deletion. Prolemasses need extra care, I did not delete any of their uploads and will work with them later. Taivo (talk) 10:50, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to Taivo, Yann and Fæ. For the help and input. I am afraid we are not done. The Users/Files I reported so far, i have found by accident categorizing other maps. I have not even begun to look for fake maps. I expect to find many more. 5 Minutes clicking and I got:

What is the proper way for me to proceed? The only reason I reported this here was because I suspected sockpuppets. Should I report them here? Or just mass deletion requests? Greetings--Jahobr (talk) 15:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I just found the first fake map that is currently in use: original vs fake (New Hampshire recolored). In use here w:nl:Amerikaanse presidentsverkiezingen 2000 since may 2020. (I will of course fix this)

Xiphactinus A (talk) 21:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC) I tried to make my point that the maps are fake fairly clear in the description, but I may not have been totally spotless there. It's just for sandbox purposes because I don't have much knowledge of wikitext and all these terminals and special things Wikipedia has, well I use them in sandboxes in order to bascially write my own wikipedia. I would never put any of my fake/made-up maps, images, or stuff on the mainspace, sorry if there was any trouble about this, not trying to harm/make people believe false information. I'm just doing this because I want a little space for me to work on my stuff. If you delete it, it's fine. I'd be a little upset, but it's no big deal. I'm nobody's sockpuppet though, I'm my own person.

@Xiphactinus A: I am sorry if you got "under the wheels". Getting suddenly confronted with deletion requests is never nice, sorry. I must admit I am worried about your "write my own wikipedia" comment. I am not 100% sure what you mean by that, but it could turn out, that you attempt something that is at odds with the scope of this project or Wikipedias. --Jahobr (talk) 23:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
@Jahobr: By "write my own wikipedia," I mean that in my sandboxes I write pages that are like wikipedia pages but are made-up for my own little world in my head. Reason why I can't just do this somewhere else is my liking for all the templates available in Wikipedia, and my lack of knowledge in regards to recreating these templates and terminals in some other wiki. Xiphactinus A (talk) 00:15, 20 February 2021 (UTC):
Alright, reading over Commons policy, I have discovered what I had been doing is not allowed on Commons. I'll try not to do that from now on, but I would like to ask if it was okay to continue just on Wikipedia sandbox, without images? I don't need the images, they're useful, but unnecessary. If not, is there any other platform I can be directed to to continue this type of work? Thanks. Xiphactinus A (talk) 19:34, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
@Xiphactinus A: No, Wikipedia explicitly forbids the use of user pages and sandboxes for non-wiki purposes, such as you have been doing. There are plenty of other wiki farms out there (Wikia/Fandom being the largest); some of them already have many MediaWiki functions and templates built in. At the end of the day, Commons and Wikipedia are not responsible for your personal projects, and have no obligation to host them. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Okay. I already know about Wikia/Fandom having been a user of that site for nearly 4 years, and I used Wikipedia merely because of all the features it has. I do have a few questions should I move my work to that site.

Is it legal for me to directly copy Javascript or css terminals from here to there? I quite like all the features Wikipedia has and would love to use them for my own projects. Given my own projects are not for commercial use, nor do I think many people aside from myself will see them, will it be legal for me to copy over the javascript and css codes to this other wiki so that I can use it? Xiphactinus A (talk) 00:10, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
(squeezed in) @Xiphactinus A: As far as i know, the whole Wikimedia project is under some free licence. So it should be possible. The specifics depend on the components the their specific licenses. Hard to give a general answer. Yes-ish, likely naming source and authors required, republishing likely only under the same free licence. --Jahobr (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I found further users uploading fictional maps. Some have valide content mixed in

What is the proper way for me to proceed? The only reason I reported this here was because I suspected sockpuppets. Should I report them here? Or just mass deletion requests? Good night --Jahobr (talk) 23:26, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm one of the users mentioned on this list. I would have no problem with the files I've uploaded being deleted. All content which I develop is placed on fiction.wikia.com. Many of the Wikipedia templates do not exist or function improperly on the Fandom Websites, and I do not place any of my content outside of my Sandbox. --Calthrina950 (talk) 23:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
@Calthrina950: Commons has a specific purpose to host educational and historical content, not to serve as a webhost. Please stop misusing Commons for personal purposes. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:49, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm aware of the Commons policy. I only uploaded these images for use on the Fiction Wikia platform, and I've tried to limit how many such images that I upload. I will not upload any additional images after today.--Calthrina950 (talk) 23:53, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Clearly fake maps - especially those by users who are abusing Commons to host files for Wikia and other sites - are eligible for G1 (and often F10 as well) in my opinion. I've deleted the fake maps of most of the users listed above on that grounds. However, it might be worth discussing a dedicated speedy deletion category for fake maps of this sort (clearly excluding, of course, files like File:King and Emperor.PNG that illustrate notable fictional worlds and alternate histories, and thus have educational value.) From the comments above, it is clear that those misusing Commons as a webhost for their fake maps either don't know or don't care that they are violating Commons policy. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:05, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Here are new entries to the list (individual assessment still required):
Here some cases that are less clear to me:
I think i am about done with the cases who are easy to spot. I skimmed only through "missing cat", "unidentifed maps" and "presidential election maps". I have not checked other countries, or state level maps. Greetings --Jahobr (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
I have opened a discussion here on enwiki regarding users misusing enwiki to host similar fake history. Many of those users end up using Commons to host their images. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:59, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
(obligatory not-an-admin) I've just noticed this discussion but I've been going around and nominating "alternative history" maps for deletion for a while at this point. I didn't realize how widespread of an issue it is - is it recommended to report uploaders doing this? Elliot321 (talk) 04:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
(Not an admin). Hi, I originally reported here because I thought it was one user mass posting using sockpuppets. This seems not do be the case. It is a creative community using this platform for their hobby. No evil intent, just dangerous when the maps get mixed in with the real data. I think, when the backlog is cleard, quick continuous deletion requests are the way to go on commons. Just like what you have been doing. Massive userpage-fantasy-novels should be reported in their respective wikis. Side-note we have the {{Fictitious map}} template. It does not fit great for alternative timelines but a clear visual marker like this should be used in the small number of cases were the files are actually relevant. --Jahobr (talk) 10:29, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Here the next users I found. All files have deletion requests already. Mentioning them here pings them a gives a chance to see the discussion: User:Xkeeton, User:Oliver Lambkin, User:Sjwalkerio, User:Iamnotcapableofthis, User:TheTexasRanger Greetings --Jahobr (talk) 13:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

A list on AN is not that helpful in the long term. It would be better to add the maps (or a single sample from a series) to a backlog category, like "Fictional maps needing review". Implicitly the uploading accounts can be reviewed at the same time as reviewing cases, without needing to make allegations about the motivation of the uploaders. --Fæ (talk) 13:28, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Watermarked images

Reporting the uploads here by Teddyshouse (talk · contribs) as some are watermarked and may be copyrighted. Carcharoth (talk) 22:03, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I deleted them all. They all without exception had watermarked ©. As the uploads were 8 years old, block is not practical. Taivo (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete older versions of two files for privacy reasons

Hello, I just spoke with User:Leo067 and he asked me to file a request to delete the older versions of the following two files because the edit summaries contain personal information:

Thank you, --Gnom (talk) 19:06, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

@Leo067 and Gnom: What exactly am I deleting? Also, it's generally best not to make privacy-related revdel requests on a highly visible page like this. See Commons:Revision_deletion#How_to_request_Revision_Deletion. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Gnom, File:Manching DOPH-0557-032a 9x777.jpg enthält nur 1 Version, vermutlich wegen deines Imports um 20:03 Uhr. --Túrelio (talk) 21:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
@Gnom, the last/2nd version of File:Airbus CityAirbus D-HCIA hovering.jpg has the additional problem that it wasn't only cropped, but also massively reduced in size. I therefore propose to upload a new version with same crop-section, but w/o reduction of size/resolution. --Túrelio (talk) 21:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
File:Airbus CityAirbus D-HCIA hovering.jpg has now been stripped of personal data by deletion of 1st version plus hiding of 8 versions in the history. --Túrelio (talk) 22:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Thanks, --Gnom (talk) 06:40, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I am messaging you regarding a "possible copyright violation".

The images you marked as possible copyright violations are not in violation of any copyrights as they are property of the company and I work at this company and I am uploading these images on behalf of the company. Because of this I ask you to remove my warning and un mark the images. If you want to know any additional information let me know. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KoliaGeorgian (talk • contribs)

@KoliaGeorgian: Commons does not know, who is behind username, so we cannot be convinced, that you have permission to upload the files. Please open COM:OTRS page and look, what kind of e-mail should be sent to our permissions department at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. After receiving and accepting the letter the deleted files can be restored. Taivo (talk) 13:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Please close this

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Stamp US 1873 3c official war dept.jpg has been open for months and is obvious keep. There are several more old ones still open in this category: Category:Philately related deletion requests. Ww2censor (talk) 11:48, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Nat. Taivo (talk) 12:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you finally delete this?!

Hi, Wo st01 deleted my article without giving me e a chance to rewrite or review it. BUT he left this picture which can now be found via google with all negative connotation that come from seeing that there is a discussion on the picture. Can you finally delete it? It is taking forever and it is creating a bad image for the coach I wrote about which is the entire opposite of what I was hoping for.

This is a really bad experience and I will tell everyone who is interested how I experienced this so called "free enzyclopedia". Some of your adminstrators - I am sorry to say so - don't have a clue about the origin of enzyclopedias. I hope, this message reaches someone who is smart and understands, that if you take the responsibility to edit, you have to do it sensibly. The guys I ran into so far are power hungry, deleting whatever their censorship monitor thinks is right, without asking questions or asking "Why". And that is what sensible comes down to.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Datei:Philanthropisches_Coaching.png

Delete it now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ida Universum (talk • contribs) 12:52, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Unfortunately Commons is understaffed and we have queues more than half of year long. Please be patent. Meanwhile, you can speak about that to everyone, write about that in your blog and newspapers. Television coverage would be excellent. I'm serious, that will help us. Taivo (talk) 12:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
For the record: Ida Universum (talk · contribs) is violating the terms of use by not declaring her paid editing activities. She has no willingness to understand "notabiity" or other rules of Wiki and thus believes this is all an evil conspiracy against her client and his pseudoscience. -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 20:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vinod young.jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vinod young.jpg is about a "deleted file re-uploaded" case; therefore the file must be deleted without waiting for a week. IMHO. --E4024 (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done DR closed and file deleted. User blocked per {{Checkuserblock}} by Elcobbola. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:27, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Patrijarh srpski Porfirije.jpg

This photo (File:Patrijarh srpski Porfirije.jpg) is copyrighted photo from copyrighted website of Serbian Orthodox Church (source), but since it's protected i am not able to add copyvio tag, therefore admin assistance is needed. --Smooth O (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Template removal in photos with copyvio

Hello, a while ago I marked several photos with the copyvio template because they came from British Museum website with a CC-BY-NC license (for example this). The problem was that the user User talk:Jononmac46 undid the changes and despite being asked to do so, he has not restored the templates. To avoid editing wars, I think it would be best for a librarian to review the photos and, if necessary, delete them. The affected images are on User talk:Jononmac46's talk page. Thanks, --Elisardojm (talk) 17:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done SD tags promptly restored, then files deleted. User warned. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 21:51, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Ìch heiss Nat.. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 08:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

FYI and asking for assistance

Colleagues, I stumbled upon a group of spammers (for some reasons to me it doesn't look like a bot but like a group of paid editors) from Turkey. They use a few image patterns, the content of the images and descs differs even if they look similar. Patterns: a) sheet, b) logo c) inscription, d) plate-like logo, e) collage. This search shows 296 hits and may contain some false positives. I indeffed abt 12 accounts but there are way more, it's past midnight and my eyes are asking for some rest... Thanks, Achim (talk) 23:48, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

I think I was the first to notice these. (See above Mass DR.) They discovered Commons as a platform to publicise commercial products. I hope it will not become a lasting headache. E4024 (talk) 00:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Make a search with "satin al" (buy in TR) and rapidly you find files like File:Ucuz-takipci-satin-al.jpg or File:Takipci Satin Al.jpg. --E4024 (talk) 00:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
File:Pubg hile satın al.png, File:Youtubeizlenmesatinal.jpg and several others. E4024 (talk) 00:18, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I also find (indeed I found the above group this way) files like File:Gappay.png making searches for "uncategorized Turkish". That is another bridgehead to find such files. E4024 (talk) 00:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
See also: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ankara PST.jpg. E4024 (talk) 01:12, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
I've also noticed this spam before. I've tagged all remaining images from blocked accounts for speedy deletion and added File:ManDeodorantSpray.jpg. This is also not the first mass spamming that I've encountered on Commons. Please see this notice from December. Johnj1995 (talk) 19:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done, 300 files are deleted, 54 accounts are blocked. Thanks to all helping volunteers! Achim (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

File:Zoo Rostock Übersichtsplan.jpg

Hi, please delete the file version Feb. 4 as it is a copyvio and not covered by freedom of panorama. Thx, XenonX3 (talk) 15:05, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --Krd 15:11, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Can someone delete this image?

File:Privilege Escalation Diagram.jpg

It is largely an embarrassment for me and a low quality image that does not serve a good purpose and from my early days on Wikimedia Commons. I was fourteen at the time and did not even know what I was thinking when uploading this image. Aasim 22:26, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Nevertheless, your image is used on the Defence Intelligence Blog[129] :-) --Túrelio (talk) 22:31, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
It has been replaced by a SVG so I would support a courtesy deletion Gbawden (talk) 09:39, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. I deleted the file as courtesy. Taivo (talk) 11:51, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
Lea faka-Tonga: Awesome Aasim
While I agree with the deletion - the SVG version is more useful as an educational tool - there is something charming about a hand-written message. It may be older than your father, but there's a charming Fortran-tutorial book from the 1970s called A FORTRAN Coloring Book (Kaufman, Roger, M.I.T. Press, 1978). This was done in the days before "desktop publishing." The entire thing is hand-written (NOT "typeset in a hand-written font" but actually hand-written), with hand-drawn illustrations. It's very charming and, for its time, a good tutorial on the Fortran (then called FORTRAN) programming language. Several other "coloring book"-style tutorials were later written, some are now available for free as PDFs.[130] Davidwr (talk) 14:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)
There's something charming in any historical document. The file I deleted was not a historical document. Taivo (talk) 11:21, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I want to be an administrator

Can you give me step by step process of the request admin process or just guide me thru the admin process please and thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LilBigBrains (talk • contribs) 23:27, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

@LilBigBrains: You can find the info at Commons:Administrators, but I'll let you know now, admin privileges are generally only given to users with a long history of contributions. You can do an awful lot without admin powers. --IagoQnsi (talk) 23:47, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 Nothing to do. --Achim (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I have requested to be an bureaucrat

I have requested to be an bureaucrat and made a subpage what do I do next please and thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by LilBigBrains (talk • contribs) 00:48, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

@LilBigBrains: See my message on your talk page for advice. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 01:04, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 Nothing to do. --Achim (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Relgen.js/i18n/sl

Hello. I have translated MediaWiki:Relgen.js/text to Slovene language (at MediaWiki:Relgen.js/i18n/sl). Could someone knowledgeable please check whether it works fine and remedy any possible syntax errors? Thank you a lot. (pinging FDMS4 though I don't know if he is still active) --TadejM (t/p) 04:37, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 Comment This is redundant because only administrators can edit files in MediaWiki namespace: Help:Namespaces. Also I believe that content model for the page should be changed to JavaScript. --jdx Re: 06:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, Jdx. I have removed the redundant protection, but can't edit the content model since the message "You do not have permission to edit this JavaScript page because it may affect all visitors" appears.

I would kindly ask you or whoever has the appropriate permissions to change the content model as required. --TadejM (t/p) 12:00, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Advertisement?

Is it alright to tag one's contributions like this, 

|Author=Ralf Roletschek (talk) - Fahrradtechnik auf fahrradmonteur.de

i.e. including a weblink to a private webpage? I'm also curious about the license conditions for this user's contributions and how useful it is for Commons to include them. Note also that the German explanation of conditions for re-use seem to be incomparable with CC-BY-NC-ND. Rießler (talk) 10:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

It's fine to include a photographer's website in an attribution. That's not considered spamming on Commons, and we should not bias norms against photographers who make the effort to transparently create an account.
The extra conditions are not meaningful on Commons, and the templates or rubric that claims otherwise ought to be removed both to be fair on reusers and to be fair on Ralf, who may be under the mistaken impression that they are protecting their moral rights, when in practice all of this text can, and probably should, be ignored by reusers.
@Ralf Roletschek: as a courtesy. --Fæ (talk) 10:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Wie oft soll das noch durchgekaut werden? Ich spreche kein Englisch. --Ralf Roletschek 10:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Checkuser

I have created a subpage for my checkuser request now how do I paste it to the checkuser request page??? 𝓛𝓲𝓵𝓑𝓲𝓰𝓑𝓻𝓪𝓲𝓷𝓼 (talk) 16:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC) LilBigBrains

Would you mind learning how to sign your talk first, please? --E4024 (talk) 16:08, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

 Nothing to do. --Achim (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Merge files for India location map

I simplified layering for File:India location map.svg (no redundant nested layers inside groups like there is now) and merged all international provinces/subdivisions in the other countries layer into a single path and reduced the document size to ~1.3 MB. No changes were made to boundaries or disputed areas. This file, for obvious reasons, is protected so I can't upload the changes directly to the file. I uploaded this reduced version here. Can some admin merge the changes I want to make to the India location map in some way? C1MM (talk) 16:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible someone can help me out here? C1MM (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Please close a DR

Please close Commons:Deletion requests/File:Julien Chesneau.png ASAP; the DR is being vandalised. E4024 (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done By AntiCompositeNumber Gbawden (talk) 11:50, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

With regards to this

I'm going to return in a year. -- Lofty abyss 18:17, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

DR close request

Hi, Could an admin close Commons:Deletion requests/File:055 (2) - Flickr - secret coach park.jpg as it's been opened since August 2020, If the DR's apart of backlogs then I have no objections to it staying as is, Just assumed it's been long forgotten about, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 18:41, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks Ymblanter greatly appreciated :). –Davey2010Talk 20:00, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

FoP files deletion request

Hi, could somebody look at my request here? Thank you. dwf² ✉ 07:00, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Delete photo from File history

Hi! On the page https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:M%C3%A8re_Myriam.jpg, I replaced the photo I had uploaded because I did not have the author's permission to upload the first photo, only the next one, the one I replaced on February 10. So it is necessary to delete the first photo, uploaded on February 07: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/3/3b/20210210141026%21M%C3%A8re_Myriam.jpg As soon as I realized this, I changed the photo and wrote that I did not have permission for the first photo. I thought it was going to disappear, but I see it is still in the history of Wikipedia Commons. For the photo that I uploaded on 02/10/2021 to replace the previous one, I have the author's permission. Please quickly delete the one from 02/07/2021. Thanks! Dandavy (talk) 11:03, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Dandavy, the second upload is a crop of the first. Cropping doesn't constitute a new copyright. --Achim (talk) 12:24, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
@Achim55: The author of the photo has only given permission for the portrait (close-up), not for the wider shot. I made a mistake while uploading the first one. It is necessary to delete the first one because it is an infringement of copyright. --Dandavy (talk) 13:50, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Revision deleted. However, author's permission is needed (see COM:OTRS). --Achim (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Achim55: Thanks! --Dandavy (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Could this image be speedy deleted

I was supposed to speedy this image and accidentally created a DR instead: DR. It's not super urgent but it's some kid who possibly uploaded an image of themselves or someone else and also tried to create an article with it. -kyykaarme (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism-only account User:Tarik289

User:Tarik289 appeared shorty after my categorization cleanup of irredentist & fictional flags and maps, which obviously irked pan-Turkist community of users. His actions can be summarized as:

--Orijentolog (talk) 18:40, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done User blocked. No warnings needed as this is an continuation of the same behaviour from English Wikipedia and they should know better (Please see Special:CentralAuth/Tarik289). Furthermore, these (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) are unacceptable and are clearly acts of vandalism and/or disruptive editing. The user is not here to contribute in a constructive manner. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 19:44, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Complete an edit request on India location map

Hi, I have made changes to the India location map (this was mainly merging all external country subdivisions into a single path and reducing file size to ~1.3 mB). I put an earlier request for admins to merge the files File:India location map simplified.svg and File:India location map.svg as was done previously here. As I am not an admin and this file is admin-protected I can't make these changes. Response has been nill on talk page of the file itself and here on this noticeboard. Can one of you make the change instead? NOTE: This edit did not change India's boundaries at all. C1MM (talk) 07:30, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Ships by name (flat list)

The following discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.

@Themightyquill: . Why did you move Category:Ships by name to a new name Category:Ships by name (flat list), without consensus. This needs to be reversed by a different Administrator. Meanwhile you should resign as an Administrator over this issue. Broichmore (talk) 16:07, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

@Themightyquill: . On this question, you took it upon yourself to resolve a problem that only you, saw as being one. The fact that people were leaving singular images in the category Ships by name, when you preferred that it should only hold categories.
It was explained, by many, that the solution was to put a note at the top of the category explaining not to do it. The note being: This category should only contain other categories. For it to work a new cat was required, along the lines of singular images of ships without a specific category by name so people had a place to put park them.
Unhappy with that, you proposed to create a new category, called Category:Ships by name (flat list), this would magically do the job where the other failed. Only it (predictably) didn't, so it too has to have a note at the top saying: This category should only contain other categories.
So now we have two cats doing exactly the same job. You were told this.
It was explained at the time that well designed categories, resolve problems, they don't create them. This Ships by name (flat list) is a poorly designed cat, a sink hole of effort. You were told this.
You also (against consensus) made Category:Ships by name (flat list) a hidden category, which for a commonly used and referred to cat, was, and is, a ridiculous notion. Hidden categories by definition are not commonly referred to, they are admin only places, of no ongoing interest, and not meant to be seen. Places of no access in other words. This is a used category. You were told this.
It was explained to you that Ships by name would continue to be used in the same old way, and that all of the above would only create additional house keeping and continual revisiting. You were told this, would happen. So it has been the case in continual abundance over the last two years.
People who specialize in the ships area and who are more expert than you, told you this. You dynamically chose to overrule that.
You blatantly proceeded with this, for a cheap stat boost and power grab.
This nonsense needs to be reversed by a different Administrator. Meanwhile you should resign as an Administrator over this issue. You need to resign because of ignoring consensus and gaming the system.
The rules of engagement are for all to follow; Admins are not exempt. Broichmore (talk) 17:17, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Broichmore in the past they insulted me. Even the English dictionary I linked wrote it was an insult. Nothing happened to them. Regrettably... Never worry, most of our admins do an excellent work to be acknowledged and appreciated. Good luck. --E4024 (talk) 15:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

@Themightyquill: . What reasons do you have for ignoring my question. I see your only too fast enough to pontificate in the Commons:Universal Code of Conduct consultation Broichmore (talk) 13:03, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Silence here , is a deafening admission of guilt, but I don't see any resignation. Does anyone here want to defend 1). Why Ships Ships by name (flat list) is a hidden cat, or 2.) why lengthening its name makes it better than the original Ships by name? Broichmore (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Closing CfDs is, in my opinion, among the most difficult tasks available to Commons admins. Cases are rarely as clear-cut as DRs, and often it is a matter of choosing the lesser evil among imperfect choices. Closure often also involves a substantial workload to implement. TMQ is an experienced CfD closer, and one of the very few admins working to reduce the CfD backlog. Starting a second CfD specifically to allow further discussion of the move was a reasonable gesture, and hardly an indication of any kind of power grab.

Broichmore, there are appropriate ways to respond to a category move that you disagree with, like asking an uninvolved admin to review the close. I would like to note that the discussion was closed two and a half years ago, and that you did not participate in that initial discussion. Making baseless accusations and demanding their resignation is not an appropriate response. You are an experienced Commons contributor; I expect far better of you than hounding another editor, and I will not tolerate you continuing to do so. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

The above discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.

Commons Delinker bot seems to be dead for a long time now

Hello fellow admins!

I may not be up to date with the community discussions here, but by skimming through various (talk)pages I had to notice that:

Could someone enlighten me what's the status of affairs here? If the bot needs fixing then please nudge someone who can, or tell us if you need help. If the bot is unfixable there is a tremendous task of working down the backlog and remove it from the process altogether until a replacement is created. What we have now is simply harmful: people expect renames/delinks to happen magically while there is no mana in the magic box. Any help or suggestions are appreciated! Thanks! --grin ✎ 11:12, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

@Grin: I have never gotten a response from Magnus. He edited Wikidata 3 hours ago.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 11:43, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Ha was contacted on dewp as well before his last edits, no response. I can imagine various reasons why he don't or can't respond so this is not about Magnus: I would very much like the bot to finish its tasks one way or another. --grin ✎ 12:09, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@Grin: So would I.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:20, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
I spent multiple hours on this yet but i am unable to find the cause, there is a issue with sql but the executed SQL seems fine to me, strange! The bot was coded by Magnus Manske, maybe Magnus has an idea how to fix this. @Grin: I can grant you access to delinker on toolsforge if you like. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:13, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: Regardless of how I despise php in general if there is really nobody else stepping in then please contact me on gmail using account grinapo and I'll run manual tests to see the error. (I can't promise to do it all the time, but I consider this problem pretty grave to spend some time on it.) Until then a question: the deployed code is exactly the same as the one in the repository? --grin ✎ 19:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: The bot last removed replace commands in this edit 15:21, 3 November 2020 (UTC). Is the wikitext "reason=[[COM:Duplicate|Duplicate]]: Exact or scaled-down duplicate: [[:File:Kassaman instrumental.ogg]]" in the following edit allowed? {{Universal replace}} is undocumented.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:44, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
How much time and effort does it take for Commons (or WMF) to find someone who is willing, capable, and has enough time, to take care of all the random technical debt here?
I can fix this one last time, but I'd rather take this opportunity to train someone who will become capable, than to 'just fix this' myself. I have found new interests and duties, so I don't foresee myself returning to this project, and I cannot further Common's dependence on myself. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 22:57, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
@Zhuyifei1999: apologies; you are still listen on the bot's page as a contact person, that's why you were pinged. If you dislike doing that then just don't: I do not think anyone would be happy to force you to spend your own time on something you don't want to. Sorry for the ping, anyway. I'll try to check the code with Steinsplitter. --grin ✎ 19:04, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm not blaming you to ping me. I'm fine with pings, just that whether I read or respond is dependent on how bad the situation is. Only responded to this one because it has been going on for months.
Anyways, glad to know you are going to take care of it. I approved your LDAP. lmk if you need help. I'm on Freenode IRC as 'zhuyifei1999_' --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 22:31, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
I have succeeded to enter the toolsforge and I'm looking at the extreme pile of errors. I have to move cautiously but I'll try to put it in working shape. -- grin ✎ 11:43, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
The bot is alive under strict human supervision. Progressing through a huge amount of edits now. I think I have almost all the bugs found, but I'd need some input from the people involved to see how to resolve them since some of those are locgical bugs (or bugs in the mediawiki-api upstream the bot uses). Thanks for the help and patience. ;-) --grin ✎ 18:49, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Can I suggest someone start a request at Commons:Bots/Work requests? I don't see why it's necessary for us to have a single bot for this task or at the very least, we should just request someone else consider doing what they can with whatever portion of the work there is. I notice that Magnus himself seems to have taken over the bot after someone else started it. If it is possible to do this manually (or semi-manually with AWB), I'll try to help. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:09, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Would reactivating the bot solve this? Thank you for your bot time. Lotje (talk) 16:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
If there was an active replacement request then possibly yes. I won't check the files now, spent my day on the bot and I have a lot to do otherwise. :-) --grin ✎ 18:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
I meant ping @Lotje: too ;) --grin ✎ 18:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

 Comment To prevent fellow admins to go berserk due to the updates here the further updates go to User_talk:CommonsDelinker#Resurrecting. :-) The bot its running in manual mode, right now with disabled removals (only replacement is done), when it finishes processing the huge amount of entries I'll re-run for replacements, then restart with removals. Then re-set the automatic job running. The figure out how to make the changes I've made permanent. :-| --grin ✎ 09:45, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:FB_IMG_Muhammad_Rizwan.jpg

Can anyone close this DR as clear reason is given now.119.160.118.179 17:47, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 01:01, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Request for closing this Deletion request.

The user who nominated this file: File:直-jorder.gif, nominated because he wanted to deleted it, to upload a new one. But the catch is that he wanted to upload it from a site with copyrighted images(kakijun.jp).

Well, the discussion is now resolved, or at least there is no point on keeping it. So I request an admin to close that, here is the Deletion request. FanNihongo (talk) 01:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I kept the file. New version is uploaded and it is used in multiple projects. Taivo (talk) 10:33, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. FanNihongo (talk) 19:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Two-step renaming

Hi, could somebody swap over the names of these two images: File:Opinion polling for the 2021 Scottish Parliament election (constituency vote).svg and File:Opinion polling for the 2021 Scottish Parliament election (regional vote).svg. I uploaded them at the same time and must have mixed up the names. Thanks in advance, PinkPanda272 (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

PinkPanda272, it's easier if you use Upload a new version of this file and someone deletes the old versions afterwards. --Achim (talk) 15:12, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Will do, thanks for the advice. PinkPanda272 (talk) 15:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done revdel. --Achim (talk) 15:34, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Erroneous deletion

File:Dyrchafaf fy Llygaid - Pembrokeshire Youth Choir.ogg was deleted in January 2019 under section 7 of Commons:Deletion requests/SAIN audio files on the basis that the composition was still in copyright (we have OTRS permission regarding the recording), but its author died in 1940, so more than 70 year ago. It appears to have been included in that section in error. The deleting admin, User:Majora, has not edited for almost a year. User:Jason.nlw was the uploader and knows the background. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:24, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Achim (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cartas de amatarael.jpg

Can one of you kindly close Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cartas de amatarael.jpg? There is disruption on the page. --E4024 (talk) 14:11, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

infringement of copyright - inactivity of the editors or administrators

- File:EU41 2.jpg - For a month now, this photo has not been removed despite attention to copyright infringement. This photo has not permission, so it should delete in 7 days after nomination. This is scandal that an infringing photo is visible almost one month after the permission. This photo is from book ‘Wąbrzeska Kolejka Powiatowa’ by Robert Prusakowski. This is not own work. The person who inserted the photo lied, claiming to be the copyright owner. Copyright belongs doubtless to author of the book i.e. Robert Prusakowski. I do not understand why no one effective fights manifestations of violating author's rights. I am deeply disappointed in this. --Mosomortymi (talk) 16:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Ranting at people who take their spare time for volunteering here is a bit inappropriate, isn't it? --Achim (talk) 17:01, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done: Mosomortymi, I deleted the file as copyvio, even if you are using more than one account... --Achim (talk) 17:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Deletion via draw of sources

Not only the graphics were deleted, but as well as the sources of these nazi-organizations existed in Pirna. History is denied here. There was also no coordination, but between administrators. There was one for and one against. I was warning to educate against the nazi regime and used the template for it.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Assumed_Pirna_Third_Reich_flags


--SamsonBVB (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Please follow the instructions at Commons:Undeletion requests if you believe the files should be undeleted. Thuresson (talk) 13:29, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

DR needing close

Please can someone review and close Commons:Deletion requests/File:Captain Tom mural on North Baileygate, Pontefract (21st June 2020).jpg Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Nat. -- CptViraj (talk) 05:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Could an Admin revdel the original upload of File:Winton 2021.jpg that has a copyrighted logo in it (per COM:TOO Australia)? Bidgee (talk) 01:27, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --Krd 06:53, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Stale Deletion Requests

I would be grateful if any administrators can help with closing the following 2 stale deletion requests (posted half a year ago) regarding bad sources:

Many thanks.廣九直通車 (talk) 03:06, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Nat. -- CptViraj (talk) 05:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

IPBE for User:Baomi

There was no specific section for this, but Jeff G. told me to go here so here it goes. I would like to request the IP block exemption right for Baomi, an experienced uploader that can't edit Wikimedia Commons (as well as other Wikimedia wiki's like the English-language Wikipedia) due to the Great Firewall of China. I am sure that this user is a great addition (back) to Wikimedia Commons and endorse that they should have the ability to edit here again, despite the difficult political situation currently present in the People's Republic of China (Mainland China). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 18:07, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Moved here from COM:RFR as that page doesn't have section for IPBE and I've seen IPBE requests being handled here. -- CptViraj (talk) 00:55, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Is it really needed? Baomi has made only 20 edits since January 2020 and his last upload is 11½ months old. Taivo (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
@Taivo: , he can't edit Wikimedia Commons because of an IP block, he can only access this website through a VPN so he can't edit here. This user right would allow him to return. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚) 10:29, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done, I don't see any red flags. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
@CptViraj: Thank you! Would it make sense to have an IPBE section at COM:RFR or to indicate there that IPBE requests should be handled here?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:39, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Adding new section on RFR will require community discussion. This page isn't the only venue where you can request IPBE, I've seen admins granting IPBE on request here, on their TP, on private request to an admin, on an OTRS request, so currently you just need to convince an admin to give you IPBE. -- CptViraj (talk) 13:50, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
@CptViraj: Please see COM:VPP#Add an IPBE section to COM:RFR.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 06:41, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Rename File:Flag of the Crimean ASSR (1939) copy.svg to File:Flag of the Crimean ASSR (1939).svg

Please rename File:Flag of the Crimean ASSR (1939) copy.svg to File:Flag of the Crimean ASSR (1939).svg. --Лобачев Владимир (talk) 07:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 08:03, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Correcting protected page description

Hi! The Hungarian description at File:Yasaka-dori early morning with street lanterns and the Tower of Yasaka (Hokan-ji Temple), Kyoto, Japan.jpg is wrong in spelling (transcription of Hepburn to Hungarian per hu:WP:JAPÁN), please help to correct to {{hu|A Jaszaka-dóri kora reggel, utcai lámpákkal és a Jaszaka-toronnyal. Kiotó fontos kulturális öröksége, a Hókan-dzsi egy 46 méter magas, ötemeletes, cseréptetős pagoda, amelyet a 6. században alapítottak (Hókan-dzsi templom, 388 Jaszaka Kamimacsi, Higasijama-ku, [[:hu:Kiotó|Kiotó]], [[:hu:Japán|Japán]])}} Thank you in advance. Xia (talk) 07:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Achim (talk) 14:51, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

File:Egin Lee.jpg

Hello, can an administrator please delete the image version of 10:40, 16 February 2021: there is no sufficient source information given for this photograph being under a free license. Best regards, Mosbatho (talk) 13:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: Deleted as copyvio, was most likely from http://www.kugou.com/singer/84760.html. --Achim (talk) 14:45, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! --Mosbatho (talk) 20:25, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Cannot create category page

.*(mattia|vlad|morleo)[^\/]*(mattia|vlad|morleo).* @Category:Vladimir Vladimirovich Trubetskoy Wolcott (talk) 14:01, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: Name whitelisted. --Achim (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Wolcott (talk) 02:31, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Sprechen Sie Deutsch?

Too long time here; German speaking admins? --E4024 (talk) 19:40, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --Didym (talk) 19:44, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

I request the deletion of these images

⻖-order.gif(its nomination page)
⻏-order.gif(its nomination page)
⺦-order.gif(its nomination page)
Those three images were nominated for the same reason and all those three ended up in deletion, so therefore I request an admin to delete those images. FanNihongo (talk) 23:18, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Error in image name and description of current English DYK - File:Bilateral pleural effusions turning out to be urinothorax.png

File:Bilateral pleural effusions turning out to be urinothorax.png is the current image used in the DYK section of the English wiki. The image name and caption on the Commons page is incorrect, this is a unilateral right-sided pleural effusion. This is supported by the original source of the image which states fig1: Case 1: chest radiograph showing pleural effusion on the right side. Link to original paper. I suggest the image is moved to a more suitable name and the caption is changed to:

Right sided pleural effusion caused by urinothorax

I have changed the UK article and made a note on the DYK front page that there is an error, but cannot make changes while protected here. It seems to me it would be best to change the caption ASAP, but perhaps move to a more suitable name once off the front page. Thanks, Spaully (talk) 13:04, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

Split of File:Florian Jelinek.jpg into two separate files

I would like to inquire whether it would be possible to split the two versions of the image File:Florian Jelinek.jpg into two files (27 January 2012 as File:Florian Jelinek.jpg; 14 December 2013 as File:Chaosflo44.jpg) while maintaining their upload and version history.

The images differ fundamentally from each other and are both useful to illustrate this article about the YouTuber Chaosflo44 in the German Wikipedia. Since they were both uploaded by Chaosflo44 (talk) while retaining CC-BY-SA-3.0, such a division should be permitted.

Best regards, --Rossel44 (talk) 22:58, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

@Rossel44: You can add {{Split}} to the file page, which will add it to the queue. Cheers, Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:06, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Rossel44 (talk) 23:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

The uploader is blocked

But some DRs are still open. Thanks for your time. --E4024 (talk) 01:11, 10 March 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 06:34, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, admin. One month is too long for this other DR. Can one of you admins please close it? Thx. --E4024 (talk) 13:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. I kept it, because the file is still used. Taivo (talk) 08:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

I would like to update the logo on our page - can I delete the old file?

Hi, I would like to update the logo on this site: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weltrat_f%C3%BCr_Sportwissenschaft_und_Leibes-/K%C3%B6rpererziehung I am authorised to make this change. Is it possible to replace the old logo image file with the new one, and what copyright options can I chose from? Thank you Maria — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mgoetzel (talk • contribs) 18:22, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

The file de:Datei:ICSSPE Logo.svg is not stored on Commons, so here is the wrong place in the moment. In my opinion it could be transferred to Commons, though, because it consists only of text and simple geometric shapes. Nevertheless, do not delete the existing file, but it could be renamed. The logo I find on the organisation website (direct link to PNG image) contains a darker blue tone, is this the change, Maria? Do you have it in SVG format? (On the other hand, should anyway be a simple color change on the old version.) — Speravir – 21:53, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
The file is correctly marked in de.wiki as "Do not transfer the file into Commons". In my opinion the file is not made from only simple geometrical figures and is copyrightable. Taivo (talk) 08:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
Taivo, from my experience this textbox is almost by default added to local files, or at least has been in the past (not saying that every image with this message was actually eligible for Commons). — Speravir – 22:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Speravir Taivo, thank you both. Yes, the logo was updated and all that changed are the colours. I have the new logo file as jpg or png file.I don't think it can be transferred to Commons, as it is indeed with copyright. Could you please help and advise, how to update it on our page? I am happy to leave the old logo and add the new with a comment from when till what point in time each logo was used by our organisation. For me it is important, that we show the current logo. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.206.224.90 (talk) 10:03, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive_83&oldid=543586812"