Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 86

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

Duplicate files but with different format

The "File:Cyclone Damien at peak intensity on February 8.png" is an identical but with much less resolution of "File:Damien 2020-02-08 0619Z.jpg". The uploader is new and thought he was uploading it from English Wikipedia to Commons, never noticing it was already there. The "png" file should not therefore be in Commons and should be deleted. However, since the two images are not identical in format, png vs jpg, I cannot flag the png using {{Duplicate}} for removal. Should I use {{Speedydelete}}?

Pierre cb (talk) 23:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Dr close & block request

Hi, Could an admin kindly close all DRs done by User:62.216.207.224 and maybe block them please as I can only assume they're either trolling or are a sock of someone. The DRs all say "COM is no repository for cute cat pictures ", Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:57, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

I blocked the IP for a week. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

block request

Hi, Could an admin please block Lilzlulz who's only intent here is to troll. They've done nothing productive since being here and very unlikely to be productive any time this century, Thanks. –Davey2010Talk 20:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

  • Yeah no I don't warn blatant trolls, You're more than welcome to waste your time but I'm not wasting mine. As stated they've done nothing but troll in the 2-3 years of being here. Tell me one good or productive thing they've done here and I will withdraw this request. –Davey2010Talk 21:33, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I simply don't agree with you that their only intent here is to troll. It seems they uploaded a photo of themselves a while ago and now regret it, and are now being a bit too persistent in their demand to take it down. This is very different from someone who came here with ill intentions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:40, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I misread their userpage deletion rationale which was my main reason for being here, the second reasoning being "lulz" is more a troll-y thing than anything and third being they admitted here the image in question is a copyvio although that could be an attempt to have it deleted.
Fair enough, I personally believe they're just trolling but maybe not so have struck the request, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
(Unstruck as per Эlcobbola below. –Davey2010Talk 22:05, 22 July 2021 (UTC))
Sure looks like trolling to me. Эlcobbola talk 21:59, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Can someone please block this person either for a day or indenfitely as they're now edit warring and they keep inserting a black screen over their image and the image in question is being used everywhere, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:04, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks User:King of Hearts very much appreciated, Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 00:41, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Three days? Smack on wrist for serial disruptor. But let's see if it resumes. Rodhullandemu (talk) 11:30, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Account that has posted fake pictures

Hi all, sorry I'm not too familiar with how Commons works, so I don't know if this is the best place for this, but: All the images uploaded by this user are fake. They claim to be images from various times in the early 20th century in China, but they're images of a Hong Kong drag artist taken in modern times. You can see his work on his instagram here. I've already removed the images from all articles on the English Wikipedia, where they were masquerading as genuine historical images, but I'm wondering if anything can be done here to stop them being misused this way in the future. Heimstern (talk) 11:08, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

@Heimstern: Nominate the images concerened for speedy or regular deletion as copyright violations, if possible linking to the actual image that is copied and our deletion process will remove it so it cannot be used again Gbawden (talk) 14:45, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
@Heimstern and Gbawden: I did that and also warned the user. Note that Google found most of the photos on his website.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:58, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

OTRS page moves

Can some admin please take a look at COM:OTRSN#Commons:OTRS and perhaps make any necessary page moves? COM:OTRS recently was renamed as COM:VRT and it looks like some related pages might have not been moved in accordance with the name change. It probably would be a good idea for the naming of relevant pages to be consistent not only with other related pages but also with the in-body use of VRT in the various pages so as to avoid any confusion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:55, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

 Info Please see Commons:Translators'_noticeboard#OTRS_to_VRTS_renaming_process 4nn1l2 (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the link 4nn1l2. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:31, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Ailene29

User Ailene29 uploads tons of images of thumb size (less than 90k), including photos and claim to be the owner. The quality and the fact that there is no META leads me to think they are captures from website of unknown copyright. Ailene29 has been warned and a large number of his/her uploads have been deleted. Could an administrator keep an eye on this user to see if it needs only a warning or to be blocked.

Pierre cb (talk) 00:08, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done All uploads are obvious copyvios. I've blocked as NOTHERE/CIR. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:37, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Bahnfan44789

passed away in October 2019, Source. Regards Kallewirsch (talk) 07:34, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Userpage protected, name added to Commons:Deceased contributors 4nn1l2 (talk) 07:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

User:Tm

Aavindraa (talk) 02:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The advice in Commons:Talk page guidelines against removing comments by others was added in 2016 without any apparent consensus or discussion as far as I can see on the talk page.
It appears to be unreasonable advice and probably should be removed from the guideline to avoid this sort of misunderstanding. If someone wishes to blank comments or indeed notices by others on their user talk page, they are free to do so without threat of sysop action as a potential consequence. It can be presumed that the user has read what they are blanking, and anyone else can examine the talk page history.
If you wish to establish a consensus for the way these categories are linked, then do that, possibly by a discussion on the VP. You don't need to agree it with Tm. --Fæ (talk) 03:07, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply. I didn't know that deleting other users' comments is considered acceptable behavior. Since I don't want to COM:Edit war with Tm, what is the VP? Aavindraa (talk) 03:16, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
I wouldn't say it's acceptable behavior. It's just that there are no policies prohibiting the removal of other users' messages on their talk page. pandakekok9 03:21, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
@Aavindraa: the VP is Commons:Village Pump, a place for centralized discussion.  Mysterymanblue  19:15, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 Comment First thing there is no "clear violation of en:WP:TPO" as this is Wikimedia Commons and not english wikipedia and Commons:Talk page guidelines is a guideline, i.e. a advice, not policy and there is nothing that sets in stone that it is forbidden to delete an message on ones talk page, specially a one that accuses me of vandalism with my "sense of humour" and edit wars, when such things are completly false.
Second, as it seems you know how to look at page historic you would see that Historiograf did not add this link, but was Ihimutefu that added the link to Category:Gender-role reversals or women in power. Third Commons is not Wikipedia so i dont see why a second link to en:Gender bias on Wikipedia, in particular when these role reversal is similar in both cases, for example and as a curiosity if there is not connection, what is doing File:A woman defends her castle.jpg (categorized under Category:Gender-role reversals or women in power) ​in in the italian article of "World upside down"? Tm (talk)
Blanking TP messages isn’t prohibited on enWP either; the only exception there I can think of offhand is for declined block appeals (while the block is in effect). Personally I would consider the silent removal of a personal message slightly rude (that of a template, not so much) but nothing to get worked up about in any case.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for actually replying in a space where I can comment. Now let me reply to your comment made inside of a change edit: " this edit is not a categorization as you claim... ". This is a misinterpretation. You are now en:WP:Cherrypicking a page on Italian Wikipedia lacking citations/references to support this illegitimate connection, which is ironic considering you just derided me for linking to English Wikipedia policy pages. Also (not that it really matters) the edit made by Ihimutefu was just to use Template:See also category. Historiograf originally had it on the page, if you check the history. Aavindraa (talk) 03:30, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Note that to avoid potential misunderstanding, I have slightly amended the guideline and this is discussed at Commons_talk:Talk_page_guidelines#Blanking_"personal_messages"_without_replying. This is an issue of making the guideline reflect this project's norms, not a means to resolve this thread. --Fæ (talk) 03:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Filter 153 (cross-wiki uploads)

Almost all the reports at Commons talk:Abuse filter are due to filter 153 (cross-wiki uploads), usually resulting in the same response from Jeff explaining what the filter does and how they can get around it. The warning the filter provides (MediaWiki:abusefilter-warning-cwuploads) is not very descriptive. Can it maybe be changed to something better, in particular to direct the user to the local Special:UploadWizard? ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 08:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I suppose you don't want to give advice on how to bypass the filter in an easy way. The advice should be about how to remove from your upload the concerns that justify the filter in the first place. What are the false positives like? How can they be distinguished from the positives you do want to stop? How can a user show their upload is indeed not one you want to stop? –LPfi (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
The filter just stops crosswiki uploads. Presumably if the person follows the upload wizard they'll be told about licensing issues, have to select a license, and at that point they'll stop or resolve the issue. We're already giving advice on how to bypass the filter, see Commons_talk:Abuse_filter or any of the archives (Commons talk:Abuse filter/Archive 2021/07, Commons talk:Abuse filter/Archive 2021/06, Commons talk:Abuse filter/Archive 2021/05, etc.), plus the filter is public. It's just clogging up space and discouraging edits with a vague message, not actually preventing abuse. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Request to restore user talk page access for User talk:Alexis Jazz

Alexis Jazz is a long-term and very high-volume contributor to Commons. They were blocked on 24 March 2020 by Trijnstel based on check user information showing misuse of multiple accounts. At the time the outcome of an undiscussed block was controversial, with a long post-block discussion at User_talk:Alexis_Jazz#blocked with many views expressed, including multiple requests to unblock their account and some of those views to unblock posted by experienced Commons administrators and a global sysop.

This thread is not an unblock request, but a request to restore user talk page access so that Alexis Jazz has the opportunity after 489 days of being blocked on this project, to be able to discuss their block and what conditions might be acceptable to an unblocking administrator for them to resume making positive contributions to this project. Magog the Ogre removed talk page access two days after the initial block, after an extended heated discussion about the block.

It is highly unusual to permanently block user talk page access for long term contributors unless there is very significant evidence of harassment or legal threats and based on a brief discussion at mw:User_talk:Fæ#Viewing_deleted_files where I suggested making a civil request on behalf of Alexis Jazz, it seems more than reasonable to grant access to discuss the block, enabling them to put forward constructive ideas on how this can be handled in a transparent and open discussion.

Thanks --Fæ (talk) 15:02, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

 Support A project that has no concept of forgiveness has no right to exist. Rodhullandemu (talk) 15:24, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 Support--- FitIndia Talk ✉ 16:39, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 Support - I'd go as far as to support Alexis being unblocked. Their talkpage should never have been revoked in the first place - why? - Because they clearly stated here "fine, I'm sorry. I'm done" so what does revoking their TP access 5 minutes later achieve ? ... Absolutely nothing. I'd also support banning Magog from further applying any revocations to Alexis' talkpage as they jumped on it twice to revoke tp access in 2 days in a row!. –Davey2010Talk 17:12, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Over a year is more than enough for them to learn that their Sheriff sock is a stupid idea. And I'm still not convinced that the block was necessary in the first place, so I support an unblock as well. Alexis didn't evade their block AFAIK, and has been a constructive user in multiple, other wikis. It is our loss if we don't allow them the chance to contribute again to Commons. pandakekok9 01:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Based on the concensus above I have changed the block settings to allow AlexiJazz to edit their own talk page Gbawden (talk) 06:48, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

File:Euceros-serricornis-male.jpg und File:Oxytorus-luridator-female.jpg

Liebe Admins,

bei den beiden im Betreff genannten Bildern, die ich hochgeladen habe, steht im Kommentar (unter Dateiversionen) folgender Satz: "Uploaded a work by Kees Zwakhals from Die Bilder wurden mir für WikiCommons geschickt with UploadWizard". Das gefällt dem Fotografen nicht. Ich würde folgendes vorschlagen: "Uploaded a work by Kees Zwakhals by Schönitzer using UploadWizard" Es wäre schön, wenn ihr das so oder anders ändern könntet. Danke, Klaus Schöntzer

@Schönitzer: Hi Klaus. Please sign your postings with 4 tildes. You can make this edit yourself - you don't need an admin to do it for you 06:57, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Repeatedly by this user, who uploads copyrighted material supposedly as their own. ǁ ǁǁǁ Chalk19 (talk) 05:26, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done I gave them a final warning - Per COM:BP they should at least be warned of an impending block. In future you can issue warnings like this yourself - I use the User Messages gadget. And if you bring an editor to AN please notify them of thee fact on their talk page Gbawden (talk) 06:53, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi:

My publisher is requesting that I get permissions for reprints directly from the photographer. How do I find the contact information for the photographers?

Thank you,

Mark C. Childs mchilds@unm.edu — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcchilds (talk • contribs) 19:04, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mcchilds: Hi, and welcome. Please see COM:REUSE. Which files are you trying to get permission for?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:16, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jeff G: Sebilj in Sarajevo at night by J. Budissin. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcchilds (talk • contribs) 19:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mcchilds: I guess you mean File:Sarajevo Sebilj at Night.JPG by J budissin. Syntax is important here. You have your choice of six free licenses, or you or your publisher can negotiate with the user for alternative licensing here in public or by using Special:EmailUser/J Budissin or "julian.nyca (at) lausitz.la" in German or Hornjoserbsce (Upper Sorbian).   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:57, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Jeff G: Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcchilds (talk • contribs) 20:21, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

@Mcchilds: You're welcome. Please sign your posts.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 21:47, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Reverse renaming

Hi:

I have renamed File:Multiple lenticular clouds.jpg to File:Multiple pannus clouds.jpg (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Multiple_lenticular_clouds.jpg&action=history). I realized now that I made a mistake, could an administrator reverse this action?

Pierre cb (talk) 13:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done MorganKevinJ(talk) 16:42, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Flashing imagery, needs to be deleted but several issues

Hey, there is a file with flashing lights that is also very popular that needs to be deleted, but I am worried that the normal deletion process is too slow for such a dangerous thing, and with the speedy delete I run the chance of accidentally exposing someone to this content who may have a bad reaction to it when reviewing deletion (photosensitive epilepsy) What is the most logical and straightforward course of action from here on in? Thanks so much in advance, and here is the link if you are interested comment added by Asdiapod (talk • contribs) 02:59, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

@Asdiapod: For me, it is jerky, but not flashing. Please try other browsers / platforms.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
as far as I understood, it is that animations that are moving too fast (with more than 3 images a second) or too long should be changed to movies when needed, so they can be stopped, because moving images may trigger seizures, cf. e.g. Accessibility - Animations. I wasn't aware of this, but even for people, who won't get a seizure, it may be considered distracting from the text, to have endless animations around that are unstoppable... --Aferghes (talk) 07:44, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: On pc it may not be as big of an issue due to size, but on mobile it is certainly greatly enlarged and it poses a very real threat, I'm so sorry but I must go now but whenever I get internet access again i'll be sure to come back here, and I will experiment with other browsers as well! comment added by Asdiapod (talk • contribs) 08:33, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Being honest I was expecting this to be a "in your face" thing ... Anyway Asdiapod I've viewed this on pc and mobile and both look fine and don't render any different, In terms of quality the gif is awful but I'm not getting any flashing from it...., Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:35, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Spammer

Please deal with extreme prejudice. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Renardfl --Palosirkka (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done - contribs is empty so presumably their edits have been revision deleted. –Davey2010Talk 20:37, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Questionable...

I don't know why, but this file, File:Jim Pyne and Heather Kozar married.jpg , it rubs me the wrong way. What wedding photographer would simply upload this celeb-shot onto a free platform? Drmies (talk) 14:43, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I can think of several reasons. The couple may have asked the photographer to publish the photo for Wikipedia. Or the photographer wants to show the world What beautiful images they can make. Perhaps more possibilities... Elly (talk) 07:34, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Do we need a model release? -M.nelson (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
Someone who wanted to use it in advertising would need a model release. AnonMoos (talk) 21:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

LTA

Need a quick block for the user who contributed File:Javelin olympics.jpg, and deletion. Look on en-wiki for details, if you like; it's worth running CU and blocking whatever you run into. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 15:47, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Elcobbola. --Achim (talk) 16:31, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Template:StanRadar

Should be nominated for deletion as clear license laundering case, b'cause this is a pirated website, which licenses content they are obviously not copyright holders of. Failed to add the appropriate deletion template by myself due to 'abuse filter'. Please anybody do this in my stead. --188.123.231.54 16:20, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Not in public domain

Sayan Sengupta 999 has uploaded File:Ditipriya Roy .jpg and File:Ditipriya Roy,Jul 2021.jpg that are not in public domain but copied/collected from her Instagram (https://www.instagram.com/roy_ditipriya) photographs and reels. These stands image copyright violations here. Thank you. Run n Fly (talk) 05:06, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Both files are deleted. Taivo (talk) 08:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

UNDEL of 1951–72 Philippine buildings

Hello. To all interested admins, can someone (or anyone) go through the undeletion requests (including those I filed) at Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests, regarding Philippine buildings of August 1951–72 which were recently accepted by consensus as OK for Commons (see COM:Philippines#Public domain exceptions for artistic works and the accompanying VPC discussion).

The relevant UNDEL requests begin at those of Philamlife Theater, and goes all the way to those of InterContinental Manila. Thank you. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:21, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism and personal attack user

Report Sinh tử hữu mệnh (talk · contribs) personal attack on me in en.wp and other wikis: Commons, es.wp, meta wiki, ru.wp, id.wp... Blocked infinitely in vi.wp. ⁂๖ۣۜJon ♥ ๖ۣۜDaenerys໖ 05:27, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

I left them a final warning. If this continues over here, the account will be blocked. De728631 (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Shared personal information

An IP account is inquiring about a person's personal details on Help Desk. Their question includes the names and address of the person they are looking for, and an email address (which they claim to be their own). This looks problematic to me. Renerpho (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2021 (UTC) The edit in question: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3AHelp_desk&type=revision&diff=578488069&oldid=578486885 Renerpho (talk) 20:45, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done @Renerpho: Thank you for pointing this out. I have revdeled the relevant edits and redacted the personal information. De728631 (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

User:InstitutodederechopenalUCLM

@InstitutodederechopenalUCLM: has uploaded a number of images today - (Uploads). A number of them - 6 or 8 - seem to be press clippings for which, presumably, InstitutodederechopenalUCLM is not the copyright holder / cannot licence. This calls into question, for me, whether the uploader has the capacity to licence any of the images uploaded; or whether they've instead uploaded a set of domain specific images irrespective of ownership. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:41, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

I deleted 6 newspaper clippings. Taivo (talk) 11:23, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Request for file history deletion

Dear admin,

I want to ask your assistance to hide all older file histories in File:Panduan berkontribusi konten di Wikimedia Commons; 2021.pdf, leaving the current revision to the public. The reason is the current one is already the final version and prevent others from using the previous version.

Thank you. All the best, Rachmat (WMID) (talk) 06:29, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

@Rachmat (WMID): That is an odd request. The current version will be what people use unless they specifically fetch another version. If they do that, they probably have good reason, such as telling about the file history. It is not in the spirit of free content to hinder such use, and I suppose such reverts should not be done unless there is some special reason to fear some specific misuse – which isn't much hampered by revision deletion, as a fake version can be created from scratch. –LPfi (talk) 07:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Commons has generally allowed courtesy deletion of the history of recent uploads in the past. I’m not seeing an issue here. Bidgee (talk) 07:14, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. The first versions qualified for speedy deletion as uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 10:09, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

SPAM

Spam:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/PatinaShoes&ilshowall=1

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/ShoesPatina&ilshowall=1

Thx. Lesless (talk) 14:20, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Both blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Deleting uploads Gbawden (talk) 14:29, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, COuld someone block Hungry and wanting a cigarette - They're evidently a sock of someone and are only here to troll, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:35, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks ACN you're help is greatly appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 10:53, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, Can an admin please block this delightful person and revdel their edit please, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 20:00, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

I have revdel'd the edit but I don't think a block is needed. That guy has been inactive for an hour. Please re-report if this continues though. De728631 (talk) 21:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Deletion Close Request for Potentially Flickr washed photos of Offline TV at Twitch Con 2018

Commons:Deletion requests/Potentially Flickr washed photos of Offline TV at Twitch Con 2018 has been open since 19 March 2021‎. Although I'm the only editor to mark my comment explicitly with a bolded delete, others in the discussion are in support of deletion, and now another editor has gone through and tagged the nominated files for speedy deletion as copyright violations. Can an admin review and and take appropriate action on this? Thanks, -- Whpq (talk) 20:44, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done —RP88 (talk) 21:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Translation required

​As mentioned there, a new FuzzyBot run is necessary after an error correction. I am completely unsure whether this will occur automatically, or whether it can be triggered manually to get sooner rid of the error. -- sarang♥사랑 07:33, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

@Sarang: ✓ Done --Minoraxtalk 07:37, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Please create

Template:Motd/2021-08-09 with

{{Motd filename|1=Canvas back duck diving.webm|2=2021|3=08|4=09}} .

thx. -- RZuo (talk) 09:57, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done --AFBorchert (talk) 10:23, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Admin help

Hi, Could an admin delete File:2 Weeks In Italy - A Cinematic Travel Film.webm and then move File:2 Weeks In Italy A Cinematic Travel Film.webm to the old name please?
Consensus at a DR was to mute the audio however I wasn't able to reupload but I have included time, data and original Commons uploader to the new file, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 21:13, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done — I deleted the temporarily restored file at File:2 Weeks In Italy - A Cinematic Travel Film.webm and moved File:2 Weeks In Italy A Cinematic Travel Film.webm (without redirect or replacement) to File:2 Weeks In Italy - A Cinematic Travel Film.webm. —RP88 (talk) 22:18, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks User:RP88, Your help is greatly appreciated, Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 22:21, 10 August 2021 (UTC)

Request for a new category

.*t(?:ee)?.?shirts? (printing|quilt|everywhere|design|online|(to|on|in) |buy).* @Category:T-shirts in Nigeria

Why is it not possible to create categories about T-shirts? Ove Raul (talk) 13:42, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ove Raul: What was the error message?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:02, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
@Jeff G., I pasted above the text string which the error message told me to post on this page. Here it is again: .*t(?:ee)?.?shirts? (printing|quilt|everywhere|design|online|(to|on|in) |buy).* @Category:T-shirts in Nigeria
@Ove Raul: So please tells us, what is the new category you would like to create and what exactly did you do to get this message? It should also be noted that Category:T-shirts in Nigeria does not exist, so you might want to create this page first as a subcategory of Category:T-shirts by location. De728631 (talk) 19:10, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
I just created Category:T-shirts in Japan for you, so I suppose the error message appeared when you tried to add a file to the non-existant Nigeria category? De728631 (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Jeff G. & De728631 - No one is able to create Category:T-shirts in Nigeria - It brings up the following message:
You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason:
The page title or edit you have tried to create cannot be created or edited by you at this time. It matches an entry on the local or global blacklists, used to prevent vandalism.
Instructions:
If you receive this message when you try to edit, create, or move an existing page:
Any administrator can create or move this page for you.
If the page you tried to edit or create is not a talk page, suggest your changes at its talk page and add {{Edit request}}. This will categorize the page into Category:Commons protected edit requests, which administrators regularly check.
If this does not work, please post a request at the Administrators' noticeboard.
You may also contact any administrator on their talk page or by e-mail.
Be sure to specify the exact title of the page you are trying to create or edit, and if it might be misunderstood (for example an article with an unusual name), consider explaining briefly what you want to do.
If you wrote any text, save it temporarily on your computer until you can edit it.
If you think it is an error that you cannot edit, move or create this page, please report the following code to the Administrators' noticeboard: .*t(?:ee)?.?shirts? (printing|quilt|everywhere|design|online|(to|on|in) |buy).* @Category:T-shirts in Nigeria
Thank you.
I assume there's some sort of blacklist somewhere?, –Davey2010Talk 19:24, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
Yes, and reporting that code to this page is exactly what I did, but it seems (strangely enogh) that this is not understood here? @De728631, no, the error message appeared when I tried to create the non-existant Nigeria category. Adding a file to a non-existent category is no problem at all, ever, it’s just that the link will be red.
@De728631, you wrote: ”It should also be noted that Category:T-shirts in Nigeria does not exist, so you might want to create this page first”. – Well, this is exactly the category page I tried to create but is unable to create. I’m sorry if that was not clear enough for you. (And anyone can see it does not exist, since the link to it is red.) When I try to create it, the error message showed up which Davey2010 quoted here in full.
I don’t understand why categories with T-shirts are considered so controversial that ordinary members are blocked from creating them. Ove Raul (talk) 17:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Ove Raul, I'll be honest I couldn't make much sense of your original rationale above - I originally checked your abuse logs and when that didn't return anything I was then stumped as to what issue you even had .... Your message above wasn't as clear as it could've been,
That all being said you simply followed the instructions given in the original message so you cannot be faulted for following the instructions given - The error message needs to be updated. –Davey2010Talk 17:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Some kind of over zealous spam filter? Secretlondon (talk) 19:55, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
Apparently admins are able to create Category:T-shirts in Nigeria, which I just did. De728631 (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, but why should it be restricted to admin creation? Ove Raul (talk) 00:53, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
That was created because there was apparently spam about t-shirts at some point. I don't know if it's current, but I assume it was once a real issue that page creations matching that name were likely to be spam.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:34, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

unjustified reverts rename request

I don't understand why my rename request are reverted. Example - [1]. In many titles of photos, designations of polish steam locomotives is wrong written, I wanted to correct the name according to the PKP classification system [2]. Then names of photos will be more legible and understandable. OK359 is wrong, correct is Ok1-359. Many people from England or other coutries know Wolsztyn and it would be weak if designations of steam locomotives in the name of pictures will be wrong. Whereas the argument about "renaming only because the new name looks a bit better" I accept for bad joke or showing ignorance from TommyG --Mmedstereast (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

  • Endorse renamers decline - The hyphen doesn't change the meaning of the name. There's a few files with and without the hyphen so I don't see any valid reason to remove it so I agree with the nominators decline. –Davey2010Talk 20:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
OK359 in wrong classification of steam locomotive - right is Ok1-359. This notation is correct in accordance with PKP classification system. Series of steam locomotives - Ok1, should separated from the number 359. This not only stupid hyphen, this is obligatory system of polish railways since 100 years. This is glaring error in Poland. I don't correct this to "looking a bit better", but only that the name will be readable and correct. --Mmedstereast (talk) 20:28, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
COM:FRNOT #1 still applies. No meaning is changed, No typos are present, Nothing in the file needs to be changed. Also please use the preview function - I'm edit conflicting with you and it's rather irritating now. –Davey2010Talk 20:35, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't correct this to "looking a bit better", but only that the name will be readable according with PKP system. --Mmedstereast (talk) 20:38, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
My apologies there is no hyphen changes - You're objecting to capital letters which I've only just spotted - My opinion is the same - The categories follow the classification however the capital letter in the file names don't change the meaning of the file so I still don't believe these should be renamed as per COMFRNOT #1. –Davey2010Talk 21:24, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

Unfree image

Please see Contributions for Creteee or Uploads by Creteee. Fremith (talk) 00:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 12:31, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
@Taivo: What did you do?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:00, 15 August 2021 (UTC)
Actually I did not see any unfree images there: they were all textlogos. But I changed licenses of all these images and I categorized them. Taivo (talk) 15:44, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Garbage image

Nonsense file (wrong description, wrong date, wrong category, …):

File:ATARI BREAKOUT - EASTER EGG DE GOOGLE.png
ATARI BREAKOUT - EASTER EGG DE GOOGLE

-- 217.225.243.182 14:19, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Deleted thanks to Túrelio!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:40, 15 August 2021 (UTC)

Two questions about separating CSS file and Upload Wizard request

Hello, I already asked the two questions here and a user replied, but I didn't get a complete answer. That user said I could ask my questions here. I don't want to write the same questions again, so please, see my questions in the link above if you can. Thanks! Aram (talk) 22:38, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

User:C2Rio Tours & Travel

Hi, Could someone block C2Rio Tours & Travel for their username please, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 19:11, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 06:40, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

block request

Hi, Could an admin block 186.80.18.21 please as they're randomly adding no source template to images even tho there's a source in those, They've also been edit warring over this back in July with another editor although wasn't blocked for it, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:00, 17 August 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I previously blocked this IP for a month Gbawden (talk) 06:39, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. I blocked the IP for 3 months now. Thank you for reverting! Taivo (talk) 08:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Pursuit

Gentlemen, I am being persecuted by an anonymous person who adds my private photo from Facebook while processing it. Please make every effort to stop these actions.

As examples, here are the files he uploaded and one of them has not yet been deleted: File:Гоміки.jpg; File:Vovkas face.jpg. --Jphwra (talk) 18:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Deleted the file and indeffed the account. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:26, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Backlog of edit requests

Just wanted to give a heads up that there are several old (and a few new) protected edit requests backlogged at COM:EP. Some of them seem minor (such as those for flags) so they would probably be quick to fix. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 22:47, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jeff G. 5

revdel request

Hi, Could an admin revdel all edits from here to here please,
Whilst closing over a hundred DRs Jeff closed a DR which showed the penis of a 13yo as Keep - Whilst I don't condone him closing it given he was making over a hundred DR closures[3] it would be fair to assume this was overlooked,
I've asked Marcus to provide diffs of this being an ongoing issue but Marcus has refused to do so (because there aren't any), Marcus is essentially calling Jeff a peadophile which is a very serious allegation to make and as stated unless diffs are provided of ongoing problems then this comment should not be allowed to stand and should be revdelled for being grossly degrading or offensive,
As an FYI I have no problems with anyone at that RFA opposing because of that issue but that comment goes far and beyond the pale, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 01:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Davey2010 lies. I never calles Jeff G. a peadophile. I said what he has done is seen as a crime in a lot of countries. Big, big, big difference. Maybe there should be asked a lawyer. Would be strange if we were not longer allowed to tell the truth in this project. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 01:36, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
No but you were implying it that's my point. Either way that comment should be revdelled and realistically you should be sanctioned for it. Good night. –Davey2010Talk 01:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 Comment I have not yet decided on whether this comment is sufficiently bad to redact from the live version; but definitely  Oppose nuking the revision history - this impacts dozens of unrelated edits on a live RfA, and people need to be able to see how the history of comments unfolded. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:16, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
The comment is not nice to Jeff but I cannot see anything what would justify censoring it. This is not a libel in my eyes. Jeff rashly closed the DR (shit happens, I get it), Marcus rashly commented that action. That's all. --jdx Re: 07:00, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment should not be restored. I don't make a call about it's revision deletion, but the comment itself is gratuitous. Here is just a Wikimedia project, not a court of law to talk about crimes and such. We should avoid such terminology here. 4nn1l2 (talk) 09:33, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  • Many thanks to everyone who commented - Admittedly after posting this I did realise a lot of edits would have to be deleted and sort of assumed it wouldn't happen but wasn't entirely sure if it would or wouldn't. Anyway I've withdrawn my request based on the comments above (I'm not pleased about it but arguing to the death wont get anyone anywhere - If anyone wants to revdel it I wont object but may as well withdraw the request,
Thanks again for everyones help/comments much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 11:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Davey2010 in Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jeff G. 5

User:Davey2010 reverted my voting explanation in parts.

  1. what I have written is in my opinion simply the truth. User:Jeff G., who was not an administrator that time, [Commons:Deletion requests/File:Erect penis of 13 year old male.jpg had refused (!) a deletion request]. The file name is very clearly problematic and so the image was too. In the US an a lot of other countries this is prohibited child pornography. We don't need to discuss this, this is a fact. An erectes penis of a 13 year old boy or a person who acts like such a 13 years old person is seen as child pornography. To keep such an images, why ever, is a problem. And I think, a User who is not an administrator and do so anyway had to be punihed. I can't see here any point for a discussion. So I con't see, where my stamenent has something in it, that's problematic. The later explanations by Jeff G. are quite clearly recognizable as excuses.
  2. The Strong Supporter of the candidate tries to whitewash the candidacy. In what a world do we live, in such a case a User that in the forst is not an Administrator and in the Second is a self declared Strong Supporter of the Candidate can do this?
  3. A statement like this is a clear attempt of voter intimidation: Vote in a way, we don't like, and we will come over you.

I voted, cast my vote and that should be it for me. But no, you can't live and work in peace here, because some contributors have to talk things down, others can't leave them alone and are only satisfied when everything goes as they imagine. Other opinions are to be suppressed, the idea seems to be. Under the guise of alleged insults and alleged defamation, free speech is increasingly restricted in this project. Until here nobody can say anything anymore. Not even the truth. And whoever does it is persecuted and threatened. But let's remember - it wasn't me who stood in front of a child pornographic image. With my vote it was done for me, I'm not interestin in trashing in this matter. But if I am censored and threatened in such a way as Jeff G. and Davey2010 is now I have to defend myself and also how we work in this project. It seems the 5th attempt must finally be successful for the candidate, no matter how to enforce it. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 01:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

  • Not repeating myself. See the thread above. (Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#revdel_request). It's one thing to oppose because of a DR close. It's very much another to imply that someone is a word I will not say. Like I said I was acting as a decent human being. –Davey2010Talk 01:35, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Here is no court of law and we have no means to judge if someone has committed a crime or not, so talking about "crimes" seems gratuitous and pointless to me. I don't support restoring it back or sanctioning Davey2010 for removing it. And I don't understand when it is said that someone acts like an admin but is not an admin. Adminship is just a set of tools to facilitate contributing to the project, not a status to give some benefits or prerogatives to some editors which other editors are deprived of. 4nn1l2 (talk) 09:45, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

Request to close

Hello. May I request interested admins to close these two deletion requests started by me about 8 months ago — Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rogier Tower at night.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Dexia Tower.jpg. These two deletion requests are for two files that I suspect are copyright violations. Thanks in advance. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:40, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done — Racconish 💬 10:47, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

TumiMajess/TumiMokgethi

I have no idea if this is actionable, but this user's contributions are...just very odd. They consist mostly of posting extremely brief greetings on various talk pages and nonsensical posts about looking for either "adult" media or APKs. They are similar on other wikis; the user is blocked on mediawiki.org. At the very least the user's edits need to be monitored. – BMacZero (🗩) 16:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Please block

User talk:Вовка х у є с о с, he loaded the mounted vandal files. --Jphwra (talk) 20:05, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Blocked by Pi.1415926535. --jdx Re: 07:38, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Categories on T-shirts

Why is it still impossible to create categories on T-shirts? Is this really controversial somehow, and if so, why?

I’d like to have Category:T-shirts in Uruguay and Category:T-shirts in the United States and Category:T-shirts in politics. Thank you. Ove Raul (talk) 21:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ove Raul: Given global travel, and the fact that t-shirts are mobile, wouldn't it be better to have cats for t-shirts from (manufactured, distributed, or sold in) certain geographical areas?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:31, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
No, on the contrary, I think. Categories should show what is actually worn as fashion in different places. It is less interesting to know where the item has been manufactured nowadays, especially since almost all clothes are being made in China anyway... Ove Raul (talk) 11:55, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
I'm not familiar enough with that portion of the category tree to have an opinion on whether Category:T-shirts by country and its subcategories are good categorization practice, but I can comment on what is preventing your creation of these categories. These categories can only be created or edited by users with the tboverride right (currently template editors and administrators) because of the .*t(?:ee)?.?shirts? (printing|quilt|everywhere|design|online|(to|on|in) |buy).* rule on the global title blacklist on Meta-Wiki at m:Title blacklist. This rule was added by Billinghurst on 6 August 2016. —RP88 (talk) 23:04, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping. @Ove Raul and RP88: I have updated the global title blacklist to allow for category names. We can also add further exclusions to Mediawiki:Titlewhitelist. If you think that the list is still too restrictive for all sites then please drop a note to m:Talk:title blacklist with examples. Noting that the filter is only looking at titles.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:17, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: Thanks for the update to the global title blacklist. Is there a reason you elected to still block the talk pages for these category names, or just an unintended omission? —RP88 (talk) 23:45, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
@RP88: Not a good one, omission only => 🧠👨‍🦯. I have updated and I am waiting for the cache to catch up to test. Apologies for missing your prior ping, it did not register for me through the echo system. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:43, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Change has worked and category_talk: is also exempted.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:52, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. Ove Raul (talk) 12:01, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst, RP88, and Jeff G.: Nobody has answered the original question "Why is it still impossible to create categories on T-shirts?" Who instituted the ban and why'd they do it? Was it a category created long ago that triggered an overreaction by an administrator that hasn't edited here in years? Why don't I see anything resembling "T-shirts" in mw:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist? Category:Men wearing black T-shirts contains over 600 images which is way beyond the amount which would normally trigger diffusion. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
@DanielPenfield: I wrote this reply before you struck your question, but I'll post it for posterity. You don't see it in mw:MediaWiki:Titleblacklist because that is the local title block list for www.mediawiki.org, which is a different wiki than Commons. As I mentioned above, this was not a local ban on Commons (which is why you also won't also see it in the local title block list for Commons at MediaWiki:Titleblacklist), it was in the global title block list on Meta-Wiki at m:Title blacklist (which affects all WMF wikis). I looked around a bit on Meta-Wiki but I couldn't find an on-wiki rationale for the addition of the t-shirts rule to the global title block list, but I am not an administrator on Meta-Wiki so it is not clear where relevant discussions may have taken place (the addition appears in the log archive at m:Title blacklist/Log/2016/07 but not at m:Talk:Title blacklist/Archives/2016). Commons does have a local title safe list at MediaWiki:Titlewhitelist that a Commons administrator can use to override the global title block list. —RP88 (talk) 18:24, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
With regard to the filter itself, T-shirt spam comes in cycles, same with football jerseys, etc. and the first filter will be way back in metawiki history, they are updated in time as the spam evolves, and gets through or is showing in global filters. It can be a clear issue crosswiki, whereas today's actual fight is gambling spam, though that is more IP address address and less on title. That the logging for title blacklist is not allowed is problematic, and requests for change are not actioned phab:T23206/phab:T68450.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC)
@DanielPenfield: The regular expression used globally for t-shirts did not stop the word t-shirts, it stopped "t-shirts" immediately followed by a range of words. Being able to craft that range of words used is about trying to find balance. The tools that we have in 2016 to see find what is actually in use at all sites, is a lot better than available in 2016, and better than 2011. So those who do those global regex will always listen for problems, what happens is that people don't speak up about the problem, unlike what was done in this case. 👍👍👍  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:01, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Close Deletion Request

Hello, can an interested admin close the deletion request Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anne Frank lacht naar de schoolfotograaf.jpg? No new arguments have been brought up in over 6 months and the general consensus has been to keep. --ShyAlpaca482 (talk) 11:55, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 07:28, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Delete User:HaterOfB1234

Vandalism/attack page, and revdel edits by the user. SebïFïg (talk) 22:39, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Indef-blocked by AntiCompositeNumber. --Túrelio (talk) 07:47, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

Contribution of Julia Rogozina, who is the author?

I checked several files uploaded by Julia, see User contributions for Julia.rogozina.

I am afraid that all 5 files uploaded by Julia should be deleted speedy. Check, please. --Andrew Krizhanovsky (talk) 18:03, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

You should have notified @Julia.rogozina: so I have done it now for you. It seems to me that she works for this aerobatic team called "Первый полет" and uploaded photos that were acquired from different authors. Instead of deleting them speedily, I will tag them for missing permission. This will allow for contacting the COM:VRT team with evidence of copyright transfer. De728631 (talk) 22:49, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

File versions removal request

A participant, who attented an offline Wikipedia event yesterday, requested for them to be removed from the photos: File:Wikipedia 20 Forum in Kyiv 2021 by nickispeaki 04.jpg, File:Wikipedia 20 Forum in Kyiv 2021 by nickispeaki 05.jpg, File:Wikipedia 20 Forum in Kyiv 2021 by nickispeaki 06.jpg. I have uploaded new versions with them blurred out, now the previous versions of those files should be hidden. --TohaomgTohaomg (talk) 07:27, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 07:40, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

User making rapid-fire semi-automated edits with errors in them.

User_talk:Sarang/Archive/2021#stop_removing_1=. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:37, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

He is removing required parameters from templates by the hundreds or thousands. Please intervene. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:13, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

violation de droit

Bonjour,

une de mes amis a un jour poster un dessin personnel sur wikipédia et je ne voudrais plus que celui-ci soit visible sur internet et associé à mon nom, j'ai déjà fait beaucoup de demande de suppression: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Copie_de_AFFICHE-TKS.png

Pouvez-vous le supprimer rapidement s'il vous plait,

coordialement, Nathanaël Le Cunuder — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 90.32.8.81 (talk) 15:38, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

violation of law

Hello,

a friend of mine once posted a personal drawing on wikipedia and I would no longer like it to be visible on the internet and associated with my name, I have already made a lot of deletion requests: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Copie_de_AFFICHE-TKS.png

Can you quickly delete it please,

coordinate,

Nathanaël Le Cunuder
translator: Google Translate via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
File:Copie de AFFICHE-TKS.png a été supprimé il y a 18 minutes, grâce à Андрей Романенко !   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)
File:Copie de AFFICHE-TKS.png was deleted 18 minutes ago, thanks to Андрей Романенко!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:59, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Request to delete files

Please remove the following files from Wikipedia Commons. I am their author and I need to change their names and change something in the graphics.

Polish Wikipedia Commons: Podbeskidzie Bielsko-Biała Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 01.jpg 

Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 02.jpg

Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 03.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 03.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 04.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 04.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 05.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 05.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 06.png Kit body podbeskidzie2022b 06.png

Thank you in advance KrolKrzys16 — Preceding unsigned comment added by KrolKrzys16 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

@KrolKrzys16: you can tag any file you uploaded in the past week with {{SD|G7}} or {{My bad upload}} and an admin will delete it shortly thereafter.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Template:Jaworzno by century

I have problem with this template - I can't remowe this data Category:Jaworzno in the 21st century|21st century from template. Identical Template:Kościerzyna by century doesn't show it. I can't solve the problem. Additionally I ask about repair this template - Template:PolandVoivodeshipyear. --Choojvdoopie (talk) 22:13, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Comment removal request

Hi, Could an admin very kindly remove "Well done tho on making yourself look like a right idiot!" from my comment at Commons:Administrators/Requests/Jeff G. 5 please?,
I was meant to have removed it some days ago but I ended up forgetting due to the recent hoo-har at ANU
There was no need for that comment and I apologise to Pandakekok9 for saying that. I think I was perhaps a bit to passionate about that RFA,
Thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010Talk 12:29, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Pls move

Pls. move Category:Salon de L'Automobile de Paris 1946 to Category:Salon de l'Automobile de Paris 1946. Sorry there is a typo in the Lemma. Best --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 14:50, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

@Ｔｏｍ: Done. Should File:Salon de L'Automobile de Paris 1946.jpg be moved as well? pandakekok9 15:03, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
@Pandakekok9: Yes please move the file. Now the category be deleted. Thx. --Ｔｏｍ (talk) 15:17, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
@Ｔｏｍ: I've done the file rename; and since I'm not a sysop, I've tagged the category for speedy deletion. Hopefully an admin will notice it more easily. pandakekok9 15:22, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Please revert name change of File:Coat of arms of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.svg

This file was recently re-named from File:Badge of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.svg to "Coat of Arms of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.svg". "Badge" is the correct terminology; it's not a coat of arms.

See the Blazon for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police on the Public Register of Arms, Flags, and Badge of Canada:

Blazon

Badge A roundel Bleu Celeste charged with a bison’s head caboshed proper, within an annulus Azure edged and inscribed with the Motto in letters Or, environed by maple leaves Vert and ensigned by the Royal Crown proper resting on a scroll Azure inscribed CANADA in letters Or;

Motto MAINTIENS LE DROIT

In the view of the Canadian Heraldic Authority, it is clearly a Badge, not a Coat-of-Arms. --Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 01:16, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

@Mr Serjeant Buzfuz: You'd probably want to talk to Illegitimate Barrister about that, as they are the uploader and the one who moved the file. The admins here usually don't handle content disputes. pandakekok9 03:18, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Please block

Gwendolinent who vandalised this article on fr.wp with a file he uploaded here in the sole purpose of making a fool of someone. Many thanks in advance --Do not follow (talk) 11:55, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I warned the user. All contributions are deleted due to copyright violation, out of scope or vandalism. Taivo (talk) 17:29, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Whitelist Category:Men wearing black T-shirts in the United States and Category:Men wearing T-shirts in the United States by color

Referencing this discussion, would someone kindly whitelist Category:Men wearing black T-shirts in the United States and Category:Men wearing T-shirts in the United States by color? Note that one of Category:Men wearing black T-shirts in the United States's parents, Category:Men wearing black T-shirts, contains 600+ images as of this writing--a quantity that is {{CatDiffuse}}-worthy. Thank you in advance. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 12:12, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 17:25, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Delete old file versions (bad upload)

Please delete the old file versions of File:TuS Chlodwig Zülpich logo.svg, they are simply bad and I had trouble with the upload results. Please leave the most recent one because it finally worked. If possible you may put the comment of the first upload version into the last one's comment box. Thanks and best regards Nordat (talk) 12:22, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 17:15, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Mass CV (CC-BY-NC) from padil.gov.au

Hello Fellow Admins,

I've discovered a mass CV problem (ca. 3200+ images): [4] coming from: [www.padil.gov.au www.padil.gov.au]. Most of them are under NC Creative Commons license, like this example: [[:File:Ophiusa disjungens female dorsal.jpg] > [5]. But, what is worse, some of them were revied falsely as being compliant with our rules, like: this one. OK, I know it was reviewed back in 2012, and over then it could be under a "real" CC, but how likely it is, that a organization such us PADIL, has changed its licensing? Anyways, even with those that were positively reviewed, we are left with more than 3000 that weren't and should be deleted, which is a bit of task for a single admin. Help? Thanks! Masur (talk) 22:07, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

It appears that the images were, in fact, formerly listed as CC-BY 3.0 AU: see here for the image you linked. It's not uncommon for large sites to change their licensing. Fortunately, because Creative Commons licenses are irrevocable, the files on Commons should be fine. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:44, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
But most of them aren't (weren't) reviewed for their licenses... Masur (talk) 06:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist update request

Please add following rule \btrafford\.com/BookStore/BookDetails/499580-lubeks-threelogy in "section" Boxing books spammer's (aka George Reeves Person) links. The link has been used by the LTA here: Special:Diff/587028341. --jdx Re: 07:26, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done —RP88 (talk) 07:47, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Another MediaWiki:Spam-blacklist update request

Please add following regexps in "section" Pechkurov's links:
\bkinopoisk\.ru/name/6355519\b
\bcrunchbase\.com/person/aleksej-pechkurov\b
Thanks, --jdx Re: 08:43, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done--Steinsplitter (talk) 10:05, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Another clone of TumiMajess

Found another clone of TumiMajess, previously blocked as NOTHERE by Pi.1415926535. See Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_86#TumiMajess/TumiMokgethi. There are a few other suspiciously similar usernames registered, but they haven't edited yet so I can't tell if they are the same user. – BMacZero (🗩) 15:52, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Advertising

Hi to anybody who may answer my question! Is it possible to delete the advertising for a special car company from the commons video of the day 2021-08-30. Thanks in advance! --Bärbel Miemietz (talk) 08:12, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

@Bärbel Miemietz: Please give the filename. Taivo (talk) 15:38, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, I thought the commons video of the day would be the same all over the world: It is File:Ljubljana heating station from drone.webm on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Hauptseite?uselang=de with an unnecessary car posing in the last sequence. Thank you for looking at it. --Bärbel Miemietz (talk) 20:28, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

WLM SE 2021 mass message

I'm looking after the Wiki Loves Monuments contest in Sweden, and would like to send a mass message to previous entrants encouraging them to enter again. I've followed the recommendations here and here, and have updated Commons:Wiki Loves Monuments in Sweden/Mass message with the necessary information. Could an admin please send the message for me via Special:MassMessage? Thanks in advance! /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 10:16, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

 Doing… -- CptViraj (talk) 12:46, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 Thank you. CptViraj! /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 14:17, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Copyrighted image ?

File:Mairie_de_Walheim.jpg is on https://walheim.fr/mairie/l-equipe-municipale. https://ideez.net/ design the village website. User:Ideez added this image . Are they the same? Copyright problem? I do not know the customs of Commons. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 21:25, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

I've tagged it as missing permission; Ideez will need to verify their identity through COM:VRT to prove that they are associated with the website https://ideez.net/. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:30, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, COuld someone block 181.60.238.2 who keeps removing a DR template from a file, They don't speak English and I find Google Translater to be useless, They have an edit warring template which should translate to their preffered language so there should be no excuse to edit war, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 00:34, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 07:01, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks Taivo much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 10:43, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

File:View from EDSA-Ortigas Flyover (Paulo O) - Flickr.jpg

Can an admin revdel the old version of File:View from EDSA-Ortigas Flyover (Paulo O) - Flickr.jpg? I edited it to remove the billboard which may be a potential no FOP (DW) issue. Thanks in advance. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 12:40, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Next time, just add it to Category:Media with unacceptable data in old versions. Thanks, 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:05, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

User:Peter39c repeatedly removing deletion discussion notice

User:Peter39c has removed the deletion discussion notice, and even after being warned about this, removed the notice again. Note that this editor has also been warned in the past about this behaviour so this is not a new problem. -- Whpq (talk) 19:50, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Had already been warned 4 times and blocked previously for the same reason. This is disruption. Enough is enough. Blocked for one week. Furthermore, I think this comment is uncivil, even though I don't understand Italian. I relied on Google Translate. 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:20, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

Getting the DelReqHandler

Hello admins,

I was just wondering if I could get the DelReqHandler as I see many loose deletion request that needs to be closed. I tried it doing manually but it takes time as well as errors happen. --Contributers2020Talk to me here 04:17, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

the gadget checks whether the user is in group "sysop", so, if you are not an admin, it won't work for you. rubin16 (talk) 08:40, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Would it be possible to at least restrict the deletion function to sysops, and allow everyone else to close? This would make it easier for non-admins to close DRs that obviously can be closed. pandakekok9 10:26, 25 August 2021 (UTC)
Oh great, the-people-who-dont-have-trust-because-of-nothing person came. Also Pandakekok9's request is correct. We should do this. --\Contributers2020Talk to me here
Are you going to start signing your posts some time? Because if you can't even get that right, that's just another reason why I don't trust you with any elevated rights. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:06, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what you are talking about User:Andy Dingley. --Contributers2020Talk to me here 04:54, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Archiving: I don't think it is good to give the right to handle DRs to any user while technically competent user can actually avoid it by himself. rubin16 (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. rubin16 (talk) 13:19, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Upload wizard mobile ui CSS fix

Hi, I would request to add User:Zache/Minerva-UploadWizard.css CSS sniplet to mediawiki:minerva.css. Current Special:UploadWizard layout is wider than the screen width when screen is narrow which renders it very hard to use. (phab::T261589) Proposed change will basically remove the mandatory minwidth from the layout so that the upload wizard will work also with mobile devices. I suggested the change already in 2020 in village pump and with no response comments there so I propose change now directy here. Zache (talk) 03:37, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: Thank you! I tested the change and it seems that mediawiki:minerva.css is not loaded on mobileview, but the mediawiki:mobile.css is used sot it would be needed there too. I made also a small visual change to User:Zache/Minerva-UploadWizard.css to make it look better (diff). --Zache (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Zache: Copied there too. Thought it was a cache issue and should be fixed by the mere passage of time. 4nn1l2 (talk) 02:09, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: I tried it first with debug=1 which should by pass the cache? In any case, when added to mobile.css it did change something, but clearly not all and layout is broken. My educated guess based on how browser shows it is that the upload wizards CSS -styles are loaded after the mediawiki:mobile.css ones and those will be overwritten. Any ideas or do you think that this would be still cache issue? (my next idea would be write it as a gadget and load it by default) --Zache (talk) 02:52, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
No such luck that mobile.css problem would have been cache issue.. I think that the change to mediawiki:mobile.css can be reverted and I made a request on phab (phab:T290124) for temporary interface admin on beta commons so i can debug/create gadget there. --Zache (talk) 06:06, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
OK 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:47, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Zache: You may RfIA at https://commons.wikimedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:05, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
That page is just placeholder content. Official guideline is afaik To request changes to the software configuration, the creation of new Beta Cluster wikis or user rights, please file a task in Phabricator. [6] Zache (talk) 03:08, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Though, it may still proceed faster if I ping somebody to do it. @Multichill: You have byrocrate rights in betacommons so you could do the phab:T290124? --Zache (talk) 03:27, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
@Fæ and Romaine: You have also byrocrate rights in Beta Commons, so you could give permissions too. --Zache (talk) 06:04, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

This account Alia Shah is only uploading copyrighted images.Princepratap1234 (talk) 10:29, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Warned and nuked. @Princepratap1234: In future you can warn them yourself - only after suitable warnings will we consider a block. And if you bring someone here you are expected to notify them on their talk page Gbawden (talk) 10:53, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Semafor wjazdowy do stacji Wałbrzych Szczawienko.jpg

I've been waiting for almost a month for someone to delete this photo which infringes copyrights. How much more will I wait for a decision?I have the impression that DR is an excuse for the administrators laziness, who do not want to make a decision to delete. Once upon a time I waited over a month for the decision of lazy administrators only when I kindly pointed out this fact to them. If I were you, I would remowe DR possibility since some are so lazy that after a month they will not take a stand in the discussion. If I would give Template:Copyvio or Template:No permission since then you would probably have to delete in short time, but I requested for deletion, so you wait long time for decision, I don't know why. you can delete the template but you don't decide about delete. I don't understand it.

PS. I have learned that add templates to photos in order to motivate administrators is vandalism. It's funny. You are not doing anything when the photos infringe copyright, but if somebody tries get your attention, you whintervene. --Choojvdoopie (talk) 16:46, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mmedstereast. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:14, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

As mentioned by Cordylus on the RFCU, it looks like Choojvdoopie has been replacing {{PD-Polish}} tags with {{Copyvio}} and linking to known unreliable sites like Alamy as evidence: File:MBxd1 na lokomotywowni Koszalin Wąsk, lata 70 lub 80-te.jpg. If the deleting admin doesn't check the page history, they'll just think that it's a simple copyvio with no valid PD claims being made since the license was removed. I propose that we mass restore all images tagged by this user. Thoughts? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:41, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Seconded.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Uploader at the first should show permission for the use of these images on Commons. Also I can download pictures from internet and say that I have a permission. He should provide permission from the copyright owner or to prove that the photos are in the public domain. His photos is from website of Towarzystwo Koszalińskiej Kolei Wąskotorowej and he should have permision from this society. I was wrong about alamy stock site, but some photos I found on this site http://www.archeo.kolej.pl/maron/pkdfoto.htm. This site is very old, so I recognized that uploader illegal copied photos from this site. More, he did not provide author's names of these photos, though autors are given on this website. In addition, I did not find photos on the website of Towarzystwo Koszalińskiej Kolei Wąskotorowej, there allegedly come from, in uploader's opinion. It was suspicious for me. I have encountered numerous cases where the uploader provides false data and does not identify the real author of the photo. Uploader, instead of explaining me calmly, that he has the rights to photography, he began to hold me solely responsible for deletion. He wrote me that my behavior was worse than of the Nazis, seriously, he began to experience it strongly this happening. He owes himself, if not for me it could have been done by someone else, everyone has the right to report the photos. I will not allow me to be called worse than a Nazi, therefore I suggested seeking the help of a psychiatrist, since he experiences the loss of her photographs so much. Creating me a great villain is bad way for discussion with me. --Choojvdoopie (talk) 12:15, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
This discussion now includes private claims about living people that require private evidence. Please restrict yourself to emailing COM:VRTS in confidence. --Fæ (talk) 12:28, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
Any images claimed to be PD, where the claim is not outlandish, should not be nominated for speedy deletion. You intentionally removed the license from the page, tricking the deleting admin into deleting the image. At worst it can be nominated for regular deletion, if the evidence of PD is believed to be insufficient. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:42, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
How about we desysop any admin who doesn't check file history before deleting? (And I can think of a few names who'd be first to go). Andy Dingley (talk) 11:29, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
@Andy Dingley: We would need proof.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 10:19, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

I have done the mass restoration. @Tyreponiyb: If you wish to question the copyright status of a file uploaded as PD in good faith, you may open a DR to demand evidence of the PD status. However, removing the PD template and tagging it for speedy deletion is a malicious act of vandalism, and you will be blocked if you ever do that again. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:22, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Block request

Hi, Could someone indef Maomalkadafi please as they're repeatedly posting random letters, words and weird emojis everywhere - They were warned to stop but have since continued. They've not contributed in any meaningful way here and unlikely to ever do so hence indef request, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 01:05, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:08, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks 4nn1l2 much appreciated :), –Davey2010Talk 10:03, 4 September 2021 (UTC)

Empty categories

There are many empty subcategories in Category:Errors which can probably be speedy deleted. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:46, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 15:07, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Move files where target exists

Hello!

Both File:N-I.jpg and File:Ribbon equivalent.png should be moved to File:N-I.xcf and File:Ribbon equivalent.xcf respectively. The problem is that the xcf file pages already exist. Both files originally were xcf files, then someone overwrote the files with a jpg and png respectively, but now someone has reverted to the original xcf version so that should be reflected in the name, keep the old/new names as redirects. Thanks - Jonteemil (talk) 20:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 02:05, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Case Olaf Kosinsky

We have a CU case at de:wp that links following accounts:

Olaf Kosinsky (talk · contribs) is the long established main account who had VRT access from August 2012 to June 2021. MalDabei was used for declared paid editing (see here) but supported by the main account by moving newly created articles at en:wp from draft to regular article space (example), by reviewing them at de:wp (example), and by handling permission tickets (example).

Subteno was a short-lived account, not used at Commons. PF75172 has no uploads and was used to file deletion requests. The few DRs are interesting as they focus on photos that possibly deemed unfavorable to the paying customers (example: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thomas Limberger 2 Press 2015.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:TL CGI.jpeg whereas the far more professional photo File:Limberger SAC.jpg, uploaded by Erroomus (talk · contribs), did not find the same scrutiny. The last account, Arbitror me, was used to upload a series of logos for a family of magazines which were subsequently inserted by Gruner + Jahr (talk · contribs), a declared paid-editing account by the equally-named company.

We do not require disclosure of paid editing at Commons. However, it appears unacceptable that the main account was used to handle tickets for uploads by the alternate account MalDabei. Consequently, we have to consider

  • how we proceed with these accounts and
  • we need to go through all uploads by MalDabei which were handled by Olaf Konsinsky (we need a list for this).

--AFBorchert (talk) 12:07, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Anyway it is a cross wiki abuse of multiple accounts, not only paid editing. -jkb- (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
First blocking all accounts. Or do we allow one account to edit? To answer questions... Regards, Yann (talk) 12:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef'ed all accounts: if someone uploads on Commons images for the purpose of Paid editing misuse on Wikipedia, it's of course relevant for Commons, too. --A.Savin 12:58, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

How is SP abuse for undisclosed Paid editing on wikipedia a reason for a block at Commons? -- Rillke(q?) 13:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
The answer is abuse. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:06, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Undisclosed paid editing is violation of the terms of use. I actually expect them to be globally locked soon.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:24, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
A global lock unfortunately was already denied by Martin Urbanec: m:Steward requests/Global#Global lock for Olaf Kosinsky. -- Chaddy (talk) 13:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Rejecting the global lock abided with the rules, while the block at Commons with the current reasoning is at least questionable. -- Rillke(q?) 13:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
@Yann: It should be abuse at Commons, not abuse at [insert sister project here]. -- Rillke(q?) 13:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
@Rillke: Using an account to validate permissions of uploads by another account is a clear abuse of Commons policy. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:19, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
@Yann: Policy side, I can't find anything which would imply that for VRT (as opposed to COM:LR), and it is not uncommon to verify own uploads amongst the support team if they recieve photos. What they should probably avoid is to verify own permission. Up until now, I see no evidence that Olaf ever verified uploads where they are the copyright holder. Plus it looks like, socket puppetry hasn't been abused in order to fake verification (we'll see if something pops up in the list below) or conduct any other illegal activity at Commons. Maybe they used one account for uploading because they were logged-in while doing their paid editing at WP, or because this faciliates cashing up but does this constite abusive use of multiple accounts? Are users blockable here due to conflicts of interest as shown in the deletion requests, or not, and if so, would Commons like to adopt a policy on that helping editors to understand what is okay and what isn't? -- Rillke(q?) 08:47, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: According to m:Terms of use, every project can adopt an alternative paid contribution disclosure policy, which Commons did here. -- Rillke(q?) 13:36, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
@Rillke: May be we are reading different ToUs, but this version says "These Terms of Use prohibit engaging in deceptive activities, including misrepresentation of affiliation, impersonation, and fraud. As part of these obligations, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation".--Ymblanter (talk) 15:34, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Oh, I see, you refer to the provision that the projects can overwrite this requirement. The next question is then whether we have discusse the alt policy?--Ymblanter (talk) 15:37, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Can any commons admin please again check the images that were deleted after dl requests of Olaf Kosinsky and/or one of his sock puppets? AFBorcherts made an interesting point. Olaf Kosinsky had commercial interests when contributing here and so maybe he tried to kick out images his costumers didn't like or even images that could have been competitors to his own images. This presumption is interesting and not implausible. So it would be wise to check those dls again, I think. -- Chaddy (talk) 13:27, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

You would probably still need to obtain permission by the author for some of the professional-looking photographs. -- Rillke(q?) 13:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
No alternative account voted on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Thomas Limberger 2 Press 2015.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:TL CGI.jpeg and the request were closed by a third party. So while certainly not transparent, I can't see how rules were broken with these regular deletion requests. So blocking them doesn't appear to be better then politicians or officers not abiding their law. -- Rillke(q?) 13:54, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
At the time of these dls no one was really aware of what Olaf Kosinsky really did. So why are you against another check of his dl requests under new circumstances now? -- Chaddy (talk) 14:04, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Is de:Thomas Limberger among the PE-suspected articles? Most images of this person have been uploaded by Testdrive4321 (talk · contribs), which is a strange username for someone uploading rather professional images and who was active on :de mainly Limberger-related.
Now, File:Thomas Limberger 2 Press 2015.jpg, which had been uploaded in 2015 by Testdrive4321, was deleted in 2021. However, the identical photo, which is currently the main article-portrait on :de and :en, was uploaded also in 2016 as File:Limberger SAC.jpg by Erroomus (talk · contribs) with completely insufficient source and permission (accordingly no-perm-tagged already). --Túrelio (talk) 15:07, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Subject of the 2nd DR was File:TL CGI.jpeg, which had been uploaded also by Testdrive4321 in 2014 and has been deleted in March 2021. Interestingly, a critical news-article about the depicted person (Limberger) had been published in early march here and uses exactly this image (still today) and credits it to "Wikipedia". This was just 5 days before opening of the mentioned DR on Commons, which may still be a coincidence. In addition, the same portrait is still used on Limberger's Twitter-acccount[7], thereby suggesting that the image on Commons was either a copyvio or uploaded on behalf of Limberger. Apart from these findings, the DRs were handled formally correct, as already stated by Rillke. --Túrelio (talk) 15:26, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

List of uploads by alternate accounts with VRT/OTRS approval from Olaf Kosinsky

This is a first batch of uploads. I listed contributions by MalDabei and will check the other accounts later.

De728631 (talk) 16:32, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Subteno is not a global account and the others don't have any VRT-approved uploads, so MalDabei is the only "person" of interest when it comes to possible incorrect OTRS tickets. De728631 (talk) 16:38, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
SUL Subtenol -jkb- (talk) 17:11, 5 September 2021 (UTC)

Out-of-scoper

Ameyre --Palosirkka (talk) 16:18, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

  • @Palosirkka: You can normally just nominate these types of files for speedy deletion under criteria F10. This has the added benefit of notifying the uploader that their contributions may not be appropriate. GMGtalk 19:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
  • @Palosirkka and GreenMeansGo: I would not use F10 here, or any kind of speedy deletion really, for a batch of more than 5-10 images. Speedy deletion is supposed to make things more efficient, but individual speedy nominations end up splitting up the batch and causing extra overhead (especially if multiple admins review the images independently). A batch DR saves everyone time here. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:34, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
@King of Hearts: Fair. Either way, you notify the uploader, which can hopefully help them to eventually become a productive contributor. Apologies. GMGtalk 23:41, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done. Uploads are nominated for deletion. Taivo (talk) 08:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Old but good pic of Klaus Kinski from 1977

In the category on actor Klaus Kinski, there is this very good picture: File:Klaus-Kinski-Bruno-de-Mones.JPG. It is a scan of a print from 1977 and was uploaded only in 2015 as "own work". The uploader has provided some other pics related on the second person (right), the known photographer Bruno de Mones who took the Kinski portrait shown in the middle of the pic above. I have a bit of a strange feeling concerning the copyright status of the above file - however, given that the uploader posted also a digital portrait of that photographer Bruno de Mones made in 2015 (see File:Bruno-de-Mones-portrait.jpg), this seems a hint that the uploader has some direct relation to him and that the pic of 1977 in question might be completely legal. Benefit of the doubt that everything is ok? Pittigrilli (talk) 07:33, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I nominated it for deletion. Taivo (talk) 08:02, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
Follow-up question: I see that there is a problem with the depicted photography in the middle. Could I then save at least the Kinski depiction on the very left by cropping it out into a new pic? Pittigrilli (talk) 08:12, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
I am not sure. I have suspicions, just like you have. Taivo (talk) 09:11, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
True. Maybe during the deletion discussion, the uploader comes with some facts. Otherwise, good riddance... Pittigrilli (talk) 10:38, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Revdel?

Could someone revdel the last but one edit on my user talk please? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (talk) 08:09, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Taivo (talk) 08:58, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Template:Ditto

Please can someone import Wikisource:Template:Ditto (specifically from en.Wikisource)? I wish to use it on a transcription or a piece of printed ephemera, File:Jack Wright - John Elwyn - exhibition catalogue - 1949 - Paul Alexander Gallery.jpg, but I think it will be more generally useful for such cases. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:12, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Admins can't import pages from Wikisource using Special:Import, but you can just copy&paste the template here and mention this in the edit summary. 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:46, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Req for closing

Can someone close this ridiculuos DR, please? I think there are enough edits by sock- and meatpuppets. --Achim (talk) 10:26, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Gbawden (talk) 10:30, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Monuments mass message please

Hi Admins

I'm looking after the Wiki Loves Monuments contest in Ireland, and would like to send a mass message to previous entrants encouraging them to enter again (as I did in 2019). I've followed the steps I used in 2019, and have created a page with the necessary information at User:Smirkybec/WLM-IE2021Message. Could an admin please send the message for me via Special:MassMessage if there are no issues with the content or scope? Many thanks. Smirkybec (talk) 11:32, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:40, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Smirkybec (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Images from Sikh Wiki

I noticed a few images that have been uploaded from Sikh Wiki (which has a CC-BY license) but the problem is that the images themselves are just randomly uploaded over there without any copyright rules. I nominated one for deletion (as it was from 'The Hindu Photo Library') and I found another that was taken in 1985 and is likely a news image, but uploaded here as sourced to SikhWiki under a CC-BY tag. How do we deal with this? I'm sure there are a lot more images than just the two I found. Is there a bot that can give a list of images sourced to sikhwiki? If this is the wrong forum, please let me know where to bring this up. cheers —SpacemanSpiff 09:07, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Certainly just because sikhiwiki.org may license its site under CC-BY doesn't have any bearing on whether media hosted there may be free. It doesn't look like they require any information whatsoever on individual files, not even a source, much less a license. I'm not any help with bots, but I suspect that after three blocks, it may be time to show @Manakpreet Singh: the door, at least until they can demonstrate some basic understanding of licensing requirements. It doesn't look like they've ever even attempted to engage with the community, and more so, have repeatedly reuploaded deleted files. GMGtalk 11:24, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Separating 2 files

Hi, I forgot how to separate 2 files (File:Bonifacio Monument.jpg) without loosing the upload history. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:47, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean COM:SPLIT? --jdx Re: 23:02, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
Can we really split such files? What is the license and source for the second image? I used to just revert the file to the original version per COM:OW. By the way, both files should be deleted due to FOP, I think. 4nn1l2 (talk) 06:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: Notice that the file was uploaded and then deleted three times. Yann probably restored too much. Anyway, look closely, it seems that all necessary info is available (leaving FOP issue out). --jdx Re: 06:47, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: File:Bonifacio Monument (Guillermo Tolentino).jpg. @Yann: The trick is to 1) restore only those revisions that you plan to move away from the current title; 2) move the file to the new title without redirect; 3) restore the rest of the revisions. @4nn1l2: These were freshly undeleted, see Template:PD-Philippines-artistic work. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:48, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Pinging JWilz12345, the original filer of the request, to comment on the copyright status of these two works. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:52, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Yann, King of Hearts, 4nn1l2, and Jdx: . The only image that I requested to be restored is w:Bonifacio Monument, depicting Tolentino's work that dates to 1930s (during the regime of Act 3134, in which works needed to be registered for them to attain protection). That protection was for 30 years, and needed renewal still for it to extend. As w:Intellectual Property Office (Philippines)-Bureau of Copyright, in their statement, found no registration records for this monument, it is thus in public domain as an unregistered sculpture.
For the other work that looks like a relief of some sort, unfortunately it is still off limits here. It incepted in 1998 (artist died in 2016), during the era of automatic copyright protection (with no need for formalities). JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 07:56, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks to all. Yann (talk) 10:43, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I want to delete an upload history and photo about me

Hi, I was proving how to use wikimedia, and then I upload my history and my photo, but know I want to delete it. Could you please please help me??

The archive is https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Pingui2406&ilshowall=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pingui2406 (talk • contribs) 03:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

@Pingui2406: ✓ Done King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:56, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

This image is the subject to malicious editing by Indian users and editiors

This image File:The People of India 1868 Aheer.jpg is used on the wikipedia article about the "Ahir". That page is super blocked on WP and it looks like the fight has spilled over to Commons as this image has been heavily vandalised as well. I have reinstated the correct description but I am sure it will be changed again. You might want to consider putting this image under observation along with other "ethnic" images of Indian castes and communities. They all look like subjects and topics that end up in edit wars.146.199.128.251 07:47, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

I've also restored the other entries of the description and semi-protected the file. --Túrelio (talk) 08:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Logo vandal

Please block new IPs of this vandal on sight. Their behavior is pretty easy to isolate: useless, often harmful, edits in logo-related files and categories, accompanied by short hasty descriptions. Harmful because a minor misinformation on Commons may make a subsequent edit on Wikidata or another wiki look like it's justified.

Here are the already identified addresses, all these contributions lists need at least a review (although TNT-ing may be a better, more practical option):

Useful link (on Wikidata): [8] Gikü (talk) 13:00, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Name of work. said to be in Japanese museum is incorrect.

In the Paintings by John William Waterhouse table, there is a thumbnail for a painting in the Kōriyama City Museum of Art. It is claimed to be called "Flora", painted in 1911.

Waterhouse's painting called "Flora" was painted in 1890 and bears no resemblance to the thumbnail of the painting in the Japanese museum. It's a dark-haired woman seated on a white stone bench with her legs crossed at the knee, leaning against a stucco wall. There is a niche to her right with a bronze-looking statue of a man, white flowers, and what appears to be ivy come. g out of the niche. She holds what could be a burlap-looking sack or a wide-brimmed hat . Her gauze-like sleeveless dress, with a yellow scarf-like belt, droops off her right shoulder. The painting is 13inW x 29.5inH.

Waterhouse's 1911 painting which matches that thumbnail is called "Maidens Picking Flowers by a Stream". In the foreground is a dark-haired young woman, in a red short-sleeved dress with a dark cloth-like belt, on her knees, picking flowers from between the rocks of a meandering stream. There are vague images of other young women in the background, upstream. The painting is 31.3inW x 37inH.

There is no way these psintings vould be confused with each other. The error is more likely the result of a translation problem by whomever made that entry in the table. This does need to be corrected, to avoid confusing others using this Wiki website.

I do not know how to make such a correction, nor woukd I do so without notifying administrators. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Mary Mitchell <email redacted> — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.62.160.193 (talk) 04:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@Maculosae tegmine lyncis: who uploaded the file. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:13, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The study for "Maidens picking flowers" is different from this "Flora"; the Kōriyama-hosted site calls this "Flora", in Japanese, フローラ (Furōra), and, in English, Flora (I don't know who gets to determine a painting's (current) appellation); unfortunately no date is given; the index to the 2002 Peter Trippi/Phaidon (ISBN 0 7148 4232 X) J. W. Waterhouse includes both an 1891 version (with B&W illustration, which looks like this "Flora") and a 1914 version (no accompanying illustration); perhaps it's this second painting? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 12:06, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

how to deal with DRs of identifiable Afghans feeling threatened by Taliban?

Yesterday I speedy-processed 2 DRs, Commons:Deletion_requests/File:111122-M-MM918-006_(6425584105).jpg and Commons:Deletion_requests/File:091205-N-4021H-004_(4161307030).jpg, for images showing Afghan people together with US military personell, which had been nominated per "This image contains identifiable Afghans that may be threatened by the Taliban" by third party. As the perceived threat seemed not unreasonable, I unceremoniously speedy-deleted both images, which were unused, but had been on Commons for many years (sourced from a US-military Flickr-account, which still shows the images).
Since such deletion requests could increase in the near future, I was looking for a way to discuss this problem at least with my admin-colleagues and to find a consented solution/operating-procedure, but at the same time to avoid this topic attracting off-wiki attention for obvious reasons. As I am not aware of a closed user-group for admins on Commons, I even considered involving the oversighter-usergroup. However, per this undeletion-request by User:Awesome Aasim I feel forced to post on a public board as COM:AN. Suggestions/Opinions? --Túrelio (talk) 08:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

I dunno, does WMF handle such issues? "Threat of harm posted on-wiki" and "information on-wiki that could be a threat to someone off-wiki" are subtly different, WMF handles the former but do they also action the latter? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Honestly, I doubt they would care, as the (potential) threat is external and does not concern a user. --Túrelio (talk) 08:29, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Though I think these two deletion requests are well-intentioned, with the rationale "This image contains identifiable Afghans that may be threatened by the Taliban" we would have to delete all images showing identifiable Afghans together with US or allied military personell. That, of course, could be a stance - a bit extreme, but we could say that for the protection of the Afghan people, we don't want that content here. The images, in most cases, would be still out there (as they were in most cases taken from US military and other public domain sources on the net), so it would be more of a symbolic decision, but we could do it, though only after wider community discussion and consensus IMHO - as it would be a general question and not focussed on individual persons. In my opinion, we should follow a less radical approach: If there are deletion requests that seem to come from the affected persons or their relatives themselves; if it is plausible that the requests are coming from people fearing for their safety, honor these and delete the images. But don't delete everything, and also don't delete single images because a third party merely thinks that "Afghans that may be threatened by the Taliban", that would seem arbitrary - why delete image A, B, and C of identifiable Afghans, but not D, E, and F? Consequently, I would restore these two images for the time being. Gestumblindi (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Well, we don't know who is being the DR. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:50, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
We are missing crucial information: What was the source of these images? Were they in use (for example on Wikipedia)? Are they avaialable elsewhere online? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:08, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
As I had written above expressedly, they were not in on-wiki use and sourced (still available) to a US military Flickr account[9]. --Túrelio (talk) 12:19, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
  • I would say speedy deletions are not needed in such cases and proper DRs are preferred. But I hope such DRs be closed in exactly 7 days (or as soon as possible), not in months. As an admin, I am ready to close them myself. Feel free to ping me or draw my attention to them by any means including writing on my talk page. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:05, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
I'm happy to take down photos of people personally feeling threatened. But I can't imagine the Taliban would bother looking at us without first scraping those US military Flickrs. And there's definite value to having visual records of that period of history; Afghans and US military working together is one side of the story, but it's still part of the story.--Prosfilaes (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Questions we need to answer include:
  1. Should we preemptively delete images of Afghans in US military photos, i.e. anyone can raise a DR and have the image deleted? If so, what are the boundaries here, e.g. Afghan(s) and US military member(s) must appear together in the photo? must include front of their face? must not be COM:INUSE? etc.
  2. If not, then we would only accept courtesy deletion requests from an Afghan who feels threatened by a photo of them. Do we accept all such claims at face value? If not, what kind of verification process could we use that doesn't make them feel uncomfortable?
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

History split needed

Please perform a history split on File:Kaba.jpg, in order that the original, unrestored, version is available. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done File:Kaba (restored).jpg 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Mass nomination

Is there an easy way to nominate all of someone's uploads for deletion? The uploads here [10] all seem to be copyvios and at a minimum are missing proper evidence of permission. Many are scans from newspapers/books which are almost certainly copyrighted. EnPassant (talk) 18:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

@EnPassant: you can do that with the VFC gadget. Once enabled, click the "Perform batch task" link on the sidebar while on the user's contribution page. It'll bring up the option to load all of their uploads, which you can then batch select to nominate for deletion, tag as lacking permission, or various other things. clpo13(talk) 18:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done All files tagged as "No permission". Yann (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! EnPassant (talk)!

Upload wizard mobile ui CSS fix 2

@4nn1l2 and Multichill: As follow up for last request. I now got the beta commons interface admin rights and tested the CSS-rules and modified it to gadget. So these could be added now to real commons too.

--Zache (talk) 17:06, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Also note, this will effect to desktop version too. If wide of the screen is smaller than the UploadWizard's fixed 750px+left panel width then it will change the UploadWizard to single column. --Zache (talk) 00:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: : I updated the MediaWiki:Gadget-uploadWizardMobile.css on beta and now it includes fixes for the UI bugs reported by Donald Trung. It could be updated to commons.wikimedia.org too. --Zache (talk) 13:16, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Please delete or hide upload history

Recently I uploaded File:Vliegende mieren A.jpg. Because of the action of Schlurcherbot I noticed that I forgot for privacy reasons to delete the GPS information in the EXIF data. I have uploaded a new version without this GPS info, but from the file history all info can be found. Could you please hide the original upload on 2021 jul 30 11:27 and the changes on 2021 sep 15 01:41, 2021 sep 15 09:20 and 2021 sep 15 om 22:43. Another option is to delete the file and that I upload a new one with a different name. Thanks. Wouter (talk) 13:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:36, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Abusefilter tweaks for POTY 2020

Could an admin please swap Picture of the Year/2020/ in for the existing Picture of the Year/2019/ in the following abuse filters: 77, 96, & 129. It may be worth adding my name to the 'exclusions' list in 96 as well. Thank ye kindly! firefly ( t · c ) 16:33, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 16:45, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
4nn1l2 Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 06:10, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Picture of the Day

Today's Picture of the Day does not load for me either on my desktop or my mobile phone. Anyone else facing the same problem? 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:11, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm having the same issue. It may have to do with the picture's extreme width? (34,033 × 5,265 pixels). I can load the original file on File:Paisaje en Sutton, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 98-106 PAN.jpg (Link "Original File") but the preview images don't load. - Oh, nevermind, now it suddenly works! Gestumblindi (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
What does "does not load mean"? I can see the image (i.e. its thumbnail) on the main page, but indeed, I cannot see it on File:Paisaje en Sutton, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 98-106 PAN.jpg. Most likely the same issue as in Special:PermanentLink/591668287#File:Monotype font samples.png broken by some kind of change?. --jdx Re: 20:22, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
The issue of the Main Page got fixed for me magically too, just like Gestumblindi.
Still I cannot see the thumbnail at File:Paisaje en Sutton, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 98-106 PAN.jpg and the Main Page used to be exactly like this (no thumbnails, only filename). 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:39, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
A few days ago I experienced the same issue for every Commons picture everywhere in Wikimedia projects - that is, for a while, all Wikipedia pages etc. just displayed the file names of the embedded Commons pictures instead of the thumbnails. Maybe for 30 minutes or so. Gestumblindi (talk) 23:24, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Porn

Can someone have a look at the work of User:YoungSamantha? The porn is probably stolen, and one of the items was inserted just now on en-wiki by User:JohnDahlBerger, whom I blocked, and on whom I'm about to run CU because this has LTA written all over it. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 14:27, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

FYI: This is just Desperado1995 - see w:Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Desperado1995. I haven't been categorising on Commons (e.g., Asturias1995, Bolshevik1995, Tuxedo1995, etc.) because they're obvious and not frankly worth the time. Эlcobbola talk 14:57, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

File:09541jfGuadalupe Cloverleaf Interchange J P Rizal Cembo Station Mandaluyong Makati Cityfvf 24.jpg

I would like to request an admin to blur the billboard ads here and conduct revision deletion afterwards. Thanks in advance. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 03:55, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Also one more file that needs blurring of copyvio billboards: File:09541jfGuadalupe Cloverleaf Interchange J P Rizal Cembo Station Mandaluyong Makati Cityfvf 29.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:00, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Another one needing blurring: File:09632jfGuadalupe Ferry Interchange J P Rizal Cembo Station Mandaluyong Makati Cityfvf 14.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:14, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: No need for adminship to blur a file and uploading a new version. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:33, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@Yann: I requested here because I don't have any apps that will edit those files in a way that does not destroy their exif metadata (I solely use phone in contributing). Another thing, they must be revision deleted, something that we non-admins cannot do. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@JWilz12345: For blurring, you should ask on Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop. Then you can ask the revision deletions here. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@Yann: the DW elements are now blurred. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:51, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 14:11, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Gadget and abusefilter tweaks for POTY 2020

Could an IAdmin please update MediaWiki:Gadget-EnhancedPOTY.js with the changes here, and MediaWiki:Gadget-POTYEnhancements.core.js with the changes here. Secondly, could an admin please swap "2020" in for "2019" in the #POTY 2019 section at the Titleblacklist. Thanks, firefly ( t · c ) 13:15, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Apologies, forgot to also ask that once the above gadget changes are made, could an IA also enable the gadget at MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition - essentially restoring this edit. firefly ( t · c ) 13:19, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@Firefly ✓ Done AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:16, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@AntiCompositeNumber: thanks, sorry - one more: can you (or another IA) update MediaWiki:Gadget-POTYEnhancements.js with the changes here. Thanks, firefly ( t · c ) 15:40, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
@Firefly ✓ Done AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Protections and voting enabling for POTY 2020

In what should hopefully be the last POTY 2020 related request, can I ask that the following happen:

Thanks once again, firefly ( t · c ) 17:04, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Just an additional note - in the past the Titleblacklist change has been made to coincide exactly with the start of Round 1 (in this case at 18:00 UTC, or in about 40 minutes). If the actioning admin feels able to do that we'd appreciate it, however I understand that's not entirely a reasonable request to make of someone, so no pressure! firefly ( t · c ) 17:20, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done I will do the Titleblacklist change exactly at 18:00 UTC. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:46, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you 4nn1l2 that is immensely kind of you! firefly ( t · c ) 17:47, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

Issue with anonymity

Good night (when I am writing this). When I made this account I was like 12 years old, I think. Now that I have grown I regret having put my actual name. That's why I request to changing this username to AdroidTheOne if you may, please. I would like to ensure that my name will be changed in the most pages as possible, like the files I have uploaded. Otherwise; I request their deletion, providing I will upload them again with the new username. --JuanMartinExeni (talk) 00:47, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

@JuanMartinExeni: Hi. Instructions for changing your username are at m:SRUC.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 00:56, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

POTY gadget dependency issue

Could an admin familiar with Gadgets add jquery.ui as a dependency for POTYEnhancements.core here at the definitions page. IIRC all it should require is prepending it to the list of dependencies for the entry (dependencies=mediawiki.util,site). Without the explicit dependency some users may experience UI oddities. Thanks to Zhuyifei1999 for finding this). firefly ( t · c ) 12:18, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by AntiCompositeNumber. 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Main page announcement for POTY

Apologies for yet another request - I stupidly forgot to include this in my post yesterday.

Could we have the Main Page 'announcement' for POTY R1 turned on? That means effectively reimplementing this edit, except linking to COM:POTY/2020, and with the text reading "Round 1 ends 1 October". Thanks! firefly ( t · c ) 18:54, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 08:07, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Protected edit requests backlog

could you please resolve some Category:Commons protected edit requests. many are waiting for months. RZuo (talk) 08:16, 20 September 2021 (UTC)

Logo vandal, again

82.78.75.246 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Questionable categorizations, reported in the past without any admin action: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 86#Logo vandal. Gikü (talk) 20:00, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure, that the user should be punished. I deleted some empty categories. Taivo (talk) 08:48, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Category renaming

Please revert this move. Thanks in advance. Unnamed UserName me 01:43, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done I reverted the move, warned the user and nominated one unused selfie for deletion. Taivo (talk) 08:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Can you tell me if Doron Webber submitting the photo consent email? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:645:C001:23A0:E5F8:C118:8A1B:A67C (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Not that I could find.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 22:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Question about deletion rationale for possible hoax on en.wiki

There are a number of images that are used in a likely hoax article on en.wiki that are hosted here on commons. Most of the images are photoshopped or otherwise manipulated with added CBS logos, logos for a radio show that does not exist, or simply inserting one person into a picture with someone else. A couple may be just unedited images of someone standing with a celebrity. Would they fall under not educationally useful or self promotion? Is there a rational for being used as a hoax? Or would the files be okay, as long as the copyright status is fine? The images are File:P-9P1-MGY-5CJ_-_Copy.jpg, File:Mets_(5.jpg, File:Rudd.png, File:BRYCE_FINAL_2018-07-16_07-16-38_Moment_-_Copy.jpg, File:Fenton_with_Georgiou.jpg, File:NathanLane-StateTheatreEaston-Dabour-028_-_Copy_-_Copy_(3)_-_Copy_-_Copy.jpg, File:2018_Vandervoort.jpg and File:Georgiou_with_van_Straten.png. There is also File:Georgiou.jpg of the person just standing alone. There are also File:Rudd.png, File:John_Georgiou.jpg, File:Photograph_(2).gif and File:John_L._Georgiou.jpg uploaded by another user apparently involved in the hoax. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:06, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

See here for an admission from the editor that they did not take the pictures themselves. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 17:09, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

The article using some of these images has been deleted. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:40, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done I deleted the files with a DR. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a ton. I appreciate it. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 20:25, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

user:NicoleSharp

Please put a redirect to "user:Nicole Sharp" from "user:NicoleSharp." "user:NicoleSharp" is reserved so that no one can register this username due to its similarity to "user:Nicole Sharp". I need the redirect from "NicoleSharp" to "Nicole Sharp" to provide attribution for images uploaded to Commons from my Flickr account of "NicoleSharp." Please see "commons:village pump#incorrect filenames and attribution for Flickr images" and "user talk:Ser Amantio di Nicolao#Flickr wiki authorship" for additional details. Nicole Sharp (talk) 08:57, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Rather than that, how about
|author=[https://www.flickr.com/photos/nicolesharp/ Nicole Sharp @ Flickr] / [[user:Nicole Sharp|Nicole Sharp]]
in the description? That gives:
Nicole Sharp @ Flickr / Nicole Sharp
see File:2021-05-13T06 (Dan's Rock Overlook Park) 377.jpg
I prefer this, as it puts the fix on the files where it's needed, rather than creating two entities in userspace (we can guarantee that a few years from now, someone will delete that). Also we'd have to fix the file pages anyway. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:58, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
But this fix doesn't ensure that kind of attribution for future uploads from their Flickr. @Nicole Sharp: regardless of whether you change the author information as suggested above, you can register User:NicoleSharp as a "doppelganger" account. There is even a template to put on that page afterwards. You would just add this as the only line of the user page: {{doppelganger|Nicole Sharp}} — Rhododendrites talk |  16:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
I cannot edit the page "user:NicoleSharp" since I am not an administrator. If you can please make this change, that would be appreciated. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
  • There is no current link on the uploaded file desc pages to any user page on Commons.
I prefer this (without the doppelganger) because we just don't need the doppelganger. We're creating the link manually, so we might as well create that link and point them wherever we prefer, doing it directly. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
  • If someone needs to contact the original author of the photo, they should use my Wikimedia Commons talkpage. It is better if the authorship links to my Wikimedia Commons account instead of my Flickr account. They can still access my Flickr account from the source link, but unless the authorship is also linked to my Wikimedia user page, there is no way for them to know that I am on Wikimedia Commons if only the Flickr authorship is given (other than by linking to my homepage from Flickr, but that is roundabout). Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
    • Okay, I see that you used both, separated by a slash. That could be better. My Wikimedia userpage links to my website homepage, which links to Flickr, and likewise my Flickr account links to my website homepage, which links to my Wikimedia userpage. I have more control over my Wikimedia userpage though (e.g. to add links and other information) than I do with my Flickr userpage, so that is the preferred link to use for authorship of content hosted on Wikimedia Commons. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

A better solution would be to modify the code of the Flickr to Commons upload tool to ask the uploader if the author of the photo(s) already has a Commons account, and then automatically add a wikilink to the Commons userpage in the authorship. Nicole Sharp (talk) 22:28, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Page renaming

Hi, will an administrator please rename OberonMouse13.png as requested in the template there. Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 16:16, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Need some help moving two pages (cant fix it myself anymore)

Hi there, while uploading a few historic manuscript I made two mistakes, and now I can't fix it myself anymore:

  1. This file should be moved to "Shah Abbas the Great hunting in Karabakh, Safavid Iran, 17th century.jpg"[11]
  2. This file should be moved to "Shah Abbas the Great hunting in Radkan, Safavid Iran, 17th century.jpg"[12]

Could someone move these two pages for me? Would really appreciate it! Best, - LouisAragon (talk) 21:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

 Half done The second one done, the first one does not make sense as the source is the same as the destination. BTW, next time just use {{Rename}}. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 22:23, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: Thanks for spotting that mistake on my part; its getting late over here, heh. Btw, what to do about this redirect remnant? (File:Shah Abbas the Great hunting in Karabagh, Safavid Iran, 17th century.jpg) It will still lead to the wrong image. - LouisAragon (talk) 23:13, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Fixed [13] 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:06, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Upload failed

Not sure if this is the right forum for this issue. Since 1 h the upload manager doesn't work and get allways after minutes the same "Our servers are currently under maintenance or experiencing a technical problem. Please try again in a few minutes.

See the error message at the bottom of this page for more information." thx --Derzno (talk) 07:03, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Exception for edit filter 56

Can a sysop please add an exception for "COM:OMGAPENIS" at filter 56? See this abuse filter report by BirdValiant (permalink). pandakekok9 10:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Antun Motika paintings

Would an admin mind taking a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Antun Motika paintings and seeing if it can be closed? The uploader of the two files being discussed has been globally blocked and nobody else has commented since the DR was started back in February. If the files are OK as licensed, then there's no need for DR to remain open; if not, then VRT verification is unlikely to come from the uploader. Not trying to jump the queue here and if there's nothing more to do than wait, then that's fine. I just thought I ask about it here since there's be no comments claiming the files should be kept. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:11, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you 4nn1l2. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:47, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Stanford prison experiment images

Would an admin mind taking a look at Commons:Deletion requests/Stanford prison experiment images? All of the files being discussed now seem to have been VRT verified which means there's probably no reason for the DR to remain open any longer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 14:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you 4nn1l2. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

27.66.0.0/16

Spam, personal attack ([14], [15], [16], [17]... Recently blocked on vi.wp for personal attack and spamming. ⁂๖ۣۜJon ♥ ๖ۣۜDaenerys໖ 16:18, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

IP blocked for 1 week. --Túrelio (talk) 16:32, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

User Hawk Aster re-uploaded my file under a different name without my authorisation...

Hello, My file File:GIGN27 Domenjod 140618.jpg, uploaded by myself in the Category: "Groupe d'intervention de la Gendarmerie nationale" on 14 August 2018, was re-uploaded on 29 July 2019 by user:Hawk Aster without any authorisation, under the false label "own work" and under a different name : File:GIGN Training.png. It is of course wrong and should be corrected. I now wonder whether other uploads by the same user should also be investigated. Thanks in advance & best regards, --Domenjod (talk) 12:27, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Domenjod: This is particularly egregious because it's a copyright violation of Commons content by a Commons contributor, Hawk Aster (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  should indeed be watched carefully. They also falsely claim that your CC 4.0 content is public domain! Anyway, the right way to handle this is to open a deletion request, and I've done so. Hopefully an admin will handle it quickly due to this discussion. Also, just so you know, you're supposed to notify users when you talk about them here—I've done that for you as well. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 15:34, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Psiĥedelisto: . Thanks very much for your help. Much appreciated. Now, I could not communicate with user:Hawk Aster since there is no active talk page for this user...Thanks again & best regards, --Domenjod (talk) 15:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@Domenjod: When a talk page doesn't exist for a user you have to create it. They'll get the message all the same. I would note though that User talk:Hawk Aster was created by a bot on 23 February 2020, so it did indeed exist at the time you opened this, FYI. Psiĥedelisto (talk •

contribs) please always ping! 16:01, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Psiĥedelisto: I see. I got confused because, when displaying the file, User:Hawk Aster appeared in red (and still does...). Thanks again...--Domenjod (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@Domenjod, could you please check the user's other uploads, if there are more of such uncredited "duplicates". --Túrelio (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
Hello, @Túrelio: . All I can say is that only one of these files (the one I pointed to) is a copy of one of my own. Not sure if there is any easy way to check where the other files come from (or if they are "legal" !). Rgds, --Domenjod (talk) 16:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
@Túrelio: Seems like all Hawk Aster's photos are stolen, but some are hard to prove. File:GIGN 2017.webp is a Getty image by Miguel Medina, in use here. File:GIGN 2017.jpg existed in 2014 and appears on this forum: [18]. File:GIGN после боя.jpg is by Library of War. They should be stopped from doing this, as they are literally lying, claiming work they are certainly not doing from Russia. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 16:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 Comment All files by Hawk Aster are tagged or deleted. User is warned. Yann (talk) 19:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Please add a link to File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text and without padding.svg on File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg

Only admins can edit File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text.svg, so please mention my derivative work File:Wikimedia Foundation RGB logo with text and without padding.svg somewhere there so that if someone else can't find it the work isn't needlessly redone. Sorry if this is wrong place, can't figure out how to make a request to edit protected contents. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 14:31, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Next time, please add {{Edit request}} to the file talk page. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 00:25, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Continuing discussion: how to deal with DRs of identifiable Afghans feeling threatened by Taliban?

Thank you kindly Túrelio for responding to my DRs. I would like to take the opportunity to continue the discussion you started here because I believe this will become an increasingly important topic as the Taliban consolidates its power. Consequently, I think we have a responsibility, and need to be prepared to preemptively mitigate any human rights risks that may fall upon the people of Afghanistan through contributions on Wikimedia Commons (and other Wikimedia projects for that matter). I proceed in two parts. Firstly, I will list some of the arguments presented against the DRs and reasons why I disagree with them. Secondly, and more importantly, I hope to continue the discussion to develop a framework of sorts through which such requests can be vetted and acted upon because DRs in regards to Afghanistan will no doubt continue and increase over time, and I can hardly imagine the Foundation has the resources to go thought all requests in a timely manner.

Argument: The images are publicly available on Flickr and other platforms.
Response: While it is true that some of the images on Commons are publicly visible on other platforms, that is something we cannot change. However, being members of the the Wikimedia community, we have the agency to do something and by removing certain images from Commons (or archiving them from public view, if that is a possibility?) we are mitigating potential risks to the people involved by reducing the scope of access to the images.

Argument: Responding to DR of people personally feeling threatened
Response: The problem I see here is that people might not know that images of them exist, and in what context they might be framed. Hence, to say that we will "only" (or rather primarily) respond to requests from Afghans themselves doesn't quite make sense to me. How is someone supposed to send a deletion request if they don't even know the the existence of such an image on an open platform?

Argument: Emailing emergency@wikimedia.org
Response: Surely one can contact the Foundation, but this seems to me like an enormously unsustainable process considering the amount of images that can be considered "high-risk." I can hardly imagine the Foundation having the resources to go through so many requests and making decisions. Besides, considering this is a community platform, wouldn't it make more sense for us, the community, to come up with a framework through which such decisions can be made and allowing the Foundation to focus on truly crucial, imminent and life threatening cases, of which there are enough.

Argument: Value to having visual records of that period of history.
Response: I completely agree with this sentiment, hence my first question would be if anyone knows whether there is a feature to archive images and hide them from public view for X amount of time, until the crisis has been resolved. If that is not possible, one really has to think whether keeping a public record outweighs the possibility that an image could put someone in serious danger (especially considering people involved are quite likely unaware of an image of them being publicly available on such a platform).

Developing a framework to deal with DRs of identifiable Afghans that may be threatened by current Taliban administration.

Considering the the chilling sophistication and activities of companies such as Clearview AI who prey on publicly available images to train its facial recognition AI and the complete uncertainly of the technologies the Taliban might use to exert control, I believe we it is our responsibility to reduce human rights any and all risks to Afghan people that may come from Wikimedia projects.

I would argue that if the image includes someone's face that is identifiable the initial DR is accepted.

Next if the answer to any of the questions below (this is certainly not an exhaustive list, so please feel free to add/delete/edit) is a "yes", it certainly pass all grounds for deletion.

  • Is the person a human rights activist?
  • Is the person a women's rights activist?
  • Is the person a journalist, blogger, academic, writer who has openly voiced their dislike of the Taliban?
  • Has the person worked at a foreign news agency?
  • Has the person worked with the US or any of its allies?
  • Was the person part of the former Afghan administration?
  • Was the person active in any of these political parties, parties that have under the Taliban been banned?
  • Does the person belong to an ethnic minority group such as Haraza, Tajik, Uzbek...?
  • Does the person belong to a religious minority group such as Shia, Sikh, Hindu,
  • Christian, Ahmadi...?
  • Has the person been targeted by the Taliban before?
  • Is the person from the LGBTQ+ community?

This is just a preliminary framework, but I look forward to hearing what you all have to say and hope we can develop a proper workflow and protocol to protect and support the people of Afghanistan.

--Mclovinplasse (talk) 15:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

@Mclovinplasse: This really seems like an unnecessary, over-the-top level of alarm. Should Commons have similar policies for identifiable people in Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Venezuela, and other countries that have poor human rights records (by European standards)? It seems like it will be used more to censor activists in Afghanistan than it will be used to help anyone, it's not like the Taliban will give us time to discuss it. The DR process is already massively constipated, remember. I find the two deletions already carried out highly suspect as well (the filenames are US gov't standard filenames so easy to bring up in Google, so I see what was deleted). Clearly this over-the-top fear is already leading to erasure of Afghans from Commons because the people in the photos didn't request them. Why are you assuming they are even still in Afghanistan much less feel threatened in any way? This feels almost colonial to me—how can you say Afghan people have any less right to be posted here than anyone else? Please reconsider. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 15:42, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
How image removal from Commons can help people if the images originate from other sites (like US DoD Flickr service) and are still available there? Ankry (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
I think the issue is determining "feeling threatened by Taliban" when not even the users themselves are aware that these photos exist. I mean, if someone contact us [credibly] because they are endangered by a photo we have published, it seems right to speedy it. But we don't know if every Afghan depicted on Commons feels threatened by the Taliban for being here. And I find remote that we can even know in most cases. Platonides (talk) 00:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your response, @Psiĥedelisto: . I prefer discussing in lists and bullet points, I hope that format is okay with you all.
1. The situation in Afghanistan is hardly comparable to anywhere else in the world. The places you mentioned have a historical record of human rights abuses hence content on human rights defenders or any dissenters of these administrations are not as readily and publicly available (for good reason). One has to understand the uniqueness of the situation that Afghanistan is in at the moment, transitioning from an American colony wherein human rights, gender equality, freedom of expression where advocated (albeit highly problematic) and infrastructures were built to Taliban rule who’s ideals could not differ more and where people are known to be persecuted for their work.
2. On the question of whether Commons should have policies that take human rights in the foreground, I definitely think it should. For instance, to think that photographs of identifiable people can be published on Commons without their knowledge or consent is rather outdated and dangerous, especially in an age where facial recognition technology has reached extreme sophistication and censorship and surveillance is increasing around the globe.
3. How can people within images request a deletion if they are quite likely unaware of the image’s existence and publication in the first place? I may be inclined to agree that it is an erasure (although I am not even remotely advocating for the removal of all Afghans from Common as you imply), but is that not justified if it means possibly protecting someones life? Are we willing to take the risk that someone might seriously be harmed? There are individuals and groups of people that a very highly threatened under Taliban rule and as a Wikimedian I feel compelled to use my agency on this platform to help protect them.
4. In regards that this feels colonial, I don’t quite understand how. Was it Afghans who uploaded these images? In a large majority of cases no, but rather any number of western colonial organisations that have not had the decency to scrub Afghani digital footprints, Afghanis that are now being persecuted as a result of this. Here are article by Reuters, Wired and Al Jazeera reporting on this.
Concludingly, I understand what I am proposing can be quite risky and can lead to unnecessary erasure of content, hence why not work towards figuring out a rubric that can protect people while also protecting content already on Commons. --Mclovinplasse (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Please help restore the page Help:Nominate for deletion

I accidentally used 'Nominate for deletion' on this page and asked the administrator for help. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tychou12 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done by Rodhullandemu Gbawden (talk) 14:55, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Deletion request File:Suchinda Kraprayoon.jpg

Dear admins,

Unfortunately, User:Annop Nakabut cannot wait for a decision on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Suchinda Kraprayoon.jpg and keeps removing the deletion notice from the file description at File:Suchinda Kraprayoon.jpg even though the deletion request is still open and he/she has not participated in the discussion or stated a comprehensible reason why the file should be kept. Could you please take a decision on the deletion request and/or protect the file description for the time of the ongoing deletion discussion and/or warn the user against disruptive edits? Unfortunately my appeal to discuss and be patient has not been fruitful. Kind regards, --Bujo (talk) 14:14, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Annop Nakabut re-uploaded the photo. I warned him/her and deleted the file again. Taivo (talk) 07:52, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Dubious file overwrites - cleanup in aisle 9 & a possible block

User:Abro_shubro - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Abro_shubro - is uploading porn as replacement images for various things. I've reverted his changes (to date), but the history of each image could do with porn removal; and we can probably conclude that Abro_shubro is not here to build Commons. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:27, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done: User indeffed and uploads deleted. Thanks to Tagishsimon for reverting! --Achim (talk) 07:07, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photographs by Conor Ashleigh

Could someone please have a look at the files in these DRs?

The listed files were deleted because the author did not agree to publish them under a free license. However, many of the files were later re-uploaded to Commons. I'm reluctant to tag them with {{SD|G4}} because the re-uploader is an admin and likely had a good reason. Yet I couldn't find any evidence that the author has changed his mind. The author's permission would be unnecessary if the photos were taken as work for hire for the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, but it's not clear if this is the case. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Tagging Léna (talk · contribs) as she re-uploaded the files. Ixfd64 (talk) 23:38, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for the tagging ! At the moment of the upload the pictures where published under CC-by licence in Flickr. Since it was from a government body, I didn't thought it could have been Flickr-washing. My take would be to trust institutions on Flickr to have negotiated the rights with the photograph to publish their works under a free licence (it is the case in my experience with working with GLAMs), so no speedy delegation but maybe a deletion request to debate to which extend we should trust the DFAT CC-by claim. Léna (talk) 08:09, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
 Info: I've posted a comment asking the DFAT to confirm whether the pictures were taken as work for hire. Ixfd64 (talk) 17:18, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
I've definitely seen institutions screw this up, though, even ones that are usually careful. Every so often I've had to remind the Seattle Municipal Archives that they left their default CC license for their Flickr uploads on an image such as a copyrighted poster that was in their collection but was designed by a private entity. - Jmabel ! talk 18:47, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
Yep. I also once "caught" Oak Ridge National Laboratory sharing an image from Nvidia that they didn't own the rights to. Ixfd64 (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

FYI: Commons:Arbitration

Hi to all. I have moved the old arbitration proposal to a new page name and inserted a page that explains the current situation. It wasn't useful having a failed proposal as the lede on the matter. I hope that this is okay, and others may wish to hack at the initial version of the text. Once we can get a stable text then we should mark it up for translation. There were not a lot of links to the page, and some of those were better aligned to a current page, than the old proposal.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:03, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Please restore Greek alphabet

Could somebody please move Creek alphabet back to Greek alphabet, and delete Greek script? Tidying up after move vandalism from en:WP:LTA/Wikinger. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done 4nn1l2 (talk) 12:41, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Consolidated list E-H

Something weird is going on on the subject page. The last four entries in the list, all beginning with the letter "H", do not appear on the page. When I look at the raw markup, they are all there, with apparently identical wording to those above.

Is there a limit on the size or number of transclusions permitted? I note that if I temporarily delete countries above the 4 H entries, the H entries appear. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. If you see the "Post-expand include size" row in the "Parser profiling data" table below the editing box in preview mode, you will see that not only the E-H has been broken, but also other similar pages have been broken too.
The simple solution is to split the pages. Let's see what Aymatth2—the creator of these pages—thinks. 4nn1l2 (talk) 23:20, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
I suppose they should be split. I can do that. Not sure how useful they are though. The A-B list is "countries whose names start with A or B in the English language". I wonder if this is happening on the regional lists like Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Consolidated list Western Europe? Aymatth2 (talk) 13:00, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
In my opinion, alphabetically-sorted consolidated lists are not useful and can be safely deleted. Regional consolidated lists are okay, but the most useful things are simple redirects such as COM:IRAN, I think. Let's see what User:Jameslwoodward thinks. 4nn1l2 (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
The alphabetical lists are due to history: a few years ago, apart from a few country-specific sub-pages, all the copyright rules were in one alphabetical list as in Old revision of Commons:Copyright rules by territory . When splitting out pages for each territory was proposed, one concern was that we would lose the ability to view the rules as a whole. The alphabetical lists were to address that concern. There are very few page views. I would certainly not object to deleting them. Aymatth2 (talk) 17:41, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
The reported problem does not (and will not) happen to the regional lists. Here is a detailed report, according to which none reaches even to the 70% of the threshold. So they are all safe. Currently, the heaviest page is that of South America:
4nn1l2 (talk) 15:18, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

I don't find the regional lists at all helpful. For me, the most logical thing is to go to the alpha lists, which I do regularly. I agree that that's not completely logical -- in most cases it would be faster to go to COM:XYZ, provided that I knew how to spell XYZ which I usually do. I'm not sure I understand why we can't simply solve the problem by further dividing the lists -- E-H might be E-F and G-H if that were the only problem. Since most of the groups are a problem, someone should start at A and set up groups that were maybe 70% full. That could be me, if I would not be stepping on toes.

I see the objection that the alpha list is alpha in English and would be different in other languages. Certainly speakers of other languages could create their own alpha lists, but much of Commons relies on English -- Categories for example. I don't know ow many of the country summaries are available in a language other than English -- I see that there is a French version for France and a Spanish version for Spain, but not vice-versa -- so it's probably not many. Thus an alpha list in another language would not be very useful. Perhaps where the country name alphabetizes differently in the native language, we could enter it in this list twice -- Spain both under S and under E. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:16, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I started them but am neutral about whether they are kept (split) or deleted. Probably simplest to split into one per letter of the alphabet. It is possible even that may not work long term though. The country-specific articles keep on steadily expanding. I think you will find fairly complete translations in French, but only spotty coverage in other languages apart from the countries where those languages are spoken. It would not be difficult to}} generate lists in other languages, just a slightly tedious job. {{CRT list2}} has the complete list, translated into many different languages. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:34, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Copyright rules by territory

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O
P Q R Sa-Sl So-Sy T U V W X Y Z

I am going ahead with split into one per letter. Then we can forget about these lists for at least a few years. Aymatth2 (talk) 12:41, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Done. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Reporting ducks of already blocked sockpuppet Nicojaba2780

Hi, I recently saw a request to do a SVG version of a PNG file, which I did (File:Ruta 5 (Chile-5Rb).svg), turns out I opened a can of worms. After digging a little bit I want to report User:201.189.64.8, User:200.124.48.245 and User:Nicolás barria as duck sockpuppets of already blocked User:Nicojaba2780. Their behavior is to spam-request road graphics of Chile as in Revision of User talk:Roqz, Revision of User talk:Fredddie, Revision of User talk:Clayolactico. --Roqz (talk) 03:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

@Roqz: Could you please fill up a Commons:Requests for checkuser? Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:00, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

User:Ewan First

Promotion-only userpage needs to be deleted. --103.253.26.33 19:22, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. Userpage and all uploads deleted, user indefinitely blocked. Taivo (talk) 06:36, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Speedy some temporarily undeleted / incompletely redeleted files

Hi all.

In Commons:UNDEL/Archive/2021-07#File:Whenwewereveryyo0000unse i2b7 orig 0046.png and File:Whenwewereveryyo0000unse i2b7 orig 0048.png, a number of images were undeleted so they could be migrated to English Wikisource (different copyright policy). That process is complete and the emigrated images now live at s:Category:When We Were Very Young images. However, for the obvious reason, once the clock expired only the two images mentioned in the section title were re-deleted. IOW, they've been through the process with outcome "delete" so it's just the technical job of implementing it that's missing due to a snafu.

Could someone run through and delete everything in Special:PrefixIndex/File:Whenwewereveryyo0000unse i2b7?

Alternately, I can either tag them with a temporary category; tag them with a speedy template; or generate a PWB-friendly list of them in a sandbox somewhere. Or whatever other approach makes sense. Xover (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

 Doing… I started, but now I get Uncaught TypeError: $(...).append(...).dialog is not a function from https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex/File:Whenwewereveryyo0000unse_i2b7 at line 402:644 TypeError: $(...).append(...).dialog is not a function at Object.fail (<anonymous>:402:644) at Object.secureCall (<anonymous>:399:848) at Object.nextTask (<anonymous>:399:958) at HTMLLIElement.<anonymous> (<anonymous>:204:2046) at HTMLLIElement.dispatch (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery%2Coojs-ui-core%2Coojs-ui-widgets&skin=monobook&version=1o0br:70:214) at HTMLLIElement.elemData.handle (https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/load.php?lang=en&modules=jquery%2Coojs-ui-core%2Coojs-ui-widgets&skin=monobook&version=1. Yann (talk) 14:29, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
The error message is still there, so I have opened a discussion on VPT. Yann (talk) 18:14, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
I guess the Toolforge is down due to the certificate expiration, see
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T291387
--Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Xover (talk) 09:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Advertising accounts

Hi, Regarding COM:AN/B#Reporting some accounts, is there a consensus to block these accounts on sight? It would be useful to have a checkuser: apparently all are from Vietnam. Are they socks, or just different people using the same marketing method? Thanks, Yann (talk) 14:08, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I would say to block spam accounts on sight; that doesn't preclude a checkuser, which sounds like a good idea. Do we have any edit filter that prevents new users from adding external links? Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:42, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism filter?

Template:Tracking Is there a filter possible preventing this type of contribution? The vandal is not going to stop, and the only other workaround I see is if I semiprotect all my uploads.--Ymblanter (talk) 05:30, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

(Now only available to administrators, I deleted all the uploads).--Ymblanter (talk) 06:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, AbuseFilter is lame when it comes to action='upload' but you may try to play with variable file_sha1 and function contains_any and feed it with SHA1 hashes of all images the vandal uses. This is kinda naive but may work if the vandal is dumb. Also you may try to build a gallery with all your uploads and cascade semi protect it. --jdx Re: 06:57, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, I will just cascade-protect several hundreds of my recent uploads--Ymblanter (talk) 14:53, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: We might be able to do something based on page_first_contributor based n Special:AbuseFilter/examine/1778185835, look at user_age of contributor and then other components. If you can identify a range of pages that you have had disrupted, then I can have a look-see.  — billinghurst sDrewth 15:36, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
This is an LTA which on a regular basis shows op on the English Wikipedia adding images of corpses etc to noticeboards and unrelated articles. This is the first time I encountered them on Commons, probably they went after me because I blocked one of the socks or removed the images, or may be deleted the images from Commons, I do not know. I spent about an hour in the morning cleaning up the junk they uploaded on top of my images. I guess they will further attack other en.wp administrators, but since most of these are not Commons administrators, it will be more difficult for them to clean up this mess. The only reasonable solution would be prohibit uploads by non-autoconfirmed users, or at least to prohibit them upload other versions on top of existing images, but the Commons community is clearly not prepared to take this step. I myself have dozens of trhousands uploads, protecting all of them is impractical, but I protect several hundred most recent ones now. Cleaning up photos of corpses is not exactly what I like to do most during breakfast.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:25, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
The cascading semi-protection is not available, meaning the only option is to protect the images one by one.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: See Special:AbuseFilter/254 It tests successfully for those files that you fixed yesterday. You can see that it is specific, so not useful as a generic catchall filter. Just there to run for a while to see if we can get false positives.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
Great, thanks a lot.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
The LTA returned and predictable hit different files (thanks @Elcobbola: for taking care of them before I saw the damage), so protection remains the only option. Since I am not the only one under attack, I seriously encourage prohibiting reuploads to non-confirmed users.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:13, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
I would support such a restriction. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
+1. Since we have COM:OVERWRITE anyway, I don't understand why should nearly everyone still be able to overwrite. Instead, we should have a usergroup for this, just like file movers or LR. Regards --A.Savin 02:38, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Special:ListGroupRights shows that "reupload" is a right in "autoconfirmed" Special:AbuseFilter/examine/1779640675 Aristand's upload shows they had all the rights that are auto assigned . The right also appears in "confirmed user" and "administrators". So any change to autoconfirmed is going to need significant rethink and plan on manual or automatic assignation of a group with that right.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: "Autoconfirmed" actually means nothing. It should be seriously considered to remove the "reupload" right as automated setting for any "autoconfirmed". At latest since we have the anti-overwrite policy, that doesn't make sense anymore. "Reupload" should be included in sysop, LR/TE flag, or granted on request. I don't see how this change could cause problems. Regards --A.Savin 13:10, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

That was sort of my point, though what is the replacement. For Wikisources, there are definitely reasons to reupload a work where you are fixing missed scan pages, or rescanned pages, and the like. There are times when someone can do a better cleanup of an extracted images (so here we are separating self-reupload from reupload. Often these can be done by people with advanced rights at those wikis, but zero similar rights here. So we need to look at this with a wider view than Commons and WPs. I am not comfortable with autoconfirmed, as it stands today, and not happy with a completely restricted manually assigned process. I definitely agree that the overwrite policy is under-policed, and abused, though, there is a clear need for reupload, though often we would expect self-reupload. I think that these factors need to be teased apart and it is more than just moving the reupload right to a very restricted group of editors. Noting that I have raised a phabricator ticket to have reuploads appear 1) as a specific special:tags in RC; 2) to have it as a specific binary abusefilter component for reupload.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:50, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

 Comment I have changed AF/254 to use different measures to identify pages with existing files, though I am not particularly happy with using either. I have asked Daimona Eaytoy whether there is a ready means to identify reuploads/new versions of files that I am missing.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:40, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I will stop protecting my new uploads for the tie being, let us see whether this works.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:51, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
Daimona says that the choices that I made are best. To further protect through AF is going to need to means limiting to user groups that are manually assigned through Special:UserRights.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:54, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Art works of Gali Huss

I understand from User:היידן that some files he uploaded of art works of Gali Huss should be deleted, as the artist decided he is not willing to release it in free license. Can you please delete the following files:

Eran (talk) 19:31, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Please delete the photos. The artist seeks to give others for use and has not yet signed a copyright waiver.היידן (talk)
✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 06:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Oversight (previous admin working to help me on this has left the Wikimedia Commons community)

I previously requestedsome help removing some personal information from some things. Following my request, an admin had been helping me address it.

Because of something about MediaWiki itself, the steps that needed to be taken were a bit of a process. Although some work has been done thus far to address the problem for some of the content, the administrator that was helping me get the personal information removed, ~riley, apparently ceased working on Wikimedia Commons.

So I am left unsure of how I am supposed to proceed in getting the rest of the content addressed.

I would rather not discuss any further details here publicly, but if I could correspond via e-mail with an administrator who would be willing to help take care of this, I would very much appreciate it. Tharthan (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

@Tharthan: please see Commons:Oversight for the contact details, if you are looking for true oversight, rather than a revision deletion. That is the only place where the people with the rights are able to progress your matter.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:11, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
@Billinghurst: The previous admin who was working with me was doing so with regard to revision deletion. They suggested that it made the most sense to do that first, and then once that had been accomplished, I could then pursue oversight. Tharthan (talk) 16:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
@Tharthan: If it is oversight that you now need it can only be attended to through the contact point that you have, no one else here can do anything; and stewards are unlikely to intercede. If you you are sending requests to the OS email address and not getting any response then please make that an overt statement here and then we as a community can request that information from the OSers looking for them to review whether we have the right number of people doing the role, and whether there is a need for a refresh.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Special:ListUsers/oversight is the list and all have been active at Commons in the last month.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
The revision deletion step was only fully completed for some of the content. It has not yet been completed for what is left. And, as I said, the reason why the revision deletion step has only been completed for some of the content is because the former administrator who was working with me retired from Wikimedia Commons.
Therefore, right now, I am seeking to have the revision deletion step completed for the rest of the content. After that is finished, I could (and absolutely would) pursue oversight for all of the relevant content.
But, as I said, going into any more detail than that about the matter here seems unwise to me. If you (or another administrator) require(s) further detail, I would be much more comfortable discussing it via e-mail (like before) with whoever it is who might be able to help me. I mean no offence in my insistence upon that, but the matter in question is something that renders such a request prudent. Tharthan (talk) 03:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Request to lock "File:BGC.jpg"

Good day. May I request an admin to lock the file name "File:BGC.jpg"? It is random and not descriptive, and may be used to upload problematic images (title has been used to upload 3 problematic images in the past). Thanks! JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

 Comment Not sure. The newest upload is 5 years old. We have lived 5 years without problem. Taivo (talk) 20:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Block request (IP)

Hi, Could an admin block 82.78.75.105 please - They keep adding vehicles with logos on to logo categories (Ie this, this and this were all added to Category:Iveco Logos - obviously this category is meant for actual logos),
Anyway I've asked them to stop and given them a final warning but they've continued - I had also some months ago told them to stop on another IP too, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:11, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
Many thanks, –Davey2010Talk 19:08, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Exception for edit filter 56, again

This time a French word gets mistaken for an obscenity by abuse filter 56; see this user's filter log from 10:39 to 11:03 UTC. Weirdly even if it's not in all caps, the filter still gets tripped; something's seriously wrong with the filter. pandakekok9 11:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

This is not correct. The filter does not get triggered if the word is not in all caps. The user has always written the word GAY in all caps (see the English descriptions such as {{en|1=Eléonore GAY}}). Why do they write the family name in all caps? 4nn1l2 (talk) 01:27, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Because that's the way it's done in some places. I'm not sure who exactly, besides Esperantists, but you put the family name in all caps because different cultures have different places the family name may go in the name, so you write Isaac ASIMOV and NATSUME Sōseki, instead of writing "Sōseki Natsume" or "Natsume Sōseki (this Japanese name puts the family name first)". It's an attempt to be more international.--Prosfilaes (talk) 02:33, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! This seems sensible to me now.
The only solution that comes to my mind is to remove the word GAY from the filter altogether.
I'll wait for 48 hours to see if someone else comes up with a better idea. If not, I will proceed with removing the word. 4nn1l2 (talk) 03:25, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: A solution could be to make exceptions for every member of Category:Gay (surname); alas, Eléonore GAY is not a member yet, so could you make an exception just for her?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:38, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
✓ Done Added an exception just for Eléonore GAY. 4nn1l2 (talk) 19:13, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
@4nn1l2: Thanks! Pinging @El92100, Pandakekok9 as OPs.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:17, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Instant Delete broken

Hi, Since yesterday, the Instant Delete gadget is broken. The wheel turns indeefinitely, and the file is never deleted. Any idea? Yann (talk) 21:17, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Flickr file names

I've already posted this request several times, but without any resolution. @Ser Amantio di Nicolao: copied a number of my photographs from Flickr Pro to Wikimedia Commons, but changed the file names. While this is certainly permitted by the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license that I use for my photos, changing the file names creates a number of technical problems for providing proper attribution under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license. For example, if I have to delete and then re-upload a photo album to Flickr Pro, or if I switch photo hosting from Flickr Pro back to Piwigo, the attribution hyperlinks will no longer work. The only way to find the original source image is with the original file name, which I deliberately keep intact for this reason. The original file name does not show in the EXIF, image description, or anywhere else on the Wikimedia Commons page for the imported image, which I would argue is an important part of the "Attribution" requirement for the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license (since it provides the name of the original source file, in addition to providing the name of the original author), even if it might not be legally required.

Is there any way to rename the images to (for example) "OriginalFileName (FlickrID)"? If not, can these images be deleted and then uploaded again using the correct file names? File names are not unique (e.g. there is more than one image named "IMG_0001") but the combinations of "OriginalFileName (FlickrID)" or "AuthorName-AlbumName-OriginalFileName" are always unique. The Flickr ID of an image can change though (for example if the image is deleted and then re-uploaded) so using "AlbumName-OriginalFileName" is better in the long run for providing attribution. I don't mind uploading them myself, but I cannot upload any of the images that were already uploaded by Ser Amantio di Nicolao, since they are duplicates unless the original uploads are deleted first. I also have no way to upload more than 50 images at a time, which makes uploading the images myself difficult, unless someone can elevate my upload privileges to allow uploading more than 50 images at a time.

The images are listed at: [19] and [20]. The title sequences are:

If the images cannot be renamed or deleted, then the sequence of images titled "File:View from the Cove Overlook Rest Area, Keyser's Ridge, Garrett, Maryland, May 26, 2021…" should be categorized as "Lunar eclipse of 2021 May 26 in the United States." I don't know how to batch-categorize images.

—Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:19, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Ghammakhor

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ghammakhor

None of above files are user own work. this User uploads file from google image in Commons under own work title. please delete all of them. act of this users also make problem for other wikis too because this users change with own copyright violated files with original files of articles like this and so

Also if look at this talk page you can see a lof of file that have already deleted

act of this user is not helpful for Wikipedia please block this account

[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 06:55, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

✓ Done. I blocked the user for a year and will delete his/her uploads. Taivo (talk) 14:25, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive_86&oldid=733357479"