Hosta

Hello, I am requesting that the automatic creation of categories whose cat name is a single emoji (or ZWJ sequence) be allowed, contrary to the current configuration of the disallowlist. This would be a large one-time bot job with small updates each time the emoji database updates in June. Details can be found at commons:bots/Work requests#rerequesting emoji redirects and commons:bots/Work requests/Archive 16#redirect from emoji categories to U+1FNNN form. Thank you. Arlo James Barnes 12:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

• FatimaEmami1402 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

This guy is uploading lots of out of scope, personal files. He’s probably a sock of someone else. Please check Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hadi emami 75325. RodRabelo7 (talk) 19:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

• Based on the fact this user now has 2 accounts; Hadi emami 75325, FatimaEmami1402 and based on the fact this user is STILL mass uploading there images they should be blocked for socking and uploading out of scope images.

–Davey2010^Talk 20:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

This account is clearly the same individual as well:

• Hadiemami1404 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

And this account active on Wikidata too:

• Hadiemami2023 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Marbletan (talk) 21:00, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done Nuked and all blocked by Elcobbola and I. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Pi. FWIW, all officially Confirmed. Эlcobbola _talk 21:23, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Would an admin mind taking a look at File:Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial.png? The file was DR'd on February 17 by one editor and then renominated on February 24 by another editor which seems unnecessary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

The second anonymous editor also started Commons:Deletion requests/File:Old Guard, MLK Memorial promotion ceremony -Image 1 of 3- (6103464621).jpg so it may have just been someone going through MLK memorials in the US for FoP issues. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi, please delete File:Aafi at DCW general meet-up 18 February 2023.jpg, as it has been superseded by File:Aafi at DCW general meet-up 18 February 2023.png. I organised the event where @Bilal Nibraas took this photo. They are in a learning phase. It is quite difficult to seek permissions for the background design included in this image as it does not fall under de minimis. Please delete! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

@TheAafi @Bilal Nibraas

 Done Emha (talk) 14:36, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Emha! ─ The Aafī (^talk) 14:52, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

• PlanespotterA320 (talk · contribs)

Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 07:41, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:48, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Where can I submit a request to change the name of following folders:

• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1900s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1910s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1930s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1940s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1950s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1960s
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1970s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1980s‎
• Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1990s‎

to

• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1900s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1910s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1930s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1940s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1950s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1960s
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1970s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1980s‎
• Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1990s‎

I didn't use MOVE, because it creates a redirect.

Cheers Shkuru Afshar (talk) 02:33, 23 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shkuru Afshar Why would you be moving them? There is usually a separate category for Actresses separate from Male actors. See Category:Actors in the 1960s. Are they different for the birth categories? Still, you can do a move and just uncheck the "Leave a redirect behind" option and then create the parent category afterwards. Ricky81682 (talk) 02:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Because the word "Actors" does necessarily specify it a generic category for both sexes or just men.

But "moving and uncheking the "Leave a redirect behind" option and then create the parent category afterwards" is the help that I neede.

Thank you Shkuru Afshar (talk) 02:46, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I don't see "Leave a redirect behind" option! Shkuru Afshar (talk) 02:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

@Shkuru Afshar Are you talking about moving the categories under those categories? I don't understand. We already have Category:Actors from Iran born in the 1900s and Category:Male actors from Iran born in the 1900s so what do you want to do? We have a lengthy history of separating "Male actors" and "actresses" and keeping an "actors" category for like group pictures and the like so it won't be deleted uniquely for Iranian ones born in the 20th century. Ricky81682 (talk) 03:03, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Oh. Apparently these categories already exist! and there is no needed to rename them.

Thank you. Shkuru Afshar (talk) 03:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

--Emha (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you :) Shkuru Afshar (talk) 07:57, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

As part of attempts to improve curation, and ensure copyvios don't sit around un-noticed, I've drafted {{Internet Archive link/sandbox}} to categorise linked IA items, as having 'verified' or 'unverified' status with respect to the source (at IA) being compatible with Commons copyright policy.

The intent is that over time, every single link to an item on Internet Archive gets 'verified', with 'unverified' works that are found to be incompatible with commons licensing or copyright policy being removed or deleted on Commons, of course.

This verified/unverified logic could also be used in templates which link to other scanned works such as those on HathiTrust/Google, and generate appropriate categories in a similar manner.

I would also like to add further logic to the template that flags 'unverified' items that have remained in that state for an extended period, to the attention of license reviewers. ( I would also like to have logic that automatically converts an 'unverified' file status into a Deletion request after a set period, but consensus is not strong for that kind of assertive copyright management policy.)

I am posting here because, it would need an admin to swap the sandbox version (once someone has tested it) over to the main template.

I would also be interested in hearing what other recomendations admins have for resolving long-standing curation issues, like this.

ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 21:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Just to get an idea of the scale, Commons:IA books reports that as of 24 August 2021, there were 1,471,948 documents uploaded. Category:Scans from the Internet Archive has 1,563,881 files but a lot of subcategories. I don't see what verified will help do via a template. In this case, I think we could be better off with a comment on the talk page if someone has checked it (or nothing at all) and a deletion request if it is problematic but the template seems workable. It is a giant project. Ricky81682 (talk) 06:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

@Yasu: The romanization of the Japanese language has three major writing systems: Hepburn romanization, Nihon-shiki romanization, and Kunrei-shiki romanization, of which Nihon-shiki romanization and Kunrei-shiki romanization are the strict and lax forms within the ISO 3602 standard recognized by the International Organization for Standardization, respectively, while Hepburn romanization is the most widely used worldwide among the three systems. In the case of the Japanese word 鳥海 (with kana ちょうかい), which corresponds to Hepburn romanization, Nihon-shiki romanization, and Kunrei-shiki romanization, they are Chōkai, Tyoukain, and Tyôkai. And the Chokai that you insisted on in this topic, which system is it? 隐世高人 (talk) 22:08, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

I came accoss an image page File:Facebook Delete Account Notification.jpg that didn't have any licensing info. After checking history, an IP editor removed the licensing templates, including licence reviewed template.

I tried to readd the licence reviewed template, but I don't have licence reivew user right to do so, but at least readded PD-ineligible template. Maybe one of the admins can readd it the same template as original? Stylez995 (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Would appreciate some admin advice on what to do next on the closure-as-keep of Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Waltercolor.

It's a derivative work issue regarding 14 drawings that appear to be based on specific and possibly copyrighted photographs. The artist was in the process of seeking permission from the original photographers one by one (and had received one such approval), when admin Racconish closed the discussion last week with the advice of suggest renominations with a narrower scope. The scope seems the same, though: there are now 13 remaining drawings that appear to be based on specific photos. Either they receive photographer permission, we discover that the original photo isn't copyrighted after all, or the community decide, case by case, whether any given photograph is sufficiently similar to a copyrighted reference work.

Racconish's talk page advice was that I read some law articles and break the nomination up according to "heterogeneity", but apart from one photo maybe being public domain, I can't see how the remaining 13 cases are different. The main law issue (as I understand it) is that French law differs from US law on copying a photo: all of the drawings are part of a French project.

Am I expected to renominate the remaining 12 or 13 files on the same "...uploaded by Waltercolor" request page, perhaps with the public domain one in a separate request (where if we conclude it's not public domain, it's back where it started and we have to discuss permission and derivative similarity)? Should the discussion simply be reopened instead? Belbury (talk) 10:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello, would someone with tboverride be able to make a redirect from File:Screenshot 2014-09-05 14.46.43.png to File:QWPR keyboard layout.png? It was a previous name of the file at enwiki. Thanks! HouseBlaster (talk) 17:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

 Not done The file was renamed at en, where a local redirect already exists. --Didym (talk) 18:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

May I ask you to reconsider? The redirect at enwiki has since been deleted, as the page no longer exists locally at enwiki and thus a redirect would not be followed. Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

• Dr. Nono YesMaybe (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Usual mix of blackface, copyvios and claiming family video clips to be historically significant or viral. File:Tribute to Tic Taw.webm ("Rediscovered, High Definition public domain complete print") is a children's video previously uploaded by Palooka2 (talk · contribs).

Master account does not exist on Commons but they've been filed at Category:Sockpuppets of Oatsandcream before. Belbury (talk) 13:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

• Delete everything, including their (pointless) uploads. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

At File:Non-virus Koshu in greenhouse.jpg, the very first revision appears to have been a mistaken upload. We've received valid permission for the current photograph there via VRT, but this photo appears to require revision deletion; we don't have evidence that the mistakenly uploaded picture is available under a valid free license. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 07:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 20:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

The current metadata in this file contains details that should not be in public like phone numbers and email address. I am not an expert in removing much of the Exif details but it would be good if some admin does it. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 10:20, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Actually this is a copyright violation. Deleted. Yann (talk) 16:49, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear @Yann, I couldn't get that. Could you please explain a bit. I guess the same person (who photographed it) uploaded this image? I didn't notice anything except the privacy stuff in the EXIF because a different person wouldn't be having an image with full EXIF details normally. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 16:56, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

The uploader is CandideyeMedia while the copyright holder is Muhammed Adhil KM Adhil. IMO a formal written permission is needed. Yann (talk) 17:01, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Yann, thanks, okay, I get it. Wasn't tagging the file with no-permission more appropriate then than hitting the delete button? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 17:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Yann, could you please clarify? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:36, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

If there were information in the file violating privacy, the right thing to do is to delete it right away. Admins have access to the deleted version and can download it, remove the offending EXIF and upload the cleared version (the uploader probably has the original and could also upload a new version) – once the copyright reasons have been sorted out. –LPfi (talk) 06:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Can someone take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Joan Finney (Kansas governor).jpg and close it, please? It’s been over three months now since it was opened. I’d close it, however, I’m the nominator and a non-admin so I couldn’t delete it. Thanks, Corky 01:17, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I just replied there. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757-san i have similiar issue but simple can you close this one as well? 💖 Sakura Hana 🌸 (talk) 08:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Already done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:24, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, could someone block 37.129.237.161 who since being here has only repeatedly blanked the com:helpdesk, I haven't warned the user because they're clearly not here to contribute, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 14:07, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

IP blocked for a day for cross-wiki abuse. –Davey2010^Talk 17:18, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Bundesverfassungsgericht_Richterroben.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=699563035 is a little gibberish but seems to have some personal information in it? Probably safest to hide it. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 14:33, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:28, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

TLDR: Inviting administrators to an exploratory call to discuss how we can better highlight Commons content and community. We propose a call on March 8th, 9th, 15th or 16th, at 6 pm UTC. Please reply to let us know your preferred date and time for the call, or if you would like a different date or time.

Hello Administrators,

We’re a small team of people at the Foundation who are responding to community needs for a revitalized Wikimedia Commons. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Product_and_technical_support_for_Commons_2022-23  

We would like to  invite you to an exploratory call to discuss how we can highlight the best media on Commons and create a stronger sense of community, using the Commons homepage, social media, and other channels.

If you’re an administrator who has been active in homepage editing, monthly photo challenges, or quality/featured images discussions, we would greatly appreciate your input and insights. During the call, we can discuss the scope and approach, potential workshops, and other collaborators. We propose a call on March 8th, 9th, 15th or 16th, at 6 pm UTC. Please reply to let us know your preferred date and time for the call, or if you would like a different date or time.

Thank you for your attention, and we look forward to hearing from you.

Best regards,

Commons Steering Committee 08:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC) Udehb-WMF (talk) 08:28, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF I think you're misunderstanding the role of administrators on Commons. If you want to talk to the people running Featured Pictures, Quality images, and Photo Challenge. you'll find them here and here and here. Some of them are administrators, most of them are not. El Grafo (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@El Grafo, your response makes sense. Has the letter that we signed some months ago reached you @Udehb-WMF and others at the WMF end? @Udehb-WMF, would you mind going through Commons:Think big - open letter about Wikimedia Commons and perhaps posting this invitation there? ─ The Aafī (^talk) 10:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@El Grafo, @TheAafi, thank you for your suggestions. I'm aware of the letter signed a few months ago and appreciate the suggestions made. This exploratory call is a follow-up on that letter, as it is intended to build upon the suggestions made and discuss how we can better highlight Commons content and community. We believe that administrators are key folks to impact the homepage. So we wanted to connect with them first before extending the invitation to the wider community. We hope this clarifies our intent. Please reply to the thread if you want to join the exploratory call. Udehb-WMF (talk) 15:42, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

Not a good idea to leave the rank-and-file out of this conversation. Schierbecker (talk) 19:25, 2 March 2023 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF So yes, you have completely misunderstood what being an administrator means on Commons. You want to give our front garden a make-over, but instead of inviting the gardeners, you're inviting the heads of the janitorial division. Admins are normal users who have access to some additional tools, that's it. They are mostly elected because they know how copyright works. They are not the kind of leaders you need or should talk to first. That's partially why not a single admin has responded here so far.

You're also misunderstanding the intention behind my answer above. I'm not trying to get into that call. I'm trying to help you reaching out to the people you actually want to have in that call. @TheAafi is 100% correct: if this is a response to the open letter, you need to talk to the people who wrote and signed that letter. So go to Commons talk:Think big - open letter about Wikimedia Commons and post your invitation there.

Apologies if this sounds harsh - I mean no offense. I just want to help you avoid some of the mistakes people sent here by WMF have made in the past. They tend to plunge forward with their ideas, completely oblivious about the inner workings of the Commons community. Consequently, the community ignores them and they quietly disappear. Most of that is due to incompatible communication strategies. For example, we are not a company or working group where someone in charge will get back to you and let you know which time slot we would prefer. That's impossible, and probably another reason nobody has replied so far ... El Grafo (talk) 09:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

I second what @El Grafo has said above. If this is a follow-up to the open letter, the invitation or anything relevant, belongs to that venue. AN is definitely not the right venue for this invitation. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 09:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

Hello @El Grafo, @TheAafi, @Schierbecker, I apologize for any confusion that may have resulted from my initial response. I am very grateful for your help in understanding the role of administrators on Commons and for providing me with the venues to reach out to the appropriate people. Moreover, I would like to offer more clarity on the call. This call is intended to be an exploratory one, as the general call will occur afterward. We are hoping to first get feedback from those who have been actively involved in homepage editing and quality/featured image discussions. Your suggestions have been extremely helpful in identifying the right venues. Thank you again for your input and assistance. I also did not intend to imply that you were trying to join the call when I responded to your message; I was simply expressing my appreciation for your help. Once again, I apologize for any miscommunication on my part. Udehb-WMF (talk) 11:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

@Udehb-WMF No reason to apologize. WMF sent you on a mission into a foreign country where they speak your language but don't share your customs. That makes communication difficult, and misunderstandings happen (that goes both ways, as I misunderstood you too - apologies for that!). So just so we're clear: I'm very glad that you are here! El Grafo (talk) 16:34, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

A call at 18:00UTC means that for people in the ESEAP region it will be after 2am in their local kind of hard to be inclusive, and offer equity if people cant be involved. Perhaps you could offer calls on a weekends rather than in the middle of the working week at around 09:00 UTC so that more contributors can also participate Gnangarra 14:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

oh and presume that there will be translators available for those who find english a barrier to participation. Gnangarra 14:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what's the purpose of this user uploading such files, someone please help me check this user. Thanks! Tryvix1509 (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Right: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Elenanowak. Yann (talk) 10:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Isn't this IP an open proxy? — Mike Novikoff 22:05, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed http proxy, blocked for 6 months. --Achim55 (talk) 22:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Open proxy should be globally blocked. Reported to SRG. Tryvix1509 (talk) 00:50, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Referencing this discussion, would someone kindly whitelist Category:People wearing black T-shirts in the United States? Note that two of Category:People wearing black T-shirts's children, Category:Men wearing black T-shirts and Category:Women wearing black T-shirts, contain 555+ and 150+ images, respectively, as of this writing--quantities that are {{CatDiffuse}}-worthy into country-specific subcategories that would need Category:People wearing black T-shirts in ... as parents. Note that the T-shirt categories created from this prior request show no evidence of abuse 18 months after the request was granted. Thank you in advance. -- DanielPenfield (talk) 19:39, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 06:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear admins,

could an admin have a look at the rename requests at File:BG Will Dyer.jpg and File:William B. Dyer III (5).jpg. Author requests. It needs an admin due to a redirect blocking the renames.

Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 00:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Ymblanter (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear admins,

I see 11 accounts that were recently created and wonder if it is a person? It is always the same kind of categories and the same operations of (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) and (these) users.

Sincerely, Antoine.01_overleg(Antoine) 11:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

I think so and my guess is that this is all User:Eissink based on the edit pattern. Given that the user has a global ban, a check user should probably be done. Multichill (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to create an article about the Pledge algorithm however during this creation I did not have permission to add images. Would it be possible to get permission to do so? Good day Sincerely. Gabotav (talk) 11:55, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

@Gabotav: You are on the wrong project. I suppose you want to create an article in Wikipedia, so you should go to the language you want to write to. For the English Wikipedia, it is here. Here you are on Wikimedia Commons, which concerns multimedia documents only, not text articles. Yann (talk) 17:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

File:English Opening Symmetrical Variation.jpg and other chess images by user:Hfjhjoiijklij4 are screenshots from chess.com

Another their images also looks like copivio File:Shiny guinea pig.jpg or had wrong "source" File:Tufted deer distribution map.png. -- DS28 (talk) 06:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Two copyvios are deleted (one of them due to failed license review). In my opinion chess diagrams are not copyrightable. I nominated one upload for regular deletion due to bad quality. Taivo (talk) 07:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Could someone please speedy delete all images in Category:Traveling toy photographs by Kasadera for violating copyright (photographs of Pokémon figures) and then speedy delete all the categories for being empty and unlikely to be ever meaningfully used.

I talked to the uploader and it seems like they don't intend to crop the images or add de minimis claims to any of them. TilmannR (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, I think number of these images could be "saved" by simply cropping away the infringing character, as I have done with File:Arcanine in Zuoying, Kaohsiung 72 (Lotus Pond) (38995045010).jpg and File:Arcanine in Zuoying, Kaohsiung 8 (Lotus Pond) (38994944030).jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 14:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Well, it's a lot of work. Should we ask the broader community (e.g. at the village pump) to help with the cropping, such that the admins only need to revdel? Or do admins have a sufficiently convenient crop + revdel interface that non-admin help isn't required? TilmannR (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

• Didn't we used to have a deletion process, involving discussion? Andy Dingley (talk) 16:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

  @Andy Dingley: We do have both deletion requests and speedy deletions. I don't remember reading a guideline that requires us to "save" obvious copyright violations by cropping. TilmannR (talk) 17:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

  The current rule is COM:CSD#F3: photos taken in a public place (where there is no infringement of the photographer's copyright) are ineligible for speedy deletion. By the way, there is a previous discussion on this issue, Commons:Village pump/Proposals/Archive/2023/01#When copyvio is incidental and easy to fix, place a burden on deleters to do so, with general agreement that fixable copyright violations should not be speedily deleted in at least some circumstances, such as when the image is "useful" according to some definition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

  Ah! Thank you. I totally forgot about F3.

  The deletion request is at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by OmegaFallon. TilmannR (talk) 20:17, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Did I setup the deletion right or miss stuff out? I just clicked on the image to check and it had a list there of stuff to do which I thought was normally all auto stuff. Regards. Govvy (talk) 15:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@Govvy: (I'm not an admin.) Everything is fine. The list is there for people, who place the {{Delete}} template manually. It is indeed automated, when you use the "Nominate for deletion" link in the toolbox on the left. (See Commons:Deletion_policy#Regular_deletion.)

Questions like this get answered more quickly at the Commons:Help desk. The administrator's noticeboard is for reporting certain issues that require administrator privileges to fix. TilmannR (talk) 17:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

@TilmannR: k, thanks, I've never seen the Commons help desk or noticed the link before. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 23:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

Dear admins,

could someone please have a look at the uploads by user User00002002. All their images seem to be randomly taken of the internet. The images all lack an indication where the image is from. Some are proven to be somewhere else on the internet. Could an admin please intervene.

Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 13:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Most files deleted, the remainder at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by User00002002. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:07, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi all--I wonder about the contributions by User:SofaKngJEDI. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 22:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Are you serious dude? Why so many people are going at me for a submission that is fact is beyond comprehension SofaKngJEDI (talk) 22:54, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

All uploads deleted. @SofaKngJEDI: Please read Commons:Licensing. You cannot claim scans of copyrighted newspapers as your own work. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

File:Carlos Freixo.jpg’s old version shows some copyrighted Disney characters. Would someone mind deleting it? Best regards, RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

This recently uploaded file has appeared online as early as 2018 according to TinEye, for example here and the website says all rights reserved. It is automatically protected because it appeared on urdu wiki's main page so I cannot mark it for deletion/copyright status resolution. TFerenczy (talk) 10:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Tagged as well as other uploads from this user. Also warned. Yann (talk) 11:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I have a quick request from organizers of the Ukrainian edition of Wiki Loves Folklore – we'd like to invite people who most recently participated in similar Ukrainian photo contests (Wiki Loves Earth in Ukraine 2021 + Wiki Loves Monuments in Ukraine 2022).

• List of receivers
• Text of the message (first line is the subject, everything else is the body of the message; I've already accounted for having a correct signature & timestamp)

AntonProtsiuk (WMUA) (talk) 13:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

 Doing… -- CptViraj (talk) 18:02, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 18:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Could someone block Premanidhi Majhi sambalpuri as a sock of PremanidhiMajhi please and could their images also be deleted ? Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 15:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 16:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Apologies only just this minute come on - many thanks @Yann for your help/actions are greatly appreciated, Many Thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 00:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Could some other administrator please take over trying to moderate this discussion? As I remarked there, while I am still neutral on the outcome, I have ceased to be able to be neutral on the personalities. I don't think my further participation would be helpful.

All things being equal, it would be good if the person who takes this on is literate in English and German. - Jmabel ! talk 02:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

FYI: I blocked them for 2 hours for file ns only after 225 single probably bot-generated DRs. That's disruption even if they are justified. → Commons:Village pump/Copyright#Scans of ancient books. --Achim55 (talk) 13:30, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Good. Claiming a copyright on what appear to be public domain books is simply copyfraud. Yann (talk) 16:22, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

To whom it may concern: In this edit this user @User talk:StarTesla dayos (creating false user account with harmful word=Dayos) has attacked other user personally and harassed the user in Farsi (Persian) language with words that they need to be hidden or oversight. This needs quick action both for the edit and the ab-user. Gharouni (talk) 04:50, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user indefinitely and hided the edit. Taivo (talk) 10:09, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks administer Taivo. Gharouni (talk) 13:04, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

@TaivoHi. The edit still visible because it is under someone else's edit (it doesn't have topic) and edited by a bot to fix unsigned message. Gharouni (talk) 07:41, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate it if you kindly hide the ab-user's username in the bot's edit Gharouni (talk) 10:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

 Note: A discussion is taking place on COM:Village pump/Proposals regarding the topic of whether or not to implement global abuse filters on Commons. The thread is Implementing global abuse filters. Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 22:00, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Disruptive username, user page and talk edits are copyvios from a manga (see this) and should be deleted. See also enwiki VOA block. Nintendofan885^{T&Cs apply} 00:11, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:19, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I can't delete files any more. I get the following: Errors were encountered while deleting the file: Could not acquire locks on server rdb1. Could not acquire locks on server rdb2. Could not acquire locks on server rdb3. No error on Chrome console. Any idea? Yann (talk) 18:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

It seems to work now... :( Yann (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

I guess File:Cyrus the Great II.jpg and File:(Persia) Ciro el Grande.jpg are identical to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Cyrus portrait.jpg and/or Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Cyrus portrait.jpg. Hanooz 17:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

 Half done Deleted the March 19, 2023 revision of File:Cyrus_the_Great_II.jpg per G4. The others were not identical to the linked DRs. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Aren't they variations of the deleted files? I'd appreciate it if you could temporarily undelete File:Cyrus portrait.jpg. Hanooz 17:54, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Salve, mi sono appena iscritto e non so come pubblicare una nuova pagina per la mia opera lirica. Grazie D'Alessandro 18eighteenstudio (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Alessandro, vai su wikipedia e leggi it:Aiuto:Tour guidato. --Achim55 (talk) 20:24, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

It looks like someone tried to overwrite File:Takanohana.jpg in January 2021 with a completely differnt photo of the subject. I've got no idea about the provenance of the problem version so can't say whether a split is warranted. Would an admin mind looking at this and deleting the old version if needed? For reference, the uploader of the problem version also seems to have uploaded File:Taka02.jpg around roughly the same time, and that file was subsequently deleted as a copyvio. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. No split is needed. I deleted the version as copyvio. Taivo (talk) 07:04, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Taivo. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

• File:Eva Sangiorgi Viennale 2018 Sommer-Pressekonferenz 11.jpg
• File:Eva Sangiorgi Viennale 2018 Sommer-Pressekonferenz 11 (cropped).jpg

Thanks! Cryptic-waveform (talk) 12:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 13:04, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

Per the deletion request (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Eva Avila in 2022.jpg), this file should have location information removed. I already uploaded a new version of the file without the info in Exif data. Now the original file needs to be hidden, and all revisions prior to https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Eva_Avila_in_2022.jpg&oldid=733591120 need to be hidden as well. Thanks! Cryptic-waveform (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 16:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I had asked about week ago if some other administrator could please take over trying to moderate this discussion; I don't think anyone followed up, and I now see that request has been archived. As I remarked, while I am still neutral on the outcome, I have ceased to be able to be neutral on the personalities. I don't think my further participation would be helpful. I looked in today and it looks to me like it has now headed into at least on personal attack. Jmabel ! talk 01:26, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

As I already wrote on the page, this problem needs a proposal to discuss all party categories at once. GPSLeo (talk) 16:20, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

It sounds like you need a proposal to rewrite the general English language emphasis but we can go up to political parties or Germany political parties if that helps. In either case, those categories aren't included in this discussion itself. Ricky81682 (talk) 03:59, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Could someone take the time to delete files uploaded by Masterstrock1 and potentially take any other appropriate action? It seems fairly obvious that all of their remaining uploads are copyvios, and many of their uploads have been deleted in the past. --Veikk0.ma (talk) 06:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I warned the user and deleted all his/her uploads as different kind of copyvios. Taivo (talk) 07:49, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Please review what do with recent uploads by Olga Voinova. --Geohakkeri (talk) 22:35, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I deleted a lot of files due to copyright violation. They were used in an article, which is nominated for deletion. If the article will be kept, then license of all other files must be reviewed (some of them are ineligible for copyright, some are copyrighted). Taivo (talk) 07:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

On the page (and perhaps elsewhere), the text:

 under a microscopes

should be edited to:

 under a microscope

so that it does not result in a plural noun with a singular article ('a') Seauton (talk) 22:15, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 08:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

I guess all those files need to be nuked. --Geohakkeri (talk) 18:24, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

 Done --Didym (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• File:EF4 damage in Rolling Fork, Mississippi along Mulberry Street.jpg

1. Needs to have Category:2023 Rolling Fork–Silver City tornado rather than Category:Tornado outbreak of March 24–27, 2023. This is protected after appearing on English Wiki ITN. The tornado category is a sub-category in the outbreak category.

• File:EF4 damage to a duplex in Rolling Fork.jpg

1. Needs to have Template:PD-USGov-NOAA instead of CC-Zero for the copyright license.
2. This should also have the following updated description: “A duplex that was completely destroyed along Collette Avenue and Worthington Avenue in Rolling Fork, Mississippi. The National Weather Service rated this damage EF4 on the Enhanced Fujita scale, with winds estimated at 170 miles per hour.”

Fairly minor changes, but since the pages are administrator protected due to appearing on English Wiki ITN, I am unable to make those changes. Elijahandskip (talk) 21:55, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

• @Elijahandskip: I did this earlier today. Please don't multi-post requests, especially without indicating that the request has been made elsewhere. - Jmabel ! talk 03:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

This was made 3 days ago after I was re-directed here. I got redirected 2 times (once on the Commons by a admin and 2 times on the discord) for this question. 100% forgot that I asked it here. My bad. Elijahandskip (talk) 03:19, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Why nobody cares about Speedy deletion files?! Someone stolen my pictures and uploaded them here. At least check this "Category". 91.98.34.48 01:44, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Which files need deletion? Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 02:15, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

This is your only edit from this ip, so none of the rest of us have any way of knowing what pictures you are talking about. If you are concerned about some particular file or files, links/names could be helpful. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:59, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Could another admin - possibly one familiar with US sports television broadcasts might be helpful - please take a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2023-0109-CFPtitlegame-Stetson Bennett.jpg. User's uploads include some that looked to me to possibly have been taken off video screens, including boxes of text that might be video chyrons, or might be physical signs, or something else, I don't know. In response to my questions and concerns, the uploader has repeated "I was there in person" (which I have no reason to doubt, but avoids the question of if the photos were COM:DW taken from a video screen), snark, and insults directed at me. Possibly someone else might have better success in communicating with them and clarifying details. Thank you, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Coins of Uganda

Could an administrator please download these files and then upload them to en:wp with proper fair use claims? They were in use at w:Ugandan shilling, and the article would be stronger if the images were present again. 123.51.107.94 01:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I'd be more comfortable doing a temporary undelete for someone to do the uploads to en-Wikpedia themselves. You made this request from an IP address. Do you have an account? If so, if I do a temporary undelete, would you take responsibility for the downloading, uploading, appropriate templates for non-free use, etc.? If not, can you recruit someone who would? (Or maybe some other admin wants to take it on including all that.) - Jmabel ! talk 02:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

This is probably a case of Flickr washing. Any help from an administrator is welcome. User has uploaded more than 100 files, though some seem legit. RodRabelo7 (talk) 05:46, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

 Comment I deleted this 2, as well as Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 0okm9ijn0987. User warned. Other files need review. Yann (talk) 07:39, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

I have withdrawn my nomination at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Doverromanpaintedhouse2.jpg. Can somebody close this? Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Gbawden (talk) 13:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

(previously: commons:administrators' noticeboard/Archive 92#mediawiki:titleblacklist bypass for emoji categories)

Hello, I am requesting that the automatic creation of categories whose cat name is a single emoji (or ZWJ sequence) be allowed, contrary to the current configuration of the disallowlist. This would be a large one-time bot job with small updates each time the emoji database updates in June. Details can be found at commons:bots/Work requests/Archive 15#rerequesting emoji redirects and commons:bots/Work requests/Archive 16#redirect from emoji categories to U+1FNNN form. Thank you. Arlo James Barnes 12:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Please close Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LriaS MAOVK wouexj, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Junta3.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK TST 尖沙咀 Tsim Sha Tsui 國際廣場 iSquare mall view Nathan Road August 2020 SS2 02.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Skycrapers an lights in Hong Kong (9443615281).jpg (section), Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK MK 旺角 Mongkok 亞皆老街 Argyle Street 砵蘭街 Portland Street 山東街 Shangtung Street 朗豪坊 Langham Place shop OTIS escalators November 2021 SS2 02.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK Central Admiralty Lung Wui Road view TST night Masterpiece lighting.JPG, AXXXXK sock disruptive editing.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 09:16, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Could you explain why the files should be deleted? Are they falsely claimed as own work or is there a FOP problem? GPSLeo (talk) 09:47, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

It seems they are uploaded by a blocked user, at least the ones I looked at were claimed to be. However, that is not a reason I can find in Deletion policy. Most of these requests seem to cite no other deletion rationale. –LPfi (talk) 11:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• Meister und Margarita (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Potsdamergänzer (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

User Meister und Margarita is blocked since 2019 on Commons, German, English and some other WP because of sockpuppetry and other offences. According to a checkuser on German wiki, Potsdamergänzer is a sockpuppet, which is blocked on German WP, but not on Commons.

I see that this second user is currently still active on Commons. Is this nothing serious or is this worth a CheckUser on Commons? DovaModaal (talk) 13:54, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Blocked. Yann (talk) 15:53, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

• User: 92.4.173.101 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• User: Hieutrung19 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Unregistered IP of User:Hieutrung19 engaging in vandalism by twice removing the copyright violation notice of the File:Mr Vo Van Thuong 2023 (cropped).jpg. Bookish Worm (talk) 09:25, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Hieutrung19 blocked for a week, IP blocked for 3 days. Yann (talk) 10:09, 6 April 2023 (UTC)

I have set my Global setting for Angika (anp) language. But when I log in in to commons.wikimedia.org, my default home page is redirected to Nepali (ne).

It should be redirected to English version home page with an option to translate the home page in to the Angika language.

Kind request to resolve the issue at the earliest please.

Angpradesh (talk) 05:29, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

Currently, the main page translation is not supported by Translate Extension. So, you have to create the Main Page manually for Angika (anp) language. After that, I can update it on {{Lang-mp}} and MediaWiki:MainPages.js. This will fix the issue. Additionally on this, looks like the translation of 'Main Page' for both the language is same, मुख्य पृष्ठ. This is why it is redirected to Nepali, I guess. Kind regards, Tulsi 24x7 13:46, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I have created the Main Page मुख्य_पृष्ठ_(anp) for Angika (anp) language. Kindly do the needful at your end please. Thanks & regards. Angpradesh (talk) 17:36, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Issue has been resolved. Kind regards, Tulsi 24x7 02:42, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if I missed a consensus to re-upload these images, but some images of US coins deleted during Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with deepcat:"50 State Quarters" have been again added. As best I can tell, the designs in question have all been uploaded to their earlier names. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:16, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

I have withdrawn my nomination at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Doverromanpaintedhouse2.jpg. Can somebody close this? Thanks. -- Whpq (talk) 13:16, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Gbawden (talk) 13:50, 3 April 2023 (UTC)

User:Fornax has uploaded versions of images that have been processed by AI. I posted on their talk page informing them of COM:OVERWRITE, but they did not agree.

I've posted here in the past about similar uploads by another user, and these have the same issues of creating information not present in the original images (e.g. the eyes in this example), introduce coloring in monochrome images (example), among other interpretations and creation of artifacts.

I propose that this user revert all uploads where they have performed such "optimizations". Opencooper (talk) 00:17, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@Fornax: This is unacceptable. COM:OVERWRITE is an official guideline, regardless of your opinion. Commons:Overwriting existing files#DO NOT overwrite explicitly says NOT to overwrite when Artificially upscaling or enlarging using any tool, including AI-based or deep learning services. Additionally, many of your "optimizations" are anything but. Your edit to File:Match factory worker with phossy jaw.jpg added blatantly fake detail (the AI added hair, not present in the original, that obscures the bone deformation), and File:August von Mackensen fieldmarshal.jpg looks cartoonishly fake. I suggest you revert all your AI upscalings, and that you cease uploading images that add false detail (i.e, almost all AI upscalings). Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:19, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

O.K. I will revert all black and white images. But in some cases I will re-upload them with a different name as derivative work.--Fornax (talk) 03:21, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

P.S.: I will not revert any more pictures. In most cases of optimization I did not even use ai. The images were usually enhanced in Photoshop (background, colour, contrast) sometimes also using the sharpening tool in Photoshop. In those cases where I was the initial uploader, I won't revert anything anyway.--Fornax (talk) 03:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@Fornax: Thank you for reverting the overwrites. I think it's good how you also included a template indicating that the image was retouched as in this example, though would also be nice to include it in the filename too rather than just appending "(2)", as well as an appropriate category.

While uploading these are separate images might be acceptable to demonstrate what an AI-processed image looks like, I don't think it's appropriate to actually use these in articles as you are doing. Numerous issues have already been pointed out with this processing and how it distorts images with interpretations and fake information, and yet I don't see how you still think it's okay to use these in articles as actually representing their subject. You're using a 1890 photograph with fake clarity in the faces of the subjects in an article on the German Wikipedia for example. In another case, you're using a 20th century photograph from the German Federal Archives with false sharpness in areas that certainly wasn't present in the original. Regardless, you're inserting these into articles without any consensus from the community to use this unnamed technology and without noting such in the articles themselves. It shocks me that you can't see how flagrantly this violates community standards and norms such as verifiability. Opencooper (talk) 05:40, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

@Opencooper: Thank you very much for your detailed comments. Anyone who is interested can have a look at the originals at any time. That's what the reference to the original files was for. Whether an ai version is really an improvement or not, everyone may decide for himself. However, I think it is wrong to take a principally rejecting attitude. I am convinced that modern ai-technology also has its justification in this field. So far, I have not heard any negative comments from the German-language Wikipedia. On the contrary, there has already been a "thank you" for the improved photo. But I also admit that ai still has its limits in many cases. In the future I will choose such modifications very carefully.--Fornax (talk) 07:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

@Fornax, uploading modifications of existing files is perfectly acceptable so long as the modified file is of a reasonably educational nature. But a big part of the reason we want the modified files uploaded to a new filename is so that end users have a choice as to which file they want to use in an article, rather than being forced to use the modified one. Further, if a file is already in use, its caption in an article may apply specifically to the nature of the original file (i.e., it would be very strange if the caption referred to a "black and white photograph of..." and what they saw was a full color image). We're here to serve as a repository of freely licensed material, not to force editorial choices on the Wikis that use that material. Hopefully that makes sense. — Huntster (t @ c) 12:25, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

I absolutely agree.--Fornax (talk) 12:59, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

@Opencooper: By the way, how do you know that the file 1890 photograph you mentioned that I first uploaded is the original state? After all, I have already edited it before uploading. Digital changes always take place when uploading a file. The original will never be available digitally.--Fornax (talk) 09:12, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, please consider protect this image as it is used on the MediaWiki interface on some wikis. Thanks in advance! Tryvix1509 (talk) 04:29, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Maybe a "semi-protect"? - Jmabel ! talk 04:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I agree. Tryvix1509 (talk) 05:04, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done - Jmabel ! talk 16:45, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

(previously: commons:administrators' noticeboard/Archive 92#mediawiki:titleblacklist bypass for emoji categories)

Hello, I am requesting that the automatic creation of categories whose cat name is a single emoji (or ZWJ sequence) be allowed, contrary to the current configuration of the disallowlist. This would be a large one-time bot job with small updates each time the emoji database updates in June. Details can be found at commons:bots/Work requests/Archive 15#rerequesting emoji redirects and commons:bots/Work requests/Archive 16#redirect from emoji categories to U+1FNNN form. Thank you. Arlo James Barnes 12:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

• Will there be some sort of systematic redirects, since that makes for category names that are almost impossible to type? - Jmabel ! talk 16:46, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

• Impossible? I'm not sure what you mean. -- Arlo James Barnes 14:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

• Is there some reason to have the emoji categories named as the emoji itself (as I understand is the intention)? Why? As the mere possibility requires them to be Unicode characters, one can equally well use the Unicode code point (such as the existing Category:U+1F36F), which can be typed in any system. The Unicode name should also be available, in the category name, the category description or the info box. The visual form can hopefully also be seen in the category description, the info box and the files in the category. I see that the requests are mainly for redirects. I don't see any discussion having been linked from the requests. Are they needed? Are there possible issues? –LPfi (talk) 10:27, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, the intention is that any valid way of referring to the emoji be enterable (such as by using hotcat). I have no problem with the U+ form being the 'canonical' one which redirects would target, but its rather inconvenient to look said up rather than just emoji-keyboarding the character in. -- Arlo James Barnes 14:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

• For the blacklist problem. Why do we not just replace the blacklist with an abuse filter and then allow such names for all users with autopatrol rights? GPSLeo (talk) 14:52, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

• Replacing the entire disallowlist should probably be a separate proposal, methinks. -- Arlo James Barnes 14:40, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Could an admin please delete this picture of me as it is now personal: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Me_in_May_2022.jpg And could an admin please place an indefinite block on this account? I am pretty much done here. Shoot for the Stars (talk) 21:16, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. If you want to be unblocked, just ask. Taivo (talk) 08:43, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Could anyone please have a look at files like File:Prime Minister Liz Truss announces her resignation (cropped) (cropped).jpg, which where taken from gov.uk (statement there: “ All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated”) but contain pretty restrictive copyright information in the EXIF data (crown copyright, “This image is for Editorial use purposes only. The Image can not be used for advertising or commercial use. The Image can not be altered in any form.”). We have quite a lot of images with this stament. --Polarlys (talk) 22:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

i think the exif statement is a case of "otherwise stated". this should be sent to DR or com:vpc. RZuo (talk) 09:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

UK Gov are pretty bad at this; they keep using similar boilerplate in EXIF even when the images are available on web pages under open licence (in some cases, two web pages with different open licences. . Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:47, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Use the M upcoming in my signature and then post that you've messaged me, so no one else does. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:06, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

• I'll message him, but this is weird. - Jmabel ! talk 00:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

  Another requested please. Not that weird, as Commons:Revision deletion explicitly says to not advertise the revs being deleted. Again, please email me and post here. Thanks. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:05, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

done. Ellywa (talk) 06:55, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I would like to ask that an administrator please delete the redirect page File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2023.png, so that the file with the current organization of the 1st Cavalry Division can be renamed from File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2023b.png to File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2023.png. The redirect resulted from an older version of the division's organization being renamed to File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2021-2023.png. In summary:

1. Delete redirect: File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2023.png
2. Rename: File:1st US Cavalry Division - Organization 2023b.png by dropping the provisional "b" at the end

Thank you, Noclador (talk) 09:11, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

@Noclador:  Done Please do your renaming Gbawden (talk) 09:14, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

I noted a "revert" of a deletion action can be remain unnoticed when another admin undeletes the file. Especially if this is performed without formal undeletion request. Therefore I filed a phabricator ticket "Receiving an alert when an item you deleted is undeleted by another admin." Your comments are appreciated on the ticket, link: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T334607 . Ellywa (talk) 06:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Could someone very kindly licence-review File:Courtesy bus, Belfast City Airport (March 2016) (geograph 4858017).jpg please?,
There's currently 10 thousand images waiting to be reviewed and I'll forget about the image after a week so kinda hoped it could be reviewed now if possible ?, Many thanks, Warm regards, –Davey2010^Talk 19:35, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

•  Done - Jmabel ! talk 20:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

  Many thanks Jmabel I appreciate that a lot, Many thanks, Warmest Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 22:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Can someone urgently block Ghghghghb (talk · contribs). Thanks, Number 57 (talk) 01:39, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Already done globally locked. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 02:13, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, could you close the request? It is an error. Panam2014 (talk) 12:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I also reviewed the license. Taivo (talk) 12:20, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

@Thibbs died on 14 April 2023 - he mainly contributed on wikipedia, and I've found my way over here when I went to upload a photo of him. Can someone please protect his talk page? Whereizben (talk) 13:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

• @Whereizben: Do we want to do that? I'd assume we'd still want DR notices to show up there so someone can monitor the page in case they want to keep track of such issues if they arise. - Jmabel ! talk 14:19, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

  Great point. I guess I just meant add to deceased commons (sorry, it’s been a LONG while since I’ve done any wiki editing). Whereizben (talk) 16:46, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done: Added {{Deceased Wikimedian}} to their user page. --Achim55 (talk) 16:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2001:16A2:C116:53AF:30E6:5B5D:2FA6:F9D6. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 days. Yann (talk) 16:17, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi! Please delete the older versions of these photographs. Exif contains information like camera serial number etc. I don't want to share. Newer versions additionally have license data.
File:RMU 25-32 Banovici 2016-06-09.jpg
File:RMU 25-31 Banovici 2016-06-09.jpg
File:RMU 83-157 Banovici 2016-06-09.jpg
File:RMU 25-29 Banovici 2016-06-09.jpg
File:JZ 83-175 Ugljevik 2016-06-10.jpg
Thanks! Herbert Ortner (talk) 17:52, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done all old versions hidden. GPSLeo (talk) 18:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

I want the following pictures to be deleted, they were uploaded by me but they are not very useful for educational purposes and are generated through AI. I initially uploaded them because I thought that they might help contextualise some text on wikipedia but I have realised that they are not very useful for educational purposes and should be deleted. I also do not want any Wiki to become an AI generated picture's dump. Thank you.

[1]

[2]

[3]

--Greentree0 (talk) 00:47, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

@Greentree0: I'll delete these for you but for the future: any time you want to delete your own upload that has been there less than 7 days and is not in use, just mark it with {{speedydelete|G7}} or if that is at all hard to remember, {{subst:My bad upload}}. - Jmabel ! talk 01:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done - Jmabel ! talk 01:40, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Sure, I'll keep that in mind. Thanks

--Greentree0 (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

The last couple thousand (?) edits of Sarangbot (talk · contribs) have broken various files. The user has been notified. --23PowerZ (talk) 13:41, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Pinging @Sarang in case you missed this. - Jmabel ! talk 15:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I have reverted 100+ edits. I would be very grateful if someone rewrites the Smart rollback like script but allow users filtering the edits. Tryvix1509 (talk) 16:49, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

I realized immediately my error, and since that I try to correct it. Some ~30 I did by hand, but there are >1500 (I have the complete list of all affected files) which is too much. I try to get the files into a temporary category to repair them with a very simple VFC, but had not yet been successful with it. There is a possibility to identify + categorize them by the template COAInformation which deals with all of them, but it can last very long time until such a category is filled. I continue to look for a swifter repair. -- sarang♥사랑 23:02, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Now everything should be repaired, I am further checking it. The repair was delayed so long because I had to find out that VFC can be startet also from a gallery; as soon as I knew that the reparation was done in a few minutes -- sarang♥사랑 04:23, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your work! Tryvix1509 (talk) 04:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Some still have slipped through. Example. The ones I could find all appear to have two consecutive faulty edits. --23PowerZ (talk) 16:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/212.112.118.101 —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Blocked by Yann. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 16:58, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi, could an admin please send the following MassMessage?

Target list: Commons:Picture of the Year/2022/Message/Targets

Subject: Round 1 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Text:

{{subst:Commons:Picture of the Year/2022/Message}}

<small>Delivered by ~~~~</small>

Thank you :) Legoktm (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 09:14, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Can someone block user for random edits? Thanks -- Deadstar (msg) 11:46, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Yann! -- Deadstar (msg) 11:49, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Please rename file File:Wiki-sixtynine-male.jpg (NSFW) to any other (I hope more descriptive) name. I create a topic here because the request was loosely explained and declined (sorry to Richardkiwi).

This file is blacklisted by ru:Roskomnadzor by thumbnail link (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Wiki-sixtynine-male.jpg/200px-Wikisixtynine-male.jpg) only, so a file name change should make this thumbnail link unavailable. Just to be clear, it is just a silly technical trick, and I don't ask to delete anything at all, even a file page redirect. But it should be enough to remove the file from the blacklist after an automated check.

All blacklisted Wikimedia URLs are public, and available at ru:ВП:ЕР (for files look here and there) and were also sent to WMF, Wikimedia RU, and OTRS emails. There are about 200 URLs by the link, but they are added there according to different laws. And this file is the only one which was added by the new "LGBT propaganda" law. From the Russian community side, the goal all these years was to follow Wikimedia rules only and at the same side not to help Roskomnadzor in their efforts. I know that this request is not according to COM:FNC reasons list, but at the same time, it is not against COM:FRNOT. I think this is a case when COM:IAR can be used instead of strict bureaucratic rules.

Also ping AntiCompositeNumber. — putnik 17:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

We have so much content or the hole page blocked by many autocratic governments and we should of course look for solutions to bypass such blockings. But we should not change our content or do something that also disrupts the site itself. In this case I would propose to create a duplicate of the file with an other name instead of rename the original file. GPSLeo (talk) 17:36, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Unfortunately, in this case, creating a Commons duplicate or local duplicate cannot help in any way. This is specifically about the URL to the thumbnail of the Commons file with the exact name. — putnik 17:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If you replace the file in the Russian Wikipedia article with the duplicate you do not need the old thumbnail anymore as you have a new one. GPSLeo (talk) 18:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Sorry if I didn't explain well. The problem is not that the thumbnail is not available. Because Wikimedia projects run over HTTPS, there is no way to restrict access to just one URL. On the contrary, the problem is that due to the existence and accessibility of this URL (which can easily be changed from our side), Wikimedia projects in Russia are subject to one more law in addition to the existing ones, and can be blocked in accordance with it too. From other countries, it may seem insignificant, since it does not cancel all other claims to Wikimedia projects by Russian services. But in fact, this one case can be equivalent to a hundred others if they are under the same law. — putnik 19:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

So you propose that we should censor our page to not become censored by the Russian government? If they want to block the page they will do it. Do you really think that changing the url of a file will stop them to do so? GPSLeo (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

If it would require deleting or hiding or somehow damaging any Wikimedia content then I wouldn't even suggest it in the first place. And yes, such a situation definitely may occur sooner or later with a brand new URL in the blacklist (e.g. to some file page, not to thumbnail), in which case there simply will not be such a request from my side. But I am sure that this solution should totally fix the current situation without any loss on our part. — putnik 21:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

1. impractical. russian regime can just update their list after the rename here.
2. undue. why only this file? why not all russia-censored files should be renamed? why not all files censored by any govt in the world? (keep changing the whole domain to bypass gfw china. how about that? :D )

RZuo (talk) 21:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

1. "Russian regime" has as much sense as e.g. "collective West". There are different state agencies and a lot of bureaucracy. There can be another request from one agency to another or even a court's decision. As you understand, it is not "just", it requires some work to be done.
2. There are two reasons that I've already described in this topic: a) It is the only file blacklisted by the new law; b) It is the only file that can be renamed without any harm to Wikimedia projects and even with keeping a redirect page, in most cases it is impossible. — putnik 22:55, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

And some offtopic: for you changing the whole domain could sound like a joke, but in Russia, it is one of the ways how some independent media keep surviving for years. So if someone is ready to spend their effort for this option, I will be on their side. — putnik 23:03, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

In the WikiCommons photos on the subject of ChatGPT, I noticed a photo that, in my opinion, simply represents pornography. The other photos in the "Geekorgraphy" category, in which the image is used - are ultimately nothing more than pornography. Just because computer characters are painted on women does not create content for a topic. how do you see it?~~~ Kasa Fue (talk) 09:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

It is certainly not pornography under the definition in U.S. law.

I think the direct inclusion of this under Category:ChatGPT violates the "law of least surprise", and I'll create an appropriate subcat Category:Nude or partially nude people and ChatGPT, because it is unlikely to be what most people want to see when they look at Category:ChatGPT. This is on the analogy with Category:Nude or partially nude people with toothbrushes. - Jmabel ! talk 19:35, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Agree with Kasa Fue. Category:Nude or partially nude people and ChatGPT should get deleted. Concerning all of these pics and similar ones in general: whether or not WMC should be a pornography hoster is a valid question. The pics in this category (and many others) clearly are pornography.

I haven't yet have formed a clear opinion about whether or not WMC should host pornography or which and which amounts (or how) so don't consider this a vote for deletion of the file/s (beyond the category), but I do care whether or not the policy clearly stating "Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose" is complied with if it remains as is. --Prototyperspective (talk) 20:27, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

@Kasa Fue and Prototyperspective: Please read COM:NOTCENSORED. We have had this discussion a quazillon times already. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen two discussions related to that. That doesn't mean you can ignore "Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose", violating policy.

I wasn't even calling for these/all of these to get deleted (you can call it censored) and stated so explicitly. Beyond the quoted policy, also read "However it must be asked if allowing any content whatsoever (within the bounds of the law) is really serving the Wikimedia projects' aims." Prototyperspective (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

The right place for discussing whether the files in that category are useful is a deletion request, not the administrators' noticeboard. Apparently there have been several of those (see the category talk page) and consensus is to keep them; Commons isn't served by one more discussion on the same files. For the larger question, whether Commons should host porn, the Village Pump is the right venue. I just want to remind that nudity and sexuality isn't equal to porn, and that porn is a significant phenomenon – Commons not wanting to document it would be quite odd. –LPfi (talk) 23:58, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Agree with porn is a significant phenomenon – Commons not wanting to document it would be quite odd and with what King of ♥ wrote below. However, again, I wasn't calling for deletion or at least full deletion. Also differentiate "documenting it" and having a) hundreds of b) instances of it. Nevertheless, noting that sth is porn is not sufficient for e.g. deletion.

-

Maybe it's useful to see which media of people dying WMC keeps, are a) all of them kept b) in the same way as all other media or for example(!) only where videos document wars (which has educational value) and otherwise only in a small number (in isolated categories) and kept on a case-by-case basis? (and note that gore on the Internet is a significant phenomenon too.)

Note that such issues will come up sooner or later in a more pressing way as copyright afaik expires ~70 years after death.

I'd like to mention that per en:WP:DEM policy (reasons) in principle has priority over headcounts. In any case, the prior deletion discussions did not really consider "However it must be asked if allowing any content whatsoever (within the bounds of the law) is really serving the Wikimedia projects' aims" and "Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose". Lastly, I agree that this noticeboard isn't really the right place to discuss and decide on the right approach. Prototyperspective (talk) 08:12, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

We should not discuss the amount of photos on a specific topic. Because then there would be the question why we have more photos of the Eifel tower than of penises despite there are more penises on the world then Eifel towers. The only reason to treat such photos different are the personality rights of the people depicted. GPSLeo (talk) 08:21, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with the above that per w:WP:ASTONISH, pages where a reasonable person would not expect to contain NSFW images should not contain them. This is not about censorship, but about public acceptability; we don't want people to have reservations about browsing pages located at normal-looking titles when there are other people around. It's fine for us to host NSFW images and to have categories dedicated to them, as well as have a text link to those NSFW categories from non-NSFW categories, but where I draw the line is when NSFW images show up without warning. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:25, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Please delete the current version of File:StadeFHB.jpg. Someone has overwritten the photo, and the current one is most likely violating copyrights. Omri • Talk 08:31, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done GPSLeo (talk) 08:51, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Omri • Talk 09:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

I've added {{PD-old-warning-text}} to {{PD-AR-Music/layout}}. Please add used-with-US as a pass-through parameter in {{Autotranslate}} so the warning text can be removed when appropriate! —CalendulaAsteraceae (talk • contribs) 02:49, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello, if you have access to the Commons VRT queue, please help with this and this IPBE requests. Many thanks! Bencemac (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

@Bencemac I did the first, but don't have access to the 2nd: which queue is it in? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:14, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! The ticket was indeed moved because I do not have access to it any more (maybe it was moved to the stewards queue?). Bencemac (talk) 06:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Can any one look at this upload and nominate it for deletion? It is not owned by the uploaded - it is a company logo! Thank you. 109.148.248.180 20:35, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Probably {{PD-textlogo}}. Yann (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

 Not done. I agree, this is textlogo. Taivo (talk) 06:50, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Flag_of_Cascadia.svg has been active since February for a copyvio image hosted since 2007. Possibly the reason for it slipping through the cracks is the deletion notice was removed from the image after 3 weeks by a frequent vandal. 97.115.100.156 10:04, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I closed the request. Taivo (talk) 11:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Could an admin please deal with the issue here--Trade (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

This user’s uploads have captions that are Twitter handles (Google the @). I removed one of the captions but the User put them back. I wouldn’t say anything but the videos get a hundred views per day. (Happened to see them looking at recent Japanese uploads.) Raquel Baranow (talk) 01:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

If you look at the view history, they were getting thousands of views before I removed the Twitter handle on several of his videos.Raquel Baranow (talk) 01:47, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

[Dif] where I deleted the Twitter handle and views per day dropped off by thousand. Raquel Baranow (talk) 02:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

I'm more concerned about his name i.e the 16 at the end, 2 vids look young...admins might need to take note of that..apart from that, this might fall under speedy deletion even though its a few months old.. Stemoc 04:29, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Deleted, as per COM:NUDE. User warned. Yann (talk) 07:19, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

.*\bCruiz.?r\b.* @Category:HMS Cruizer (ship, 1828) Broichmore (talk) 13:22, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

• @Broichmore: Created with Category:Ships by name, Category:Ships built in 1828. You didn't indicate what other parent cats you might want. - Jmabel ! talk 15:17, 25 April 2023 (UTC)

Please close Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LriaS MAOVK wouexj, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Skycrapers an lights in Hong Kong (9443615281).jpg (section), Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK Central Admiralty Lung Wui Road view TST night Masterpiece lighting.JPG and Commons:Deletion requests/File:HK MK 旺角 Mong Kok Langham Place Office Tower view Cordis Hotel May 2022 Px3 06.jpg, AXXXXK sock disruptive editing, thanks.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

• Ping Yann, Achim55 and Elcobbola.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 10:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 11:17, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: why were Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by LriaS MAOVK wouexj and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Skycrapers an lights in Hong Kong (9443615281).jpg (section) deleted, rather than merely closed as "kept"? - Jmabel ! talk 15:54, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

+1 - Hilariously enough the same board declined my vandal DR request in the past so what's changed ?, Irrespective of the filer DRs are never deleted so why were these?. Support DR undeletion. –Davey2010^Talk 16:46, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010: I think you are confused: the original files here were all kept; it's the deletion discussion itself that was deleted. - Jmabel ! talk 17:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel I think you may be the one confused as I was indeed aware of that. I do however agree my wording " vandal dr deletion request" was a tad confusing but it still should've been obvious as to what I meant?.... –Davey2010^Talk 19:00, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

These DRs were created by a vandal, who is blocked indef., that's why they were speedily kept. In addition, 2 of them were not properly filled up, so I don't see the point of keeping them. Yann (talk) 18:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Yann Imho they should be undeleted and fixed, We don't delete DRs irrespective of whether they were filed correctly or not. –Davey2010^Talk 19:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Yes, we do, when these DRs are vandalism. Now if anyone wants to undelete and fix them, I don't mind, but I don't see the point. It would only give credit to this vandal. Yann (talk) 19:08, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

No we don't @Yann so again please undelete these 2 DRs and I will fix them myself. You're more than welcome to head to COM:VPP and submit a proposal on this. –Davey2010^Talk 19:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010: I'll undelete them so you can fix them, since Yann has said he doesn't object. - Jmabel ! talk 21:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done - I've fixed both and added them to the archive page too, Many thanks @Jmabel for undeleting these, Many thanks, Kind Regards, –Davey2010^Talk 11:42, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Another instance of a user opening a large amount of garbage deletion requests: Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User_problems#Please block Kbsdg. Should we really keep them around or would deletion be fine? I'm tempted to say that deleting would be OK. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 14:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi all. There are 3 requests for Upload Wizard campaign editor rights at COM:RFR - this is not something I have encountered before. Could someone take a look? 07:27, 26 April 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gbawden (talk • contribs)

Hello,

As you may know, the various teams at the WMF are currently in the midst of annual planning. Within the Product and Technology department specifically, there are a series of proposed Objectives and Key Results, one of which specifically talks about “moderator workflows” [WE1.3]. Representatives of teams who are working on that topic would like to hear directly from people who take responsibility for certain workflows on Commons which could be classified as “moderation”: including but not limited to processing deletions, mass categorisation, bot approvals… This is to understand better your perspectives on necessary improvements for those kinds of moderation workflow.

This call will take place on: 3rd May @15:30 UTC. For more information and to confirm participation, please visit the sign-up page

Your input during the call would be highly appreciated. But this is not the only way you can provide feedback. There are other ways to discuss and comment upon the WMF annual plan, described here, as well as on the relevant section of the OKRs document talkpage linked above.

Best regards, Udehb-WMF (talk) 09:12, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Would an admin mind taking a look at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the Torres Strait Islanders.svg and see if you can figure out what Special:Contributions/112.206.107.90 might have been trying to do. I'm assuming the IP just misunderstood how DRs work since they posted the DR has been withdrawn, but they aren't the user who started the DR. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

Looks like this has been dealt with. - Jmabel ! talk 14:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: The IP is back trying to close the discussion and claiming that nomination has been withdrawn. I asked Jo-Jo Eumerus, the user who started the DR, on their user talk if they were the IP and if they were withdrawing their nomination, and they stated "no" on both counts. The IP also appears to be impersonating another user by adding their signature to the close. Is there anything that can be done here? On English Wikipedia, there are user warning templates that cover this type of thing, but I don't know about Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:25, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

I blocked this IP for 3 days. Yann (talk) 08:58, 27 April 2023 (UTC)

Due to bad code in Template:Motd/2023-04-29 (en) - an administrator needs to replace the recursive call to {{Main Page Template}} with a proper caption for the file. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:20, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

• I believe I've fixed this. - Jmabel ! talk 05:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Hi

Licence is archived so could you close the request and check the file? Panam2014 (talk) 09:45, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 14:12, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Could somebody please respond to these block-related tickets?

• ticket:2023041810007301: IPBE request
• ticket:2023042810013124: auto-blocked IP

Thanks in advance! Bencemac (talk) 11:35, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

This file contains my email address without my permission. This violates Commons' policy. Please delete this asap. Thank you! Nguyentrongphu (talk) 12:44, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 14:12, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

FYI. -- CptViraj (talk) 09:22, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

Please remove the copyrighted overwritten version of this file. COM:OW doesn't sadly describe where to report this. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:51, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done by Jmabel. Tryvix1509 (talk) 00:53, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi Admins,

I'm looking after the Wiki Loves Earth contest in Sweden, and would like to send a mass message to previous entrants encouraging them to enter again. I've followed the recommendations here and here, and have updated the necessary information at Commons:Wiki Loves Earth in Sweden/Mass message. Could an admin please send the message for me via Special:MassMessage? Thanks in advance. /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 10:10, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 12:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @CptViraj! /Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 07:33, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Former staff. Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 14:01, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Yann (talk) 15:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

Dear admin, Please change to this picture name from File: A Parmigiano Reggiano at Clipper Lounge.jpg to Gran Moravia Parmigiano Reggiano at Clipper Lounge.jpg be okay ! I want to need you to help me to change this picture be fine ! thanks ! Peachyeung316 18:49, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Can someone please investigate this user, who is making numerous spurious deletion requests without supplying a reason for any of those requests. Mindmatrix 01:53, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

The user was blocked and the deletion requests are being closed. Probably a sockpuppet of Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#User:Kbsdg. Is there an IP block that could be put in place? Cryptic-waveform (talk) 02:25, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Autoblock is enabled. Tryvix1509 (talk) 10:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Reminder that tomorrow there’s going to be a call for people who are particularly active on Commons, especially those who use advanced-permissions or specialized workflows to curate/moderate content… To discuss the specific section of the WMF annual plan focused on improving said workflows. You’d be welcome to attend and give your thoughts! 15:30 UTC. For more information and to confirm participation, please visit the sign-up page.

Udehb-WMF (talk) 11:16, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Can I join that? Tryvix1509 (talk) 12:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

yes @Tryvix1509 you definitely can. you can visit the sign-up page to confirm your participation Udehb-WMF (talk) 18:05, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Can an admin quickly delete File:Synthesis of poly(allyl diglycol carbonate).svg? Thanks, — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 11:40, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done GPSLeo (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! — Chem Sim 2001 (talk) 13:21, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm want you permission autropol. איתן טרנופולסקי (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

@איתן טרנופולסקי (1) that is done at COM:RFR, not here, and (2) that's normally only done for accounts with 500+ edits on Commons. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 00:36, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

I created a proposal to define how and how long pages should become protected if they got vandalized: Commons talk:Protection policy#Define times for vandalism semi protection GPSLeo (talk) 15:26, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Honda_Cb_750_Hornet.png&action=edit&redlink=1
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Vmw_xr900.png&action=edit&redlink=1
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Kawasaki_zx4rr.png&action=edit&redlink=1
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Suzuki_gsx250_twin_liquid.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Bmw_xr900.png&action=edit&redlink=1
• https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Peugeot_pulsion_125.png&action=edit&redlink=1 for example see source 0:11 from 0:59 screenshot

All this file, who was error speedy delete without reason, were a screenshot of YouTube creative commons license and it was written in the page of all the files. If control it is truth. Please restore this file. It was this user https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:93.148.93.45 https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/2.38.140.112 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/193.205.162.70 who false requested the deletions and he is a account name is "Corvettec6r" sockpuppeting's vandal who acts as an ip to mask and hide his changes, example https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Suzuki_GSX250R.png&oldid=754834924 as in this case it does this on purpose to damage the project and cause valid images to be deleted. 37.159.126.35 13:03, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

• Sounds like you should bring this to Commons:Undeletion requests. If there is a sockpuppeting issue, that probably should go to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. And, to be honest, accusations of sockpuppeting from someone who either doesn't have an account or chooses to edit anonymously when making accusations seem to me a bit like "the pot calling the kettle black." - Jmabel ! talk 14:55, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Jmabel These cases are immediate cancellations without discussion or consent made incorrectly without even seeing the licenses and lawful origin of the files. If are an admin you can see the log and verify and have access to the deleted files, you can realize that they weren't really deleted either quickly or through an application. Example is this file https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Peugeot_pulsion_125.png&action=edit&redlink=1 it was not to be eliminated under any circumstances; an example is this where there is even the source of the screenshot of the video on YouTube (sic!) if you see the video 0:11 from 0:59. For sockpuppet, do all the necessary checks, I performed a duck test but these are secondary considerations. It is lapidary and evident that these screenshots should not have been deleted and whoever has it perhaps out of good faith trusting the applicant, has however made a big mistake. Therefore I kindly ask for its restoration with immediate effect, then eventually it will be evaluated and will proceed with a consensual nominations. 37.159.125.76 06:47, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

• As I said, "Sounds like you should bring this to Commons:Undeletion requests. If there is a sockpuppeting issue, that probably should go to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems. And, to be honest, accusations of sockpuppeting from someone who either doesn't have an account or chooses to edit anonymously when making accusations seem to me a bit like 'the pot calling the kettle black.'" I stand by that. - Jmabel ! talk 17:50, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

The global POTY central notice went live, but the target (Commons:Picture_of_the_Year/2022) appears to not be activated - would whomever is managing this take a look please? — xaosflux ^Talk 00:24, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Cross post left at meta:CentralNotice/Request/Picture_of_the_Year_2022#Central_Notice_admin_comments. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:33, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Works fine for me. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 00:42, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4 it just began working for me on the last load, perhaps some bad script caching was at play. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:44, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

@Xaosflux: sorry, I *just* opened voting. Thanks for the ping, I screwed up the UTC conversion in my calendar reminder. Legoktm (talk) 00:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! — xaosflux ^Talk 00:45, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, could an admin please send the following MassMessage for POTY R2?

Target list: Commons:Picture of the Year/2022/MessageR2/Targets

Subject: Round 2 of Picture of the Year 2022 voting is open!

Text:

{{subst:Commons:Picture of the Year/2022/MessageR2}}

<small>Delivered by ~~~~</small>

Thank you! Legoktm (talk) 07:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

 Sent. -- CptViraj (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

• Useiz (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser)

The above account seems like a clear sockpuppet of Quincywhite2009 (talk • contribs • Luxo's • SUL • deleted contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser): jumping straight into Teletoon-related images, as well as esoteric internal Wikipedia-related images like File:Oversight logo.png. Courtesy ping Elcobbola who blocked the recent sock Special:Contribs/DesChafe1909. Mz7 (talk) 10:29, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Quite a duck. Yann (talk) 11:19, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

For the past couple of days I have been unable to upload a new version of any Commons file over about 2mb in size.

Everything looks OK when I click on "Upload a new version of this file", and files under about 2mb do upload (although it takes longer than usual for files approaching 2 mb). But with a 4mb file I'm getting an error message like this:

Error: Our servers are currently under maintenance or experiencing a technical problem. Please try again in a few minutes.

See the error message at the bottom of this page for more information.

Request from 69.158.175.xxx via cp1077 cp1077, Varnish XID 769267872

Error: 503, Backend fetch failed at Tue, 09 May 2023 02:24:21 GMT

I've edited for many years, but don't think I've ever seen anything like this before. Can anyone please advise me concerning what's going on and what to do about it? Thanks --WikiPedant (talk) 03:21, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

• I've seen this happen occasionally, but not repeatedly, and not generally on relatively small files. - Jmabel ! talk 06:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
• @WikiPedant and Jmabel: In which file do you have this problem when using the "Upload new version" function? Tryvix1509 (talk) 15:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Tryvix1509: This is the file for which a new 4mb version failed to upload: File:President Clinton and SDLP leader John Hume 02.jpg. To see if the problem persisted, I tested a second 4mb upload: File:Westbrook Mall in Calgary (49684947587).jpg. It failed too. I believe that in the very early days of Commons there was a 2mb limit on uploads. Is there any chance that somebody has -- accidentally or otherwise -- reinstated it? (But, if so, why aren't lots of people complaining?) -- WikiPedant (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  happens to me constantly but i'm on 3G internet, did complain about it to the -techs on IRC a few times, they never found a solution, figured its due to low speed it tries to upload at cause if it tries to upload at less than 50kbps, it won't go thru before the time limit..see if you can force your router to the highest upload rate, assuming its HSDPA or better? i usually get it for images over 8Mb, never 2mb.. Stemoc 17:25, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Stemoc: Thanks but I have fiber-optic service and have had no problems with my internet speed. Pages load very fast. The only roadblock seems to be right here on Commons with uploading new versions of images. -- WikiPedant (talk) 00:51, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Tryvix1509: hasn't happened recently for me, so nothing to add. - Jmabel ! talk 17:08, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I hope that I am in the right place with my request.

I recently uploaded a very simple logo of the "Bibliothek des Konservatismus" ("Library of Conservatism" - a conservative specialist library from Berlin). The logo consists of very simple text and very simple graphic elements (2 elongated rectangles and 2 trapezoids). In my view, it can be viewed under PD-textlogo.

Following this, an IP user wrote to me on my discussion page (in German) and introduced himself as the head of the library, demanding the deletion of the logo. I have submitted a deletion request here, which has not yet been processed. I was then asked again to delete the logo by 15th May, otherwise I would have to take further action.

Two questions on my part:

1. Have I overlooked something that I should have considered beforehand? In my opinion, the logo is kept simple and therefore uploading it would not be a problem. I would like to avoid such problems in the future, in case I have done something wrong.

2. How should this request from the library director be handled? Can/Should the file be deleted according to the request? If so, please take care of it quickly.

Greetings, Welkend (talk) 10:01, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I also think this is blow TOO. If they want to make an official removal request they have to make a DMCA takedown request foundation:Legal:DMCA takedowns. GPSLeo (talk) 10:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Right, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bibliothek des Konservatismus Logo.svg.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 10:55, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Agreed. I have closed the DR to state as such - they can request a DMCA take down or a courtesy deletion Gbawden (talk) 10:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Deceased user :( AlPaD (talk) 18:03, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Sad to hear they passed away.

Regarding their user rights, my understanding of practice is to not remove the user rights except for ones with inactivity policies (e.g. adminship); there is no risk of abuse because they are globally locked (examples of other deceased users having user rights: 1, 2). I won't object to anyone else doing this, though. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757: Hello, I meant the filemover flag and not autopatrol, because autopatrol doesn't do much here (except some filter bypass) and it's better to not to be removed to honor the user who left us (I understood it in the meta after a previous request), as for filemover I'm not not sure if it should remove. Thanks! AlPaD (talk) 18:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Ultimately I think all the flags can stay, but I think it's best not to leave this section pending for too long to respect the deceased user. I'm sorry if this request was offensive or invasive. AlPaD (talk) 19:27, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 06:58, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Could someone please review the license of File:M83 - Midnight City.webm before it is displayed on the main page tonight? I can't find any mention of CC on the linked source page. --TadejM ^(t/p) 22:09, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

I have now tagged the video as a copyvio [1] and reverted the MOTD template to an older revision.[2] --TadejM ^(t/p) 22:35, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Which was also a copyvio... --TadejM ^(t/p) 22:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Please revdel the revisions of these files that publicly-identify the user: File:Iflaq at WCI 2023 (1).jpg, File:Iflaq at WCI 2023 (2).jpg and File:Iflaq at WCI 2023 (3).jpg. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 05:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

and also delete the redirects left behind. The Rename Tool didn't allow suppressing redirects. ─ The Aafī on Mobile ^(talk) 05:35, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@TheAafi  Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

The Commission has approved this explanatory statement of its decision in Case 2022/199.

Policy prohibits checkusers from publicly confirming a user's IP address. Concerns were referred to the Commission about two occasions on which Fitindia publicly confirmed an IP address. While investigating, additional concerns emerged about the general accuracy of Fitindia's checks.

Fitindia's access to non-public personal data was removed globally for 1 year. Fitindia's Commons checkuser permission was removed. Access can be regained at any time by the usual procedure, following the expiry of the data access removal period. This decision was approved by 7 votes to 1.

Connecting users to their IP address may have severe consequences. Financial, social or personal risks may be taken when publishing information to a Wikimedia website, or even when engaging in misuse of the website.

Whilst the Privacy, Access to nonpublic personal data and Global CheckUser Policies permit confirmation of the connection between a user and IP addresses, this should only be done in the exceptional circumstances provided under the policies. The required practice was summarised in our November 2022 statement to checkusers: IP addresses are to be blocked without specifying the sock-master.

Checkusers must at all times meet a high standard of accuracy. Even occasional errors will require intervention by the Commission, if these suggest a checkuser lacks the necessary skill in using the interface. In straightforward cases of concern about accuracy, the Commission is likely to employ measures short of removal of permissions, such as suspension of access pending further training.

The Commission consulted Fitindia during its investigation and took into account Fitindia's apology. Fitindia was, at the time of the infractions, an inexperienced checkuser. Checkusers can receive training from peers, but training is not mandatory. Checkusers in practice are afforded a high degree of independence. These factors can combine to mean that inaccurate practice goes uncorrected or unjustified confirmation of a user's IP address goes unnoticed.

The Commission recommends a review of the onboarding protocol for checkusers.

The Commission notes Fitindia's full cooperation with our investigation and long record of service. The decision to remove non-public data access should be seen as a temporary measure, intended (inter alia) to ensure that Fitindia refamiliarises themselves with the privacy policies. The decision to revoke checkuser access should be seen as requiring Fitindia to resubmit themselves to community scrutiny. Neither decision is intended to be punitive, nor to indicate that Fitindia will never again be suitable to volunteer for this or other roles. It can be appropriate in a community of volunteers to show compassion for mistakes.

Faendalimas (talk) 23:14, 8 May 2023 (UTC) Chair Ombuds Commission

• @Faendalimas: If revealing one’s I.P. address is such a grave crime, how should then be sanctioned those responsible for the constantly broken Global Login, which so often causes users with several open tabs to inadvertently publish edits showing their I.P. because they were unexpectedly logged off between the last preview and the final submit? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 00:14, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  Two things:

  1. You can always see if you're logged in, so while I can understand the situation, it's certainly not the developers' fault if you leak your IP while logged out yourself.

  2. If it does happen now, accidentally editing logged out is a valid oversight reason after which your IP is no longer public.

  --Zabe (talk) 00:33, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Zabe: could you clarify what you mean by "valid oversight reason"? Means nothing to me; not even clear which sense of "oversight" here. - Jmabel ! talk 01:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  Overisght as in suppression per m:OS#Policy #1 — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think the sense of "oversight" is that of COM:OVERSIGHT (i.e. Removal of non-public personal information in line with the global oversight policy). — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 01:54, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  Yes this issue arises occasionaly. Remember that if you disclose your own IP address with your own Username thats not a privacy issue, its inadvisable I would recommend against it but your risk. What you cannot do is disclose someone elses information. In a recent case I had to deal with this, on my home wiki not as an Ombud. We had a question arise about the vaildity of some IP edits, Another user (not an admin or CU) used what we would call a duck test to demonstrate the IP on our wiki was the same as a logged in user on another, this was all on our Village page. I had the entire discussion Oversighted so its hidden and left it at that. This situation happens I know people sometimes do not realise they have been logged out when crossing wikis, its a simple fix with Oversight of the IP address. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 05:44, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  I am more wounding how we can improve our onboarding protocol for checkusers, like we need to give a quiz for checkuser candidates? SCP-2000 07:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  No, we just need to ensure when admins run for CU, people don't blindly support them because they are an admin, 95% of admins are not cut out to be CU's, you should not trust a user to be a good CU just cause they have the mop, you need to trust a user to have CU rights if they have experience in dealing with actual vandalism and finding socks, and have been active on this project for a long time (8+years is preferred)..he only became a CU on this project because he was an "active" admin and on that basis alone, personally I prefer admins here with cross-wiki experience as CU, we don't have that many here so I will definitely be opposing a lot of candidates in the next few months if and when they run,like i said in a previous CU request, lets not lower the bar for this right, lets try to raise it up a bit more.... Stemoc 04:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

  Agree with this. Since my time on Ombuds I have had to spend time reading through the CU applications across multiple wikis, usually after the fact. What I see is that although they can be tough elections like any RfA they are not being asked the right questions. In fact the election is not much different to an Admin election. Focussed on past edit history, though may include some of their admin work. A CU application should be more like a Steward election in that they are asked questions relevant to this role. Not the same questions but focus them on what they are applying for. Personally I want to know if the candidate understands the CheckUser Policy, Privacy Policy, both are public policies anyone can read them so if your applying for CheckUser I think they could be read by the candidate. Do they understand the meaning of Privacy in this environment. There are more technical sides of it I do not expect a new CU to know but what is available on Meta should have been read through. But someone has to ask these questions of the candidates. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 07:37, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

• Could the OC provide a training module draft on privacy matters, for new CUs? This would faciliate and help to standardize the "onboarding process". (Which is not really a process yet, I have to admit.) --MBq (talk) 10:46, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

  Its not as simple as that unfortunately. Note the OC is not a Community Elected Commission, we are appointed by WMF as such should not be doing things that should be led by the community. In this case it would be a combination perhaps of the CheckUsers and Stewards who should take the lead on this. We are happy to help but need to be asked by the community to do so. Cheers Faendalimas (talk) 07:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Question If a RFCU contains the proxy/VPN, normally, how will checkusers handle it? – Tryvix1509 (talk) 15:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

wrong account Elenakunzetova (talk) 17:37, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Elenakunzetova accounts cannot be deleted. Why do you want to delete this account? Do you have other accounts? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Maybe you want to change your username? Commons cannot do that. Please ask that in meta: meta:Steward requests/Username changes.

Возможно, нужно изменить имя учётной записи? Викисклад не может это делать, это нужно спросить в Мета: meta:Steward requests/Username changes. Taivo (talk) 11:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Can this module be protected Module:Map I have spent the greater part of two days wondering why map images are not warpable by wikimaps warper. Shyamal L. 16:28, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Shyamal  Done template-protected indef due to high transclusion count. I note that no level of protection would have prevented the issue you mentioned, though, because TadejM is an admin. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:07, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Also for next time, protection requests are better suited to COM:AN/BP. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

At the time, the tool reported a 502 error, so the best thing I could do at that moment was to outcomment the code and let others fix the issue. I checked whether the rest of the module code worked before saving and it did work. I'm glad that the tool is now available again and the code has been reinstated. --TadejM ^(t/p) 17:12, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

The captions and summary of this file (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%82%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D1%8E%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE_%D0%93%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%B8_%D0%91%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B8.png) is provocative and hateful. Iktsokh (talk) 18:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:41, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

This change from United Kingdom to Great Britain. Thanks Broichmore (talk) 11:16, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Why? Category:Painters from the United Kingdom does exist, Category:Painters from United Kingdom does not. --Túrelio (talk) 12:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Yes it does. Read again what you just asked me? The UK is the majority and longest established of the umbrella cats. In many areas Great Britain denotes the time period 1707 to 1800. England before 1707, and UK after 1800. This is just going to cause confusion. The general convention is as here. This guy should have gone for discussion in the first place. Broichmore (talk) 14:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

No idea what you are talking about. The diff, which you linked above, only shows a change from "Category:Painters from United Kingdom" to "Category:Painters from the United Kingdom". --Túrelio (talk) 14:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Broichmore: Túrelio appears to be correct, and I think you were wrong to revert this. - Jmabel ! talk 15:13, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

United Kingdom is the preferred form. That's in the history of this cats changes. I changed it back from Great Britain. I agree its now correct, as United Kingdom. When I changed it, it appeared to reject the change. That's why I came here. Apologies for wasting your time. Broichmore (talk) 15:29, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

You've warned me about uploading a photo that I own saying that it's copyright infringement or something. It is not. I would like to upload it please.

File:Chad Price on red carpet at 2023 JUNO Awards in Edmonton.jpg

Inthisdream (talk) 20:02, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, metadata of this image suggest it to be an agency-shot and expressedly say "Photo: CARAS\iPhoto BC_RC_141". Own work? --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Inthisdream: are you saying that you are the photographer? And, if not, then on what basis do you own the rights? - Jmabel ! talk 22:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Inthisdream claims to be Chad Price's manager.[3] He claims the photographer "gifted" the image to Chad Price. Others point to the photographer being Dale MacMillan with a link to Getty Images with what looks to be an NC license. The nature of the gift is not clear; it could be a license for Chad Price (but not others) to use the image. There is also the apparent inconsistency of the gift being given to Chad Price but Inthisdream only claiming to be the manager in one place but the "owner" here. Glrx (talk) 00:24, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Plus the claim of "own work", which contradicts being gifted by the photographer.

I'd say at this point the only way to sort this out is correspondence with VRT (and accurate acknowledgement of the photographer). If copyright has been assigned to Inthisdream, then Inthisdream can pass VRT a copy of the relevant contract. If not, we'd need the license to come from correspondence by the photographer with VRT. - Jmabel ! talk 02:36, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, kindly remove patroller rights from Uncitoyen (talk · contribs). Thanks C1K98V ^{(💬 ✒️ 📂)} 04:35, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. -- CptViraj (talk) 06:52, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Could an admin revdel the all the oldest images (leaving only the recent one) at File:Davey2010 - For archive purposes only - Flickr comment 10 May 2023.png please?
Unfortunately Wayback and Archive.is wont archive the Flickr comments and there doesn't seem to be ANY way of preserving this information so for the time being I've created this image until I can figure out a better way, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:01, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010  Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Brilliant many thanks Mdaniel much appreciated, Thanks, –Davey2010^Talk 18:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Davey2010 I got web.archive.org to take a screenshot, see [4]. Per Andy, I'm now deleting the file. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 18:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Mdaniels5757, Many thanks for this - I had no idea screenshots like this could even be done, I've gone ahead and replaced the link as this is much better alternative, Many thanks again for your help MDaniel, –Davey2010^Talk 18:57, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Text by two different authors cannot be "own work". The legend "NOT TO BE RE-USED UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE" is contrary to the stated licence. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:36, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Davey2010 has removed the copyvio tagged I placed on this image, with the edit summary No. Either you can find a tool that can archive these comments or this can stay". AFAIK, we are not a web archive, and his is not an adequate justification for copyright violation. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing What a sad, pathetic and spiteful individual you are!. This was done purely for our viewers who are interested in the historical side of this,

Well it is a adequate justification and as far as I'm concerned it can stay, The image is tiny and written over to stop any reuse so whats the issue ? –Davey2010^Talk 18:54, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Can an admin also comment on this personal arrack? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:16, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

sigh @Davey2010: really?? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:52, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I see Elcobbola blocked Davey2010 for a week over this in light of apparently previous issues. I think this section is resolved now. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757: That was changed to indefinite eight minutes after your post.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 20:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I declined unblock request. Taivo (talk) 12:32, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

@Mdaniels5757, Taivo, and Elcobbola: Davey2010 still remains some rights. Should their rights be removed? – Tryvix1509 (talk) 01:41, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

No, I do not think so. Davey was not blocked for abusing the rights. If he will request unblock after some time and if he will be unblocked, then it's good, when he has the rights. Taivo (talk) 07:54, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

To be clear: Davey2010 was blocked indefinitely for calling another user a «sad, pathetic and spiteful individual», is that it? I deplore that kind of language, but can we pretty please have a similar sanction against a handful of users (including some admins) who have used in the past that kind of language? -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:43, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin I mean, provide recent diffs and I'll consider them. I note that Davey would have been blocked for a shorter term had he not doubled down and not had an extensive history of these issues; and would probably not have been blocked at all if this was a first offense. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

I created userid OneSkyWalker1 before I realized that I already have a userid on this site. OneSkyWalker (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

@OneSkyWalker Accounts cannot be deleted. As it looks like you've made no edits using OneSkyWalker1, you can just use this account as if OneSkyWalker1 never existed. Best, —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

If you have a minute to take a look at Template talk:Smartlink and are comfortable performing this template edit, I would be grateful. Thanks. Jonesey95 (talk) 16:06, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hey Admins. If you search for "13609905889", there are about 500 images that have this China (PRC) phone number in the image title and the image description. All of that needs to be removed en masse somehow, as it constitutes advertising. I've been chipping away at it piecemeal for maybe a year or so now, as here: File:218公路 218 Highway 大脚印探险救援！ Large footp - panoramio (1).jpg and in many other images. I will keep chipping away at it one at a time if no one does anything, but this is really a problem that I think someone with administrator power should just go in and "solve" with their admin powers. I consider all the images themselves as precious documentation of western China; all or most are valuable. Ping me if needed. --Geographyinitiative (talk) 00:56, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

• Shouldn't really need an admin (just filemover and some knowledge of tools), but I'll take it on. - Jmabel ! talk 02:40, 17 May 2023 (UTC)
• Man, massrename is pretty slow on this large a batch. But it should all work out. Marking this  Done, though I still have some followup to do when the batch job completes. - Jmabel ! talk 03:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel: COM:AN doesn't use SpBot. – Tryvix1509 (talk) 15:27, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Tryvix1509: yes, I'm aware of that. Does that mean we should never mark a section as resolved? - Jmabel ! talk 17:36, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

i am a friend of Hunter March’s. he asked me recently to help make some wanted edits to his wikipedia page since he didn’t know how. well, i didn’t either but i managed to figure some stuff out. one thing he really wanted updated was the photo on his page so i uploaded a new one with his approval. apparently it was deleted because of lack of copyright or something. i honestly don’t understand any of this so i just need someone to let me know how we can properly and permanently add an updated photo to his page please Rachael LP (talk) 07:07, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

The photo can be restored after VRT-permission from copyright holder is received and accepted. The copyright holder is photographer Jacob E. Tovar, not depicted person Hunter March or you. Alternatively, make a photo about Hunter March yourself and upload it. Taivo (talk) 08:12, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

N.B. This concerned File:Hunty at home.jpg.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ _{please ping or talk to me}🇺🇦 10:55, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

@Rachael LP: if you are editing at the request of the subject of an article, have you read the English-language Wikipedia's policy on conflicts of interest? You definitely should, because if you violate it, you are likely to be blocked there. - Jmabel ! talk 17:38, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Could someone look in at Commons:Deletion requests/Audio files of tango music published after 1922? On sheer numbers the "keep" and "delete" votes are equal. I'm one of the people who has weighed in, so it seems to me it would be poor form for me to determine what happens here. I personally believe this is a straight-out copyright issue, so it shouldn't matter if an equal number of people don't like the result. - Jmabel ! talk 23:17, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

It's already been closed. I agree with the closing admin. Bedivere (talk) 15:35, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I am developing a new tool for adding SDC (primarily depicts) statements at DepictAssist, and would like to request a tag be created for the application. Thanks! Dominic (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Request:

Tag name	Display text	Description
DepictAssist	DepictAssist	Toolforge tool assisting users in adding SDC statements

Dominic (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

@Dominic  Done —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Dominic (talk) 14:25, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

There is a lot of spam by IPs adding Weblinks, E-Mail-Addresses or phone numbers to pages. In most cases this is added as a caption. That is of course to be reverted but should we also hide the revision as we do not know what what is behind the link of whom the E-Mail-Address or phone number belongs to? GPSLeo (talk) 07:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

We should have a filter preventing IPs adding phone numbers and email addresses anywhere. Yann (talk) 11:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

Then the filter does not work for captions. GPSLeo (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

@Yann and GPSLeo: Maybe using regex? Tryvix1509 (talk) 15:29, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

Probably yes. I am not a filter expert, so... Yann (talk) 16:05, 17 May 2023 (UTC)

See also RFC822. Tryvix1509 (talk) 10:18, 21 May 2023 (UTC)

[14]. Thanks. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 03:02, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 06:59, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

In two related deletion debates, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Reception (5 May 2023) and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Buckingham Palace Realms Lunch (5 May 2023), started by User:A1Cafel, they claim to have conducted email correspondence with a professional photographer, who asserted that their images are not under open licence. In other correspondence, that photographer states that the rights were transferred to the UK government (who, we know, released them, via Flickr, under open licence).

The correspondence has been consolidated under Ticket:2023050910013168.

While it possible that the photographer sent multiple, contradictory emails, this seems unlikely and the matter needs to be investigated by an uninvolved administrator with VRS access. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:55, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

I have no idea why there is a conflict in two emails, but I definitely email Ian Jones under the VRT ticket Ticket:2023050710000407. Any VRT volunteers can check if you don't believe it, and it is a serious offense to claim me of lying/creating a fake email. I won't object the most recent email sent by Mr. Jones after further confirmation of the ownership. --A1Cafel (talk) 14:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Regardless, I think A1Cafel should step back. While they are again allowed to do ordinary DRs (I assume), e-mailing photographers and copyright owners is delicate business, and with the history, I would very much prefer them leaving that to somebody else. –LPfi (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

 Non-admin comment Just to link Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with Photo by Mark Tantrum where an email to the photographer may also be in progress. - FotoFree (talk) 18:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment A1Cafel should be banned to create any DR. The demonstration is clear about inability to understand policies and deletion criteria. Yann (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  I concur that many of A1Cafel have been problematic, leading to a considerable waste of time by the community, and agree with the motion to entirely ban them from DRs (they are already restricted on that, from what can be seen from his flag log). Darwin ^Ahoy! 12:12, 22 May 2023 (UTC)

• VRT agent comment I have viewed the emails (ticket:2023050910013168). I don't believe that User:A1Cafel is lying, there are multiple contradictory emails in this ticket. I have asked A1Cafel to confirm one confidential thing via email, and await their response. I would refrain from dogpiling on them at this time (at least for this :)). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:22, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

  OK, @A1Cafel replied to me. Again, they were not lying, and if I only had the email correspondence that they had at the time they requested deletion, I would have requested deletion too. Pinging people who may have lessened their opinion of A1Cafel based on this to encourage them to restore their opinion of A1Cafel to wherever it was before: @Yann, Stemoc, Pigsonthewing, and LPfi.

  That being said, A1Cafel's initial email to the photographer, while it was professional, was not well-phrased to avoid this type of miscommunication--in short, and again without revealing confidential information, it asked the wrong questions. I agree with how LPfi put it, emailing "photographers and copyright owners is delicate business", best suited for more careful hands at this time. I would therefore ask A1Cafel to leave emailing photographers/copyright owners/etc. to someone else.

  I hope this resolves the user-focused portion of this dispute. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 03:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

  I seldom email to photographer to ask for permission, unless it involved in my deletion requests. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

  thats the point, you do this a lot and you have been warned not to do it, you nominated them for deletion so you should NOT be the one sending the photographer any e-mail/correspondence for clarification, you should have thought of that before you MASS NOMINATE anything for deletion which is something you constantly do. It's kinda ironic the one admin on this project thats on your side a lot is the one here defending you. You have been topic banned for a similar situation of constant DR without following the guidelines, you should have been blocked for longer for violating that Topic ban by logging out and continuing to mass nominate images for DR which IMO carries a minimum of 3 months full block but alas the same partial admin "got" involved and you got off easy and now we are here. Can we get an impartial admin with VRT access to deal with this please? or else i fear it will happen again...and again.....he has already had 2 Topic Bans on this, there should not be a third...This project should not be treated like some game and if this user continues to message photographers, I feel it will not be for the good of this project cause a user who doesn't understand the guidelines or the copyright laws is going to do more damage messaging photographers and might even put the project itself in a far worse situation if the people he messages, gets the wrong impression from him..*cough* libel *cough* ... Stemoc 05:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Stemoc, adminstrator @DarwIn told me they were willing to deal with that, but I am unsure if they still want to. In my opinion, someone trustworthy should email Jones in order to make this question clear once and for all. RodRabelo7 (talk) 18:59, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Mdaniels5757. "Would" is the past tense of "will." You wrote above, "I would therefore ask A1Cafel to leave emailing photographers/copyright owners/etc. to someone else."

  1. Will you formally make this request to A1Cafel or is the above statement by you considered to have been your request to A1Cafel?

  2. Who is "someone else?"

  3. What was the response to your request?

  A1Cafel stated, "I seldom email to photographer to ask for permission, unless it involved in my deletion requests"

  Was this an appropriate response to your request by A1Cafel? (assuming that you have already made the above request of A1Cafel.)

  A1Cafel's response does not appear to acknowledge your request at all. -- Ooligan (talk) 09:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

  @LPfi. Pinging, because a comment about emailing photographers were mentioned and agreeable to the Admin and are related to my questions. -- Ooligan (talk) 09:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

  @Ooligan @A1Cafel

  1. Sure: I formally request that A1Cafel refrain from emailing photographers/copyright owners/etc.

  2. Literally anyone else.

  3. It was inadequate to resolve the concerns. I ask that A1Cafel respond to (ideally, agree to) my "formal" request in (1) above.

  Best, —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 14:30, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

  I concur with the request made by Mdaniels--A1Cafel (talk) 06:39, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I am the VRT agent who processed the ticket communication and finally accepted the permission, after initially having voted for deletion. With the assertion from the photographer that he has conveyed full rights of usage with no restriction to Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (who were the ones to published the images), and weighing all other circumstances, i found it justified to accept the images. I would be happy if we could close the case now without blaming anyone personally. Cheers, --Mussklprozz (talk) 07:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

not yet, he has sent another photographer an email even when told not to and because he lacks the understanding of the copyright laws of that said country where the photographer is from (NZ), one would assume he again said or implied the wrong thing, as he will do anything toe get stuff deleted...mind you, when he filed that DR, he didn't even bother to write the words himself, he just copy/pasted what Elcobbola wrote in a previous DR to justify his deletions, as you can see per the 2nd DR on that link, and now he did it third time just goes to show he has no idea what he is doing and is dangerous to this project.It can't just end here, someone needs to drop the hammer...Multiple violation in the span of 2 years cannot be swept under the rug anymore.. Stemoc 07:57, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

one would think that if a user wants to challenge copyright claims of some reputable organisations s/he would act cautiously instead of mass DR without consulting the community beforehand,

but this user is not the only elephant in china shops. see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Photos from Parlamentul Republicii Moldova Flickr stream for the outrageous behaviour of another user, who of course roams free of any fear of punishment. then you understand why these problematic mass DR keep appearing. RZuo (talk) 11:25, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Wikipe-tanCrazy.gif is the media of the day. However File:Wikipe-tanCrazy-my.gif is a technically superior version of the very same file. Can it please be replaced with the better version? C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

i'm curious how it's "technically superior"? it only replaced some characters? RZuo (talk) 20:28, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

much less gif artefacts. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 20:52, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

The old revision of File:Wikipe-tanCrazy.gif may be better. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:57, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Then there are two better versions to chose from. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 21:04, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

No objection, so reverted to the older version (as I don't feel like figuring out how to change the filename for MOTD). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:12, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Could you please add your opinion about this case. I simply demand our decisions to be consistent. Most of the similar images have been kept, but Jim and Rosenzweig opposed undeletion of this one. I also ask Rosenzweig to create new DRs, or better a general vote on VPC or a RFC if he believes that these images should be deleted, but AFAIK, nothing was done. Yann (talk) 17:05, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how we can claim "de minimis" in cases when the vehicle is covered with copyrighted works, such as on all of the planes at Category:Pokémon Jet. Although I don't agree, I understand the argument if it's just a single character on the nose or tail, but when the there is no part of the plane or train that is not covered, that's not DM. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

It is fine for me if a consensus is reached that these images should be deleted (actually I was surprised they were kept). But it should be global decision, affecting all the files. Yann (talk) 19:01, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

Category:1989 works in Ukraine. --Микола Василечко (talk) 04:40, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 07:18, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Would an admin or license reviewer mind taking a look at File:Cameron, Barbara (1996) - by Robert Giard - Copyright Estate of Robert Giard.jpg? It's currently has no license and has already been tagged for speedy deletion as such, but there's pretty much no license accepted by Commons which could be used to satisfy the permission statement added to the file's description. I've notified the uploader of this already, but I'm not sure what use should be done since the permission statement essentially amounts to a NC/ND type of license. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

• @Marchjuly: from Commons point of view, it should be deleted, but it should be acceptable for non-free use in en-wiki. I suggest setting up the non-free use at en:Barbara May Cameron, then deleting from Commons. - Jmabel ! talk 16:32, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
  • Thank you for looking at this Jmabel. I’ve been trying to explain as much to the uploader on their English Wikipedia user talk page but they’re arguing that a non-free version of the same photo already uploaded by someone else can’t be used because it’s been cropped without the permission of the copyright holder and was uploaded without the copyright holder’s consent. The uploader replaced the already being used non-free photo with the one they uploaded to Commons. When I restored the non-free photo, they kept removing it. They’re stating that if their version is unacceptable then all versions are unacceptable. — Marchjuly (talk) 18:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

This username is offensive, please block it.

• شهنام حروم زاده (talk · contribs)

Please revert all her edits and hide them Best regards. Shahnamk (talk) 14:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Achim55 (talk) 14:52, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Category:Saint Thecla churches in Ukraine --Микола Василечко (talk) 08:36, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --Túrelio (talk) 09:30, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Hi, VFC and Commons:MyGallery are broken, probably due to deprecated JS tools scripts. An interface admin is needed to fix these. See MediaWiki talk:Gadget-VisualFileChange.js#VFC not working for details. Thanks, Yann (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done for now, but this is actually just a temporary fix and the code needs to be rewritten. --Didym (talk) 20:24, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Didym or another interface admin: According to phab:T337651 the underlying issue is that jquery.tipsy has been removed (as announced in meta:Tech/News/2023/19 which has also been copied to Commons:Village pump/Technical, so it could have been known). There are more scripts affected and need to be fixed, too, especially some Commons gadgets, but also some (more or less?) heavily used user scripts (by Perhelion and Rillke): search for scripts using jquery.tipsy. (AntiCompositeNumber, CptViraj and Lucas Werkmeister, apparently you have affected user scripts, too).

In the Phab task linked above Izno has pointed to the next coming issue, announced in meta:Tech/News/2023/20 (and technical village pump of Commons): jquery.cookie will be removed, too, and should be replaced by mediawiki.cookie: search for scripts using "cookie", but I do not know which of these found scripts are actually using the jquery module.

— Speravir – 23:34, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter-in am 2023-05-17.png needs renaming to File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige Fahrdienstleiter:in am 2023-05-17.png. The colon is a german gender marker, the current dash in the file name makes no sense. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 16:08, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn: Hasn't this already been recently discussed? - Jmabel ! talk 18:49, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2023/05#File:Betriebszentrale_S-Bahn_Berlin,_Halenseestraße_am_Friedhof_Grunewald_mit_Stellenanzeige_Fahrdienstleiter:in_am_2023-05-17.png. - Jmabel ! talk 18:54, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

But not resolved. But the issue does not go away by itself. C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 19:31, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

Colons in file names might cause technical issues, even if we manage to rename a file to use one (I haven't tried, but the discussion linked to by Jmabel suggests that it might not be possible now). How about simply omitting the word and rename the file to File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige am 2023-05-17.png or even without the date in the file name, File:Betriebszentrale S-Bahn Berlin, Halenseestraße am Friedhof Grunewald mit Stellenanzeige.png which would be meaningful enough IMHO? Gestumblindi (talk) 19:58, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

It's pretty standard to replace characters causing issues in filenames with other characters. The text in the description of the picture in question has the correct typography. I'd suggest doing nothing. Cryptic-waveform (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2023 (UTC)

There are hundreds of files with a colon on the name. They obviously do not cause issues. (And as I have shown there is an issue: It is not possible to do a revsion upload to one of this files at the moment). C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 00:03, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

ping|C.Suthorn}} No, actually, they do cause issues. Quite a few tools break on them. I don't think we've allowed creating more such files for somewhere over 5 years, though I could be mistaken. If you could find one newer than that, I'd be interested to see it. - Jmabel ! talk 00:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

@C.Suthorn: re-ping. Tryvix1509 (talk) 02:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

The newest File with a colon in it is from 2015. As I have pointed out, if a new revision of a file is uploaded, it will be without the colon. There may have been any number of files uploaded after 2015, that simply vanished, when a new revision was uploaded. What "tools" break with a colon in the name? If that really was the case: There are hundreds of files with a colon in the name. If actually any relevant tool was affected, they would have been renamed.

The colon as a gender marker came into use in 2015 (de:Gender-Doppelpunkt#Geschichte) at the same time, when the last still existing file with a colon was uploaded to commons. Today it is used by UBSKM, BFIT-Bund, Graz, Mainz, Hamburg, Basel-Stadt, Bundestag, Bremen, Hamburg, Lübeck, the universities of Aalen, Heidelberg, Freiburg, München, Würzburg, Berlin, Hamburg, Kassel, Darmstadt, Rostock, Hagen, Aachen, Bochum, Köln, Kaiserslautern, Leipzig, Dresden, Flensburg, Erfurt, Weimar, Graz, St. Gallen, Zürich, the websites watson, zeit-campus, woz, t3n, annabelle, spiegel, futurezone, hinz&kunzt, brigitte, gala, eltern, hamburger morgenpost, hessenschau, krautreporter, tagesspiegel, frankfurter rundschau, linkedin, netzpolitik, abgeordentenwatch, ze.tt, the organisations SBB, TIP, Salesforce, Apple, Lufthansa, IDA, Plan International.

One can only assume how many files have not been uploaded to commons, because the uploader was alienated, by not being able to upload a file with the correct name and how many filenames have been butchered thereby alienating the uploader and making them leave the project. As far as i can see, there is no CfD, phab-ticket or consensus to phase out the colon from commons. It is said, that 90% of contributers are male (and CIS white) - this hidden naming convention may contribute to that issue.

(Disclosure: I prefer the Gendertrema and actually think the Genderdoppelpunkt is a bad decision) C.Suthorn (@Life_is@no-pony.farm) (talk) 04:38, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

File names are not a big thing. Basically, they have to be unique and fairly descriptive, and that's it. They're a technicality and I wouldn't get too obsessed with them. Most people actually don't care about file names and would even upload things like Image1223595.jpg if we let them (but we want something a bit more descriptive). There are the file description, categories, structured data for a more detailed and accurate description. I guess that it would be a good idea to rename the few hundred files still existing with a colon to file names without, for the reasons pointed out by Jmabel, they cause problems. Gestumblindi (talk) 08:57, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

+1 Tryvix1509 (talk) 09:36, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Would an admin please take a look at File:Soumitra Dutta Johnson Dean Office Portrait.png, File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait.png File:Soumitra Dutta Office Portrait Johnson.png and File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait CCB.png to check whether any of them is a re-upload of File:Soumitra Portrait.jpg, File:Soumitra Dutta, Anne & Elmer Lindseth Dean.jpg, File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait.jpg or File:Soumitra Dutta Office Portrait.jpg? An undeletion request made by the uploader back in December 2016 was declined, and these might be re-uploads of the deleted files. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, all four:

• File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait CCB.png is a reupload of File:Soumitra Portrait.jpg
• File:Soumitra Dutta Johnson Dean Office Portrait.png is a reupload of File:Soumitra Dutta, Anne & Elmer Lindseth Dean.jpg.
• File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait.png is a reupload of File:Soumitra Dutta Portrait.jpg
• File:Soumitra Dutta Office Portrait Johnson.png is a reupload of File:Soumitra Dutta Office Portrait.jpg

Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Pi.1415926535. Can the reuploads be kept as licensed? Do they need to be DR'd or tagged for speedy deletion? -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:35, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I would tag for speedy as G4. The original uploads had metadata that indicated copyvio; the reuploads had that metadata suspiciously erased. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 16:55, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done: Thank you again for looking at these Pi.1415926535. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:36, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Can some admin fix the English language caption on File:Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Ukraine.jpg and remove "Request for deletion" from it. The file is cascade protected. Thanks, ─ The Aafī (^talk) 03:24, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Done - Jmabel ! talk 04:39, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Jmabel, the caption still appears as "Recep Tayyip Erdoğan in Ukraine (Request For Deletion)". ─ The Aafī (^talk) 06:52, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

  Fixed by @GPSLeo. Thanks. ─ The Aafī (^talk) 13:39, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

@TheAafi and GPSLeo: my apologies. Due to a glitch in the tools, I can't see captions without going through some really intricate maneuvers (I've complained before, but no one's fixed it) so I barely think of them; I mentally substituted "description". My bad. - Jmabel ! talk 14:25, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Enmanuelgac (talk · contribs) has uploaded multiple copyright images and logos from websites and then claimed to release them himself under a commons licence on Wikipedia. Two of his uploads were deleted by administrators earlier today and his response was to ignore the administrators and re-upload the exact same images. This user has been blocked from editing in article space for a while on en:wikipedia, but his behaviour today (including sockpuppetry) has resulting in an indefinite total block. Those same behaviours are becoming apparent here too. --10mmsocket (talk) 16:38, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

These are quite a mix. All mis-licensed, but some may be PD (for various reasons). I've turned three of these into DRs, didn't go through them all. - Jmabel ! talk 18:40, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done. I warned the user and nominated one more logo for deletion. Taivo (talk) 15:29, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for warnings. I hope complies, because his response to criticism and positive advice on en.wikipedia has been terrible (hence the permanent block) 10mmsocket (talk) 15:56, 3 June 2023 (UTC)

Could anyone perform this file updating, if this is technically possible? VSL (talk) 06:17, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Please can someone close (and maybe enact) Commons:Categories for discussion/2022/03/Category:Russo-Ukrainian War by day? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

• I'll close it, but I leave it to someone else to go through and rename the categories. - Jmabel ! talk 18:30, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I am a frequent target of an LTA, who regularly spams my user pages across wiki projects—could my talk page (and potentially my user page as well) here be protected accordingly? Thank you! —Kittycataclysm (talk) 18:17, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Attack-edits hidden and talkpage semi-protected for 1 year. --Túrelio (talk) 18:56, 7 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Has anyone a tool for mass undeletion of 146 files? Yann (talk) 19:04, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

@Yann Yes, my Twinkle port (which you can enable in preferences!) can handle this. I'll take care of it. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I have it enable, but I never tried it. ;o) Yann (talk) 08:14, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

I've noticed some (to me at least) unusual vandalism coming from a series of IPv6 addresses, see contributions here, here, and here. All reverted, all following similar patterns in the edit and edit summary, and the final IP blocked as vandalism was ongoing. I'm wondering if some kind of abusefilter could be set up to catch these? @Yann? — Huntster (t @ c) 17:02, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done All /64 ranges for these blocked. Yann (talk) 18:44, 10 June 2023 (UTC)

This user has been blocked indefinitely in the Wikipedia namespace because they are a sock. It has however become apparent to me that they have a unified login and they have taken to vandalising mine and another user's talk page here, here and here. AlanS (talk) 01:58, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done blocked indef, reverted move. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 03:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Mdaniels5757, is it possible to get this done across all wiki namespaces so that this behaviour doesn't continue? AlanS (talk) 05:04, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Gugrak is blocked site-wide on commons. If you’re meaning across all Wikimedia projects, send a request to m:Steward requests/Global. Tropicalkitty (talk) 05:08, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for your assistance. AlanS (talk) 07:25, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

Please redact two edits [15][16] and protect User talk:Matěj Suchánek for a month or so. (See en:WP:LTA/GRP for details.) --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:55, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Revision are hidden. No need for page protection at this point. --A.Savin 13:05, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@A.Savin: As expected, he is back. Please hide and protect. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:04, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done. --A.Savin 16:40, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

There are two different images uploaded as File:Eye of Ra 2.svg and the file description is about the older image, so doesn't represent the picture's copyrights anymore. The older picture is linked to File:Horusauge.jpg and File:Ra Symbol (Stargate).svg, while the newer picture is linked to File:Eyeofra.png. In order to respect the original copyrights and dates, can we split File:Eye of Ra 2.svg into two separate files with the original dates and authors for each? Est. 2021 (talk) 03:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I see User:Richardkiwi made some edits to the file downstream of this request. @Est. 2021: is there anything remaining to be done? - Jmabel ! talk 17:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel Yes sir, the file history of File:Eye of Ra 2.svg should be split into two distinct images; the older image should keep this name, while the more recent image should be moved to File:Eye of Ra 3.svg (keeping its original uploader and date). Thanks in advance, Est. 2021 (talk) 18:50, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

Done. Just to let you know, though, I don't think anything I did required any special privileges, and I think it could all have been done by a regular user. Downloaded Lockal's version to my PC, reverted to the original at File:Eye of Ra 2.svg, then uploaded Lockal's version as File:Eye of Ra 3.svg. - Jmabel ! talk 20:09, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

I was trying to keep the original file history, but ok. Est. 2021 (talk) 08:01, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Requesting to change the license on File:Murder of Simon Sudbury - Froissart, Chroniques de France et d'Angleterre, Book II (c.1460-1480), f.172 - BL Royal MS 18 E I.jpg from {{Cc-zero}} to {{Pd-old-auto}}, due to the fact that it was created 544–564 years ago --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 16:21, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka: Why don't you do it yourself? 20 upper 07:13, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@20 upper: It was admin protected yesterday, now it's not. Weird ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ --QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 07:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Wow, that's weird. 20 upper 09:18, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

As the digitisation may give a copyright in the UK, I recommend keeping the CC-zero and just adding the {{PD-old-auto-expired}} (sic!). –LPfi (talk) 07:22, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

There are 4 pending requests. An admin please check them, thanks! Tryvix1509 (talk) 08:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

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

We have an odd situation on en.wikipedia with paid editing and ChatGPT usage. See:

• en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User:Lets.Custodio making paid/ChatGPT edits
  • permalink — Preceding unsigned comment added by A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

I noticed this person edits on Commons. I don't know if their additions here are problematic but I thought you should know what we've encountered. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Looks like the church photos are all copyvios, or at least uploaded without permission being stated.

The better quality food photos could have been copied from food blogs (the user's enwiki edits include random food blogs added as sources), but there's some consistency in the cameras, being taken on just two different ones, and some photos are taken on the same crockery. I can't find any sources with a reverse image search.

My take on the enwiki ANI discussion is that a blocked user has hired someone through LinkedIn to make a bunch of deniably plausible edits to Wikipedia, as a prelude to asking for specific edits later on, or just asking her to hand over the account after a few weeks. The early uploads could plausibly be her own photos. Belbury (talk) 21:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

It's irksome but interesting, too. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:09, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Deletion request Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Maps of Middle-earth is a month old and discussion has finished. Please can an admin resolve it? -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 09:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

We've got >3000 deletion requests still awaiting closure that were first opened during or before April. There's a bit of a backlog that we're trying to catch up on. That doesn't excuse the delays, but it might help explain why the delay has occurred. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:43, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I believe the site would benefit from having additional administrators who regularly respond to deletion requests. 20 upper 06:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@Red-tailed hawk: Thank you for responding. I have had a (simpler) deletion request processed since this one was started, so I was not aware of any backlog. I shall be patient. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 10:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

@Verbarson: you say "discussion has finished" but I don't see anything like a consensus there. - Jmabel ! talk 00:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Or if there is one, it would take quite a while to work out which way it went on each individual file. - Jmabel ! talk 00:30, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done Closed. Yann (talk) 08:06, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

@Yann: Thank you. -- Verbarson  ^talk_edits 09:38, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm in email touch with Godot13, a valued and longtime user, who seems to have run into some sort of range block while spending the summer away from his usual location. As an en.wp administrator, I was able to do make him IP-block exempt, but that only works for the English Wikipedia. Can someone help him out here? Wehwalt (talk) 22:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done - Jmabel ! talk 00:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Hi all, I'm searching fro an admin that would help me to add SDC components to a series of fully protected/cascade-protected files. My main motivation is that I'm a bit annoyed that some files remain in SDC tracking categories forever, as they are not able to be updated by bots, including mine. Some Python skills would be required to perform the additions efficiently, also to understand that the code provided below is not malicious. The help I need would be as follows:

1. Please save the python script from User:SchlurcherBot/commonsapiaddclaimsoauth in a file (as Python is tab based, it would be needed to preserve these). Please name the file commonsapiaddclaimsoauth.py
2. Install the dependencies of the python script (requests, requessts_oauthlib, argparse, sys)
3. Get oAuth login details for your admin account. This can be done by m:Special:OAuthConsumerRegistration/propose (using an OAuth 1.0a owner-only consumer). In this step you can restrict the rights; I'm not sure what is needed, as I cannot test this, but as far as I see only basic rights and edit protected files is needed for the consumer.
4. Add your oAuth login details generated to the placeholders in your local copy of the file commonsapiaddclaimsoauth.py
5. Execute the following code line-by-line directly from the terminal in the folder that contains the file commonsapiaddclaimsoauth.py: User:SchlurcherBot/Blocked

Best regards, Schlurcher (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Non-admin comment: Are they many enough that manual edits won't suffice? Or perhaps temporary unprotecting them? Running other persons' scripts with admin privileges is a bit scary, and evaluating code is harder than just writing or modifying simple code. –LPfi (talk) 12:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@LPfi: All files are given in User:SchlurcherBot/Blocked. It's currently 50 files with probably 3 SDC claims added per single edit. Doing these customized 150 SDC edits manually will probably take you hours. Most of the files are interface facing pictures, so even temporary unprotecting them sounds very bad. I had also investigated before to lower the cascade protection to template editor level, but this is technically not possible; cascade protection is always full protection.

Regarding the code concern. The code is open: User:SchlurcherBot/commonsapiaddclaimsoauth. The code for adding the claims is fairly basic and not much magic. Getting the claims is more work, that's why I've separated this part out and the claims are added as arguments. Generally agree never trust code on the internet, so for that reason some python experience would be needed. BTW, it's not the first time this is being done. I've asked User:Krd in 2019 and 2021 before. So if it helps, this was done before :-) (see also User_talk:Krd#Batch_editing_protected_files_(from_2021_archive)) --Schlurcher (talk) 16:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

create a new bot account that specialises in "adding sdc to protected files" and apply for (temporary) sysop for the new bot. problem solved. RZuo (talk) 14:00, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

@RZuo: I had explored this option in 2019 both on the general noticeboard (where it's lost somewhere in the archives probably) and in Commons_talk:Bots/Requests#Admin_Bot_Request. Community decision at this time was more or less consistent, that the admin bot operator should have admin rights as well. So, I abandoned the idea. Out of this request User:Krd offered help and we did a first round of such edits, but he has lost the script and it's not working anymore (see above). ––Schlurcher (talk) 16:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

sorry to hear that. you're certainly trusted to run a sysop bot. after all, the community already entrusted your bot to edit millions of files. i think you should try applying.

and as i said, you should make a new bot that specialises in this, so even if your sysop bot goes wrong a block wont affect the ordinary bot. and if you use it for other edits, repeatedly, the community can easily "catch" that and revoke the trust. (no offence, just an imaginary scenario to explain to other users methods that ensure the bot would not be misused.) RZuo (talk) 21:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Since we have {{User category}} to create hidden categories by user, I have a doubt: is it just for files? or can I use a hidden category (something like Category:Categories by User:Est. 2021) to keep track and care of the (non-user) categories I created? I'm currently manually listing them at User:Est. 2021/categories, but that's hard work. Thanks in advance, Est. 2021 (talk) 22:43, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

@Est. 2021: I believe that would be fine. Or you can list them on your user page (or a subpage of your user page) to keep track. - Jmabel ! talk 00:02, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Oh, fine. Thank you! Est. 2021 (talk) 02:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3AContributions&target=Est.+2021&namespace=14&newOnly=1 .

i reject the practice of creating such categories as Category:Edits by User:Est. 2021 Category:Categories by User:Est. 2021 Category:Requests by User:Est. 2021, etc. commons is not about you.--RZuo (talk) 14:12, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Can someone from the administrators give me the rights "file mover / Dateiverschiebung". It happens sometimes that file names have to be changed into Māori spelling. Ulanwp (talk) 07:47, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

You must ask that in requests for rights. Taivo (talk) 10:42, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your hint. Ulanwp (talk) 10:58, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done Ulanwp (talk) 12:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Is it possible to protect this file from any reversions for a long period of time? Recently the user User:The Squirrel Conspiracy reverted it in spite of the long discussion here https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Flag_of_Russia_(1991%E2%80%931993).svg. FlorianH76 (talk) 15:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

It is, in fact, already protected. Because there was a slow-burning edit war and there is *not* consensus in the talk page, I reverted it to the last stable version, which stood from 2010 through January 2023. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:52, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but actually the version before your reversion was right. It was discussed many times. Why you didn't read the discussion? And it was protected on the right version before your changes. FlorianH76 (talk) 23:34, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

User:Sursenasinhh is almost certainly a long-term abuse sock (see Commons SPI and enwiki SPI).

They have uploaded three files - I'm pretty sure these files are re-uploads of the files deleted here or here, but not completely certain as I can't view deleted files:

• File:Shishupala.jpg - Likely File:Salvation of Chedi King Shishupal Chandel by Lord Krishna (Hari).jpg
• File:Chandelas of Jejakabhukti around 9-11th c.jpg - Likely File:Chandel Empire during 10-12th CE.jpg or File:Chandel Empire (1160 CE).jpg
• File:Chandelas of Jejakabhukti around 1202 CE.jpg - Likely File:Chandel Empire around 1202 A.D.jpg

Hope someone can confirm, delete the files, and block the sock. Utcursch (talk) 15:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

 Done First image is identical, second is very very similar to both that you posted. Sock blocked, uploads wiped. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:00, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Would an admin please take a look at File:Galluppi family coat of arms.jpg? When I tried to click on the source url to verfiy the file's licesning, the file was automatically downloaded onto my computer. This could just be happening to me or it could be something to do with the source url itself. If it's a case of the latter, then that seems like a really bad thing to allow. In addition, the file's licensing probably needs to be confirmed per COM:COA. While it's true that most blazons for COA aren't protected by copyright，individual emblazons often are and they need to be released under an acceptable license for Commons to host them if they're not already PD for some reason. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:59, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

• I see nothing odd about the source URL, but also no sign of appropriate licensing. - Jmabel ! talk 15:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)
• All of Tommy Lee J. (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user uploads look like they need review, and maybe deletion. They're all (quick look) "licensed" CC, with no evidence and no plausible connection between a rights holder and anyone adding that licence. Some may be old enough to be PD. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:59, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Andy Dingley you are welcome to review my edits but I am positive all pics I uploaded are in the free domain, except for the last one, that is this coat of arms. No date is provided for the painting but based on the colors and texture I believe it's relatively old. Maybe late 19th century. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 22:00, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

• But you tagged them with a CC licence, which is incorrect. If you think they're PD, they should have been tagged as that instead. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:04, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Andy Dingley Which files are you referring to? And sorry, I don't know the exact terminology. I just know that all I upload on commons is either public domain, over 100 years old, own work, etc. I know the basics and that copyrighted images must be uploaded at Wikipedia and not Commons. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 22:07, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

• I'm referring to all of your uploads. Now I'm in no rush to do this myself, but there are plenty of editors here who would see their current mis-licensing as reason to delete the whole lot. Some of the admins would speedy delete them and indef block you. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

  I think blocking editors because of good-faith mistake of licensing is exaggerated and deleting pictures that are likely legitmately here and only need an update of licensing is a mistake, but this is just my opinion. Why don't you point out to me which uploads' licenses are wrong so I can fix the problem? Tommy Lee J. (talk) 22:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

• All of your uploads. You have put a CC licence on them. This is only possible if they either had one beforehand, or if you control the rights to them. AFAIK, that doesn't apply to any of these (I haven't checked all).

In some cases, these look old enough to have a good chance of being PD. But you will need to check that and tag them accordingly. Others, like the CoA here, I can't see any way that they can stay. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:01, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Look, I told you already I have no knowledge of terminology, I thought I was understanding what you are saying now I am confused again: if the image is PD then is the CC licence okay? If that's the case then what I repeat what I said in the beginning: all pictures are PD except for this coat of arms for which there is not certainty but it does look old enough to be PD. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 00:13, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• Take a good read of COM:LICENSING. There are broadly three things that can happen.

1. Public Domain. If it's already public domain. You can't "make this happen". No-one (except some governments) can. It gets to be public domain because it's old (rules vary internationally and get complicated). Or because it's US Federal Government.

2. It's freely licensed. There is a copyright. Someone owns that. That someone licenses it, with something like a CC-by-sa licence. It has to be someone with authority to do this, not just someone uploading it. Nearly always they licensed it already and published it on another website, with a clear licence mark on it. Lots of stuff cross-loaded from Flickr is like this.

If it's your creation, you can license it. This is the one time when you get to choose a licence.

3. Anything else. That's not allowed here.

There are a couple of further problems. Some stuff is "your photo", but still not your copyright. You photographed an artwork, or made some other derivative work. You thought it was a 2, it's probably a 3. Gets complicated, varies internationally.

When you choose the licence on upload, you have to choose a right one. Unless you own it, this isn't a free choice (yes, I know the upload tool sucks). You have to pick the right one that describes the situation we've arrived at, even if it isn't one we'd choose from free choice. This is what's happened here: your old photos might be PD, might be able to be tagged with the right sort of PD tag, but they are not CC- licences and never will be. Commons will typically delete stuff that's wrong because that's easier than fixing it. Commons administration is here for an easy life, not to preserve content. Andy Dingley (talk) 01:04, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

No @Andy Dingley, it's not like that. I don't know terminology and I don't know how to use licenses. I just uploaded all on the free licence because I thought it equated to PD, etc. I know when a picture is "okay" though (by which I mean it is not coyprighted). Those pictures from the book ARE PD AS WELL. They come from Salata's Il Patto Mussolini. Both book and pictures were produced and published in 1933. They are therefore in the public domain. Yes, I understand, but I think there is no need for such a fuss, I only need to update the templates. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 10:20, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, it is like that. And this is just about the point when patience ran out. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:10, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly I don't know if the "bad thing to allow" would come from me (?) because I am not even sure I understand your comment. At any rate, the url works fine at my computer. And the automatic download happens to me as well on a lot of other files. Try to copy the link and paste it into your search bar. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 22:05, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Copying and pasting the url into the search didn't change anything (at least not for me); the file still automatically downloads (without any prompting or warning) when I access that link. If this is just me, then no big deal. If this happens to others, then it's probably not a good thing regardless of who set things up that way because it force feeds the file onto the devices of those clicking the link. As for the COA itself, there's nothing on that page that suggests the file has been released as licensed; so, it's not clear why you uploaded it as {{CC-by-sa-4.0}}. Did you just randomly chose that particular license or did you have a reason for doing so? Is the licensing, perhaps, found on an inner page of that website? As pointed out above by Andy Dingley, a CC license pretty much implies two things: (1) the work is copyrighted, and (2) the work's copyright owner has released it as licensed. So, if you're not the copyright owner, you shouldn't be uploading files under CC licenses unless it's clear that the copyright holder has released the work as such. Finally, its probably not wise to just upload files that you think are OK for Commons under some random CC or other license, hoping that someone will clean things up later. Maybe that's OK once or twice, but not all the time. You're correct that nobody should be blocked for such a thing. If, however, that's all someone is doing, then it kind of indicates that they're not too interested in learning about or following Commons policy and just expect everyone to clean up after them. Such an modus operandi could possibly lead to some administrator deciding to formally warn or even block such a user. So, if you're uncertain about a file's licensing, there's no reason not to ask for assistance at COM:VPC prior to uploading the file or at the very least immediately after uploading the file. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:37, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly "regardless who set things up that way" just stop with accusations ok? Does Wikimedia not have a concept of good faith? That thing you described happens to me on several other files and I am surprised you never eperienced it before. And I reiterate the link works perfectly fine for me. The reason why uploaded it CC-by-sa-4.0 is actually very clear and we already discussed it at length here. Again kinda bad faith. I didn't hope "someone would clean things up" I thought the license was okay, I never actually even read it. I just wanted to upload it to commons because they are PD, and I thought that license was for all the PD, self-works, etc., for all works that are NOT copyrighted. i will be more careful and I am going to fix the licences. It should take a few minutes... Tommy Lee J. (talk) 10:27, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Tommy Lee J.: This is an effort to lay out the key points about public domain and COM:L free-licenses in terms of what we can accept on Commons. (For much more, follow up the links in the previous sentence.) Some of this will probably be old hat to you, but I can see that you are missing at least some of it.

• While there are some historical exceptions (mostly U.S. before the late 1980s; see the Hirtle chart for details on that), typically a photo or other image is considered to be copyrighted on creation, with the person who creates it as the copyright-holder. In some (but not all) cases where a person creates a "work for hire" as part of their job, the copyright may belong to the employer; copyrights can also sometimes be transferred contractually.
• For any work that is copyrighted, Commons will only host it if it is "free-licensed", including allowing commercial use and derivative works. Only the person who owns the copyright can grant such a license. So, if it's your own work you can grant (for example), a CC-BY-SA license, but you cannot grant such a license on someone else's work. If it's third-party work, the only legitimate way that license can be offered is if it was offered by the copyright-holder. If they did not offer such a license, you cannot simply add it. You can (possibly) get the copyright-holder or their heir to grant such a license (often done via go the COM:VRT process), but if they don't want to do it, then we can't have the image on Commons.
• Works can enter the public domain several ways. A few governments -- very few, but notably including the federal government of the United States -- place work by their employees (but usually not their contractors) immediately into the public domain. More typically, works enter the public domain a particular amount of time after their creation or after the death of their creator. Details vary by country.
• You can't offer a CC license for a work in the public domain any more than you can license use of the Brooklyn Bridge. You don't own it, so you can't grant a license to use it. Rather than a license tag/template as such, it needs a tag/template explaining why it is in the public domain. A typical example is {{PD-US-auto-expired}}, which requires a death date as a parameter. There are also specialized tags like Template:TlPD-US-not renewed, {{PD-old-assumed}} (at least 120 years old, and we can't sort out the authorship or the author's death date), or country-specific tags like {{PD-Italy}} that account for unusual features of the law in particular countries.

The upshot: "CC" tags and "PD" tags are quite distinct from one another, and represent two entirely different bases on which we can host an image. - Jmabel ! talk 00:57, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel Thanks for all the information! Tommy Lee J. (talk) 10:28, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley@Marchjuly what about the coat of arms? That's the only one I am unsure about. Some of you said something about licensing of coat of arms earlier. Is there a license that would allow to keep the file at Commons or do I have to go the Wikipedia-upload route? Tommy Lee J. (talk) 10:31, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• There is no simple consistent rule for a coat of arms. Heraldry and vexillology is a problem area hereabouts, because a couple of disruptive editors (one's permabanned everywhere but here, I don't know why we still tolerate them) keep using arguments over copyright to push their content and nationalism viewpoints.

Personally I take the view that a blazon (a text description of arms) is in the public domain, much as titles are. The expression of that, i.e. a drawing of it, is copyrightable. As this one appears to be a straight lift of a website image file, that's not OK. You could (time and skills permitting) redraw it, which would be OK. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:44, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Andy Dingley are you aware of any Wikimedia user who uses vectors to reproduce coat of arms? I've seen many of such pictures around

@Andy Dingley@Jmabel@Marchjuly So I have fixed almost everything except Gino De Finetti's artworks because they are just shy of 70 years after author's death (he decased in 1955, damn!) is there another license that could apply on all or some of his paintings to keep them on commons? Some are pretty old, they date from a early as 1915. Also could you also check if the other licences are fine? For example, is PD-Italy + PD-1996-IT good for this 1933 picture from a 1933 book? Tommy Lee J. (talk) 11:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

Re: "are you aware of any Wikimedia user who uses vectors to reproduce coat of arms?", that's actually the preferred way to do it. Just look for coats of arms that are in an SVG format.

For Italy, it doesn't matter when a painting was made, it matters when the painter died. But even if we have to delete them for now, it's not wasted. Delete them through a formal DR process, so at the end we have somewhere to keep track of when we'll be able to undelete them (and if "DR" doesn't make sense to you, just say so and someone else can follow up that part).

Someone (not me) will probably go through and look and see if you got this right. (I'd do it but I'm traveling for a couple of days, so I'm not deeply plunged into Commons right now). - Jmabel ! talk 14:45, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel Allright, thanks. All files should have the correct license except De Finetti's paintings. Legler's paintings are fine as he died in 1951. Finetti actually was German-Italian and published both in Germany and Austria-Hungary, actually nearly all his works I uploaded where published there. Don't know if that makes any difference... Tommy Lee J. (talk) 14:55, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Tommy Lee J.: There could still be some U.S. issues on some of these (our servers are located in the U.S., and there is a complicated legal situation in the U.S. on foreign works that were in copyright in 1996), so don't be surprised if a few of these still have to be deleted for some number of years, but thank you for going back and sorting out what you can. - Jmabel ! talk 17:53, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

@Jmabel Sorry but I have to object here. And I will be surprised and contest the deletion. If the file abides by the rules, then it must be kept, if not deleted. The rules cannot be vague, it either passes or not. The license template is pretty clear though: it was in the public domain in its home country (Italy) on the URAA date (1 January 1996). They all pass this. Should certain valid files be deleted, OTOH, (such as those of Mussolini) it could be interpreted as an issue with the picture itself, what it represents. I say this because I was accused of purposefully uploading an invalid link, and another editor mentioned problems with nationalism, etc. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 18:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

P.S. You said: "and there is a complicated legal situation in the U.S. on foreign works that were in copyright in 1996" but all the files on which I put that license were not copyrighted (in Italy) in 1996. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 18:49, 22 June 2023 (UTC)

• @Tommy Lee J.: if they all aged out of copyright in Italy before 1996, then no problem. I didn't take the time to look at each individual case, I was simply raising the one more issue I could imagine coming up. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

  Ohh, ok, gotcha. Then no problem, they all pass. Most of them are pics from a 1933 book; others are 17th century paintings, etc. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 19:17, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

  That a painting was published in a 1933 book does prove that painting is in the public domain. To oversimplify the issue, it is not the date of publication was more than 70 years ago but rather the artist has died more than 70 years ago. A 1933 book may have works of a 30-year old artist. Say that artist dies in 1978 at age 75. That means his copyrights do not expire until 2048 — that is 115 years after the 1933 publication date. Consider that Pablo Picasso painted Guernica in 1937. Picasso died in 1973, so the copyright is still good until 2043. Glrx (talk) 22:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Glrx mixing up things here maybe. One thing is the old-license. Another are the PD-Italy and PD-1996 license. Accordingly, the images in the 1933 book are PD because they were largely in the PD in Italy by 1996. Btw, they are photographs and not paintings. P.S. I believe they would still pass the 70-year ("old") license though, because no attribution is given to the image in this book by Salata, so I assume the copyright was his (?) through the publishing house. Salata died in in 1944. Tommy Lee J. (talk) 23:46, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Elegant Couple in ConversationDeFinetti.jpg (d. 1955) Andy Dingley (talk) 13:23, 23 June 2023 (UTC)
• Commons:Deletion requests/File:Galluppi family coat of arms.jpg Andy Dingley (talk) 21:11, 23 June 2023 (UTC)