Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections

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

Shortcuts: COM:AN/B • COM:AN/P • COM:RFPP

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

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

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


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


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


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

Archives
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)

Note

  • For page protection requests, please state protection type, file name, and proposed protection time span. See also: Protection Policy.
  • Before proposing a user be blocked, please familiarize yourself with the Commons' Blocking Policy.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/B|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.


File:10.5.17CarlWeathersByLuigiNovi12b.jpg and File:Carl Weathers (cropped 3 by 4).jpg

An editor took one of my 2017 photos of the late actor Carl Weathers, specifically Photo #12 from that set, or 10.5.17CarlWeathersByLuigiNovi12b.jpg, and created a cropped variant of that pic, which is here. That variant, or Carl_Weathers_(cropped_3_by_4), inappropriately abandoned the naming convention that I use for my photos, thus removing my name from it, despite my preference, which is stated in the licensing information on each pic's page, that use of the photos retain my name.

I have no problem with cropped variants being created to address the specific needs of indiviual articles, and many other editors have respected my naming convention when doing so, so I created a cropped variant, identical to the aforementioned one, 10.5.17CarlWeathersByLuigiNovi12b.jpg, uploaded it, redirected the non-legitimate one to this legit one, and changed many of the other foreign language articles that use the cropped version to the one that respects my license. I gave my reason for this in the edit summary that accompanied my redirect.

However, subsequent to this, an admin named User:Billinghurst reverted this. He then locked both files from editing by non-admins, falsely accusing me of "vandalism" in the process, when he gave as his reason for the lockdown "Excessive vandalism." The Commons page on vandalism does not offer an explicit definition of the term, but the one given on Wikipedia is "editing (or other behavior) deliberately intended to obstruct or defeat the project's purpose." Even if Billinhurst disagreed with my edits, even if he/she thought my reverts violated some policy (and they never indicated this to me), that does not make vandalism, nor does it make it acceptable to accuse an editor of this.

In any event, once I created the cropped variant of my file that retained my file name convention, there was no need to revert it, since it satisified both the need for which the original variant (with the incorrect name) was created, and my requirement that it keep a variant of the original name. If there was a motive to revert my edits other than mere tendentiousness or spite, Billinghurst did not make a point of reaching out to me to explain it. This is hardly an example of good faith behavior.

I ask that variants of my photos retain the original naming convention, which includes my name, that the non-legitimate variant of the photo in question be removed in favor of the legitimate one, and that Billinghurst be politely informed that knee-jerk reverts, or ones employing a false accusation as a rationale, are not acceptable. Thank you. Nightscream (talk) 17:24, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your preferred name was a duplicate so Billinghurst's actions seem correct to me. Also, as you say, the file naming is a request, not an obligation of the license. @TheLoyalOrder: , would renaming File:Carl Weathers (cropped 3 by 4).jpg to File:Carl Weathers, photo by Luigi Novi (cropped 3 by 4).jpg be acceptable to you? Abzeronow (talk) 17:43, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The preferred name was a variant, just as the photo itself was a variant, as it had the letter "b" upended to it, so it was not a duplicate of the exact same name. Irrespective of whether it is obligatory, it is a courtesy, and it reasonable for it to be respected rather than ignored. Even if you had failed to notice this request in the licensing info (which is not nececessary a bad faith act), reverting it, as Billinghurst did, was not justifiable.
Renaming it 10.5.17CarlWeathersByLuigiNovi12b would be acceptable. Nightscream (talk) 18:04, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should have stated that the file named 10.5.17CarlWeathersByLuigiNovi12b was a duplicate. Billinghurst followed policy by redirecting your desired file name to the file uploaded by TheLoyalOrder. If Billinghurst had requested full protection of the files because of an edit war, I'd have granted it. I am trying to find an equitable solution to this, as I'm willing to include a credit to you in the file name, but I'm not inclined at this time to enforce your preferred naming convention as a solution to this issue. Abzeronow (talk) 21:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i don't really care, cheers TheLoyalOrder (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment @Nightscream: This is Commons and a site inhabited by many of us following the consensus rules of the community. We have consensus guidance about uploads, Commons:Upload. We have consensus guidance on derivatives, Commons:Derivative works. We have consensus guidance on licensing, Commons:Licensing. We have guidance on Commons:Creative Commons. We have the consensus guidance for file naming, Commons:File naming, which we follow, and that allows you to put names on files that you upload. We have consensus guidance about renaming, Commons:File renaming. We even have consensus guidance on duplicates, Commons:Duplicates.

I welcome you bringing issues here where you are addressing the consensus or issues where the administrators are operating outside of the consensus of the community. What I do not welcome is a kid stamping their feet that they want things their way, where you are operating outside of the consensus policies and procedures of the community. [Your repeated edits OUTSIDE of the consensus guidance is akin to edit warring or vandalism, take your pick.] Your uploading a file, and converting an existing file into a redirect to your files is outside the editing guidance of the community.

An administrator has no skin in the game where they act, they should be following the consensus guidance of the community, or seeking that guidance where it is unclear that the request is within an existing consensus. Your ability to make the rules at this site is to start a conversation, and suggest how the rules can be changed, and where the community reaches a consensus that what you promote is better, then we have new policies and guidance. That is the opportunity we all have. I will now return to my general admin duties following the consensus of the community as I understand it, as I have done for the last fourteen years.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:01, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing at Commons:File renaming that appears to preclude maintain the naming convention chosen by the original uploader of a file, nor changing it as you have, nor reverting it without a rationale. If I'm mistaken, please quote it. Please explain what specific thing I've done is "outside" consensus, and how.
Nor does it justify falsely accusing another editor of "vandalism" (something that unsurprisingly, you have chosen not to address), nor the incivility you have displayed here with your condescening "kid stamping their feet" remark. But if you can quote what portion of the aforementioned guideline page (and/or any other relevant) calls for either your reverts, your false accusation, or your rather hostile words above, then ball means, please do so. Nightscream (talk) 22:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You were not renaming the file, and I have declined no renaming of a file. I am not here to produce a list of how you were operating outside of the guidance, I am here to tell you I followed the policies, procedures and conventions that exist for administrators to act. Not once, nor twice, instead on multiple occasions to get it all replaced with your name where you think that you have a right to have derived files named as you wish. The administrators do not exist for the purposes to get derived files aligned with uploaders names; nor to have to sit and handhold on every decision that we make to the guidance. I'll take a paycut if that helps.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Block request for User:Ownmy cock

Ownmy cock (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  Harassing or defamatory username Waqar💬 15:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked by The Squirrel Conspiracy. Yann (talk) 20:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request protection

Request creation protection of File:Eiffel Tower in pink, Paris (51541894248).jpg as it has been created for multiple times without addressing the issues. A1Cafel (talk) 16:45, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done ─ Aafī (talk) 17:57, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuto9030

Yuto9030 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  User was given a final warning in July 2023 after having uploaded copyright violations (some of which appear to be of the Kardashians) before, and has done so again today. Berchanhimez (talk) 00:01, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Yuto9030. Yann (talk) 06:13, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aram Asghar

Aram Asghar (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  Re-uploading the repeatedly deleted files that were previously uploaded by blocked user HeyRaphael (talk · contribs) and his socks. Marbletan (talk) 12:54, 24 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All his uploads have passed FlickrReview. He has no deleted edits and he is not warned. HeyRaphael has no deleted edits, but a lot of sockpuppets. Please give more information. Taivo (talk) 09:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Taivo: Some of the uploads were deleted due to the discussion here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Texasi9PCI. Here is a list of uploads that match previously deleted files (due to flickerwashing/copyvio): Marbletan (talk) 12:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. I blocked the user indefinitely and deleted all his/her uploads. Taivo (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for page semi-protection for user talk pages

Please semi-protect these user talk pages due to excessive vandalism by cross-wiki long term abuse Sidowpknbkhihj (talk · contribs) aka w:ja:LTA:HEATHROW socks.

  1. User talk:とせあんれ
  2. User talk:ひまるや
  3. User talk:Ktojsecgiioe

--郊外生活Kogaiseikatsu (talk,contribs) 13:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Block request for User:Haisollokopas

Haisollokopas (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  The User has a lot of deleted copyvios. After the last warning he is still uploading them as own files. For example here:File:Modern Chetniks.jpg or here File:Croatian soldiers in 1995.jpg. Also he uploaded a lot of flags and logos as own images which meet the threshold of originality. Please, block him. FlorianH76 (talk) 07:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week. Also promotion of neo-fascists organizations. Yann (talk) 15:00, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections&oldid=888879753"