Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

Shortcut: COM:AN

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
Vandalism ^{[new section]}	User problems ^{[new section]}	Blocks and protections ^{[new section]}	Other ^{[new section]}
Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.	Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.	Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.	Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.
Archives
24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

^{Translate this page}

Note

Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

How to prevent massive IP spam

Any ideas how we could prevent spam like this 2A00:1FA3:647:6A37:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user? I was only able to stop this fast because the IP also added the spam to my talk page resulting in notifying me. GPSLeo (talk) 16:09, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, A filter should be able to block this, i.e. external links added by IPs. Yann (talk) 16:16, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we can limit links from IPs to one per 5 Minutes. As there are some good copyvio reports from IPs we should not block them entirely. But here that would not have helped anyways as there was a sleeper account Butgju6h (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) . GPSLeo (talk) 17:56, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The ConfirmEdit Extension ([1]) is built for that juse case and can be customized that it will trigger uppon addurl. --Schlurcher (talk) 19:27, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I created a filter requiring a CAPTCHA if an anon user adds more than one link in five minutes. GPSLeo (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Special:UserRights/Hansmuller

User has been globally banned by WMF, consider remove filemover from this account. Phương Linh (talk) 11:20, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed, thanks! -- CptViraj (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Datasets about potential logos - April 2025 uploads

Hi all, we have released a new dataset of potential logos uploaded in April 2025, together with another one of those which have already been deleted as of 2025-05-02. We are sharing them with you for your consideration.

This is part of our current work with the logo detection tool. We hope it will be useful for your moderation activities.

If you encounter issues with the datasets or have comments/requests, please reach out to me or to Sannita (WMF).

Thanks for your attention! –-MFossati (WMF) (talk) 11:24, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DR of a file linked on ENWP main page

Hi, could an admin please look at this DR Commons:Deletion requests/File:P1288411-2.jpg, open since Mar 22? It's used on en:2025 Canadian federal election currently linked to on ENWP main page, so would be nice to get rid of it if it's indeed a copyvio. Thanks in advance, Consigned (talk) 13:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I have however also nominated File:Jonathan Pedneault Interview.jpg for deletion now. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Consigned (talk) 17:07, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyupload-allowed-domains requests

Hello. Can I get an admin's attention to 2 requests at MediaWiki talk:Copyupload-allowed-domains. Thank you! -- DaxServer (talk) 15:11, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done already. Thanks Bedivere (talk) 05:42, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Nudity and sexuality-related deletion requests/pending is full of overdue deletion requests

Specifically all the ones related to women’s underwear created by inactive user ThePinkShoes back in January. They’re all frivolous and virtually all of them have a consensus to keep. Dronebogus (talk) 00:19, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus: Can you give an example of a couple of those from ThePinkShoes with consensus to keep? I see several with exactly 4 voices: 2 for, 2 against. - Jmabel ! talk 04:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Partly pulled black panties.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:The blue panties and a finger.png Dronebogus (talk) 18:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Dronebogus: thanks. Feel free to list any others that are at least 2-to-1 (including nominator) for deletion, and I'll close those. - Jmabel ! talk 01:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through and closed all the ones that were not uploaded by Elementofthisworld, as they were unanimous or near unanimous keeps. However, most of the uploads by Elementofthisworld probably should be deleted on scope grounds, because they're of unusably bad quality. Ras67, Dronebogus, and Jeff posted identical keep messages on all of ThePinkShoes's nominations, so unless they go back and look at those files individually and change their minds, they're not likely to be deleted, but I don't think they should be speedy kept. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: My messages evolved as I found more justifications. Pinging @Elementofthisworld as mentioned above. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:06, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Elementofthisworld. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:41, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Radzivon Panschwitz

User:Radzivon Panschwitz uploads photos of historical personalities such as File:Radaslau Ostrovsky with Himmler.jpg, File:Vital tsyarpitski.png, File:BNSP.png, File:Alexandr Krichinsky.jpg, File:Flag of Belarusian Central Council.png, File:Michal Vituska.jpg (some from the Second World War) and falsely passes them off as “his own work”. Can someone delete these files and warn the user?--KastusK (talk) 21:30, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@KastusK you are supposed to inform the user about the report at their Talk Page. This is clearly stated above. I have done it this time for you. Please take care of this in future. Regarding your report, you can nominate all of them for deletion if you believe they are copyvios. There is a well established process for this. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 09:30, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please resolve this issue

We all know that Commons policies don't prohibit AI images. However there are two users (who apparently don't like AI images) want to delete my image here for reasons outside any rules. My image is free and has no violations. They added invalid reasons, like: they delete the image themselves from other projects and then claim "it was removed from there"! They even try to remove it from any project to give the impression that it's a (useless and unused image). I'm tired of this and I hope the admins close the discussion ASAP. --Ibrahim.ID ✪ 07:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Com:NOTUSED is a policy. I'd suggest you spend more time explaining where it could be rather than arguing to have it resolved here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 09:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was removed from the enwiki article as a consensus based on a discussion at that site, not a unilateral action by one involved editor. DMacks (talk) 14:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Whether an image is used in an en:w article is an issue for discussion on en:w. Deletion discussions with multiple comments are sometimes open for considerable time. IMO this is not an issue for Wikimedia Adninistrators' noticeboard. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:23, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should we do sometthing about Count of JK?

There seems to be a lot of complaints regarding his photos of adolescent Taiwanese school girls Trade (talk) 13:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Some of the images individually might arguably be mundane street photography, but looking at the user's uploads as a series seems CREEP. (From a quick look, I am unsure if the user knows much English, perhaps someone who knows Chinese can alert the user to concerns?) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 14:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on this comment? Trade (talk) 16:51, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I welcome the change in assessment. You had previously closed two DRs as "keep".

If it was just one or two images, then one could argue that it's fine, but the user seems to specifically go for photos of school girls. I'm also having a hard time believing that the photos are about school uniforms because if that was the case then I'd expect that there would be as many photos of boys in school uniforms as there are photos of girls in school uniforms to give a complete picture of a school's uniforms, but there's only a single of photo of boys in school uniforms among the uploads while there are quite a lot of photos of girls so that it really feels like the focus is rather on girls than on school uniforms. Nakonana (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* I have no objection to their being deleted; I see they already have been. Those listings were closed as kept per discussion on the listings and evaluation of the files as individual images. Given the uploader's pattern, I have no objection to wide deletion of their uploads even if some images may arguably be less objectionable if evaluated in isolation. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

coz this east asian phenomenon (students having to wear such uniforms, and subsequently people's interest in it) w:School_uniforms_in_Japan#Late_20th_century is mostly about girls. RoyZuo (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'm aware of that, but if we'd argue in the uploader's defense that the uploader is uploading these images for educational purposes to illustrate school uniforms, then the expectation would be that they show us the female and male versions of the school uniforms. The fact that their photos almost exclusively show girls is probably what makes people uncomfortable about their uploads. (The other reasons being that the photos were seemingly secretly taken and kind of seem to focus on the girls' legs specifically.) Nakonana (talk) 19:21, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of the photos specifically looks like an failed attempt of an upskirt Trade (talk) 19:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest this problem/phenomenon be raised on vp for a wider discussion.

The problem here is, there are some enthusiasts about school uniforms, but for whatever reason they dont manage to ask pupils or adult models to pose in those uniforms for photos, so they resort to snapshotting pupils in the streets.

This is not the 1st user doing this I've seen on wiki. RoyZuo (talk) 17:53, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the uploader does not respond on the consent concerns I would simply delete all photos of people by this user. GPSLeo (talk) 18:00, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What would stop him from uploading more? Trade (talk) 18:02, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the user does not respond to any concerns we need to block them. GPSLeo (talk) 18:20, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Might help if we had an editor who spoke their native language Trade (talk) 18:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

vp? Trade (talk) 18:01, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade Commons:Village pump probably. Nakonana (talk) 18:56, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoyZuo seeem more familiar with this than i am so i would prefer if he did it Trade (talk) 18:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have blocked the user and deleted all of their photos of people. If they want to explain why they are uploading photos of minors taken without their consent or knowledge, they can do so in an unblock request. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you at least leave them a message on their talk page to explain why you acted as you did and give them a chance to explain themselves? And modify their block so they can still participate in this discussion (and any future related discussions regarding their contributions? It feels wrong of me to make an AN thread that the user in question is prevented from participating in Trade (talk) 20:43, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave a talk page note (in English - others are welcome to translate). Again, if they want to explain themselves, they can do so in an unblock request. Uploading nonconsensually-taken photos of minors is a 'block first, ask questions later' scenario. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:34, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alr. ill see if i can get anyone to translate your talk page message once you have placed it Trade (talk) 21:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pi.1415926535: Your responses here consistently suggest that uploading photos of minors taken without their consent is grounds for a block:

First comment above: If they want to explain why they are uploading photos of minors taken without their consent or knowledge, they can do so in an unblock request.
Second comment above: Uploading nonconsensually-taken photos of minors is a 'block first, ask questions later' scenario.
Block log entry, quoted in its entirety: Uploading photos of minors taken without consent
Most deletion log entries, quoted in their entirety: Photos of minors taken without consent

But merely uploading photos of minors taken without their consent does not even come close to justifying a block, especially without warning.

You also closed Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Count of JK after just 16 minutes as Deleted: per nomination. The entire deletion rationale was: Out of scope as unusably bad quality. All of these images have heads cut off and many are shot at weird angles. We have lots of way better images in Category:Senior high school girls of Taiwan.

But that deletion rationale does not justify a speedy deletion, especially when two of the files had already survived deletion requests (Commons:Deletion requests/File:穿短裙的女學生.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/File:公車上玩手機的女孩.jpg).

To be clear, I’m not saying that your actions can’t be justified. But I am saying that they can’t be justified by the comments you made. Brianjd (talk) 07:43, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused because of what I wrote in my previous comment.

I am also confused about the broader issue. Apparently, Count of JK’s actions were so serious that they justified speedy deletion and an indefinite block without warning. But they were not so serious that they required referral to the legal team. Trade’s ‘Thoughts on this comment?’ links to Jmabel’s ‘upskirt’ comment, which was discussed at Commons:Deletion requests/File:公車上玩手機的女孩.jpg, where I noted a similar contradiction. Brianjd (talk) 08:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it’s worth, Commons:Deletion requests/File:國立臺北教育大學學生.jpg suggests that one subject was actually an adult. Pinging @Ikan Kekek. Brianjd (talk) 12:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping in mind that I may have seen most but not all of the photos that were nominated for deletion, I think this is an overreaction. Concentrating on photographing girls and not both girls and boys is neither a crime nor something we should be judging; I doubt if he photographed both, that would actually make people more comfortable; and enough of his photos were usable for it to be worth stating some kinds of standards of what will lead to deletion (for example, a photo of the torso without the face that seems to overemphasize a minor's bosom or anything suggestive of a nonconsensual upskirt photo). It also seems completely absurd to me not to attempt to have a discussion with this individual in Chinese. There are admins who speak Chinese, and their help should be requested. Otherwise, I hope Brianjd's remarks are addressed. Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could you ping those admins? Trade (talk) 14:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please redact inappropriate user page message

Dear admins,

if one clicks on “Edit” on the user page of Eatcha, the following message appears above the edit field:

STOP NOW! OR I WILL SHOOT!

Click here to leave a message.

I understand very well that users do not like it if other people edit their user page. But (a) there may be legitimate and helpful reasons to do this – e.g. to fix broken links or to update broken templates. And (b) I think the wording is just too much. Never before I have seen a user page which threatens me with death. IMHO it is tasteless and really bad behaviour to threaten other users with killing them. There was no Code of conduct when Eatcha added that notice, but even some years ago Commons was not the Wild West.

Yes, maybe this is “just a phrase”. But there are more polite phrases to express the same thing. And just the fact that somebody chooses such a violent phrase is still tasteless and really bad behaviour. Using all caps and bold face means that the user is shouting at us and emphasizes the threatening character of the message.

I would ask Eatcha to remove/improve that message, but they are gone (no contributions since 18 November 2021). AFAICS they are also not active elsewhere. Therefore, dear admins, please consider to redact that message. Thank you very much, – Aristeas (talk) 08:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am inclined to agree that this message is in bad taste (‘tasteless’ seems like the wrong word here; ‘distasteful’ could also work). But I also find it hard to believe that anyone would seriously interpret this as a death threat. (To interpret this as a death threat, you have to read it as an idiom. And if you know enough about English to do that, then you probably also know that phrases like this are often used humorously.)

There is a broader issue here: for users not familiar with edit notices, it is not clear that this message was written by Eatcha (as opposed to being written by an admin or included in the software itself). Brianjd (talk) 08:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would also say that we should disallow such personal messages in general. GPSLeo (talk) 09:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I worked a lot on COM:FPC with Eatcha when he was active here on Commons, and he was a flamboyant user, his editing was often a bit over the top and he liked to leave an imprint on whatever he was working on. I'd say this message was typically him.

At least the messages on his user page should be modified, all of them, including the threat. The Bots he made are not working or working badly. We are relying on FPCBot for doing much of the work with FPs, and Aristeas it trying to fix those issues. Whatever bot(s) he made for taking care of the COM:FMC and COM:FV, are not working, and I've been maintaining that project manually for about a year now. Eatcha's edits on this project needs a serious cleanup. --Cart (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will simply reprhase their notice and revdel their previous one. This is simply not good. _signed,Aafi ^(talk) 10:36, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done This is sorted User:Eatcha/Templates/UserPageEditNotice - both revdelled and re-phrased. I have also left them a note. _signed,Aafi ^(talk) 10:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks to all of you and especially to Aafi for rephrasing the message! The new text is perfect and expresses clearly what Eatcha probably wanted to say. – I have changed the section of this heading – not everybody will receive Eatcha’s original message as threatening (as I did), but most of us will agree that it was inappropriate.

Still open is the question raised by Brianjd and GPSLeo: Regardless of the wording, is not obvious that such a message comes from the user (here: Eatcha), not from an admin or the Mediawiki software. This may cause misunderstandings. But maybe this should be a separate discussion because it concerns user page edit notices in general. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 12:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The user subpage that I've linked above is very clear. The message comes from who created it, and here it's only Eatcha — and it's existed for about six years since 2019. ─ Aafī on Mobile ^{^(talk)} 13:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uploading mass images without a license

Can I clarify something: do we allow people to do mass uploads without a corresponding license at the point of upload? Can someone give me the policy for this? I need to see if my understanding is off. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 13:57, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the result of something like Commons:Village pump#Major design problem in Visual Editor? Or some issue around the permission pending template (I don't remember what the exact issue was, but if I'm not mistaken, it was something where no license was added in the uploading process if one chose the option that a VRT permission would be added later on)? Nakonana (talk) 15:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]