Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive 68

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

Dar de baja mi suscripción

Mi nombre es Manuel Grueso y mi correo es <correo> y quisiera darme de baja de esta página y dejar de recibir cada día, la imagen del día en mi correo. Dónde me puedo dar de baja, por favor quiero dejar de recibir cada día la imagen del día y no quiero formar parte de esta comunidad. Lo haceis vosotros mismos? Dónde puedo darme de baja? Respondan a mi correo que les he dado antes <correo> Gracias — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.136.209.131 (talk) 08:56, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Usted puede cambiar eso aquí. Jcb (talk) 11:59, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Moving Commons categories

I'm not sure if this a user problem per se, so I am going to add it here. An editor Gryffindor has been moving lots of Wikipedia articles related to Japanese subjects, etc. because apparently he/she feels that Japanese words such as en:Shogi and en:Dojo, etc. should be written using a macron. In almost every case, the move was not discussed and it many cases was subsequently reverted. Some move warring resulted in some cases, so there are ongoing discussions at some pages such as like en:Talk:Shogi#Shōgi which are trying to sort things out. Gryffindor has also been moving Commons categories like Category:Shogi. I'm not sure how interconnected category names for Commons are to category names for Wikipedia, but it seems lots of pages are being moved (based upon personal preferences, etc. and not relevant policies or guidelines) which might be better discussed first. COM:CAT#Category names mentions diacritics, but it doesn't really mention how to determine when they should be used; for example, there's Category:Dōjō (which was also moved by Gryfindor) and Category:Tokyo (and a whole lot of sub-categories), even though both words are of Japanese origin and "Tokyo" is technically written as "en:Tōkyō" when using the Latin alphabet in Japanese. So, I was wondering if an Commons administrator can take a look at these moves and possible clarify if they are OK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:30, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

There was a fairly recent discussion relating to navigation-template breakage caused by some of these moves. It was probably on COM:HD but I can’t find it offhand; maybe someone else remembers.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Weird bug in uploads

Something apparently went wrong in several uploads last week. See e.g. File:Grover Cleveland Alexander LCCN2001704359.jpg. The first edit is missing and cannot be found in the deleted version. Does anybody have a clue about what the problem could be? Most files from Category:Media without a license as of 24 February 2018 seem to be affected. Jcb (talk) 14:03, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

I believe that some of my uploads were caught out on that day by a WMF outage. This allowed files to be uploaded via the API but "invisibly" failed to upload the image text pages. Some of these were listed in Phab:T179884, which I added to a maintenance category, removing the auto-added no source tags. There is no bot or other process for notifying me about uploads which fail this way. As this is not the first time, and it is caused by WMF server failures, it would be super nice if the WMF were to create a bot task to help with notification or other housekeeping. For all I know the text pages may have been held on the WMF servers somewhere and could have been recovered without eating up volunteer time to do custom fixes. --Fæ (talk) 14:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
Some other uploaders seem to have been affected by this bug as well that day. I am trying to undelete everything and I have placed a notice on top of Category:Media without a license as of 24 February 2018 for now. I am unable to complete the undeletion now, will do so around 23:00 UTC. Jcb (talk) 14:18, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
As far as I can see everything is undeleted. All of the 259 files currently in this category seem to be affected (three different uploaders). Jcb (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2018 (UTC)
How long we wanna wait, before deleting the images? I guess somebody has to add a description to make them valid. If nowbody is able or willing to, they should get deleted... --JuTa 00:23, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
We are not in a hurry, we can give it a few days. One of the involved uploaders, Fæ, requested undeletion. Also some analysis of this situation may be good and somebody may be willing to file a bug report. This will be easier when the files are undeleted for now. Jcb (talk) 01:18, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
I have repaired several of my uploads, these need to be done manually, one at a time. As this was a WMF outage problem, it's not something I "signed up for" and not caused by my actions. Being pushed with a time limit, when there is no doubt that all of my uploads are public domain, and were anyone to bother to use the unique IDs from the filenames they can work out a source to check the fact, looks like mindless bureaucracy. When this happens the minimal courtesy that should happen is that the uploader should get a list of files that have been left with blank image pages. At the current time, I'm not convinced that Category:Images uploaded by Fæ (metadata needed) contains all of my uploads that have been damaged in this incident.
BTW, it was claimed on my talk page but not on Phab, Artix Kreiger's actions were the root cause of the server failure. If that is the case, then perhaps they could invest some of their volunteer time doing the repairs. --Fæ (talk) 04:46, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Now there is a Phabricator task and a selection of the 21 February uploads is linked there, I am redeleting the files, except for 4 uploads from Fæ that still need fixed (he already fixed most files in the meantime). (And I will keep this bug in mind when processing this cat). Jcb (talk) 12:52, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jcb: 21 February or 24 February?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 12:57, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
All these files were uploaded 21 February without a file page and then tagged as 'no license' a few days later, 24 February. See e.g. File:Grover Cleveland Alexander LCCN2001704359.jpg. Jcb (talk) 13:01, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
That's not all the affected files. I have 130+ still to repair in Category:Images uploaded by Fæ (metadata needed). All were uploaded on 21 Feb. I removed them from the backlog category, I presume a bot is not going to add them back. --Fæ (talk) 13:13, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
Ok. If I come accross more files I will drop you a note. Jcb (talk) 13:46, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
no need to shift the blame on me. But feel free to delete them if one deems them un-salvageable. Artix Kreiger (talk) 04:50, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
We are not discussing your uploads, it is mine that are getting deleted, then undeleted, then repaired by me, rather than using my time on more productive projects. It's not really your call to encourage others to "feel free to delete".
The claim was made, it would be a pity if the root cause was not your actions and remains unknown. @Magog the Ogre: care to share some context? As the root cause is not clear in Phabricator, it probably could be usefully added there. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 04:56, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
  • @Fæ: @Artix Kreiger: @Magog the Ogre: Woah woah.. Let's hold off here on blaming anyone. If MediaWiki allows a user to upload, intentionally or accidentally, 2 million bytes of text in one edit or the size of 50,000 categories (yes, I counted), then it is the blame of no user. If anything, Artix has found a software bug that can allow a single user to partially bring down the servers that needs to be patched immediately before someone uses it to their advantage. Let's move on from the finger pointing and get back to the issue at hand. ~riley (talk) 05:08, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
    I apologize if I offended anyone. Please understand that I am a engineer, so when I see a problem, I look for a reason. I didn't mean to assign "blame" as much as find a cause. Everyone makes mistakes which have entirely unforeseen consequences (personally I once brought down the entirety of Commons through my galleries).
    So if my assessment is correct, I don't think Artix did anything wrong, nor that the community should hold anything against him. In this case, Artix would be correct that the software is not coded optimally.
    Anyway, my assessment was just an initial educated guess based on years of being a software engineer and working with Mediawiki; but it could have been incorrect. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 19:57, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
While there has been no attempt to connect the two incidents, Artrix was able to exceed the maximum MediaWiki page size during creation. I have created a bug ticket for this at T188852. ~riley (talk) 21:59, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

Exif-Data

Hello, is it possible to remove the name from the Exif-Data of my uploaded pictures ? I want to stay anonymous whilst im active on Wikipedia. --Aatwork (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

You can remove it from the original files with some free exif editor (6 files seem to be involved) and then upload the modified files over the old files (using the 'Upload a new version of this file' link). After that, please drop us a note and we will remove the old versions of the files. Jcb (talk) 20:37, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for information on deleted template

While editing a category page, I felt it would be appropriate to add the {{About}} template as used on Wikipedia. The Commons page of that name (Template:About) has been deleted many times, and the deletion log suggests that this was often because it contained inappropriate content (e.g. "Translite is a brand of solid, Embossed & Multiwall Polycarbonate..."). Would it be possible for someone to see if the page ever contained a working About hatnote template, and if so whether there was a consensus to delete it? Many thanks, GKFXtalk 22:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC).

The 20 July 2013 version contained such a template. It was speedy deleted without DR or consensus. You may consider filing an undeletion request here. Jcb (talk) 22:27, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
Many thanks, I have filed a request. GKFXtalk 22:48, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for deletion

Hi, may any administrator delete Data:Wiki Loves in Spain/Wiki Loves Earth/2017/Log.tab? I can't properly edit it and need to remove it (see Commons:Help_desk#"The_content_format_application/json+pretty_is_not_supported_by_the_content_model_wikitext"). Thanks --Discasto talk 16:14, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done De728631 (talk) 23:42, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
@De728631: Thank you very much --Discasto talk 11:01, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

The file Wikipedia-logo-v2-pcd.svg is currently protected, and can be edited only by administrators. Can you link this file in Category:Picard Wikipedia logo. Thanks, Geoleplubo (talk) 12:00, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done De728631 (talk) 15:21, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Request for closing of the discussion

I have made a couple of deletion requests relating to my uploads recently, but after explanations by other users I realized that the reasons for removal are unsuitable. Please close both discussions ([1], [2]) as the consensus has already been reached. Ur frnd (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. I closed both requests as kept. Taivo (talk) 19:20, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Video of the day with non-commercial CC license

For about another hour The Engineering of the Drinking Bird.webm is the video of the day. I watched it just now and had to notice at the end that very clearly the cc-by-nc-sa logo can be seen. How to deal with this? The file is in use not alone because of being VOTD. Unfortunately YouTube does not seem to distinguish between NC or not NC, cf. Creative Commons - YouTube Help. — Speravir – 22:51, 7 March 2018 (UTC) :BTW ping @Racconish. — Speravir – 00:31, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Ping also @1Veertje. — Speravir – 00:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
If the copyright holder indeed granted a CC BY licence when uploading it to YouTube, then I suppose we can consider it multi-licensed. (AIUI that implies that NC derivative works can be kept that way by choosing the CC BY-NC-SA licence but, equally, anyone can choose to treat this version as simply CC BY.) As long as there‘s a free licence in place, it could have © symbols in every frame, with no effect on the permission.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 07:10, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
The author has indeed elected to distribute this video through YouTube under the CC-BY license, which is the only option given by YouTube beside their normal licence, and the license is irrevocable. It seems all his other videos at YouTube are under the same license (see Category:EngineerGuy). Nevertheless, you can contact the author, Bill Hammack, who is easily reachable through his website, and ask him to clarify his intention. Depending on his reaction, we can nominate the file for deletion. — Racconish ☎ 07:38, 8 March 2018 (UTC) ping Hammack who might be related to Bill Hammack (see the comment here) and seems to be also uploading here EngineerGuy's videos under the same CC-BY. 08:00, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Informal undeletion acceptable?

There is now freedom of panorama in Albania, see also new template {{FoP-Albania}}. Processing this recent undeletion request, Yann has restored most images found in Category:Albanian FOP cases/deleted. Fine :-) - but there are more that weren't categorized there in the past and can/should now be restored, e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:ALB 20070713 img 1232 (detail).jpg and some other requests found at User talk:Albinfo. As an admin, I'm not sure: is it okay if I just restore such images when I come across them and consider them acceptable under Albania's new FoP, or have they all to go through a formal undeletion request? Gestumblindi (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

 Comment In my opinion it's OK to restore without formalities, but please write after closing comment a restore comment, so that everybody would understand, when, why and by whom the file was restored. Taivo (talk) 11:56, 6 March 2018 (UTC)
@Taivo: Thanks for the reply, I have now restored some files linked from said discussion page (I see you have restored some, too, thanks again!); I didn't restore the bust from Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Hoxha Bust.jpg because I'm not sure that it was located in a public space when the image was taken. Certainly there are more images from Albania to be found that can be restored now. Gestumblindi (talk) 01:28, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I have checked all deletion requests in Category:Albanian FOP cases/deleted. All pictures taken in public places have been restored. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:42, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

user tags all his uploads as copyvios

This afternoon, Fabriciofffs (talk · contribs) tagged all his remaining uploads (mostly colorful landscape photos) as "copyvio", without providing further information. All of them had been uploaded in 2015 already. I report this here to catch some eventual background story (angried user or alike), so far unknown to me.
However, after scanning through the files, it seems quite plausible that they may indeed be copyvios, which would be quite a failure of our recent-upload patroling:

Finally, what should we do which such a user, who has exposed re-users of uploads to copyright-litigation by the true rightsholder(s), indef? --Túrelio (talk) 16:57, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

@Túrelio: didn’t you catch that “Fabriciofffs” is rather appropriate nick for one Fabricio F. Silva? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Might be. But, for a new upload it should have been verified at time of upload, which obviously didn't happen. --Túrelio (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
I have reverted the copyvio-tagging for now, a DR on a part of these files may be appropriate though. I see this user has previously nominated a part of their 2015 uploads in 2016 as copyvio, these files got deleted. Jcb (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Indeed, look at File:Fernando_de_Noronha_8.jpg#fileinfotpl_aut. First of all, on which grounds were other images from this series deleted? “BELO HORIZONTE” doesn’t look to be a personal name, but it could arouse suspicions in certain quarters. pt:Wikipédia:Pedido de remoção imediata de violação de direitos de autor #Solicito_a_remoção_imediata_por_violação_de_direitos_de_autor may be a piece of the story too. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:01, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 Comment I creared a DR: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Fabriciofffs. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:56, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Valuable Images deletion request

I've apparently submitted the following two pages wrong in the Valuable Images and Featured picture section to be assessed. Could the three following pages be deleted?

To delete the above pages, not to delete the individual images. --Adamdaley

✓ Done --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 00:44, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Requesting consensus analysis on File:Papa Juhani Mikstuur.jpg

The discussion at Commons:Village pump/Copyright#File:Papa Juhani Mikstuur.jpg, which I started, needs a consensus analysis by an uninvolved editor please. It can be closed if necessary. Thanks. George Ho (talk) 00:57, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Fortitude Valley Police Station

Please note that the very first photo of the Fortitude Valley Police Station (LHS) needs to be reversed. You can see by looking at the station's name and the clock that it needs editing. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2001:8003:74D9:B101:A93D:52EA:8740:D204 (talk) 23:18, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done but these sort of requests belong at Graphic Labs and not the Administrator' noticeboard. Bidgee (talk) 02:17, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Permanent protection

Could an Admin please permanently protect the following page: User:2eight/licence Rationale beeing that the user applies this license information template without subsetting it. I informed the user already on the talk page about this request here as well as that personal licences are not a preferred practise on commons. --Schlurcher (talk) 22:20, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

I don't see a reason to protect the file for the following reasons:
  • The file is on less than 10,000 pages and would be considered low risk for transclusion vandalism. Even if it were a template, it would not be protected.
  • By protecting the license, the user can no longer edit an article in their own user space which was created to be customized by them.
Substituting the file is a very bad idea and should not be recommended, that would add a mess of wikicode and an additional 6,000 characters to each file. ~riley (talk) 06:13, 7 March 2018 (UTC)
@~riley: Doesn't leaving them unsubsted violate COM:USER?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:44, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: According to Commons:User-specific galleries, templates and categories#Regarding licenses, no. ~riley (talk) 04:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)
“Regarding license templates: if the user-specific template incorporates a standard license template, the user-specific template should be subst:ed in use.” It has CC license. — regards, Revi 10:05, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
It has a non-standard license template, CC or not. ~riley (talk) 20:23, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Charaxes boueti, Bamboo Charaxes female (39145798422).jpg

Please consider this as a speedy deletion request as the Flickr user was not really wished to license this ten photos. She is very old and was operating as I instructed. Jee 11:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! Jee 11:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

can't update file

Hi. I went to update a file I uploaded, File:World marriage-equality laws.svg, and it says "You cannot overwrite this file". The file is not protected, at least not according to its talk page. I'm not blocked, at least not that I've been informed. A user did challenge me on editing the file, but they were a sock of a banned user and have since been blocked. Kwamikagami (talk) 18:44, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Amazingly… a former en.Wikipedia sysop has serious troubles reading page logs. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
I am more amazed by the comment "I'm not blocked, at least not that I've been informed" from a former admin. I would have thought you'd rule that out by being able to edit, but you do you. The file is protected (page history, in Category:Upload protected files, protection template in source and protection lock in top right hand corner). In such a case, you may file an edit request on the talk page and upload the version you'd intend as a new file (i.e. File:World marriage-equality laws (ER).svg for an admin to merge over. Alternatively you can make an edit request with the SVG source you'd like changed and I can manually add it in. ~riley (talk) 19:20, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Being able to edit doesn't mean I'm not blocked. For all I know Commons has different degrees of block.
Uploaded at that temp site.
But this file should not be protected to this extent. It's going to need frequent revision as events develop. The rational of "excessive vandalism" is spurious -- there's been no vandalism. Even User Growupon, who's been blocked indefinitely as a sock, was disputing the content, not vandalizing the article. Otherwise the updates are normal traffic for the file, with the expected reverts of any reporting of current events. E.g. User Sander000 reverted me when I updated the map on the status of the EU per the WP article, because the WP article was inaccurate. That doesn't warrant protection. Kwamikagami (talk) 20:08, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Equality laws aren't developing that fast.. Call it what you want, excessive vandalism, disruption, sockpuppetry; the reality is that the file has excessive reversion dating back over an extended period of time. I count 72 reverts alone, this file needs less uploading and more discussion and so far, indef protection seems the way to do it. ~riley (talk) 20:21, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Trypethelium aeneum (Eschw.) Zahlbr 454631.jpg

Can an Admin please delete the first low resolution upload version of this image? Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 21:32, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 21:36, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Responses for impeachment in South Korea on 2017.ogv

Please delete the first version (2017-06-08 21:16 (UTC)). That version is my mistake. Thanks. --Garam talk 18:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 19:18, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary categories.

Can an admin please delete these new categories by IP 144.138.80.35? All the signs added to these categories are properly organized under SADC sub-cats.

Fry1989 eh? 22:30, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Fry1989, what do you mean by SADC? Category:SADC doesn't exist, and I don't know what the acronym stands for. Nyttend (talk) 23:27, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The Southern African Development Community. The signs are part of a convention created by SADC and are organized under Category:Diagrams of road signs of the Southern African Development Community, and then sub-categorized under those countries which are party to the convention. Fry1989 eh? 23:29, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. I have found several more categories created by this IP which are lack sources and are unnecessary.

Fry1989 eh? 16:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

speedy deletion of files

Please, speedy deletion - sorry, all bad named.

The corretly name:

-- Bwag (talk) 22:16, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Bwag: ✓ Done Next time, please use {{Rename}}. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:24, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
thx! -- Bwag (talk) 08:02, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Review

Hello, any admin or LW please review this file.--√Jæ√ 08:14, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by Racconish. — Speravir – 01:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Deleted picture

Hi, I was wondering, why my picture was deleted from this article (https://lt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lietpak) and what can I do better to keep it there? Lietpak (talk) 13:46, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

@Lietpak: Hi,
The file deleted (File:Įmonės teritorija.jpg) is not your picture, so it is a copyright violation. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:47, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Yann:
I have a permission from the owner, to publish it. should i write the licence type in the wiki text {promotional}? Lietpak (talk) 17:30, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Lietpak: Please ask the copyright owner to send the permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org (see COM:OTRS for the instructions). Be aware that we need a permission for a free license, not just for Wikipedia. Regards, Yann (talk) 17:59, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Wikisanta.jpg (hist • logs • abuse log)

Hello! Could you delink this file? Currently 96 pages use it. For your information; on the Hungarian Wikipedia we replaced it to File:Christmas Wikipedia Logo.png. Thanks and best regards, Bencemac (talk) 16:39, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Arbalete

Arbalete is a user who was blocked in it.wikipedia several times for edit-warring and personal attacks, and who's currently blocked permanently for his persistent non-collaborative behaviour. Recently on commons he has made massive vandalic editing: he renamed manually (without using the "Move" button) all categories and files about the Italian town of "Cirié" changing the accent to "Ciriè". This city is named "Cirié" in all the other projects, in fact in its official municipal statute the name is spelled like that: Statuto del Comune di Cirié. I've tried discussing with him, explaining why his edits are non-constructive, that in all the projects the name is spelled "Cirié", and what I've just said about the statute. The result was just that he kept repeating that the statute isn't a valid source since and it's wrong because it goes against Italian orthograhic rules... Well, such rules, despite his words, don't prescribe the grave accent over final E, since both accents are possible ("caffè" with grave and "perché" with acute), and in the current case the proper noun has the acute accent, as reported by the statute. There's more: the same day he made that massive vandlism, an anonymous user tried changing the spelling of the category on wikidata, as you can see here. This IP, 2.205.18.95, has already been blocked several times for non-collaborative behaviour in it.wikipedia. I strongly believe that they're the same user. And there's even more: in it.wikipedia, on the 26th of October 2017, a pair of IPs tried changing manually the accent in the article about Cirié, which had to be protected by a sysop; the same day, one of these IPs, 178.0.208.141, made the same massive renaming on commons which Arbalete made again some time later. I can't help thinking that Arbalete is continuously anonymising himself to vandalise in different projects without being identified by admins, but even if the vandals behind the IPs were different users Arbalete would be supporting their vandalisms. May somebody take care of this problem? I'm not saying he must be blocked here too, nor all of his edits must be reverted, but just that he must understand that his massive renaming from a correct form to an uncorrect one is a vandalism and so he must stop with this kind of edits. Thank you in advance! 2A02:1778:113:0:0:0:0:29 13:14, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi, You must inform a user when you are reporting them on a board. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:41, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
@Yann: Yann, since you've done it yourself and this detail is now solved (anyway, he'd been already warned yesterday that I was going to inform admins), may you take care of the case or is there something else?
2A02:1778:113:0:0:0:0:29 17:25, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
According to the rules of the italian language the correct ortography is Ciriè. My opinion is that commons.wiki should follow the sources, and not the decisions of it.wiki. By the way, it.wiki sometimes doesn't follow the correct italian ortography.--Arbalete (talk) 13:07, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Too bad this report isn't about Italian language conventions but about a cross-wiki vandal, whose account has already been blocked permanently in Italian wiki and who's currently editing there as an anonymous IP not to be identified (even if his IPs have been blocked anyway by admins who identified him). However, the "Cirié" issue is about the "official" spelling of this Comune whose primary source are the municipal site and the official statute, but again in Italian grave accent isn't prescribed over final E but only over final O.
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:1097:B693:F7B0:9412 17:58, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
This is false. The ortographical rules of the italian language could not be changed by a page of the official site of a municipality.--Arbalete (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Here the italian rules on the use of accents.--Arbalete (talk) 14:54, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Again (and I'm highlighting this concept): this report isn't about Italian language conventions but about a cross-wiki vandal, Arbalete AKA Friedrichstrasse, who after having been permanently blocked in it.wikipedia for persistent vandalising has kept coming back as an anonymous user with German IPs, and lately here on commons has been making non-consensual massive renaming against sources and Wikipedian conventions. I wonder why admins (such as @Bidgee, Zhuyifei1999, Racconish, Taivo, and De728631: ) haven't taken care of this report yet. Anyway, just to answer back to the vandal's affirmations about Italian language and to prove they're false... First, the official spelling of a city isn't established by grammar books but by its official statute, consider for esample spelling not involving grammar conventions such as the user of symbol "-" between 2 proper names or the fact that a full proper name is written with or without a space inside it. Second, have you even read that books introduction? It's a book written by 2 journalists and bloggers (not linguists) of the Italian newspaper "La Stampa" about the grammar conventions adopted by "that" newspaper, in fact you can even read that it isn't to be intender either as a grammar or as a dictionary. Third, both in the Italian essential grammar by DeAgostini at page 20 and in the Italian language reference portal it's said that the grave accent occurs in "some" proper nouns, not in "all" of them. The previous argumentation was just to show the lack of justification for the massive renaming made by the vandal, I invite again admins to focus on this fact instead of Italian grammar conventions, and I'd like to point out one more thing, a new one: Arbalete himself has linked "books.google.de", which is one more evidence that he's the cross-wiki vandal using German IPs here, on wikidata and in Italian wiki to bypass his block and to edit without being identified as Arbalete. I hope that admins will read and reply to this report as soon as possible.
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:E049:8492:A2D1:97B7 16:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
The official site of this city uses "Ciriè", "Cirié" and also "Cirie". In Italy it's very common to be imprecise when it goes about ortography (for example it's very common to find "perchè" instead of "perché", or "E'" instead of È.--Arbalete (talk) 16:55, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
For the 3rd time: "this report isn't about Italian language conventions but about a cross-wiki vandal"... But I understand your behaviour. You're trying to change the focus of the attention, because if here we were talking just about your vandalic edits nobody would have any doubt in blocking you also on commons. Anyway, in the muninipal site "Cirié" is by some order of magnitude more frequent than "Ciriè" and "Cirie'", plus the official statute is named "Statuto del Comune di Cirié" and in its 1st article we can read "Comune di Cirié". Period.
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:E049:8492:A2D1:97B7 17:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
TL;DR? --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 17:03, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
In short, Arbalete is an already blocked user in it.wikipedia for vandalism, lately he's been anonymising himself with German IPs not to be identified as Arbalete so that he could still make all the edits he wanted here, on wikidata and in it.wikipedia (despite this, his IPs were blocked again in the Italian wiki). Here on commons he's recently done a massive renaming campaign, by changing all the categories and files about "Cirié" from the correct spelling to "Ciriè". He did this with no consensus, against sources and against the spelling found in each other projects. What's your opinion about this?
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:E049:8492:A2D1:97B7 17:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Since I was - inappropriately - pinged: "as a matter of principle it's best to leave all files with generally valid names at their locations, even if slightly better names may exist". — Racconish ☎ 17:34, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I'm thanking you for your answering. Arbalete did exactly this: he changed something like 25 pages between categories and files. Plus, they already had the "better" name, the name used in every other project and the name attested in the official municipal statute of the town. On these bases, how do you think we should deal with him and these edits of his?
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:E049:8492:A2D1:97B7 17:58, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
The name is not attested anywere: the municipal site is very imprecise (as the most italian sites are, when it goes to ortography).--Arbalete (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Said the Italian vandal who was blocked for damaging Wikipedia to sustain his opinions, and who anonymised himself with German IPs again and again to bypass the block but was blocked again and again. I think admins should consider this to draw their conclusions. Besides this, Cirié municipal site heading is "Città di Cirié" (with grave accent over the A and acute accent over E) and the official statute is called "Statuto del Comune di Cirié". Which prevails over any possible imprecision elsewhere. Arbalete's massive renaming on commons without consensus is definitely amiss.
2A01:7C8:AAAE:2B3:E049:8492:A2D1:97B7 19:20, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion

By mistake my bot Jæbot has uploaded some Flickr & Geograph images but it is not its task. So, any admin delete those files.--√Jæ√ 16:03, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

Are these the last 10 files in its edit-list? -Túrelio (talk) 16:17, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done --Krd 16:23, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

User:B dash

I may be completely misunderstanding something here -- if so, my apologies. I also should say that I have not found a problem with the work here, just a concern over process.

Why is B Dash, who is neither Administrator nor Bureaucrat, running Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2018. The last time he or she got involved with the list of Administrators, it caused some confusion. My concern here is that if someone who has not been chosen as a trusted member of the community runs this process, there is considerable opportunity for error and malfeasance, so that someone else will need to spend time auditing the results.

I also wonder why Steward User:Ajraddatz is acting on the request of B Dash and removing the Admin permission. Although I don't understand why our Bureaucrats cannot perform that function -- they do it on WP:EN among others -- it seems to me that a Steward should not be using his powers without a stronger audit trail. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:01, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

There is no policy who schould run the inactivity section, generally it is done by crats/admins. No idea why nobody (crat) did it this time. But i don't think Ajraddatz schould be blamed for removed access pursuant to our policy. But i agree with you that only trusted users such as admin/crat (preferably crat) schould run such a inactivity section.--Steinsplitter (talk) 11:40, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Volunteers helping run useful reports is a good thing, the only limitation should be the natural one that non-sysops cannot rely on sysop rights to check deleted media or take action. If there is an issue with how this report needs to be created transparently with published code, and hence aid accountability in case it is not done correctly, that could do with being laid out more clearly as an issue. At the same time, it makes sense for these particular notifications to sysops to be done by a Bureaucrat or long established sysop.
It would have been polite to raise this with B Dash before making an AN thread about it. B Dash may have offered to refrain from doing this without a hoo-ha. Though the intent here may be to refine guidelines or norms, it reads as a criticism of B Dash. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:49, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
This user had even made a request at Meta please clear requests here before going on to Meta. Whereas B dash has notified on talkpage for de-adminship yesterday and so early even requested at meta which I personally feel wrong and requested bureaucrats to have a check on this --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 11:59, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I didn't get pinged for some reason, but I'm happy to explain. I originally was suspicious of the request from B dash, and was going to ping a local crat to confirm, or leave the request. But I looked through past inactivity runs, noticed that he seemed to be involved in the process without issue here, and couldn't find anything in the local policy saying that such requests had to come from a bureaucrat or admin. If you decide differently here, please codify it in your local policies or let the stewards know in some way so we are aware for the future. Regards, Ajraddatz (talk) 16:29, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
As for the "audit trail", a request was made on m:SRP and I actioned it. That is completely standard for any steward-mediated removal of permissions. You are welcome to start a local discussion on letting bureaucrats remove sysop/crat flags locally if you wish, but currently only the stewards are empowered to do so here. Ajraddatz (talk) 16:32, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Jim has raised a very valid and interesting point but if B Dash runs this check without a problem, I don't think I would have any issue with it considering that this user is in good standing on this project and there is no policy prohibiting any non-admin from doing it. Policy allows Ajraddatz to act on such request from non-admin if there is no policy prohibiting the request. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 17:41, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • If there's any questions that should be asked here, it should be to the bureaucrats (of which the OP is one) as to why they are not taking initiative to run the inactivity runs. --Rschen7754 18:28, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
I've notified our crats about this thread. --Túrelio (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
  • As far as I can see, B dash has done a good job (other concerns notwithstanding). I note that @Odder: has been involved in the inactivity runs for the past few years but it seems not this run. Certainly Odder and B dash seemed to coordinate the previous run, so perhaps Odder has been keeping an eye on the process? Green Giant (talk) 19:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
    I have watched the inactivity run and I second that B dash has done a good job. Removals have been done in the meantime and I'd say there is nothing left to do now.
    Of course it is concerning that none out of 8 crats have commented at Commons:Administrators/Inactivity section/Feb-Mar 2018. From my personal point of view it wasn't necessary as I noticed no mistake and no objections or concerns have been raised. Anyway, if anybody feels ready to apply for crat status, feel free to go ahead. --Krd 09:17, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks for doing, and I apologize for any inconvenience. --B dash (talk) 11:16, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
  • There still haven't been any notices sent to those who were desysopped. --Rschen7754 00:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Block evasion by IP

When an IP is an obvious sock of an indefinitely-blocked user, how long do we normally block the IP? COM:BLOCK didn't address the issue at all. Nyttend (talk) 19:02, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Duration and extent of an IP block depends on character of an IP address. A static IP in personal use by a long-time abuser may be hard-blocked for months. A static IP shared by several users (NAT) may be soft-blocked for months. It is silly to point-block dynamic IPs for longer than ∼ 3 days, but in case of determined attempts to edit the site a range may be soft-blocked for some time. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. This is Look2See1; he's only made a few edits here with this address, but over at my en:wp talk page, someone's pointed out this address making tons of his typical edits for 2+ months now, so I think we can call it stable. Nyttend (talk) 19:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

Out of process deletion of files by User:Hystrix

Four nights ago, administrator User:Hystrix deleted a large number of files, apparently from a specific Flickr account, giving the rationale: "Uploaded files of a blocked user. To prevent harm from new tenant. -"

Several users including me asked Hystrix on their talk page why that action was performed. Hystrix did not link to any policy reason or deletion discussion that would justify this action. They did link to a Commons user's block discussion and a deletion discussion for some entirely different files from the same Flickr account.

Could another admin please restore these files? They can always be nominated for deletion again if there is an actual problem with any of them. Tokfo (talk) 19:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

  •  Admin's note: Please do not undelete these files without community consensus, wheel warring is not appropriate with dealing with such a magnitude. ~riley (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • @Hystrix: I'll start off by saying that deleting or even editing 10,000 files using semi-automated or automated tools is the job of a bot, and requires the permission of the community for not only the mass logs but the task at hand. Deleting 10,418 files without community consensus was a bad decision, it would be even a worse decision for an admin to come along and undelete them without community consensus due to the magnitude that we are dealing with here. So far, from what I have seen (correct me if I am wrong), there is no policy that has been referenced in this deletion and no discussion that has established consensus for these deletions either. Mass-deletions are extremely controversial and never should be based off of a sole admin's opinion in regards to the matter. I am going to remain neutral in regards to support or oppose for undeletion, but in either case, there needs to be consensus for how we move forward which should be discussed below. ~riley (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Hystrix (talk · contribs) should browse through delinker logs and fix massive damage at least partially. Failure to do anything to mitigate consequences of reckless deletions may be grounds for sanctions. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 Comment: While I wasn't directly involved in the discussions about this Flickr-account on :de, it's clear to me that Hystrix's intent was to avert danger (of costly copyright-litigation) from re-users. On :de Wikipedia re-users have complained about receiving costly cease and desist orders on behalf of this Flickr-user for minor infractions of the licensing terms.[3]
As not all of you may know, the copyright law of Germany and Austria allows the copyright-holder to issue a so-called Abmahnung (sort of Cease and desist) against anyone who in his opinion infringes his copyright, without first calling a court. The typical cost of an Abmahnung is between 500 and 1200 Euros for 1 image. As no court is involved, there is no independant evaluation of the case. Many people pay the amount requested in order to avoid going to court, as this might be even more costly. IANAL. --Túrelio (talk) 20:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
 Question @Túrelio: could you clarify what do you mean, please? Is it about “avoid images from this source because the rights holder is a costly troll”? Or about “we understand legal implications of Flickr licensing wrt users from Germany and Austria too poorly”? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:45, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi, it's somewhere in between. Issueing an Abmahnung it legally o.k., well, to some degree. Originally this process was put into law to deal with business vs. business quarrels, to relieve the courts. But, wrt copyright it is often used business vs. private persons (for example blog-owners). That's morally questionable, IMO, at least when several hundreths of Euros are requested. --Túrelio (talk) 21:04, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
The real question is then; why isn't Wikimedia Legal involved in this? It is not the job of a sole admin to delete 10,000 files in regards to a legal matter, Wikimedia Legal should have been sought out before any decisions were made. Last time I checked, assessing the threat of actual copyright litigation is not in our job descriptions as administrators and making any intent to avert danger is also not within our roles. Hence why we do not handle DMCA takedowns. ~riley (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Well, WMF-Legal's job is WMF, not re-users, not users. At least that's what they officially say.
"making any intent to avert danger is also not within our roles" — well; suppose we learn that a photographer/copyright-holder has a business model of (ab)using Commons/Wikipedia to targetedly expose his images to a broad public, well aware that some re-users will not comply 100 percent with the license terms (I am not talking about blatantly copyviolating re-use) and then extracting quite some money from these usually non-commercial re-users. Would you put your hands in the lap and do nothing? (sorry for the suggestive wording) By maintaining Commons we may unintentionally provide a platform for such practices. I'm aware that this is not a binary problem; but this case might be beyond what's acceptable. --Túrelio (talk) 21:22, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Sounds like a clear cut case of a en:Copyright troll. If reusers are being exposed to thousands of dollars of potential litigation that is indeed a problem. And, no, WMF-Legal is not going to help. Their job is to protect the foundation. Not reusers. I would have preferred if Hystrix at least posted somewhere on Commons that this was occurring but if this is actually what is happening it seems like we should not allow a troll to continue to use Commons for their own monetary gain. --Majora (talk) 21:28, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
You are correct on many levels, WMF has no role in the original issue and I would not sit by and allow this to happen as an administrator, however, they should be involved in regards to the mass-deletion of files in regards to litigation or be involved for taking action against the user with their business model (global lock). Considering Hystrix spent three days deleting these files (when it should have been done in one go by an adminbot), it is quite clear this was not a time sensitive manner and there is no excuse for lack of community discussion. I'd like to know why an admin feels it is appropriate for them to 1) Perform a task at bot speeds 2) Perform a task involving 10,000 files 3) Perform a task without consensus or approval 4) Fail to notify the community of their actions. ~riley (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

(EC) I have taken some time to read about this user here and at DE wiki and I am perfectly fine with this mass deletion. It seems very clear to me that this user uploaded the files (and spread them over articles where the images were inappropriate, also using a sock farm), with the apparent purpose to make money from it by chasing reusers. This user owns a tool (plaghunter.com) and uses it to find reuse. Users have reported to have received bills of over 400 Euros from this person for minor inconformities. This comes close to criminal behaviour or may even be over the legal line. Wikimedia Commons has no place for such business. Jcb (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

If some users think we should delete files whose copyright is being too strictly (however strictly that is) enforced, then they should start an RFC to get such a policy adopted. We don't have a policy to delete files for that reason; as long as we don't, yes, we should "put our hands in the lap and do nothing" about that. Tokfo (talk) 21:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
In some cases copyright trolls send these letters to people who are not actually in violation of the license. It is cheaper to just pay the requested amount instead of going to court about it. This is a form of extortion and while illegal people can make an enormous amount of money from it because it is just easier to pay than deal with the potential court fees. It costs a lot more than 400 euros to fight something in court. You think Commons should be party to this type of activity? Start a RfC regarding copyright trolls then. --Majora (talk) 21:42, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
If somebody is sending fraudulent cease and desist letters to people, then even with a new policy there isn't anything we could possibly do against that. Anybody can send fraudulent cease and desist letters to anybody about any work, including people who aren't even the copyright holders. The kind of situation you describe is a matter for the legal system and has nothing to do with Commons. Tokfo (talk) 06:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Mir war vor der Löschung die Komplexität der Materie nicht bewusst. Ich hätte vorher einen Löschantrag stellen sollen. Mein Fehler. Als Mitglied von de:OTRS habe ich mehrfach Beschwerden über hohe Abmahnungforderungen des Hochladers gelesen, auch von erfahrenen Nachnutzern, bei nur kleinen Fehlern der Kennzeichnung. User:Túrelio hat zu diesem Problem weiter oben geschrieben. Das Problem mit den Abmahnungen gibt es wohl in weiteren Ländern wie Kolumbien (siehe [4]). Der Hochlader geht vermutlich bei der Durchsetzung seiner monetären Forderungen recht perfide vor, wie eine Nachnutzerin es per Mail an de:WP schilderte. Um weitere, auch unbedarfte Nachnutzer zu schützen, habe ich die Dateien gelöscht. Dieses Geschäftsmodell, Dateien in Massen hochladen und bei auch nur kleinen Fehlern der Nachnutzung, ohne vorherige Nachfrage via Mail, sofort einen Geldbetrag einzufordern widerspricht meiner Meinung nach den Richtlinien des Projekts. An einer weiteren Diskussion, ob diese Dateien wiederhergestellt werden sollen, werde ich mich nicht beteiligen. Falls Hilfe bei der Wiederherstellung benötigt wird, werde ich mich beteiligen.
(Translation via google: Before the erasure, I was unaware of the complexity of the matter. I should have asked for a deletion request beforehand. My mistake. As a member of de: OTRS, I have read several complaints about high warning requirements of the uploader, even from experienced reusers, with only small errors of labeling. User: Túrelio has written on this issue further up. The problem with the warnings there are probably in other countries such as Colombia (see ([5]). The uploader is probably in the enforcement of his monetary demands quite perfidious before, as a reusers it by Mail to de: WP described. To protect further, also inoffensive Nachnutzer, I deleted the files. This business model, files in bulk upload and with only small errors of the reuse, without prior request via email to claim a cash immediately contradicts, in my opinion, the guidelines of the project and I will not participate in any further discussion on whether these files should be restored.) Hystrix (talk) 22:10, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Personally, I think the matter is settled with Hystrix's response. It seems we all agree that the deletions were out of process and should have been done through a regular DR. Hystrix acted out of good intentions, apologized for the mistake and offered to help fix the mistake if the community requests it. Now that the damage is done, we should not mass-undelete, but process potential undeletion via the normal UnDR process.
I wonder whether it's time we need some kind of policy or guidelines regarding abusive rights holders, though that's something to be discussed on the Village Pump or in an RFC. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 05:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't understand what could be the purpose of individual undeletion requests for >10000 files. The files were all deleted for the same "reason", so either all of them should be restored or none of them. Tokfo (talk) 07:03, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I never said anything about individual UnDRs. But potential undeletion should be discussed on a community forum, not the Administrator's board. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:49, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
@Tokfo: do you deny people from wikis the right to use correctly licensed images on their own discretion? Possibly a special warning template {{Copyright trolling}} has to be designed for this purpose, but Commons should not force such precautions upon the whole Wikimedia. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: Are you confusing me with someone else? I already agree with you, which is why I started this thread. Tokfo (talk) 09:25, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Not confused, but possibly did not recognize a straw-man argument. There is some community support for mass deletion of the produce of the copyright troll. In other words, anything licensed by the troll is by default not admitted to Wikimedia Commons. But if several pictures are valuable enough to be used in spite of danger, and if there are strong supporters for particular causes, then why not to undelete few files for which benefits outweigh risk? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:05, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
In accordance with this discussion, I have made an undeletion request. Tokfo (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Christian Ferrer is deleting my pic on the MES WIKI section

The Admin Christian ferrer is deleting Pics that are clearly for MES WIKI page for Mind Eye Society LARP games. I have uploaded pic of my self on Aztec and other Customs, use filters to shape the image as gothic vampire related.

I don't know how to contact him and tell him to stop.

Please I need help — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramonpazos (talk • contribs) 06:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Hint: Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Ramonpazos. Sänger (talk) 07:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 Not done The images in question are not deleted, yet. Please participate in the discussion linked by Sänger. Nothing to be done here. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Revdel request

Resolved

Hi, Could someone revdel this please, I'm assuming the IP is an LTA who seemingly has some sort of grudge against me, No idea, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 15:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:52, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
Brilliant thanks Steinsplitter much appreciated :), –Davey2010Talk 15:55, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Note: A global lock is requested for proxies 187.45.179.165 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ) and 187.45.179.164 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log ). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 16:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Can someone please block 158.85.76.229, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 16:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done 187.45.176.0/20 for three days. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:01, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

User:Lingveno

I posted about this user at Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections/Archive_23#User:Lingveno a week ago, but nothing was done. They are proxying for a blocked user who was using commons uploads in an extortion racket. There is an awful lot of clean up left to be done. Smartse (talk) 10:50, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

@Smartse: Regarding en:User_talk:Lingveno, just to clarify: Did he got bought by a blocked editor (Wuestenigel and socks) to upload files of the blocked editor? --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
@Steinsplitter: Thanks for the email - interwiki pings are useless! They didn't explain what happened, but that seems like the likeliest explanation. They presumably didn't know why they were doing it, but they added the images to several articles over several wikis. Semso98 claimed to have been contacted on social media and did it is a favour, but given the links to sockfarms I find that hard to believe. Smartse (talk) 17:11, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

By the way, I deem this conduct of Jeff_G. disrespectful and harmful. It is perfectly possible that Lingveno was “bought” (i.e. contracted) to make some uploads, but one requires an extraordinary evidence to broadcast sockpuppetry accusations against an established Wikimedian never having reputation of a deceiver. Jeff, either search for evidence now (this, of course, doesn’t qualify) or apologize for personal attack. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 05:53, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

@Incnis Mrsi: I never accused User:Lingveno of sockpuppetry. I thought all the files in Category:Images by Marco Verch were by Marco Verch. Where's your evidence and why didn't you notify me of the above?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 09:20, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
The posting referred by the diff above was placed in a section with files mostly (if not totally) uploaded by Lingveno, not already blocked Wuestenigel. IMHO “uploader is using them to inappropriately pepper pages in multiple projects” (emphasis mine) in this context is explicit and unambiguous; and see that it was not corrected. If it is not about socking by Lingveno, then about what? @Jeff G.: I pinged you and, moreover, you are a regular on admins’ noticeboards. Sorry, did not expect that a missing user_talk message may offend you. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: I modified it, ok?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 20:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
Good. @Jeff G.: may we consider the incident resolved? I became paranoid about baseless accusations against (really working) Wikimedians, but see now that nothing of the sort was intended. Perhaps I could better query Jeff on his user_talk first, not taking this straight to the noticeboard. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:24, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: Yes, but please consider that mention ≠ ping ≠ posting on user talk.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:12, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
@Incnis Mrsi: "an established Wikimedian" maybe, but one who on en.wiki at least, has consistently put their own financial interests ahead of the project's aims. Smartse (talk) 16:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
@Smartse: I have too little information about what happened to Lingveno in en.Wikipedia, but deception or scam AFAIK were not incriminated. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:40, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

About request

Hello, any admin please see this request and grant me the rights. I don't want to request here but no one is seeking there so I have to post here.--√Jæ√ 15:56, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

With all due respect, but to be honest this sounds like hat collecting to me. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:41, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Help me to delete the Template:User_VM/zh

The {{User VM}} which I created already has the Simple Chinese edition and Traditional Chinese edition, and I mistakenly created a Chinese edition before. Could you help me to delete the Chinese edition? --HFWMan (talk) 03:41, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 03:50, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Can someone help this user?

Might not be the best place to ask,, but I couldn't think of where better. At Commons:Help_desk#Can we take pictures of six historic photos displayed by the government agencie?, I have tried several times to help this user, but he doesn't seem to understand me. Having had similar impasses with him several other times, I'm obviously not the one to help him out. Can someone else work with him? - Jmabel ! talk 15:32, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of redirects

Hi, could an admin please close Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Icons for railway descriptions/obsolete redirect#More redirects (4)? I am waiting for a number of pages to be deleted so I can do file moves to those titles. Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 08:48, 23 March 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done For future reference, "uncontroversial maintenance", which includes the reshuffling of names, is a speedy deletion criterium and may be better suited for some of those files. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 09:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Kal Portugal Synagogue

Please delete this Category. I've moved the files to Category:Kahal Portugal Synagogue. Liadmalone (talk) 08:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Is @Liadmalone an expert on Romanization of Hebrew? Why can’t “קהל” be “Kal”? Leave {{Catredirect}} is place. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 08:42, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
No, I'm not an expert. But the plate says so in English. Liadmalone (talk) 08:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
The plate shows only that its manufacturer preferred Kahal/Кахал in Latin and Cyrillic. Transcription from Hebrew is messy – would anybody delete Matkal building just because it is another transcription than Matcal Tower? Incnis Mrsi (talk) 10:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Unless it was customary to write kal for קהל, writing kal instead of kahal is just wrong, since it skips a consonant and a vowel. Liadmalone (talk) 15:00, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

File:Kuczynski Pedro Pablo (cropped).jpg

Hi Could you delete the file. It is a cropped version and the full version have been deleted per copyvio. But the file is protected, I couldn't add a "copyvio" template. --Panam2014 (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Panam2014: This file should be deleted as a violation of COM:CRT#Peru, but it is "In the news" and thus on the mainpage at the Chinese Wikipedia, and it is therefore protected here until tomorrow. @Zhuyifei1999 (or any other Chinese speaker), can you please make a case for accelerated removal (or replacement with another photo from Category:Pedro Pablo Kuczynski) on Chinese Wikipedia?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:05, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Saw this too late --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 19:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: File:Fotografía Oficial del Presidente de la República del Perú Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.jpg. Same case but in en.wiki. Could you do the same ? --Panam2014 (talk) 14:08, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done Yann (talk) 14:09, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Yann: Congrats, you broke two Wikipedias! Would you please redirect those to File:Pedro Pablo Kuczynski (31074270420) (cropped).jpg?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:18, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Drop the overly dramatic shit - nothing was broken, a red link appeared and was quickly fixed, but more importantly, a copyright violation is a copyright violation, if you think we're going to leave copyvios around just so other projects can avoid a red link or two, you can close the door behind you on the way out. Nick (talk) 14:25, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Nick and Yann: I'm sorry, I overreacted. Redlinks on Wikipedia mainpages are a big deal, and I provided a category of potential replacement images.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:35, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I immediately notified people on IRC, who replaced the file. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:14, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Yann: Those users didn't replace the files until 11-13 minutes after you deleted them, details follow. For English Wikipedia, you deleted File:Kuczynski Pedro Pablo (cropped).jpg at 14:09.[7] @Nick swapped File:Pedro_Pablo_Kuczynski_2016_(cropped).jpg into w:Template:In the news 11 minutes later at 14:20.[8]. Similarly, for Chinese Wikipedia, you deleted File:Fotografía Oficial del Presidente de la República del Perú Pedro Pablo Kuczynski.jpg at 14:10.[9] @Antigng swapped File:Pedro_Pablo_Kuczynski_2016_(cropped).jpg into zh:Template:Itn 13 minutes later at 14:23.[10]. I had File:Pedro Pablo Kuczynski (31074270420) (cropped).jpg ready for swapping at 14:10, and its page looking better at 14:12. You could have waited until the swaps were in place to do your deletions, or you could have used file redirects as I asked at 14:18. I have screenshots of how badly the main pages looked at 14:19. All times UTC. I sincerely hope that the "In the news" editors at the English and Chinese Wikipedias vet their images better, and that we on Commons can do better to avoid making their main pages look bad.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:26, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: Will you stop complaining about how the Main Page's looked and stop criticising Yann, a copyright violation is a copyright violation and is to be dealt with promptly. Yann did everything correctly and nothing wrong or incorrectly (unlike you, the chief apologist for copyvios today). If you're still unhappy about Yann deleting a copyright violation, Wikimedia Commons is not the project for you, use your right to vanish and fork, and try to do better yourself elsewhere. Nick (talk) 18:59, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Resolved  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:06, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Help moving 195 images at Category:Le Village

Hi. Could I please ask for admin assistance to move 195 images from the renamed Category:Le Village? Because of the ambiguous name, the category has off-topic images that need to be removed such as File:Donjon, Penne, 8 octobre 1898 (3928308739).jpg but I think I can handle that. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:37, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Moved, using Commons:Cat-a-lot. Note that you don't need admin privileges to use it. Materialscientist (talk) 02:19, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Broken files

Hi, I notice quite a lot of broken files these days, so I have opened phab:T190988. Please do not delete these files used for testing, and add any relevant information. Hopefully it will be fixed soon. Thanks, Yann (talk) 04:41, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

Help to Delete the Translation Page Template:User VM/zh-has

This page was created accidentally for there is no language named "zh-has". Please help me to delete it. --HFWMan (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done --jdx Re: 04:30, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Delete my user page

Please delete my user page, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Mr.Polaz --Mr.Polaz (talk) 11:09, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Mr.Polaz: I tagged it for you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 13:04, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:05, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

updating mediawiki page

please move this page to the MediaWiki:Gadget-Cat-a-lot.js/fa Yamaha5 (talk) 04:51, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

@Yamaha5: What would be done with the existing page?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: the talk page is updated version please move the talk page to the main page. MediaWiki talk:Gadget-Cat-a-lot.js/fa --- move to-- > MediaWiki:Gadget-Cat-a-lot.js/fa like this edit Yamaha5 (talk) 06:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done Please check if everything is fine. --jdx Re: 07:26, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

File:BildBenutzer.png should be deleted

It contains a copyvio icon from Windows XP; I tried replacing it with a non-copyvio version, but the Wikimedia image server isn't letting me. Lojbanist (talk) 19:38, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Nevermind; the image server appears to have been purged. Lojbanist (talk) 19:52, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Comilla to Cumilla

Not sure where else to post this. Bangladesh has changed the english spelling of some of its cities [11]. The city of Comilla has been changed to Cumilla. All the images in Category:Comilla containing the name will need changing.--Auric (talk) 20:18, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Auric, that is not a reason to change file names. Artix Kreiger (talk) 20:46, 3 April 2018 (UTC)
@Auric: The best place to post this is probably the Village Pump, although files should probably not be renamed. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:02, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay, thanks.--Auric (talk) 12:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Artix Kreiger, No. This isn't correct. If the difference is significant, the file name should be corrected. For example in Nigeria, "Uyo" and "Oyo" are two different states. In Yoruba language, " ìgbà means "Time" and "ìgbá" means "garden egg". You may not give advise on what is a correct file name if you do not speak that language in particular. If the change in spellings (in the case of a single letter difference) do not affect the meaning of the words, then we may not need to change the file names. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 06:34, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Revision deletion

Please delete the edit summary of Special:Diff/292213123, as it includes personal attack. --B dash (talk) 05:26, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I am not sure personal attacks meet the criteria for Rev-del. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 08:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
Although the personal attack towards vandal was not nice, in my opinion it can stay so. Taivo (talk) 10:00, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Delete first version of a file

Hello,

The OTRS permission received from the owner of the rights covers only a picture of max 400x400px. Could you delete the first version of this picture ?

Best regards,

--AntonierCH (d) 08:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. However, the description template states author=Derisbourg, whereas the EXIF data state photographer=tissot.mayenfisch.com . That does not fit. --Túrelio (talk) 08:32, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you ! I will finish updating the image desc. --AntonierCH (d) 09:11, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Alligator Nest (2), NPSPhoto (9247530267).jpg: Help Requested

Recently, when I was surfing the files, I found File:Alligator Nest (2), NPSPhoto (9247530267).jpg, which was originally posted by User:Howcheng, but was suspected to be vandalized by User:Eq11220 by overwriting the original file with not related photos for multiple times. Would anyone can resume the original file and take further actions?廣九直通車 (talk) 13:39, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Reverted the file, hid the intermediate versions, warned the user. Please let us know if this continues. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 14:06, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you!廣九直通車 (talk) 00:28, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Citroen SM Interior (39669206081).jpg & File:Citroen DS3 R5 (39236154362).jpg, File:Jaguar Mark 2 (25814412248).jpg and many other images

Dear Admins,

Can an Admin please use a bot to tag all of Artix Kreiger 2s images in this large Category into a mass Deletion of a banned uploader since they apparently licensed as PD-Mark on flickr and not CCO as he claims? He probably has several hundred or a thousand such images here and was banned indefinitely for sockpuppetry. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

MOTD thumbtime

Seems to be broken again (previous was here). See {{Motd/2018-04-09 thumbtime}}, affecting the caption on {{Motd/2018-04-09 (en)}} : tried to blank it but didn't work ; might need to be deleted for the time being. — Racconish ☎ 09:40, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@Steinsplitter and Zhuyifei1999: — Racconish ☎ 10:07, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@Yann: --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 14:26, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
@Yann: nevermind, fixed : [12]. — Racconish ☎ 07:29, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Template:Information needs fixing

Please see Template_talk:Information#Fixing_linter_errors_caused_by_other_fields_property. Tidy will be replaced end of June 2018. SSastry (WMF) (talk) 13:35, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Upload Campaign:vaz

The Esperanto Commnity will run a photo-contest between 1 and 31 August, the contest Vikio Amas ZEOjn (Wiki Loves Zamenhof/Esperanto Objects, Category:Vikio Amas ZEOjn 2018). The templates al already created Category:Vikio Amas ZEOjn templates. I'll really appreciate any help setting up the campaign for the photo-contest. Thanks! Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage? 04:44, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Upload Campaign:vaz

The Esperanto Commnity will run a photo-contest between 1 and 31 August, the contest Vikio Amas ZEOjn (Wiki Loves Zamenhof/Esperanto Objects, Category:Vikio Amas ZEOjn 2018). The templates al already created Category:Vikio Amas ZEOjn templates. I'll really appreciate any help setting up the campaign for the photo-contest. Thanks! Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage? 04:44, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Categories for deletion

I have a new group of categories that should be deleted. They were created by an IP and fall under overcat.

Fry1989 eh? 19:29, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Deleted. Érico (talk) 21:30, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Template:Information needs fixing

Please see Template_talk:Information#Fixing_linter_errors_caused_by_other_fields_property. Tidy will be replaced end of June 2018. SSastry (WMF) (talk) 13:35, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

@Perhelion: That template is protected because it is widely used. Can you please help fix it?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:54, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Who is the original uploader of this file?

Two versions of the same file (apparently) have been uploaded to Commons: File:Think.jpg and File:Think.jpeg, from different Wikipedias. Can someone check if the right file has been kept and the right author attributed? Presumably it's whoever uploaded it the earliest. The name of the author on File:Think.jpg was changed by an IP edit. --ghouston (talk) 12:32, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Except for the username change due migration to SUL, is here is a problem at all? The earliest upload—April 2006—was in de.Wikipedia by Snoop~dewiki and the existing image is credited as a work by one Snoop from de.Wikipedia. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 14:37, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done. I checked it. Right version was kept, per Incnis Mrsi right author is attributed. Taivo (talk) 14:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. It seemed odd because the current version was transferred from nlwiki but is credited to an author at dewiki. --ghouston (talk) 23:58, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry to all the admins for the mistakes i have had made. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swaraj Sagar Pradhan (talk • contribs) 07:17, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

@Swaraj Sagar Pradhan: No need to apologize, many people make the same mistake as you. But please note that images from the web are usually not allowed to upload to Commons. For details, see COM:L. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:20, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Is this source reliable?

Hello folks. I don't know where to discuss this issue but is this(http://www.edmaps.com/) source reliable? It looks like self-published and questionable. I couldn't find any source for the maps presented in this website and this makes the source shady and questionable which harms the reliability of this project. I would like to hear other editors' opinions on this. Thanks. 88.226.47.49 10:42, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

"Excepting the scanned maps (public domain maps)" these maps shouldn't be uploaded here anyway because they're all copyrighted and non-free [13]. De728631 (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Yes, but there are other problems in addition to the copyvio. The maps seem random collections from the Internet fora. I could not find/see any source for the maps on the website. This is a serious problem because editors upload maps based on this questionable source and since the images are one of the most attention-grabbing parts of the Wikipedia articles, it causes serious problems regarding reliability. Are there any platform to discuss this issue on Commons? As far as I remember, there are platforms such as RSN and noticeboard for spam-black list on the WP,but I did not see such platforms on Commons. It would be an appropriate way to gain a consensus regarding such cases. 88.226.47.49 17:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Village pump should be the right venue. De728631 (talk) 23:42, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

Hyphen x Dash in POTD

In the description of today's POTD the hyphen should be changed of a dash, which only admins can do. It is not a big thing, but the main page should present everything correctly. May I ask for the correction? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 06:22, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Pleclown (talk) 06:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

A threat, carried over from the EN project

This lovely message and this message were sent sometime after the editor's range block in the English project. A block here, or a lock on my talk page, might be appropriate. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:51, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

Block or lock away. I don't worship Wikipedia like you fake wanna be Christian. See ya lol — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2600:1702:1690:E10:80B1:C5D7:1EE0:D567 (talk) 04:55, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. The IP is blocked. I semi-protected the user talkpage for a month. Taivo (talk) 08:42, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the lock. Interestingly, the anon's block was for their behaviour in other locations, not for the attacks, yet the editor appears to be blaming me, calling it a "cry baby con" and changed IPs and tagged the talk page again. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:45, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

How can I be in copyright violation when I'm creating the files using Paint and Inkscape? I'm using 2 different files, piecing them together, and then uploading. Explain...

  • File:Roman Catholic Diocese of Victoria in Texas.svg
  • File:Roman Catholic Diocese of Brownsville.svg
  • File:Roman Catholic Diocese of Kalamazoo.svg
  • File:Roman Catholic Diocese of Saginaw.svg
  • File:Roman Catholic of Chalan Kanoa.svg

Roberto221 (talk) 23:10, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

You can be in copyright violation whenever you copy a copyrighted thing without a license, the mechanism doesn't matter. Copying a book with a pen and paper may be a copyright violation. --ghouston (talk) 00:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

m:WMDE Technical Wishes/Rollback/Feedback round

A significant change to the rollback function has been proposed above. --Rschen7754 05:15, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Lisa Joy continual copyvio

Over the past several months, the same image of Lisa Joy has been uploaded repeatedly, and has been deleted several times because it is a copyrighted photo taken by HBO. Here is a link to once instance of those deletions: [14] The other link was replaced with a different photo, which I'm assuming is a copyright violation as well: [15] The first photo I linked existed at the 2nd link previously. The file is now back again here: [16] Is there any way to prevent this image from being uploaded, as it is a clear copyright violation and has been deleted multiple times before. It's been uploaded by multiple users, likely with a close connection to the subject in the photo. Gage (talk) 06:44, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Suggesting a speedy keep for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Christine Defraigne.jpg

There is obviously no valid reason to delete this picture (user that started the DR is confusing Commons with Wikipedia), although I will request a rename after the DR has been closed. I suggest to speedy keep it because any discussion in that DR has the potential to get ugly without helping in any way to determine if it the image should be kept, because that's already clear. - Alexis Jazz 19:27, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 04:37, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

WLE Germany notice

Hello,

please send User:Blech/WLE2018Rundschreiben to the user pages listed on User:Blech/WLENamen16und17. The message has been discussed on https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_Diskussion:Wiki_Loves_Earth_2018/Deutschland#Benachrichtigung_der_Teilnehmer_aus_den_Jahren_2016_und_2017 .

Thanks in advance, --Blech (talk) 15:24, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done --Didym (talk) 00:28, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Prithviraj at Aiyyaa event.jpg

Can an Admin with OTRS access please check the OTRS ticket here to see if it applies to this image above? The uploader typed in the ticket himself. If it does not apply to the ticket, please file a Deletion Request. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:20, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done You don't need to access the ticket. The permission applies to all images by Bollywood Hungama, i.e. taken in India by their photographers. Regards, Yann (talk) 04:41, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

IP block exempt question

I primarily edit on English Wikipedia where I have the ip-block-exempt flag because it is necessary for me to edit via a VPN. Since the flag is local to en.wp I can not nominate copyvio images (pretty much the only reason I edit here) without going to either a mobile or DMZ machine. I also run into this issue in the rare instances I edit over on meta. What are the requirements for obtaining ip-block-exempt here and where do I ask? Thank you. Jbhunley (talk) 20:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. Guanaco (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio by a user in uploads of photographs which source are the Swiss Federal Archives

Hello. One user uploaded a lot of portraits which are originated in the Swiss Federal Archives. Actually the photographer died 2012 and because of that the photographs are not in the public domain. Also the uploads by this user are not authorized by the Swiss Federal Archives. I have put a lot of speedy deletion requests but maybe it is easier if a admin just deletes all photographs from Peter Friedli (1925-2012) and with the Swiss Federal Archives template in it. Thank you. -> [17] --Micha (talk) 11:41, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Gefyrotes. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:56, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Micha/Micha L., schreib das zur Sicherheit noch einmal in den von Yann eröffneten Löschantrag. Es wäre vieleicht auch gar nicht so schlecht, Deine Verbndung zum Archiv kurz zu erwähnen, und dass du deshalb sicher um die fehlende Autorisierung weißt (upps, ein ß ;-)). — Speravir – 00:03, 23 April 2018 (UTC)
The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

AlexanderHovanec

Good morning. I am an administrator on enwiki. The user AlexanderHovanec was indef blocked from enwiki after they began socking during a block for BLP and sourcing violations. Back on March 16, the editor uploaded several images to commons, including some that apparently feature the editor in them. Several sockpuppets for Alex have focused on trying to insert these images of him into various enwiki articles. I am wondering what remedies might be available? Can the images be deleted? My apologies for not being too knowledgeable about Commons. Note the user has not been blocked on commons at this time. Ferret (talk) 22:28, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

None of the sockpuppets at enwiki appear to have been used at Commons, except one which created a very basic user page. We don't have grounds to block him here for sock puppetry. However, the images are probably copyright violations. They look like screenshots of some video of unknown origin. I'll start a deletion request. Guanaco (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by AlexanderHovanec. I nominated those images which were "own work" and not taken with iPhone 6s. Guanaco (talk) 22:42, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done Upon review of their talk page, I saw a long history of copyright violations and a final warning issued by me in January. Blocked three months. Guanaco (talk) 22:45, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Duplicate of deleted file, or different?

File:Hey Mama! logo.png was previously deleted in August 2017 as a result of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Hey Mama! logo.png. It was reuploaded two weeks after the deletion took place, but I hadn't noticed until now. My question is, is the deleted image an exact duplicate of the current file, or is it different in that the deleted file contains color? If it's the former, it should be deleted under COM:GCSD#4. If the latter, I will initiate a deletion discussion for this new version. ℯxplicit 04:35, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. It was even twice before uploaded and the current version was bigger version of first, but not the second. Anyway, I deleted the current file as reupload of content deleted by community consensus. Deletion rationale in the DR still perfectly fits. Taivo (talk) 07:43, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Bulk deletion request

Please could someone delete the 76 files in Category:Andy Mabbett temp - delete, which I uploaded as part of a large batch? They are either duplicates, or unwanted intro slides which include non-free stock images. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:41, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 19:49, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

AETEST

All uploads by AETEST (talk · contribs) are PR pieces, with higher resolution samples online available. Please speedy delete as copyright violation.--BevinKacon (talk) 17:52, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done--Ymblanter (talk) 18:30, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

File:Berkelium metal.jpg

I posted about this at Commons talk:Deletion policy and was very helpfully directed here by Jeff G.. As I wrote there, at File:Berkelium metal.jpg the current version (the same as the original one) is not copyrighted, but the version uploaded by User:Am-242m at 01:35, 12 April 2018 seems to be quite clearly a copyvio of Theodore Gray's periodic table poster (although the picture has been changed to something similar to the Commons image, the design of the element tile is quite clearly identical). I would hence like to request deletion of only that middle version. Double sharp (talk) 15:14, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. I cleaned history. The deleted version could be free as work of US government, but there was no source and we cannot be sure. Taivo (talk) 07:38, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
@Taivo: Thank you! Double sharp (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Fix main page template

Apparently commons is now amongst the wikis where HTML Tidy has been replaced by RemexHtml (cf. meta:Tech/News/2018/14). I cannot otherwise attribute the perculiar display glitch I speak about below. Ping @Steinsplitter and @A.Savin, who had noticed this as temporary glitch earlier.

In {{Main Page Template}} there is a syntax error only very recently leading to a different, peculiar look of the title. In line 4 of the wikicode there is an opening <span> before {{{sitename_localized|Wikimedia Commons}}}, but a closing </strong> after this, so this should at least be fixed, but then the string with the uploaded number of files will get much smaller (to default 100% font size). My suggestion would be to increase it there, as well, let’s say to 150% (slightly more than two third size of the first line): 

<div id="mf-tagline-title"><span style="color: #484848; font-size: 220%;">{{{sitename_localized|Wikimedia Commons}}}</span><br/><span style="color: #666666; font-size: 150%;">{{{tagline|a collection of [[Special:Statistics|{{NUMBEROFFILES}}]] [[Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia|freely usable]] media files to which [[Commons:Welcome|anyone can contribute]]}}}</span></div>

I made a test in the sandbox, cf. Special:PermaLink/298283876 for results. You can, of course, test with different sizes, too. — Speravir – 00:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

I forgot this: The (very probably new) parser adds the missing </span> at the very end before the closing </div> which leads to the taller font size. — Speravir – 01:16, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Ehm, now the parser fixes it for me again in the expected way, so I do not see the second line too tall. And from the massive reactions here (;-)) I guess it was also temporary this time. Nethertheless the syntax error is still there. — Speravir – 02:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Admin needed to revert vandalism

Tried to revert this edit, I’ve tried but tells me it’s protected. Bidgee (talk) 07:41, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Storkk (talk) 08:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Scarlett Castillo García

Can someone delete all Scarlett Castillo García (talk · contribs) uploads? Minor looking for Instagram.--BevinKacon (talk) 21:57, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Copyvios deleted, other files nominated for deletion. Warned user about out of scope uploads. Jon Kolbert (talk) 22:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

user:Andrew3789

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I'm looking at w:Zener Prize where all the photos of recipients have been uploaded by user:Andrew3789. They are all marked as being "own work". This just seems so unlikely to me. The dates go back as far as 1956 and the variations in quality and style looks like they have been copied from various sources. The Mason picture in particular is not an original photograph, it is quite obviously from a bad photocopy. Many of the others are "postage stamp" size low-quality that one would get from an internet screen scrape. Looks to me like these should be mass deleted. SpinningSpark 16:51, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. I deleted speedily all his uploads as copyright violations and warned him: mostly small photos and always without camera data. I did not delete one file as crop from existing Commons file. Taivo (talk) 08:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Dear Taivo and Spinningspark; Lets analyze carefully the story and suppositions raised by Spinning Spark. I have already provided many evidences including names of people who provided photos for the article on Zener Prize. In contrast, Spinning Spark did not provide any evidence. I should emphasize that a complete list of names, e-mails and documentation is available for your perusal. Photos were resized to a small format by purpose, i.e. to show clearly the face and make photos more suitable for wikipedia. As clearly stated in my previous letter all photos were provided by laureates or colleagues/family of laureates. These photos are perfectly legal and licence free. Hereby, I declare that I am the right person responsible for all uploaded photos and any legal procedure. Hence, if you have any critical comments or questions you are welcome to ask questions. I would be happy to provide all details. I am frustrated that our unique photo of Clarence Zener was also deleted. This photo was provided by Professor A.Riviere from France. He decided to make this photo available to everybody. This is the ONLY ONE licence-free photo of Clarence Melvin Zener in internet. I am ready to provide e-mail address of Professor Riviere for fast verification. This is my official request to re-upload all photos from this article in question.

Professor Cantelli already explained one fine missing detail mentioned in my e-mail this morning: 'Concerning the photo of Koester, I wrote to my old colleagues Hael Mughrabi and Essman, but I did not get any answer ... I wil try again late tomorrow with a much younger colleague and try to sort out info about Koester Award". As already explained negotiations with distinguished (very old) professors from Max-Planck Institute in Stuttgart, Germany are in progress (To avoid any inconsistences please note that this Institute was renamed few years ago. The ICIFUAS Prize was also renamed into the Zener Prize in September 1993).

Reply to Spinning Spark: You did not mention in your notice on Articles for deletion/Zener Prize that 39 original links to ASA Prize winners: asa.aip.org/encomia/gold/NAME are listed in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASA_Gold_Medal The list can be easily checked. This list also includes the original link to Warren Perry Mason (used in the article on Zener Prize) http://asa.aip.org/encomia/gold/mason.html All these links must have been redirected to the main ASA page: https://acousticalsociety.org/ quite recently (2-3 weeks?). In a similar time span you published a new article on WP Mason (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_P._Mason) . Let me emphasize that you overlooked or did not consider the last sentence from the text published by Mason’s friend Robert N. Thurston (http://asa.aip.org/encomia/gold/mason.html ) “In 1969, Warren Mason was again honored formally. At the International Conference on Ultrasonic Attenuation and Internal Friction in Crystalline Solids, held at Brown University, he was presented with an award for outstanding contributions to the subject of the conference.” Robert N. Thurston. This explains why the link was used in the article. In fact, you cited Robert N. Thurston's work many times in your article.

Let me conclude that you simply overlooked this sentence or you deleted this sentence. At any rate, I hope that you will find this information useful (a copy of Thurston's paper published under old ASA link is available).´It can be concluded that 39 original ASA links are not faked references. The link for Mason is also not a faked link. It is not clear why you suggested that this particular link is dead? and not recoverable. As an author of the new article on W.P. Mason you should know all details. You may also explain why old ASA links are no longer active. I hope that the issue of Mason's photo may be solved with old colleagues of Professor Arthur Nowick. Masons photo was not provided by Mason's family; to my knowledge this photo must have been used during many lectures and public presentations). You may try to approach Mason's family in the US.

Dear Taivo, would you be so kind to send this message to Spinning Spark? I would also appreciate to your decision concerning our photo-gallery. In the case of problems let me know what kind of documentation is required to provide complementary evidences. Sincerely Yours, Andrew3789 (talk) 21:44, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

At this stage I am coming to the conclusion that we are being trolled by multiple socks across multiple wikis. See en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zener Prize and this editor has been editing the sister articles on multiple other language versions. Other images in that article, for instance File:Andy Granato.jpg, are equally dubious but have been uploaded by a different account created and active in the same period as Andrew3789. Andrew, convince me that you really do have the original photos and permission to use them. Pick one, let's say the Arthur Nowick image. Send your evidence of permission to Commons:OTRS. When you have done that, upload it at full photographic quality together with the OTRS ticket number and correct details of the source and author, then maybe we can talk further. This is not the place to discuss the Wikipedia article referencing, take that to the deletion debate on Wikipedia. Commons is only interested in the images. SpinningSpark 08:23, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

Closing. No admin action is needed. I answered to Andrew on his user talkpage. The deleted files need OTRS-permission, after which they can be restored, or they can be re-uploaded locally into en.wiki as fair use. Problems with Zener prize article in en.wiki are unimportant for Commons. Taivo (talk) 08:56, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Todd Howard - Pipimi

In case it went unnoticed: [18] --188.76.241.35 22:22, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

I fixed it, thanks.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:51, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Artix Kreiger

Considering contributions from this account of more than 35,000 edits over more than six months, could someone summarize what happened, and whether we should examine or be concerned about past uploads? @Green Giant: as interested party. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

@Fæ: As far as I understand it, Artix seems to have raised suspicions on English Wikipedia, where a checkuser suggested Artix is the same person who operated the blocked account of Winterysteppe. The account was also blocked on several other wikis for the same reason. To be fair, I was a little surprised by how quickly Artix seemed to get involved in processes such as Deletion requests.
Artix emailed me shortly after the blocks on different wikis, asking for all their user rights to be removed and the account to be locked because they don’t want to participate any further but I suspect also to stop them from being tempted to log into another wiki. After waiting a few days for Artix to reconsider, I complied with their request. As far as Commons is concerned, there is as yet nothing to suggest Artix has done anything of concern, but I’ve not had a chance to take more than a cursory look. Does anyone have any concerns about Artix's contributions? Green Giant (talk) 18:50, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. I was unaware that it was normal to globally lock an account on user request. Presumably if the account is to be kept locked, there will be a record on Meta that will provide a block rationale?
This thread was raised because there is no evidence of account misuse on Wikimedia Commons, nor has it been claimed that this account was being used in conjunction with any other. I am aware of SPI records elsewhere, but nothing recent, so this may have been intended as a reasonable clean start per the standard offer. Naturally, I am not representing the interests of the blocked account, only wishing to understand how policy works in this case. --Fæ (talk) 19:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
English Wikipedia does not allow anonymous clean starts for indefinitely blocked users, even years later. I tend to disagree with this blanket policy, but it appears the enwiki block is legitimate. On Commons, I agree there's no cause to block Artix. If he asks for his account to be unlocked, or if he creates a new one, we should welcome him back. Guanaco (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
  • I think we should stop this nonsensical idea of blocking a user here based on English Wikipedia checkuser block if there is no actual disruption here. That's a poor judgement in my book. T Cells (talk) 05:52, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

File:IAN OLIVER MARTIN, March 3, 1979, New York City's Broadway Theatre District in NYC.jpg

Hi. This file was supposed to have been either deleted or kept as a result of the closing of Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Ianolivermartin, but the deletion tag is still on the image. Thank you. Yulia Dmitryevna 19:18, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done. Not sure what happened. Deleted now. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 02:12, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Forgotten request on protected images admin page

Hi,

There is a three years old request on Commons:Requested updates to protected images, about Video-x-generic.svg – obviously forgotten. Could someone take the request? Thank you! Thomas Linard (talk) 16:07, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 18:12, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request

Hi, could an admin respond to the edit request I made on MediaWiki talk:Common.css on 23 March? Thanks, Jc86035 (talk) 11:52, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 18:03, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

License of File:Comic barnstar.png

Could someone check what license I uploaded the above image with please? Can't remember if I asked for attribution or not, and if I did I'd like to request it at derivative works on the commons, namely File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png, where I think it's unfair another user is claiming it as their own work. Hiding (talk) 18:44, 23 April 2018 (UTC)

Was uploaded as self|GFDL|cc-by-3.0. Taivo (talk) 07:30, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you. Please can I get my copyright issue resolved then, as currently it has been breached. Hiding (talk) 20:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
@Hiding: Your image was deleted in 2010 while File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png was uploaded in 2015. While I can't see File:Comic barnstar.png it would seem unlikely that File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png was based on it. As you can see at Category:Wikimedia barnstars there are many barnstars that look like it. They all seem to be based on File:Original Barnstar.png and that can't be yours: it was uploaded years before you registered. - Alexis Jazz 21:14, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
It's exactly the same image. It's not based on File:Original Barnstar.png as a cursory comparison of File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png and File:Original Barnstar.png would reveal. If you have admin rights you should be ab;e to undelete the image and see they are the exact same image. All I am asking for is the attribution that my license requires. I'd also appreciate the assumption of good faith here. I'm telling you it's exactly the same. I'm not someone who lies, and my years of editing on various projects should stand me in good stead. Hiding (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
As an administrator I'm sorry to tell you that File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png and File:Comic barnstar.png are nowhere identical except that both are based on File:Barnstar.png which was moved to File:Original Barnstar.png. You credited that image yourself as a base for your file File:Comic barnstar.png: "Created using public domain [[Image:Barnstar.png]] as base." De728631 (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png (2015) was based on File:Original Barnstar Hires.svg (2010) that was based on File:Original Barnstar.png (2003). File:Comic barnstar.png (2008) was based on File:Original Barnstar.png (2003). With that I think we got to the bottom of it. - Alexis Jazz 21:43, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
Without being able to see the upload logs and edit history I can't dispute the argument but I'm sure I uploaded different versions and one of them was actually based on my own work. It's frustrating to not receive credit when that's clearly my design and I've clearly asked for credit in my license. Without being able to see deleted images I can't point to my original that File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png is a complete copy of, but it is a complete copy of one of my works. Is there someone here who can help me? Hiding (talk) 17:55, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) I can’t see the deleted file either, but anyone can access the upload log. Here are shown four versions uploaded on 20 February 2008, all with the summary “Created using public domain Image:Barnstar.png as base”; the other three still survive.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 18:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: Sorry to be a pain. I've tracked it down. It's File:Comicbarnstar.png that I would like attribution for as I think it is now fair for one and all to see that File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png is a copy, yes? I uploaded it under my old user name of User:Steve block before I changed my user name, as detailed at Wikipedia:Wikipedia:Changing_username/Simple/Archive32#Steve_block_→_Hiding. Hope that all helps, and sorry once again for all the confusion. Hiding (talk) 18:13, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests#File:Comic barnstar.png - Alexis Jazz 05:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
For what it is worth, I can't see any indication that File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png is a derivative work of either File:Comic barnstar.png or File:Comicbarnstar.png. —RP88 (talk) 07:16, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
Wait, are you talking about the image gallery containing your image File:Comicbarnstar.png in the "Other versions" section of File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png? If you click it you will see that it is a link to your image page. I assume the author of File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png wanted to suggest that those interested in his image might also be interested in your image. —RP88 (talk) 07:26, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
@Hiding: now the file is temporarily undeleted I'm somehow even more confused. Later versions of File:Comic barnstar.png appear to be: File:Comic barnstar-2.png, File:Comic barnstar-3.png and File:Comic barnstar-4.png. None of them look like anything else here. I have changed the author on File:Comicbarnstar.png so I would assume you are happy now? Attribution in text is not required for the image gallery on File:Comic Barnstar Hires.png: when you click an image in a gallery, you are taken to its page including author information. - Alexis Jazz 09:11, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

MOTD

Hi I seen the is no MOTD today. Can any admin add File:Poor farmer Rich farmer -A story of a labourer who became a successful farmer.webm video for today's MOTD. I have already made the description but couldn't proceed due to cascading protection. Please do the needful. Thanking you. --✝iѵɛɳ२२४०†ลℓк †๏ мэ 06:49, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 07:35, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Bourget à gauche sur bel ami de Maupassant (Rocca).jpg

Having already undone once SuperRollex's accusations of "steal", I leave it up to an admin to appreciate what needs to be done as far the file description and the related (triple) DR are concerned. Thanks, — Racconish ☎ 14:45, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done I asked not to put several DRs, and I answered about the copyright issue in the DR. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:10, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
@Yann and Storkk: thanks. — Racconish ☎ 15:12, 1 May 2018 (UTC)

Remove {{Pending}}/{{Resolved}} from COM:ANV?

Currently, the template used for adding new sections to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Vandalism adds {{Pending}} to the top, which is supposed to be changed to {{Resolved}} by the resolving admin. In my experience, admins add {{Done}} or {{Not done}} anyway, like on every other administrator page, so this seems redundant and inconsistent to me. I don't think User:ArchiverBot looks at this template to determine what to archive and what to keep, either. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

 Support. Some requests have "pending" / "resolved" and some not. This is inconsistent. Taivo (talk) 10:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 Support Storkk (talk) 12:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done Since there was unanimous so far. If serious objections or problems come up, please revert my edits to {{Report vandal}}. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Redirect deletion request

Can I please have an admin delete this redirect. I made a mistake with a file rename, this name goes to another file that needs to be uploaded. Fry1989 eh? 19:22, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Fry1989: ✓ Done Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you very much! Fry1989 eh? 19:38, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

Upload wizard filther about filename abuse

Hi! I tried to upload some images of paintings by the artist Category:Giovanni da San Giovanni, but I got the message "please chose a different, descriptive title". That's probably because I name the files with artist name first, and there is two times the word "Giovanni" close-by, so the system supposes it's an abuse, while it's not. Is it something we can do about that? Can we just fix this or can we skip this control for autopathrolled users? This time I had to rename each file with the monogram "Gdsg", but I have many more files of this artist to upload, and I'd prefer to use the estensive name. --Sailko (talk) 14:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

I tried to remove one of the word "Giovanni" and it worked fine! So the problem is the repetition. Can somebody at least tag someone who could help? It's something about the upload filename filters. I don't want to upload files with wrong filename just to avoid a mistakened filename check. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Ping --Sailko (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

User:Richiex

Este usuario ha subido muchas fotos de su pene y la verdad no me parece enciclopédico su aporte, mas bien es exhibicionista a mi parecer; se han hechos consultas de borrados de muchos o casi todos sus archivos y pocos se les han borrado, creo que tiene alguna necesidad enferma de mostrar el pene, tiene fotos del pene erecto, dormido, eyaculando, masturbandose, erecto en el pantalon, de sus testiculos, masturbacion de los testiculos, etc etc... deben hecharle un ojo.--AnelGTR (talk) 04:34, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

This user has uploaded many photos of his penis and the truth does not seem encyclopedic his contribution, rather it is exhibitionist in my opinion; there have been queries of erasures of many or almost all his files and few have been erased, I think he has some ill need to show the penis, he has photos of the penis erect, asleep, ejaculating, masturbating, erect in the pants, of his testicles, masturbation of the testicles, etc etc ... should make an eye .
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:49, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Profanity

hi. can any admin here chaange the visibility of this revision that i reverted because it is vandalism and Profanity sexual speech in Arabic. kind regards--مصعب (talk) 20:50, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Taivo (talk) 14:32, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Bug on UDR

Hi, Does anyone know what's going on here? As you can see in the summary I edited one section, but then the edit went to another section. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:12, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Yann: Which script are you using?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 05:20, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
The gadget UdelReqHandler. Yann (talk) 05:36, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Might you have started the process a few minutes earlier, or perhaps did the script have a slightly stale index? I notice the previous edit to yours was the bot archiving two sections, and the erroneous edit was entered two sections below the intended location.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 06:35, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
That should have generated an edit conflict error message, instead of editing the wrong section. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
While you had opened the section for tagging the SteinsplitterBot came in between and archived 2 sections (Special:Diff/299879950/299880212). In the moment you started editing the section (or the script did it for you) the section you wanted to tag as resolved was the 25th section, but then the actual tagged section was the 25th one. Note that in the address no section title is apparent, but only the section number. E.g. now this actual section is the 6th of all, so the address is https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&title=Commons%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard&section=6. This happened to me in the past elsewhere, too. — Speravir – 19:15, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Dopicofsubjectofphoto3wnload.png: possible G3 & in violation of license?

Hi there, commons (nor image copyright) are my strong suits, so I was wondering if an admin could take a look at this image uploaded by M45889Jackie? They are a blocked vandal on the English Wikipedia and this appears to have been uploaded purely to disparage the English Wikipedia admin Oshwah (possible G3?). It is also not in compliance with the GNU license as it does not retain attribution to the creator of the original image (Oshwah). I respect if no action can be taken, but commons and copyright are not my areas of comfort, so I thought that this should be brought forward just in case. I was going to tag it for speedy deletion, but thought it best to post here instead as I am unsure. Thanks for your help. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:27, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

I should add that it was just used on their userpage and is now unused as an admin has removed the image from the page on-wiki. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 04:30, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done, image deleted (G3), user blocked. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the help Srittau! Glad the image was able to be removed and the vandal blocked. For the past while, on the English Wikipedia, Oshwah seems to be the victim of a targeted harassment campaign by socks and vandals. This is the first time that I am aware of that it made it cross-project. Hopefully it settles down. They have had to protect his talk page (hasn't been that active as of late to do it himself) and revdel practically daily. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 07:51, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Streckerfanal.jpg

Can an Admin with knowledge of copyright decide if this 1943 Nazi era publication is free or not? If it is free, please pass it. If it is really from the Bundesarchiv, it might/could be free. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:52, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

I’m not an admin, but: This is very probably not free, but we could only know for sure if we knew the photographer(s) or if we knew for sure whether the photographs have been created in official action. Because the file is used in enwiki it could be transferred under fair use conditions, though. — Speravir – 21:38, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
More from the peanut gallery: it appears over a copyright notice and contact-for-permissions address at the source. Unless there‘s reason to believe the German Historical Museum is misrepresenting the status (institutional “copyfraud” not being unheard of), I think we have to take them at their word.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:22, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
A German speaker could contact that address asking about the photographer's name and lifespan.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:33, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
There’s also the overall graphic design to consider, including the banner & typography.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 00:22, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
There are credits in the upper right corner just above the photographs: Hr. Hoffmann (2), Weltbild (1). Hoffmann died in 1957, so the cover sheet is still copyrighted. And there is no CC licence at the source website either, so I deleted the file. De728631 (talk) 00:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Oops. overseen. At least for H. Hoffmann it is possible that is considered as public domain, if the photo originals have been in his archive, cf. Heinrich Hoffmann’s photographic archive (or shorter in German: Hoffmanns Fotoarchiv nach 1945). One of the images is not from him, though. --Speravir 22:28, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:JUDr Pribyl.jpg

Hello, I would like to ask for the recovery of this photo. We´ve recieved an OTRS permission for that. Thanks, --Michal Lenc (talk) 13:11, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Please request this over at Commons:Undeletion requests. Thank you! Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 13:47, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Danielle Fishel photo Red Carpet.jpg

Can anyone tell if the license for this image is cc by 1.0 or cc zero please? Maybe the website made a typo on the license. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 18:23, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

@Leoboudv: I see no license for it.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 18:43, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
You need to click the round thumbnail on the website. A popup will then open and display the whole photo with a banner across it: "published under creative commons 1.0". This looks more like {{Cc-by-1.0}} but there is no link to the licence proper, so it's unclear. De728631 (talk) 18:58, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
The cc by 1.0 license requires credit and a link to the license; none are provided. The cc zero license requires neither. However, since neither is specifically mentioned, and the photo was probably not taken by the website's namesake, I wouldn't trust the so-called license anyway. I tagged the file as npd.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 20:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

unblock request user

hi, I am writing to you because I would like to ask for the release of the User:Глинистый сланец the request was made following a discussion on the restoration of one of the files deleted by the administrators of commons, concerning the blocking of the user in question, the deleted files, by this user have been revalued by the administrators of commons, in order to request restoration. User talk:A3cb1#Path to unblocking --87.5.4.32 11:19, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

(potete farci qualcosa si o no ??? — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.0.97.194 (talk) 01:45, 16 May 2018‎ (UTC)

edit protected template

Main gallery: Template_talk:Image_generation#Transfer_request.

Can someone transfer Template:Image_generation/sandbox to Template:Image_generation
JoKalliauer (talk) 17:59, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ JoKalliauer (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. JoKalliauer (talk) 14:01, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Redirect request

Hello! In nominating some files for deletion using VFC, I was unable to create Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedhttp://xn--9w3b97nw6m.com/ because it is blacklisted. Can an administrator please create it as a redirect to Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from 황은비.com, please? ℯxplicit 03:09, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think that is needed. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
It currently links to 11 files, and with Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedhttp://jintime.tistory.com/ now (which should redirect to Commons:Deletion requests/Photos from jintime.tistory.com), an additional 16. It leaves notices on each file description page and uploader talk pages (which puts that at about 30 links) that lead to no where due to apparent recent restriction of such titles, which are automatically generated by VFC. ℯxplicit 04:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
 Not needed Nothing links to the blacklisted DR names; see Special:WhatLinksHere/Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedhttp://xn--9w3b97nw6m.com/ and Special:WhatLinksHere/Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedhttp://jintime.tistory.com/. -- SLV100 (talk) 11:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
That appears to be because you removed the links. Firstly, do not remove notifications from other people's User talk pages, secondly, please do not convert DRs to speedies. Feel free to comment {{Vote speedy}} on a DR, though, if you believe it should be speedied. Storkk (talk) 11:51, 11 May 2018 (UTC)
@Explicit: I updated the notification link on User_talk:Lucas11925, which I think should take care of it. Storkk (talk) 12:05, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Files by globally locked spammer

I have been dealing with User:Auwall on en-Wiki and ha-Wiki. He is globally locked for spamming as well as several of his sockpuppet accounts. He is now subject to summary glock and mass deletion of his pages globally. But his files on Commons (which are personal spamming photos) have been here for days. I don't seems to find how they should be speedily deleted or why they shouldn't be. So posting here for help. See this and his latest file by sock account which will soon be g-locked from Meta-Wiki. Ammarpad (talk) 09:43, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Account blocked, file deleted. Yann (talk) 11:10, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. Ammarpad (talk) 12:14, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Please Admin should help and delete File:Auwal muhammad azare.jpg. Ammarpad (talk) 14:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Yann (talk) 16:21, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Creation of page

Can an admin please create Commons:Deletion requests/undefinedinsource:"https://www.flickr.com/photos/techcrunch/" with the following rationale please:

Per the decision here and here. These images indicate a potential Getty copyright in the EXIF data and therefore there is an unclear copyright status. While I hate to have to delete all these images it is better if we are consistent and delete all images that have this issue.

And please remove the blacklisting that caused the issue. If VFC isn't fixed then blocking these creations just puts more strain on those of us that use that feature to mass nominate files. --Majora (talk) 18:17, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

DRs consolidated instead: Commons:Deletion requests/Getty Images photos from the TechCrunch Flickr account. -- SLV100 (talk) 20:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
If I wanted that I would have done so myself. I obviously didn't want that. I want to know why a vital tool that is used by countless people is producing blacklisted links and causing a mess. I wanted it to go on its own page instead of taking up unnecessary space with the closed DRs. --Majora (talk) 20:24, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I'm glad SLV100 did it this way! It's good to see the full history and other files that potentially need to be undeleted. - Alexis Jazz 21:22, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Completely missed the point there didn't you? The files aren't going to be undeleted. I've been working on this for months. Yann has been working on this for a while too. TechCrunch isn't going to provide a valid release for these images that other people will accept. Period. I've made my peace with that. So should you. I waited far longer than I should have to DR these images and when I finally did so I ran into a blacklist issue. VFC shouldn't be stopped by the blacklist. It screws with a lot of processes and makes cleaning up Commons far more difficult for those of us that actually care about such things. --Majora (talk) 21:50, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
we will see about that. i should think you have a consensus to undelete, notwithstanding the unreasonable preconditions of deletionists. expecting emails to dispel all doubt is dishonest: nothing will convince some people with an ax to grind. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:02, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
@SLV100: STOP doing this. You are violating copyright by copying within Wikipedia without direct attribution and you are creating a massive mess for anyone that wants to properly search for things. If you are not an admin do not consolidate DRs. You aren't doing it properly. There is a reason we have categories for DRs. This is why. Stop creating a massive mess of things. --Majora (talk) 17:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 Neutral I have not made any further edits in this matter since 03:29, 13 May 2018 (UTC). If I was mistaken to do the consolidation my apologies, but there seems to still be a disagreement by 2 users. Below are my suggestions to complete/undo the DR consolidations:
Steps to Undo DR Consolidation
  1. Create a DR page with the most recent DR comments
  2. Revert my most recent edit at Commons:Deletion requests/undefined52522100@N07 +"Getty Images"
  3. Revert all recent edits at Commons:Deletion requests/Getty Images photos from the TechCrunch Flickr account
  4. Revert these edits: [19]
  5. Create a subcategory at Category:Licensing-related deletion requests for these DRs
-- SLV100 (talk) 17:30, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
@SLV100: Very last warning: Do not edit deletion requests or related pages in any way, shape or form, except to add a comment. Do not remove or change deletion-related templates in any file or other page. You have created a huge mess, and continuing to do so leaves only the option to block you. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 17:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
the fact that the deletionists, cannot organize their multiple waves of deletion, are not a reason to remain disorganized. where would you like the DRV? do not make block threats to enforce a "admins only may do things". it is childish. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 21:59, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
Threatening with a block was unnecessary. SLV100 was acting in good faith and there is no reason to believe SLV100 will persist in doing this. I explained some stuff to SLV100 so we should all be good now.
@Majora: "You are violating copyright by copying within Wikipedia without direct attribution". I happen to have talked about this with a jurist some time ago. When you copy text (up to a few paragraphs) within a Wiki or from one Wiki to another, sufficient attribution (as required by Creative Commons) would (in general) be to credit/link the source in the edit summary. When you copy whole article you may need/want to link it seperately. In this case, all the messages in the DRs were signed so there is no attribution issue. - Alexis Jazz 06:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
The user meddled repeatedly with deletion requests, changing DRs to speedy deletion requests and other matters, creating serious problems. They were warned multiple times not to do that and were actually blocked in the past for something similar. Threatening a block was completely appropriate. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:32, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
P.S. Childish personal attacks like this are really inappropriate. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:39, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
@Srittau: I wasn't aware of past warnings/blocks SLV100 had gotten, that puts your response in a different light. The edit summary you link was no personal attack, I cleaned up part of the mess (with the intention to clean up the rest) and Yann had reverted that edit. As I was almost done with the second part of the cleanup, I continued anyway while telling Yann that if he disagrees he could revert it again without me complaining about that. You have made it clear you don't like it when all the DRs are copied, so at that point you and Yann would have to discuss things. I just made it clear in the edit summary I wouldn't be a party in that. It wasn't intended as a personal attack in any way. - Alexis Jazz 15:41, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
@Srittau: Thank you for the clarification. A clarification on my part: I am not against merging DRs, especially in this case I think it is a good idea. It was just about user behaviour. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 15:53, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
 Comment I think it is better to have the whole issue in one place. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:05, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Requested updates to protected images

Hi,

Could someone check Commons:Requested updates to protected images? The 13 files uploaded correct 13 invalid SVG protected files. For the first four, where the description page is also protected, a change in the description is also requested – see the Discussion page. Thanks! Thomas Linard (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi,
Another possibility: maybe you can unprotect these files (or some), thus I will not bother you with this kind of request? (I move my query in the "Blocks and protections" section if you want) Thomas Linard (talk) 07:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Empty Zeno cats

Could someone please check the sub-cats listed at Category:Photographs from Zeno and speedy all those that are empty? This is an unexpected hang over from a completed batch upload, where images were removed from cats after checking their visual content rather than how the source tagged them. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 01:29, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

@Fæ: why are the both remaining categories needed if the rest is unneccessary? --Emha (talk) 08:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
Not sure. Other volunteers have played around with categorisation. Most of the postcards have been added under Category:1900s postcards uploaded from Zeno with geolocation sub-categories, but these are non-postcards. --Fæ (talk) 08:55, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ --Emha (talk) 08:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. --Emha (talk) 08:47, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

Kay Körner is back

It seems that Category:Sockpuppets of Kay Körner is back. Various T-Online IPs, based in Saxony are editing various Saxony-related subjects, mostly bridges at the moment. Is quickly changing IP addresses to revert my rollbacks. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 16:09, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

IP block seems to be 84.133.65.50/20, in case a range block becomes necessary. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 16:20, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
6 hour range block. :/ Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
And another 16 hours. This is annoying. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 14:35, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
Moved to User:2C0F:F930:0:3:0:0:0:221 now. Serious block evasion. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 05:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Switching IPv6 addresses and also uses open proxies. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 06:58, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

delete Category:אריה בר

Can someone please delete Category:אריה בר? It's content was moved to Category:Arye Bar. Thanx, Lostam (talk) 09:57, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Lostam: ✓ Done, next time, please just add {{Speedy|empty cat}} or {{Bad name}} to the category, admins will then delete it. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 10:55, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Remove edit summary

Please hide the edit summary of this edit special:diff/301473488 for containing vulgar language. --Wcam (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

 Comment he just blanked his own user talk page with edit summary "what this fuck say". The most offensive part of that is the poor grammar, he meant "what the fuck is this" or "what the fuck does this mean" or something like that. I would see no reason to do anything about this. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:35, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done. I hided the edit summary. No other action is needed. Taivo (talk) 07:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Hide revision

Also hide edit summary:

- Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:31, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done by others. Taivo (talk) 08:15, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

Close DR to avoid more work

Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Henry krinkle66

Another user had created individual DRs for all these files. (I've explained VFC to them after that) It's been a few days without comment and it seems like an obvious copyvio anyway. I suggest wrapping this up so admins who haven't seen this mass DR won't start spending time handling all the individual DRs. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 09:04, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done - Jcb (talk) 09:07, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Wrong or too broad blacklist filter

Goesseln complained in Commons:Forum that the file Giuseppe Barberis - Carlo Cornaglia - Giuseppe Verdi's Don Carlo at La Scala.jpg got awarded as Featured Picture and wanted to add a remark/request to the not yet existing talk page, but run into this filter (for him and me in German): 

Eine Seite mit dem Titel „File talk:Giuseppe Barberis - Carlo Cornaglia - Giuseppe Verdi's Don Carlo at La Scala.jpg“ kann nicht erstellt werden.
Der Titel kollidiert mit diesem Sperrbegriff: .*(prinzi|giuseppe).*(giuseppe|prinzi).*

I think the filter .*(prinzi|giuseppe).*(giuseppe|prinzi).* is too broad or wrong – in my opinion it should only work for files where both prinzi and giuseppe or giuseppe and prinzi are present. In the moment I find about 11000 pages with giuseppe in the title (check) and 21 with prinzi (check), and also for the latter not all are for Giuseppe Prinzi. I do not know, how many of them do not have a talk page, though. --Speravir 00:41, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Oh, while I wrote this Sebari has been active and created the talk page for the actual file (but there are fr instance two siblings, which are affected, too). --Speravir 00:44, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
Apart from that case, I agree that the filter is overly broad, especially since guiseppe is a common name. We should reevaluate whether it's still needed. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 00:48, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
I suggest to replace this by two filters: .*giuseppe.*prinzi.* and .*prinzi.*giuseppe.*. However, this discussion should be moved to meta, IMO. As this is about a global blacklist. Ankry (talk) 09:50, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
See request on meta Ankry (talk) 10:07, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
✓ Done by Vituzzu over at meta. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:58, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Upload wizard filther for (wrong) filename abuse

Hi! I tried to upload some images of paintings by the artist Category:Giovanni da San Giovanni, but I got the message "please chose a different, descriptive title". That's probably because I name the files with artist name first, and there is two times the word "Giovanni" close-by, so the system supposes it's an abuse, while it's not. Is it something we can do about that? Can we just fix this or can we skip this control for autopathrolled users? This time I had to rename each file with the monogram "Gdsg", but I have many more files of this artist to upload, and I'd prefer to use the extensive name. --Sailko (talk) 14:15, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

I tried to remove one of the word "Giovanni" and it worked fine! So the problem is the repetition. Can somebody at least tag someone who could help? It's something about the upload filename filters. I don't want to upload files with wrong filename just to avoid a mistakened filename check. Thank you. --Sailko (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
Ping --Sailko (talk) 12:52, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
THIS IS NOT SOLVED, please do not archive until I get an aswer --Sailko (talk) 10:18, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Once I entered a list of filemane keys blocked, but it can be adited by admins only and I cant' find it anymore. --Sailko (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Sailko: Can you give an example of a rejected file name? --HyperGaruda (talk) 15:27, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@HyperGaruda: the file was in this serie: File:Gdsg, cappella della crocetta, 1621 ca., volta 08 virtù.jpg. I was forced to change "Giovanni da San Giovanni" with "Gdsg". I tried to cancel one of the Giovannis and it was fine too, but it would not have made sense. Thanks for your help. --Sailko (talk) 17:12, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
I think this is a problem similar to described above. Just concerns another global filter: .*(prinzi|giovanni).*(giovanni|prinzi).*. However I cannot be sure unless I know which exaclty filename triggered the problem. Ankry (talk) 18:44, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
@Ankry and Sailko: I don't see any instances of "Giovanni" in this log.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 19:14, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
A global filter? That explains why I could not find something relevant at MediaWiki:Titleblacklist. I tried moving the page mentioned above to File:Giovanni da san giovanni, cappella della crocetta, 1621 ca., volta 08 virtù.jpg and got an error saying the title is blacklisted. Note that there are files in Category:Giovanni da San Giovanni with "Giovanni da san giovanni" in their file names, but according to their creation dates, the last one named as such was uploaded on 13 August 2017. The giovanni line was first added (though in a different format) to the blacklist in November 2017, so I would not be surprised if that is the culprit. --HyperGaruda (talk) 19:18, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Anyone recall why it was a good idea to block /giovanni.*giovanni/? Seems bizarre without any context. --Fæ (talk) 19:31, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: This is not abusefilter. This is another mediawiki tool. @HyperGaruda: This can be overriden by admins. You can upload the file under another name and ask an admin (not file renamer) for a rename. @Fæ: I agree with you, but this should be discussed with stewards on meta, I think. See m:Talk:Title blacklist. Ankry (talk) 19:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for finding the issue. I can't really understand why they blocked "Giovanni" as it is a very common Italian name. @Ankry: last year I tried to photograph most of the works of this artist, and at this very moment I have 637 files to upload in the next months. I don't think it's fair to have them manually moved by an admin one by one. Also I already filenamed all these files in my PC, I will have to change them one by one to a wrong name, to have it renamed later.. it doesn't make sense. Can we just delete or fix that tool that blocks using a fair filename? thank you. @HyperGaruda: --Sailko (talk) 21:52, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Today I uploaded some new files for this artist and everythig was ok, so the problem is solved. Thank you all!! --Sailko (talk) 20:10, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:54, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Batch rename request

Please can someone rename my 41 images:

to:

  • 'File:Armenian Railways Museum locomotive Эш705-46 + coach - 2018-05-18 - Andy Mabbett - 01.jpg', et seq

(That's "Эш" instead of "3ա"), or tell me of a tool that can use to do that. They are all in Category:Locomotive Эш705-46. Thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:12, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

 Not done, @Pigsonthewing: Please ask over at Commons:Bots/Work requests, since admins have no special tools to do that. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 08:53, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: in 2015, I told you to use User:Legoktm/massrename.js, whis is now replaced by User:Perhelion/massrename.js. --Didym (talk) 21:24, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Please make GWOIA template a license template

{{GWOIA}}

Ken Jcb sent me - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

For a background discussion, see Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Taiwan Central Weather Bureau. De728631 (talk) 19:50, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
{{GWOIA}} now includes {{Attribution}}. I'm not sure if approval is even needed anymore now. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:13, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Davey2010

Davey2010 (talk · contribs)

Not posting this in the "User problems" section on purpose. I don't know if it's a problem. I'm just informing you.

See Revision of Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems and subsequent warring. WPPilot (talk · contribs) does indeed seem to misunderstand some things. (which I told him about on his talk page (archived)) And the message he posted on ANU was, okay, not great to put it mildly.

Davey2010, three times in a row, removed WPPilot's message on ANU with these edit summaries:

  • "RM childish rant - Go read CC Attribution and stop wasting the communities time."
  • "Suck it up and move on."
  • "Mate this isn't going to end well for you, Move on or face being blocked for a rather long time.".

Davey2010 is not an admin. I don't think it's a good for someone who is not an admin to remove reports from ANU with the exception of vandalism or doing uncontroversial housekeeping. Even when the user whose report is being removed is more or less digging their own grave. Last time I checked it wasn't called the "File mover, patroller, rollbacker and extended uploaders' noticeboard".

But now I will circle back to the beginning of this message: I'm just informing you, I'm not an admin either and if the admins are happy with Davey2010's actions than so am I. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 02:04, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

FYI I was fully under the impression that Davey2010 was a admin for what its worth --Don (talk) 02:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
The initial post by @WPPilot (twice repeated) was uncivil and inaccurate, accusing me of doing things "out of spite, and with malice". I am not surprised at Davey2010 reverting such posts. I have replied to the posts on User talk:WPPilot.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 02:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
It was a honest mistake, once Alexis explained it makes sense. The users vulgar language below does not help anything here as well. It would seem to me that he violated 3 R&R's on a page designed for communications with Admins? --Don (talk) 02:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • It was a childish rant and in my eyes didn't deserve the time of day, That being said I was only meant to have reverted twice, Your "Last time I checked it wasn't called the "File mover, patroller, rollbacker and extended uploaders' noticeboard"" comment is utterly (Redacted) stupid and also isn't worth replying too, If an admin genuinely feels WPPs comment is worthy and has merit then by all means revert (and just to go on record if WPP reverts I shant be reverting them (which is what I planned anyway)
Had Alexis made their feelings clear on my talkpage I would've (admittingly not so happily) reinstated it but hey why discuss it when we can create a (Redacted)ton of drama instead!. –Davey2010Talk 02:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
(Redacted the F word, Not helpful. –Davey2010Talk 15:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC))
@Davey2010: I don't think you should reinstate it. The post was mostly a misunderstanding and had no merit at all. But such things are not criteria. I believe you should have allowed an admin to handle it instead of removing it from their sight. They may choose to do the same thing you did, or maybe they will further explain things to the user. Or maybe they already had the user in their crosshairs and they find grounds for a block in such a report. (not in this case IMHO as the misunderstanding has been cleared now) But that decision is not yours to make. In my opinion. And my opinion is known to differ from time to time from that of admins, that's why we are not on ANU.
Oh, and when it comes to the use of profanity.. I can only assume you don't know me very well. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:18, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I suppose where I'm so used to removing various things over at EN I guess doing it here comes naturally to me, Bizarrely I enjoy taking on bigger roles but at the same have no interest in being an admin .... Makes sense huh ,
I do agree with you an admin could either help or block and in some ways depending on how you look at it you could either say I was removing undiffed crap OR I was being a hinderance and should've left it to an admin,
Baha I know Alexis Jazz swearing is sofa king good , Nah I never swear me I'm a saint, Never been blocked for swearing either . –Davey2010Talk 03:30, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

No good faith editor deserves to be insulted with "utterly fucking stupid" or accused of creating "a fuckton of drama" when they were the target of a revert war. Davey2010 has crossed the line during this misguided revert war and then made the incident worse by aggressively defending themselves on this noticeboard with deliberately trolling inflammatory language. When any account, even a long term contributor like Davey2010, is choosing to create a hostile toxic environment for others, this unambiguously fails COM:BP and at a minimum there should be an official warning to desist from further disruption or be put on the naughty step with a series of blocks.

By the way, WPPilot is on a self-imposed wikibreak. After the hostile trolling they have been exposed to, that is no surprise, in fact it's pretty smart. --Fæ (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Explaining the context
  • Context matters -
The "stupid comment" was "Your "Last time I checked it wasn't called the "File mover, patroller, rollbacker and extended uploaders' noticeboard"" comment is utterly fucking stupid" which was because I objected to Alexis saying "Last time I checked it wasn't called the "File mover, patroller, rollbacker and extended uploaders' noticeboard" which I consider a personal attack,
"Had Alexis made their feelings clear on my talkpage I would've (admittingly not so happily) reinstated it but hey why discuss it when we can create a fuckton of drama instead!" - My issue was Alexis coming here instead of coming to my talkpage - Complaining on my talkpage and asking me to refrain from reverting here would've been a better route, But all that being said this is between Me and WPPilot not Alexis.
Lastly I apologise for the reverts and I accept I could've done things differently and I certainly wont revert any future reports here (unless they're blatant trolling). –Davey2010Talk 12:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Davey2010: I will respond to that on your talk page. In short: it wasn't meant as a personal attack and I didn't take it to your talk page because I wasn't sure you were even wrong. It was wrong in my opinion, but the only opinion that matters in this case would be that of the administrators as it's their noticeboard. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • One purpose of these noticeboards is to allow an avenue of complaint about how people perceive themselves treated. Regardless of the merit of those complaints, unless they are clearly trolling, a simple reversion is pretty darn hostile in and of itself, even ignoring any childish spite left in the edit summaries. I had just asked Davey to please stop closing AN discussions altogether... so now we get reversions instead. While I think Davey's recent behavior disrupting Commons's collegial atmosphere clearly satisfies COM:BP, I will decline to impose a block myself, given our recent interaction. Storkk (talk) 10:10, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Davey2010 had to wait for an admin’s decision instead of insulting WPPilot in edit summaries. Please, don’t turn the site’s governance into anarchy. The only condition where I’d approve repeated removal of a posting is a clear-cut, obvious disruption, and anyway using edits summaries in such a way is uncivil on par with “childish rant”. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 12:36, 20 May 2018 (UTC)


  • Just to add I've apologised to WPPilot and as I said above I shan't revert here unless it's blatant vandalism/trolling, Hindsight's a lovely thing and in hindsight I could've done things differently instead of reverting and starting WW3,
Not sure if I said it here or at the ANU thread but I tend to remove threads over at EN without any problems which is why it kinda happened here, I made a mistake and I apologise (and apologised) for it, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 14:48, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
As a note 2 weeks ago I was blocked for 2 R&R's on my own talk page. I was dealing with the death of a really close friend and was just trying to remove posts instructing me to modify a photo I was unable to modify due to it being locked as it was on the front page of Commons.

I did not use foul language. I was hurting a great deal at the time and simply did not want to deal with it. Is it OK for this user to violate 3 R&R's here yet I do not even get a warning, just a "I am a admin so you can not remove this post", it was removed from my talk page and I was blocked, yet this user ca use vulgarity and act in a manner that is undeniable Wiki Stalking on me and the user gets a pass? Yes, once people started posting on this thread he posted a Apology, I am afraid his rants speak for themselves:

  • "RM childish rant - Go read CC Attribution and stop wasting the communities time."
  • "Suck it up and move on."
  • "Mate this isn't going to end well for you, Move on or face being blocked for a rather long time.".

Withdrawn to save the dramah. (I am not going to lower myself to repete the foul language used, but you can see it for yourself in his posts)

- and so now this has left a scar on my efforts that I do not deserve. His nomination was clearly out of spite as shown by his denial of Jee's posting policy on user cats and his reply was that my requesting his assistance discredited Jee's comments..

It should have been withdrawn as he was wrong, as Jee's link to the policy showed, yet the abuse just continued and he became confrontational with Jee and continued to use vulgar language in just about every place the user posted.

On his 3rd Revision to my post, he threatened me with a block "Move on or face being blocked for a rather long time" this whole nightmare took 4 hours of my time and wasted my night. I went to bed shaking and still am over this. I highly doubt I will ever contribute here again unless this user is somehow disciplined, there should be some form of continuity here, and as Jee mentions calling me OR ANY USER the F word should never be tolerated.

I work hard to get high quality unique photos that are valuable to most and unavailable to many. This should not be used as a reason to troll my contributions and have people dead set even after a admin shows them this IS policy (creator templates) and continuing to nominate it for removal even after a admin (JEE) shows him policy.

I start shaking just thinking about it. I honestly wish I had never contributed my work here. I made the mistake of attaching my real name to my work, as many photographers do, this seems to have opened me up to user bullying.

As it was a malicious event, that now has a link on the talk page on my cat that does not need to be there, and every people that looks at my work via my cat page gets to see this unsavory conduct too by just clicking on my cat talk page. I tried to remove it but Jeff decided it needs to stay there. I reviewed 30 others photographers cat's and not 1 of them has been subject to this or forced to be exposed to belligerent rhetoric linked upon the cat talk page..

I am sorry but there is zero chance I will ever return if this is simply swept under the rug. User:Davey2010's apology (This was a little to little a little too late) only came one he had discovered his actions boomeranged on him. --Don (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Please stop being melodramatic! - Your posts were reverted and your CFD/Creator were nominated (all 3 of which I was wrong to do),
I admitted my mistakes and apologised for them so there's no need to continue down this road, Had I been defensive of my actions (IE insisted I was correct and continued with the CFD/Creator) then you'd have a point but as I have said above I admitted and apologised so blocking at this point would be punitive,
It's also worth noting that not one admin or editor had reinstated your post which would indicate admins/editors probably agreed with me (although one can make the point admins never saw it but that'd be unlikely),
It's also worth noting I have stated I shan't remove future posts,
Well inregards to the apology late is better than never, I've apologised and that's all one can do, Blocking is used to prevent damage not for punitive purposes.
Many photographers and editors clash at times that's a part of life here but we should all work together not give up when something doesn't go right. –Davey2010Talk 17:02, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I would appreciate it if you could address why you thought it would be a good idea to revert here less than 48 hours after you "noted" my request that you not close AN discussions. I'm also not really sure it should be up to you to tell the person you admittedly wronged to stop harping on... especially given that this is the first time they've made their complaint without being reverted (remember, this section was started by Alexis, not WPPilot). Storkk (talk) 17:10, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
I fail to see what closing discussions have to do with reverting ? .... both aren't the same thing ....., Well like I said I've apologised to the editor and stated I shant revert here .... so I don't see the need to further drag this on, I've messed up and profusely apologised for that so the next best solution is for this to be closed and we all move on. –Davey2010Talk 17:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@WPPilot: "even after a admin (JEE) shows him policy." Jee is not an admin either.
"and every people that looks at my work via my cat page gets to see this unsavory conduct too by just clicking on my cat talk page" hardly anyone actually does that. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

How do I get a interaction ban with this user? --Don (talk) 17:39, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

What would be the point in that ? .... We've never interacted prior to today and it's very unlikely we'll ever interact again .... –Davey2010Talk 17:44, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Davey seemed to have admitted above that their action was inappropriate and they have apologized. There is nothing much to discuss here other than closing this thread. T Cells (talk) 19:22, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Please leave this open until nobody has added to it for a few days unless it spins out of control. I'm not sure this case is fully resolved yet. (note my comment above about this edit summary and my suggestion below) I guess it's almost resolved though. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment WPPilot (Don) is not happy with the link to the discussion on Category talk:D Ramey Logan. He removed it, but @Jeff G.: undid that. Jeff, seeing that discussion is not really that relevant for the category and WPPilot isn't happy about it, would you be OK with it to change the contents of that page to "The category was discussed and kept.", without link, and put the rest of the page in a <!-- comment like this -->? Anyone who really needs it will find it anyway, casual visitors won't. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:31, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: Ok.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 03:39, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Thank you both Alexis Jazz & Jeff G. A quote I found in a odd place hit this nail on the head: "Treat people the way you want to be treated. Talk to people the way you want to be talked to. Respect is earned, not given." this is the last post I make on the site. Goodbye. --Don (talk) 05:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
That "odd place" being my EN talkpage, I've reinstated the link and have amended the CFD result, There is no valid reason to remove the CFD link. –Davey2010Talk 12:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • The way how Davey2010 responded to Storkk's friendly requests is alone enough to raise a sanction against Davey2010. The sad thing is that user didn't learn anything evenafter many users including Fae and Alexis Jazz pointed out their mistakes. They still prefer to muddle in their own mistakes to prove they are right. I've no wonder why no admin is dare enough to stop him. I didn't wonder even if Davey2010 is promoted as an admin soon. This is Commons! Jee 14:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I reinstated it because CFDs should be on talkpages .... however whilst reinstating it I also changed the result on the CFD saying "This wasn't promotional, No valid reason for deletion" so anyone reading that CFD would see I was incorrect with that nomination,
As for "not learning my mistakes" - I admitted my mistakes the moment this thread was posted so that point is all but moot,
As kindly pointed out by Storkk that was indeed an autofill fail (I rely on autofill 100% over at EN and unfortunately up untill this month I would use "Fuck off" a lot ... hence why it was in that editsum, My fault for not realising it and deleting it sooner but I've since cleaned the autofill),
This really is a storm in a teacup and I would suggest someone closes this as it's becoming a timesink for myself and the community - I messed up, I immediately identified my mistakes and have stated I shant repeat those mistakes again.... So without sounding disrespectful or funny there really isn't anything else to be said or done here. –Davey2010Talk 15:17, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I accept the clarification by Storkk. But I'm not very happy with the re-insertion of CfD notification on the talk. First, we don't have an established norm or practice to add CfD notification on talk even for well discussed CfDs. This was a withdrawn CfD. Second, it should be done by a neutral volunteer to re-insert that notification if needed. Davey is noway eligible for it. He already offered above that "We've never interacted prior to today and it's very unlikely we'll ever interact again". But he created another mess today itself. Jee 15:52, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Yes we do - CFD templates are always added on talkpages, Second - Under SPEEDYKEEP I'm well within my rights to withdraw and close - Had there been a delete !vote present then no I wouldn't be able to close, Interaction has nothing to do with it. –Davey2010Talk 15:55, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) There seems; so strike-off that part. Still stick with point 2. Jee 15:58, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jcb: , what are you doing? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:05, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Stop this nonsense! Jcb (talk) 16:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I'll say, but you are the one who continued it! - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Jcb, this is already discussed with Jeff and need to be discussed first. So your action is highly inappropriate. Jee 16:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Where an admin has also reverted Alexis, As I have explained on my talkpage the result of the CFD was amended and as such there is no valid reason to remove, This is becoming rather tiresome and boring so I shan't be commenting here any more, I would ask someone just closes this and we can all focus all of this time and energy on the project as opposed to me!. –Davey2010Talk 16:07, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Yeah, Jcb did. Considering his actions lately, you should apply for admin right now - Jcb will just find a way to veto you to become admin. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jkadavoor: strictly Jcb doesn't have to discuss it, but not discussing is really inappropriate in this case. I was kind of thinking Jcb had simply overlooked my comment, but now he doubles down on his action. As for the rules on closing CfD discussions: there are always options to deviate from such rules if there is a reason. For someone who has a "IGNORE ALL RULES" sticker on his talk page, Davey2010 is incredibly obedient to them - or at least those he likes. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 16:24, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
I didn't think he overlooked these discussions. He too policing the user's category page. I'm seeing this since years; most admins and maintenance volunteers have a known hate to the photographers here. There are only a few exceptions. Jee 16:33, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I wasn't going to reply but thought this comment deserved an explanation - Archiving of indeffed editors talkpages is absolutely fine when it's beginning to get long, In this case as there were present DRs the page should've only been archived up to this month only, I suppose you want me blocked for that aswell!. –Davey2010Talk 20:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

OMG, why me. Jcb is now dead set on making sure that no one has the ability to reach me for use of my work commercially, removing my info on the cat page. I thought this was over yet it just seems to get worse. Clearly this has become a personal vendetta for many of these folks. Is there some reason that this Admin is attacking my information and trying to remove my e mail from anything that links to my work? Wow... --Don (talk) 19:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

A category page is not the right place for such things. And yes, several pairs of eyes are on you since you tried to add incompatible requirements to your uploads. Jcb (talk) 20:15, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Please provide a link to the policy page that states this. I had what you refer to as "incompatible requirements to your uploads" on the page for years. Only now in this dog pile has this become a issue. If your unable to provide a policy page that makes this claim, I am going to revert your removal of my contact information. --Don (talk) 20:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Do this and you will be blocked again. Jcb (talk) 20:38, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm not only sad but I'm extremely disappointed with a few of the editors here who have done nothing but waste their time on this thread virtually all day and night reporting every silly little detail that has happened and tried doing everything in their power to have me blocked,
I yesterday stated above:
"I apologise for the reverts and I accept I could've done things differently and I certainly wont revert any future reports here (unless they're blatant trolling)"[21]
so there was absolutely no reason or need for this to carry on .... (I identified my mistake and repeatedly stated I would put that right!)
Both said editors should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for their behaviour in this thread! (As am I for creating this whole mess in the first place!).
I have nothing else to add that hasn't already been said and so I shan't be replying to any more replies here. –Davey2010Talk 20:48, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

bonjour

la photo utilisée pour la page wiki de mon père est une photo que ma famille a mis à disposition de la presse.et qui se trouve donc sur internet par défaut mais l'original c'est nous qui la détenons, et il n'y a pas de licence pour la détention de photo de proches..elle appartient donc à la famille est date de 1995...alors je ne comprs pas pk il faudrait remplir toutes ces conditions....de licence etc surtout vu la date...et ensuite elle a été faite dans un photomaton pour les papier civil par conséquent il n'y a pas d'auteur en soit c'est une simple photo de notre père sans droits ni rien de tel....c'est une simple photo de quand il était encre bien portant....cependant elle est menacé de suppression est j'ai déjà galéré pour la mettre en ligne...la je ne vois po quoi faire d autre pour éviter la suppression merci de m en informer et de m'aider à résoudre ce problème avant sa suppression bien cordialement — Preceding unsigned comment added by RANSON FENJIRO SABINE (talk • contribs) 21:47, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello the photo used for my father's wiki page is a photo that my family has made available to the press.and is therefore on the internet by default but the original, it is us who hold it, and there is no license for the photo ownership of relatives..it therefore belongs to the family is dated 1995 ... so I do not understand why it would have to fulfill all these conditions .... license etc especially considering the date. ..and then it was made in a photo booth for the civil paper therefore there is no author in it is a simple photo of our father without rights or anything like that .... it's a simple photo of when he was still in good health ... however it is threatened with deletion is I already had a hard time to put it online ... now I do not see what else to do to avoid the deletion thank you for informing me and helping me to resolve this problem before its removal. cordially
 
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:24, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@RANSON FENJIRO SABINE: J'ai corrigé File:Abdeljalil fenjiro.jpg pour vous. I fixed File:Abdeljalil fenjiro.jpg for you.   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 23:24, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: I tweaked the translation a bit. Feel free to revert if you think appropriate. --Auntof6 (talk) 13:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Protect my talk page

Please, protect my talk page for 6 months to prevent excessive vandalism by LTA like a Krassotkin~ruwiking (impersonation of Liza Veniza) and Liza Veniza. Marshmallych 13:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done semiprotected for 2 weeks. Last protection was for 1 week and the vandalism continued, so it makes sense to have protection extend further... however removing the ability for all non-autoconfirmed users to leave you messages is a last resort, so the time frame should be kept to a minimum possible. Storkk (talk) 13:11, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Wikimedia/database problem

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T195520

When trying to access some empty categories and when trying to delete some files a moment ago, a strange new problem-page appeared, which stated:
Cannot access the database: No working replica DB server: Unknown error (10.64.32.198:3318)
--Túrelio (talk) 20:12, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Problem seems to have been solved now. --Túrelio (talk) 20:13, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Túrelio, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T195520 GMGtalk 20:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks. --Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Template:GODL-India

The discussion seems not attracting much comments so will be archived soon. I don't know whether it needs any further discussion; but just adding a notification here to attract more eyes if interested. Jee 03:20, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Commons:Wiki Loves Earth 2018 in Sweden

Can some admin please put a protection on this page. It is being vandalized very fequently. Thanks, --Cart (talk) 12:40, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Done Semi-protected for 10 days. Vandalism should stop once the event (and promotion) is over at the end of May. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 13:05, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
Thanks! --Cart (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Adding license for photos of Getty Images

Hello, I am not sure is this the right place to ask this question but it is better to directly ask Admins because I have already contacted dozens of editors and all of them left me full of questions. I went through a lot of photo uploads that were eventually deleted because I didn't provide the valid license. Later I realized the problem and I learned how to add right license type. But now there is still one problem. Yesterday I uploaded photo File:Dalida Gigi.jpg that I bought from Getty Images. You can enter the link that I provided for photo. There you can clearly read that the buyer of photo has the right of publishing it on internet pages. I bought the photo without watermark and uploaded it on wiki, and then user deleted it because "it is a possible copyright violation." Please tell me then which license template should I use when I am uploading bought photos of Getty Images. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DalidaEditor (talk • contribs) 18:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC) ○ DalidaIdeal ○ talk ○ 18:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

(not an admin) @DalidaEditor: Buying photos from Getty makes no difference. You didn't buy the photo, you bought a license. That license does not give you the right to re-license the photo. Maybe you didn't even buy a license. I legally can't say Getty is a bunch of crooks, so they most definitely are not, possibly, ever, a bunch of crooks. Getty is legally watertight and certainly nothing crooklike.
Simply put, if you bought the photo to upload it to Commons you just wasted your money. Go to https://donate.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:FundraiserRedirector next time if you want to help Wikipedia/Wikimedia.
If the image was in the public domain anyway (e.g. very old painting), read COM:ALAMY and Commons:Deleting images based on stock photo sites. You probably didn't have to buy the image. If no other good quality source exists, we actually would be happy if you bought valuable public domain images from Getty for Commons - but you should discuss such a purchase on the copyright village pump first to make sure you won't waste your money. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 19:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
By the way, you should thank Túrelio for deleting it quickly. Getty would have sued the shit out of you. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 20:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
+1 - Alexis is absolutely correct - Buying images off of Getty (or anywhere else) doesn't grant you a right to relicense the image under COM:Creative Commons - The photographer would never agree to that as then they would be losing money! (Instead of them getting orders they would instead get people just reusing the image from here which is a very very poor business model). –Davey2010Talk 20:27, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I have to tell you this. Getty Images does not sell copyrights of files but merely licenses to use images. However, that license is non-transferable, therefore you can not sub-license a file from Getty Images to someone else (such as Wikimedia Commons).
Therefore can this image not be hosted on Wikipedia, since all media on Wikimedia Commons need to be allowed for all commercial use, by anyone, and allow derivatives. So, it needs to be licensed under a free license as specified here: COM:L.
I'm so terribly sorry for telling you this, given that you've spent over $300 on this image. Hopefully, you can request a refund from Getty, or find another use of the image, because it is not acceptable on Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 20:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Someone might want to look at the Dalida images uploaded by User:Lethiernois. They seem to be related. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:11, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I am very thankful for all four of you, but in same time frustrated. I will look at those pages you have mentioned. But "is there any way to upload photos that I have in my private collection. I have around 500 photos that my parents left me as postcards of Dalida. They were taken from 50s to 80s when thwy were literally free given from her hands to fans. I tought I can upload it to wiki only if I buy the licence of same pic from Getty, but I was wrong. So can any of those postcards be uploaded as they were public domain in France already long time ago? Literally the Cher main photo is scan of her fan postcard" ? ○ DalidaIdeal ○ talk ○ 23:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
@DalidaEditor: File:Cher - Casablanca.jpg is a US photo, that's why. No such thing from France and the "simple photographs" from Italy are questionable. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 23:50, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
Is there any page where there is a list of licences and explanations for each country? I don't know the rules for each country so the list would be a normal thing. I have a lot if photos taken in Switzerland, Spain, Belgium, Germany... maybe some of those countries have simmilar rule like US? ○ DalidaIdeal ○ talk ○ 08:12, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
At en:List of countries' copyright lengths you have list of the duration of copyright for many countries. That might be a starting point to know whether an image is still in copyright or is not. Remember, while in some countries the clock ticks from the point of publication, and many other countries the year of death of the photographer/artist determines the expiration of copyright. --Túrelio (talk) 08:24, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
As you may already know, Italy treats some photographs one way and some another. Although I haven't seen anything that suggests there was ever any consultation with anyone professionally acquainted with Italian copyright law, Commons treats pretty much any "Italian" photograph as though it enters public domain 20 years from the date of creation, rather than using the longer term listed in that WP article. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 14:09, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
@World's Lamest Critic: User talk:DalidaEditor#Photographs of Dalida (also: ping @Blackcat: ) - Alexis Jazz ping plz 14:27, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
Italy's non artistic photographs that don't fall under URAA (copyrighted at 1 January 1996, basically) are in PD both in Italy and in the USA. Of course the requirements are explicitly stated: the photo must have been taken in Italy and first published in Italy (respectively before ded 31 1976 and dec 31 1978), the subject must be "an aspect of life" (for example Italy and Germany differ on this because Italy doesn't necessarily reckopn "artisticity" to the simple act of pointing and shooting: it also must involve choice of not natural or fixed light -- ie a street lamp --, model outfit, a particular pose. If you take a photograph of a person on the street it's not enough that they is watching on camera to state it's "artistic"). Also, there must not be any explicit copyright sign on the photograph (ie the photographs' autograph or studio, and so on). -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:40, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
PS To make an example: let's imagine that I take the photograph of a woman walking in the spotlight of a streetpost. She is not there for me, and she didn't expect to meet me there. She is wearing a dress of her choice and she's simply stopping and letting me take the photograph. In this case I have very little or no creativity because light and outfit don't depend on me. If I make her wear something choosen by me and add a particular light, and so on, there is an element of creativity introduced by me. Fashion photographs are artistic photographs. This one, for example, is not. This is borderline, because I suspect there might be a small element of artisticity.
The example you say is "borderline" is a studio shot involving multiple lights not a straightforward snapshot. Aside from the lighting, the hair, makeup, clothing, pose, and facial expression have all been controlled to get the desired shot. (I don't want to get away from the larger issue here, but photographers usually don't choose what models wear in fashion photography.) Each of those decisions was a creative one made by someone with expertise in that field. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
@World's Lamest Critic: : to make it simply, non artisticity means something where the photographer had little or no say, or something that would happen no matter if a photographer was there to photograph. Ie a sports match or similar. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 14:08, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
See also Copyright rules by territory.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:59, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

File:IPA_chart_2005_png.pdf

Can an admin take a look at the file rename request on File:IPA chart 2005 png.pdf? I am not entirely sure if it's warranted and even if it is there is a redirect to overwrite. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:49, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

✓ Renamed, since the name clearly contains an extraneous suffix, and the source files have been renamed, too. Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 11:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

French wiki, how to?

Okay so I have another question about commons. This is my question;

-Small card released in France in the 1970s has on front side the photo of Dalida. Behind is an icon of Orlando productions without any indication that copyrights are reserved to author of photo. Also on back side is list of recent record releases of Dalida (promotion) and at the below is the name of official Dalida fan-club, its address and telephone number. The US law says if the photo was released in United States before 1977 without any copyright indication on it, then the photo is today public domain in US (PD-US). It the same thing for other countries, in this case I am asking for France? I can't find neither no neither yes... Is it logical that in any country where photographer decides to release its image without indication that he holds copyright to that photo, the photo is public domain?

So if anyone knows the answer, please ping. But my actual question is; Is there any noticeboard of Admins for French wiki. Can anyone recommend me some French admins. I want to hear the answers from native speakers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DalidaEditor (talk • contribs) 18:50, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer: Well helpful somehow. Thanks. Dalida Editor please ping or message me 11:34, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

There's something going on with editors uploading images of . User:Lethiernois was previously blocked for uploading copyright violations. I have nominated a few of their most obvious copyright violating uploads, but I suspect most of what they have uploaded should be deleted. User:DalidaEditor also seems to be uploading Dalida images that are dubious. Now there seems to be a new user interested in Dalida - User:Fan années 70. I don't know if these accounts all belong to the same person, but something weird is definitely going on here. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

See also Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#Adding license for photos of Getty Images, Commons:Administrators' noticeboard#French wiki, how to?, and Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Old public domain of Dalida. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
@World's Lamest Critic: I am not uploading image. I am editing Dalida layout and Sheila. Do I need to upload Image? Fan années 70 (talk) 23:43, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
I saw Dalida editor and Lethiernois have problems with photographe and 20 deletions on Dalida editor. I have many photo of concert Dalida and Elvis and I came here to upload specificaly Dalida because many of her photos are not domaine public. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fan années 70 (talk • contribs) 23:47, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
@Fan années 70: do you mean photos you took in person, at the concert, yourself? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 00:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Can I balance colour of photo Dalida? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fan années 70 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

@Fan années 70: Maybe, I don't know what you want to do, but you don't have to correct your own photos. We'll prefer original photos. Experienced people in Commons:Graphic Lab/Photography workshop can make corrections if needed. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 00:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
@World's Lamest Critic: Literally I've gote none connections with any of those profiles. I noticed Lethiernois and his photo updates of Dalida, that are valid because they are from Italy, and I planned to upload the better pixelage. But this "Fan of 70s" is completely new for me. He/she has just made one edit on Dalida main page.. But if that person is going to upload some personal photos of Dalida, it will be like gift from the sky. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DalidaEditor (talk • contribs) 11:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Bonjour. Les photos que j'ai ajouté de Dalida proviennent toutes de GETTY IMAGE. Vous pouvez voir les droits d'auteurs, elles sont normalement toutes libres. Allez vérifier si vous le pouvez. Cordialement--Lethiernois (talk) 13:51, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Hello. The photos I added from Dalida are all from GETTY IMAGE. You can see the copyright, they are normally all free. Go check if you can. cordially
 
translator: Google via   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:39, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
@Lethiernois: Rien de Getty Images n'est jamais considéré par eux comme étant gratuit. De quelles URL avez-vous pris ces photos, et comment les avez-vous manipulées? Nothing from Getty Images is ever considered by them to be free. What URLs did you get those photos from, and how did you manipulate them?   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:39, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Merci de votre réponse. Les URL sont présentes sur chaque photographies. De plus, celles que j'ai ajoutées semblent être en accord avec les droits d'auteurs. --Lethiernois (talk) 15:10, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz: Not of me, but my deceased father. Is that ok for wikipedia? He didn't said that leave the photos just to me, those are in family now. But family would be formidable if I publish. I can put domaine public free use? Fan années 70 (talk) 20:54, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
@Fan années 70: please contact OTRS and send them the photos. You may also need to obtain permission from other family members. If all heirs are willing to publish the photos with a free license they can be used on Wikipedia. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:11, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

What is the process of proposing that Visual Editor be available to all editors in the Commons: namespace?

Hi

I asked this question on Help Desk and they suggested I come here. Can someone outline what the process would be to propose Visual Editor is enabled in the Commons: namespace?

For context, I'm currently working on creating a way for people to easily submit photo essays for Wiki Loves Competitions, the current prototype is here. The process is reliant on VE be enabled as an option for all users.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 08:39, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Tommy Robinson

Please can we lose https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tommy_Robinson_gag_order.jpg , see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Tommy_Robinson_(activist) .--Ianmacm (talk) 09:52, 28 May 2018 (UTC) ✓ Done

Leaving aside the politics, which I'm compelled to do, one has to look at the copyright status of this document. The opinion of the Bar Council is that it is either the copyright of the judge making the order, or Crown Copyright as a document written by a servant of the Crown in the course of their duties. As to the latter, it does not fall within the exemptions from Crown Copyright listed in the white paper (as if that has any authority) of 2000. But it is certainly not public domain, as claimed by the uploader and would in the normal course of events be deleted within seven days as having no valid licence. I can find no evidence that these documents are released under an Open Government Licence. Therefore the document can be deleted on two grounds (1) breach of copyright and (2) under the precautionary principle as having an uncertain copyright status. Fair use arguments can be made on Wikipedie, but not of course here. Rodhullandemu (talk) 10:14, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive_68&oldid=304423518"