Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

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

^{Translate this page}

Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

purge Admin backlog

---

Copyright:

• Copyright violations: ~17
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~0
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2024-12: ~57

Other:

• Duplicates: ~2
• Advertisements/spam: ~0
• Personal photos/selfies: ~27
• Other speedy deletions: ~3
• Categories for discussion: 84 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~2
• Requests for unblock: ~4
• Undeletion requests: ~8

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~41
• Interface admin: ~25
• Technical: ~0
• Template protection: ~13
• Protection level: ~0

See also: DR, HMS, …

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

Note

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

User:Finoskov, redux

Would another admin please have a look in at section #User:Finoskov, above? There may be something to it, and I tried to work it through, but have been unable to get anywhere. No other admin has really gotten involved, and this has just been sitting. - Jmabel ! talk 18:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Pretty please? - Jmabel ! talk 18:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Jmabel: My interpretation of what's going on is as follows:

Finoskov seems to be acting in good faith, but has a pattern of making incorrect edits when applying categories - an issue that has been brought to their attention by multiple users over a long period of time

The subject matter is hyper-specific - exact models in exact years in exact locations

Finoskov has chosen not to engage with the AN/UP thread, but their comment here indicates (if Google translate is correct) that they acknowledge Buch-t's concerns are regularly correct

The above comment also said (again, if Google translate is correct) - essentially - the time I spend on the project is limited and I respond first to people that talk to me in French. Considering that the AN/UP thread has been open for over a month, and they've continued to edit elsewhere during that month, I find it hard to suppress my cynicism that they're just being evasive

I think a two week block for disruptive editing is justified - miscategorization is disruptive. What are your thoughts? Should I pull the trigger?

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:15, 30 November 2024

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: Yes, that is a correct understanding of what they wrote in French (sorry, I didn't think to translate it). I don't really have an opinion on sanctions here, because I could not follow the complaint. Your assessment sounds plausible. - Jmabel ! talk 21:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

 Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 02:36, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

We haven't started deleting old, longstanding categories, after their contents have been moved somewhere else, have we?

I recently noticed that @Joeyconnick had manually moved all the contents of a category that had been in existence for well over a decade, to another category, and then called for the speedy deletion of the old category....

In my note on his or her user talk page I described the process of deleting old categories as disruptive, because we have no way of knowing how many third party sites have linked to the old name. I said the deletion of old categories, that may be linked to from third party sites, "makes the commons look fragile, unreliable, and poorly administered."

I undid the first call for speedy deletion I came across. I undid the second one, too.

But I am concerned Joey has gone on a recent binge of undiscussed category moves, followed by a large number of calls for the speedy deletions of categories he or she didn't like the name of, so I am asking for more scrutiny here. They did this 19 times today, alone. Geo Swan (talk) 02:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no need for administrative intervention here. These are completely reasonable category moves that match the enwiki naming convention. Because categories are so rarely linked to from external sites compared to files, it is not essential to keep category redirects when moving a category unless it is likely that the old name would be mistakenly used (such as a prominent building being renamed). These moves were simply replacing a parenthetical with the word "station"; users are unlikely to mistakenly use the old category name since the new category name will appear in HotCat when entering the base name

Your messages on Joeyconnick's talk page were unnecessarily rude and alarmist. Nothing they did was unreasonable; a simple "hey, I think it's better to leave category redirects" would have been a far more productive message for you to leave. It was only 64 minutes between the first of those messages and posting here, during which time Joeyconnnick was not active and cannot be assumed to have seen the messages. Posting here is a needless escalation of a trivial disagreement. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Just checking one example of category deletion, fr:Kipling_(métro_de_Toronto)#Voir_aussi now has a broken link to Commons. Hopefully someone can go through and check all the deletions to see what else has been broken. @Bedivere who made that deletion. Commander Keane (talk) 06:28, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I see. That would not be a problem if the categories were linked to Wikidata... Bedivere (talk) 07:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Even when linked to Wikidata it is better to move the category and wait some days before deleting the redirect. Sometimes the automatic moving fails and with the redirect bots will fix this. The new names have the problem that some of them might not be unique as they only have the station name without the town. GPSLeo (talk) 07:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

All such requests for speedy deletion are in violation of policy COM:CATRED.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

I've restored the ones I deleted. Bedivere (talk) 17:43, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Categories are not automatically renamed based on English Wikipedia.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Yup, I've declined cat moves for the reason that it doesn't line up with the other Wikipedias. And I also agree that speedy deletion of old category names is usually not appropriate. Abzeronow (talk) 17:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

In this case, these are stations in English-speaking places that have well-defined enwiki naming standards. Unless Commons creates its own naming standards for these stations (that somehow differs from the well-thought-out enwiki standards), it makes sense to match enwiki. The old format (which was also inherited from enwiki) was distinctly inferior. We can disagree about whether deleting the category redirects was appropriate - I don't think these are a case where CATRED says not to delete - but Geo Swan's response was unquestionably hostile. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

If they are longstanding categories, clearly Commons has such standards. Obviously, it's unlikely to be stable at some Wikipedia if they move them around just now.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 22:47, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

There has never been any naming standards on Commons - they simply inherited the enwiki name at the time of creation. The enwiki names were changed around 7 years ago as part of a large standardization project. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Your free to propose that reasoning in a CfD.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 09:25, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Thuresson: The admin closes the undeletion request discussion without reading the details

I believe User:Thuresson closed this discussion about my the undeletion request without reading its details. The closing statement says: "2010 painting by Ahmad Reza Haraji (Q33131643)". However, in the details of the discussion it is clear the painter provided the necessary CC license for the work to be used in Commons. The reason it was deleted before was that it was claimed to be a derivative work. I provided arguments in detail that it is not a valid claim. (Summary of my arguments: There are actually at least four different depictions of Imam Ali in that book with variations but similar details to the deleted work. Which of those is it a derivative of? The referenced book itself describes those as conventional Ali portraits, implying that they are typical. We have at least one very similar depiction in Commons which is indisputably in the public domain. Why is it not considered a derivative of work in public domain, but rather a different particular one in the referenced book? The differences between the public domain work and the claimed original are below the threshold of originality. )

I request the discussion to be re-opened, since there was no clear community consensus about this deletion and we are losing a work of value with no solid reason. I tried contacting the admin on their user page but got no result. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker: If what you want to reopen the discussion, the correct place to do that is Commons:Undeletion requests, not this page (Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems). This is a page to request administrative action related to the inappropriate conduct of a user, and for any issue brought here you are supposed to notify the relevant user on their talk page, which it appears you did not do. I don't see any issue here calling for administrative action: you can open the issue on Commons:Undeletion requests yourself, and certainly there should not be any sanctions against User:Thuresson for what at worst is likely to have been an honest mistake. Yes, they probably should have replied to you, but one instance of failure to reply does not rise to the level of administrative action. If you can show a pattern of that happening repeatedly, it might be worth raising here. - Jmabel ! talk 18:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done - Jmabel ! talk 18:51, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel Thank you, this was helpful. I'm not experienced in Commons, so I did not know I could open an undeletion discussion for a file right after the prior discussion was closed. I was not seeking a sanction against the closing admin, I was just hoping to get the action reversed. Best regards. TheJoyfulTentmaker (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

@TheJoyfulTentmaker: yes, if you have a substantive basis to argue that a DR was wrongly decided, and you can't get a response from the closing admin, that's the way to go. Obviously, if the UDR also doesn't go your way, it's time to let go. - Jmabel ! talk 19:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Buttocksphoto and Photord

• Buttocksphoto (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Photord (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

These users are likely the same person. The accounts were created on the same day, and have a very similar uploads. For Buttocksphoto the uploaded photos are a collection of images copied from Instagram, Facebook, and similar sources (examples provided below). For Phototard I have more difficulties to find sources. Yesterday, one of them appeared on the QIC page to nominate a photo (which the other account immediately tried to promote). See also the discussion here. In my opinion, these are trolling accounts created by one individual, possibly someone who was blocked after their actions on QIC (the last similar case from a comparable period was Ptrump16 - blocked for abusing multiple accounts).

Examples of obvious (and probably intentional) copyright violations:

• File:A woman Showing her white nail and sole of feet and gold chain.png from here
• File:A woman Showing her Licking cute sole of feet.png from here

-- Jakubhal 05:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

• Check also this edit - one corrects the signature after the other -- Jakubhal 05:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

  Clearly the same person, and not here to contribute positively. Blocked and uploads nuked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

We can add another one to the list:

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

Blocked and nuked. Multichill (talk) 15:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

Reporting User:Shaan_Sengupta and User:Yann

Please be noted that user User:Shaan_Sengupta are unnecessarily reporting images uploaded under GODL-India and creating nuisance when there is a debate going on the same. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Mifiin He is adding delete request for photos added from Indian Govt accounts. Now discussion is clarified that these images are clearly from Govt accounts, he is not backing off nor trying to be reasonable and understanding and continuing with vandalism attempts. Requesting Administrator's to educate him and make him stop indulging in vandalism. User:Yann is getting reporting to Administrators removed and covering User:Shaan_Sengupta and threatening me for reporting the user for vandalism. Please take action. Thank you. Mifiin (talk) 17:30, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

 Comment For information, I blocked Mifiin for a week. I had informed them that reporting Shaan Sengupta for vandalism because they do not agree with the deletion requests is not OK. This follows Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Mifiin and other deletion requests. Yann (talk) 17:52, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

What do I say to this report. I tried my best to explain them so many things which can be found in the deletion discussion. When I ran out of patience I just ghosted the discussion. I thought of checking on it today, fixed some of the things. Like I removed some files which were correctly uploaded (were tagged bcoz of mass selection of files). Also nominated some blatant violations for SD. All of them got deleted. This seems to have triggered Mifiin. Sorry, to say this but I have nothing but sympathy for them. Let them get well soon to understand what Commons is. In their words, get them use some commonsense. Thank you. ShaanSengupta^Talk 18:03, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

 Comment Had I seen this earlier, I would have issued final warnings for incivility to both Mifiin and user:Shaan Sengupta for their comments towards each other in the DR. I'm also extremely unimpressed with the latter's shotgun nomination. I was tempted to enact Pigsonthewing's suggestion that the nomination be procedurally closed, and have Shaan Sengupta redo the nomination with significantly more care, but I wasn't comfortable doing that while Mifiin is blocked and wouldn't be able to respond to the new DR. Assuming this is still open when their block expires, that might be the best course of action. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:43, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

I would start with seeking an apology for my uncivil comments. I never meant it. It all came out as a reaction and the frustration to the user's not so good comments at my talk page where he used words like Use commonsense, Just use your mind before you delete stuff, You are doing unpolite things and vandalizing pages, Please don't bring in Admins. They have no clue about most of the things and will delete what you point to them. Probably did not even check or consult anyone. and many more.... He went on to accuse Yann for misusing their power at his TP. I can't believe the kind of absurdity going on, You must understand that Wiki is not your personal place for you to show your arrogance and Block someone. I would also note that by no means I am justifying my comments. It should not have come even as a reaction. Sorry once again. Rest at the DR. ShaanSengupta^Talk 05:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

愛喝奶茶 and Throwaway865432

愛喝奶茶 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) Throwaway865432 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) Something looks fishy here. I found these while investigating File:Flag of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.svg. Throwaway865432 reuploaded the file after it was deleted per this discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and 愛喝奶茶 removed the deletion warning here. Files from these accounts look suspicious and need checking. Yann (talk) 07:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

 Comment So what exactly is suspicious about Throwaway865432's uploads? NorthTension (talk) 10:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

The talk page says it all: User talk:Throwaway865432. Yann (talk) 10:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Not really, no. You cited him and an unrelated user. NorthTension (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, I don't know if they are related or not, but they both have a bad record, and edited the same file, which is a copyright violation. They also uploaded similar flags: File:Flag of the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen (2-3).svg and File:Flag of Tanzim Hurras al-Din.svg. Yann (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I have no opinion on the accounts, but those flags are "similar" only in being white-on-something flags from the Muslim world, short on EXIF data. - Jmabel ! talk 17:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

These are literally completely dissimilar aside from having a sword on them. If you think they're related, do you not have the ability to see their IP, @Yann? NorthTension (talk) 16:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Smallworldclick

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

Newly created account. Per the guidelines, not allowed to vote at COM:QIC nor COM:FPC. I fixed the wrong edits at FPC but not at QIC. Perhaps just newbie's mistakes, still these weird edits: changing the signature, the timestamps or whatever arouses my suspicion. Thanks for your attention. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

O.k., I tried to correct the respective problems on Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 14:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Orthographic reversion editor

There's an odd user creating accounts that just revert various orthographic maps a few times. The first one I'm aware of is Trantrongnam~commonswiki (blocked), which was followed by Skibididopdop~commonswiki (also blocked), and since that block Skibididopdop~commonswiki_2 (not yet blocked). It's hard to discern a purpose, but given the names include Skibidi it is likely just testing or trolling. CMD (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Blocked by Pi.1415926535. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

New one here. CMD (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

LeoBlanchette

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

Hi, I feel this user is uploading his personal artwork only on Commons, as an abuse of COM:WEBHOST. Could someone please check if these uploads really have educational use? The first version of his user page very much looks like spam. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@Yann: It looks like a complete clip art set. I'm not sure it's an issue in and of itself - I could be persuaded either way. Their current talk page is fine. What is an issue in my eyes is that these images have previously been published on Alamy. I think we need VRT confirmation that the uploader is who they say they are, and that they didn't sign away the rights to these images when they uploaded them to Alamy. Also, they really should be renamed - it's a mess - especially that they're jpgs with "vector" in the title. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Here is an in-depth response.

I can rename them if need. Lets bring this issue to an end, and you guys can make decisions accordingly. Obviously I'm not experienced in commons.wikimedia.

First, deciding to make these public domain, and in consideration of the history this set has (having even been used extensively on educational site WikiAnswers back in the day https://web.archive.org/web/20090107025449/http://wikianswers.com/) besides many other places, I decided to put these in the public domain in the most authoritative way possible. That is why I brought them here rather than some silly spammy website that forces signups and tricks the users.

As for the few stock agencies they are left, on -- those agencies allow public domain works. So this really changes nothing (other than I will be making them free downloads where possible).

As for their uses internally here, I can think of plenty. I'd say adopt them here and make them the household pet. Otherwise, you can delete them, but I feel that would be a loss for the internet.

Its your call guys,

Thanks. LeoBlanchette (talk) 15:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

@LeoBlanchette: I think the one thing we need is an email (per COM:VRT; that small team will keep the correspondence confidential) by which you can establish that you are who you say you are, and assert that you still retain the copyright that allows you to release these. Yes, I think the files should be welcome here, and thank you for providing them. - Jmabel ! talk 17:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

I am very happy over that. This marks a huge change for me.

I also took the paid versions down off of Alamy (they are marked for deletion, probably already gone).

Thanks everyone. LeoBlanchette (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

The user already released a large set of images from these or similar series, and is in contact with VRT. I think this user problem can be closed. --Krd 03:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Copyright violation & promotional use

please delete all these files / some of these files are uploader own picture and uploads for promotional use / others are taken from google image and are not uploader own works.

Thanks[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 20:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I deleted personal images and posters, but for the rest, please provide an external source. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Zhenghecaris

Zhenghecaris (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) uploaded copyright violated image, File:Solza_margarita_fossil.jpg to Commons, which is considered as fair use image in other wiki,[1] (seems this user uploaded it from fandom wiki[2]), after warned by @Yann: .(see User_talk:Zhenghecaris#Copyright_violations) This user also have some problematic behaviors such as edit someone's image roughly to make it like what they claim (File:Zhenghecaris_with_setal_blades.jpg), and complain user's art style. (see here). Some of uploaded images are against w:WP:FRINGE (see this discussion). This user needs block now. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 11:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked him for a week. Taivo (talk) 12:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

• See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Zhenghecaris, where now that the uploader has been blocked and is unable to respond, you've been able to list their uploads for deletion without risk of challenge. Using a nomination rationale based on WP policy, and simply irrelevant here on Commons. Both of those are deeply unimpressive behaviours. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:13, 2 December 2024 (UTC)

Journalistes Anonymes

Journalistes Anonymes (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions). This editor is uploading a series of photos of individuals in which the descriptions are defamatory - calling them racists, stalkers, etc. It seems to be some type of cyberbullying and that this editor's sole purpose here is to attack these individuals. In addition, the images of individuals are cut from a class photo (File:Photo de classe Secoonde 7.png) and unlikely to be "own work" as claimed anyway. Marbletan (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Blocked, everything's deleted. Yann (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Another sock

VNM_EST.1976_02 is another obvious sock of Ssolbergj~commonswiki.

Is there anything that can be done to stop their disruption? M.Bitton (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Blocked. @M.Bitton: You can create a request for check user. May be a blockable IP range could be found. Yann (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

@Yann: I created the request. M.Bitton (talk) 17:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

2A02.C7E.628D.8D00.6F78.9FB5.B5CD.35F5

I don't know why this isn't done more automatically but please revert all the user's edits (and probably block the user), thanks. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

@Prototyperspective: All done thanks to AntiCompositeNumber.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Pammee help me !

This editor has been warned about their copyright violations and notices have been placed on their talk page regarding the deletion of their images dating back to September. All messages have been ignored, and their copyright violations continue. Their most recent upload (File:Athenina 1.jpg) on December 1 is yet another copyright violation. They appear to have no interest in addressing the issues with their images, nor any interest in complying with our copyright policy. I recommend an indefinite block until such time as they agree to abide by our policies. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 02:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, file deleted. If uploads continue, they should be blocked much longer, as they are also probably out of scope. Yann (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

User:Oklahoma01

Oklahoma01 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user : new user uploading fake images of the non-existant Federal Republic of East Africa and copyvio of others. Pierre cb (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

 Done Two more warnings, and everything's deleted. Yann (talk) 15:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)