Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

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

Shortcut: COM:AN

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

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

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


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


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


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

Archives
23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES


copyviol

all pictures here Special:ListFiles/Paanda3. thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 20:45, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Files nuked, user warned. I can't see why an admin (JuTa) would tag files with "no permission" when the uploader indicates "source=internet/author=don't know". Just speedy them as obvious copyvios. INeverCry 23:37, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They were tagged as no license btw. As explained here I'm using visual file exchange to tag files within subcategories of Category:Media uploaded without a license. I don't see the file description pages doing that. Recently I paused with it for a bout a week, and there were about 800 of them nobody else yet marked as cpvio or else. Feel free to be quicker than me and check all those files individualy and mark them accordingly. According my guess you'll need about 2-3 hours a day. regards. --JuTa 07:24, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My concern is that tagging an obvious copyvio as no license or no permission allows it to sit on Commons for atleast a week, while it should be deleted much sooner. It also allows copyvio uploaders to upload more copyvios because they're not warned and/or blocked quickly enough. In the end, we need more editors/admins helping to tag/delete copyvios, etc. INeverCry 18:36, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can only support that, and I already mentioned that to JuTa. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:59, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

deleting my pictures

Could you please delete the car pictures as it would not be necessary and I do not want them displayed

I will give you the links

  • File:M59.JPG <-- has no car plate number, why should it be deleted?


Please Delete the images as I do not want them displayed by tomorrow please because I had many complaints from a lot of people concerning the number plates regarding that the cars may be stolen and the quality of the photos are either poor or not useful.

EurovisionNim 05:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by EurovisionNim (talk • contribs)

Hi EurovisionNim,
you could edit-out the number on the car plate and then re-upload the images. --Túrelio (talk) 06:49, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I find the "may be stolen" idea to be rather dubious. Could one not just go out on the street and look at a number plate and get the same information? As for general deletion, when you uploaded these you released them under a free licence. That means that anyone can use them for any purpose, and you cannot revoke the licence. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This guy's been blocked for a week for vandalism. He seems to be having a bit of a meltdown. INeverCry 18:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why not just delete them as "unused and requested by uploader" (for those that are not in use anywhere)? —howcheng {chat} 02:41, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Those images, which did indeed fulfil the nominator's deletion-rationale, have been deleted already (except File:Honda CR-V in Malaysia.jpg due to an ongoing DR). I am all for courtesy, but it shouldn't be stretched without necessity. The images of the train and the public bus had been uploaded in April and May. --Túrelio (talk) 07:27, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
These images should not have been deleted. The user in question has had a tantrum because I removed the said images from various Wikipedia articles on the grounds of low quality, for which Nim did not appreciate. We use the best quality images at Wikipedia, and there is no reason for Nim's image to be used in an article when a higher quality image is available (unless it happens to be the best quality in a particular instance). OSX (talk • contributions) 13:22, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to check another file

File:Girls-lesbo.jpg. Which user uploaded it? thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 20:55, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Gyongpyong uploaded this file. Natuur12 (talk) 20:59, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:Pierpao, there are two easy ways to check who the uploader is:

HHVM - speed up your page load times

It looks like the WMF recently deployed HHVM, a page-load optimizing engine, as a beta feature to WMF wikis, available to activate in your preferences. Check the box, hit save, and watch page load times go down :) Cheers, FASTILY 22:22, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File history clean up

Could the file history on File:CM Punk 2.jpg be cleaned up? A user uploaded new versions of the file with copyrighted images. Thanks. Prefall (talk) 20:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Didym (talk) 20:49, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

copyviol 2

all from magazines--Pierpao.lo (listening) 04:28, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Nuked, and I'll watch to see if she uploads more. INeverCry 05:03, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

copyviol 3

here copyrighted covers. thanks--Pierpao.lo (listening) 17:42, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Yann (talk) 18:06, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any admin understanding Chinese?

Flag of Chinese Taipei for Olympic games.svg and Emblem of Chinese Taipei for Olympic games.svg were created incorrectly at beginning. Jitcji redrew and uploaded them according to the information on the official website of Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee, but Fry1989, unable to read Chinese, reverted them to the incorrect version. I translated the information on the official website into English on the talk page and renewed these two images. However, Fry1989 reverted them again. To avoid the re-upload warring, is there any admin understanding Chinese willing to help recover the correct images and stop Fry1989 insist on the incorrect version? Thanks a lot! --Akira123 (talk) 01:52, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@KTo288: , @Mys 721tx: , and @Shizhao: are a few Chinese-speaking admins that may be able to help. INeverCry 02:48, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's right I reverted! You two are breaking the file from it's counterparts, altering both it's colours and it's actual construction replacing the Emblem of the Republic of China with the Emblem of the Kuomintang Party, and that certainly falls under COM:Overwrite. I dispute your change and the accuracy of the source provided. Fry1989 eh? 03:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
From what I have read, the Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee page only specify the color code, which is reflected in Akira123's version. However, it does not specify anything about the emblem other than the vague "it should look like this". I think the color change may be necessary. -Mys_721tx (talk) 04:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Akira123 vote rigging

The choice of language that Akira123 has chosen to use on the talk pages of these three users, specifically "could you help......stop Fry1989 insist on the incorrect version?" looks like a pretty good case of vote rigging in an attempt to form a false consensus to me. I therefore hold any such consensus on the talk page in contempt. Fry1989 eh? 03:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you cannot read Chinese, and TPENOC's official website only uses Chinese, I requested those admins to explain what written on the website. Besides, do you forget what you said on your own talk page---the information cited from the official source is prior to any consensus on Wiki Commons? --Akira123 (talk) 04:08, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That depends on the quality of the source. The one provided has a highly distorted image, and replacing the Emblem of the ROC with the Kuomintang Party emblem is extremely suspect. Fry1989 eh? 04:26, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a KMT party emblem nor ROC emblem, but very similar to the former. According to the IOC official website, the source I provided is indeed TPENOC's official website. It's Fry1989's turn to provide a official source showing that the emblem on the Olympic rings is (or "should be") a ROC emblem--Akira123 (talk) 04:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have to provide any source, it's a very obvious question. The Chinese Taipei Olympic Committee and the team that uses that banner at the Olympics represents the Republic of China and not the Kuomintang political party. Since the differences between the two are easily documented, it is a valid question the accuracy of the source provided. Fry1989 eh? 04:49, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to the official source, the image you think inaccurate is the only one IOC recognizes. Obviously, what IOC recognizes is highly prior to what you think.--Akira123 (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I also said that the image is distorted. It would be nice if you could provide an official construction sheet and not an image which may or may not be inaccurate and which I believe is inaccurate for several reasons. Fry1989 eh? 05:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, here's another case of rigging on zh. -Mys_721tx (talk) 13:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly looks like there is an attempt to manipulate the outcome here. Fry1989 eh? 16:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, recently because of 2014 Asian Games, some Taiwanese media reported the issue of Blue Sky & White Sun on the emblem and flag of TPENOC too. I called it to consult the specification of the emblem and flag, and a clerk reply that they cannot answer until the authorized officer comes back Taiwan after the Games. I believe there will be a clear solution soon. --Akira123 (talk) 08:37, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gmaxwell

I see this discussion is already archived; without Gmaxwell commenting. What do we do now? Open an RfC? Changing the policy without an RfC per what was initially meant? And what do we do with Gmaxwell? Do we also need an RfC or a de-RfCU to remove his CU rights? ('cause I think there is consensus here regarding the removal of those rights) In any case, something needs to happen. And we shouldn't wait for months again. (Ideally Gmaxwell should resign himselves imho.) Trijnsteltalk 13:34, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should keep this topic open for a while and, if there are no strong objections, apply to stewards for removal of the flag.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:35, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In the discussion, Jim said Gmaxwell would lose the CU flag on October 14 automatically due to 1 year of inactivity as CU. INeverCry 03:21, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
While Gmaxwell may have not been active as a CU, he has still been editing. I do not think that we nee to rush into removing his CU permission for security reasons. Let's just wait until October 14 like was mentioned numerous times in the 1st thread. Tiptoety talk 04:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pieter Kuiper

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

This thread is now closed, as the conclusion is clear and so no further voting is needed. --A.Savin 10:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pieter Kuiper has been blocked for over two years now. Is there any reasonable point in still keeping him blocked? Jcb (talk) 22:52, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, plenty. Due to the large amount of problems he caused two years ago (see also User talk:Fæ/Pieter Kuiper), I'm not in favor of unblocking him without an RfC or something so that the community can give their opinion. How did you come up with this btw? Did he ask you to unblock him? Trijnsteltalk 23:05, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
He popped up in my watch list, his talk page is on my watch list. Jcb (talk) 23:19, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and I  Oppose an unblock. I noticed the removal of {{Sockpuppeteer}} from his userpage. My tagging of him as a sockpuppeteer on his userpage was backed up by an RFCU, and yet he called it "libellous" again just 4 hours ago. He's a confrontational, disruptive individual who can't work with others in a collegial way for any considerable length of time. I've never seen an unblock request from him, which I would oppose, unless he changes his usual tune pretty quickly. He himself wouldn't be able to participate in an RFC or at any other venue but his talk, and so if he wants to be unblocked he should do it the proper way according to blocking policy which is an unblock request, where he can state how he's going to change the negative behavior that led to the block. INeverCry 01:19, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


no fop in South Africa

this users make a great job for WikiAfrica but there is no Fop in South Africa and I find no mention of authorization; for instance

but there are a lot of files to check. If you want I can do it--Pierpao.lo (listening) 03:50, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't post deletion requests on AN. You can start a COM:DR. --Steinsplitter (talk) 06:58, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

request for speedy delete

not educatve self promotion thanks --Pierpao.lo (listening) 05:43, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Copyright violations. Please start a COM:DR next time. --Steinsplitter (talk) 06:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do i do userboxes

How do I insert user boxes onto my profile because I cannot figure it out

EurovisionNim 12:00, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Wrong place to ask such a question, but anyway: COM:UBX --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:12, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FoP-Russia undeletions

Buildings in Russia (only buildings, not sculptures etc.) are now OK for commercial Freedom of Panorama, following that a very big lot of files can be undeleted now. Admins who wish to help out but are not familiar with the procedure, may want to read this instruction first. Thanks for attention and for any help. --A.Savin 20:54, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great news!!! I'll definitely be helping with these soon (I have to go do boring grocery shopping right now). INeverCry 21:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'll help also. Geagea (talk) 01:34, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do some people add {{Kept}} on the talk page of the undeleted files, but do not add {{FoP-Russia}} to the file itself? IMO, the former is nonsense, whereas the latter is obligatory! --A.Savin 19:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The kept template is no nonsense since it is ver easy to hit the "kept option" using delhandeler. Natuur12 (talk) 20:02, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Everyone have accidents with every undeletion? Unfortunately, it does not answer my question, especially not its second part... --A.Savin 20:17, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment All help is appreciated with getting these restored, but anyone doing restorations should follow the procedure explained at User:A.Savin/How to undelete Russian FoP cases. Thanks again to everyone helping! INeverCry 20:31, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David Levine?

See here. Theobald Tiger (talk) 12:59, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strange category

Can an admin delete this category that was added to one of my subpages? I believe the user meant to ask it on the talk page itself and I will answer them on their talk page. Fry1989 eh? 17:13, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The category page never existed, so there is nothing to delete. I have removed the category formatting from the editor's text and there shouldn't be any more to do than that. Regards, Ed (Edgar181) 17:47, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh that's right, it was redlinked. I have no idea why I didn't realise that. Anyhow, thanks. Fry1989 eh? 19:14, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New watchlist notice: Photo challenge

Hi, please can an admin add the new photo challenge watchlist message requested at MediaWiki talk:WatchlistNotice today. Thank you very much. HelenOnline 20:56, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the original upload

File:Cosumnes CSD Fire Department.JPG

I have overridden the image I just uploaded but I need the original file scrubbed so the plate numbers are not in the history. Didn't realize the numbers were visible.--Amadscientist (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=135908819"