Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU • COM:ANI

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

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

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


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


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


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

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

Note

  • Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using fou 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/U|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
  • It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; Please try to remain civil with your comments.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

愛喝奶茶 and Throwaway865432

[edit]

愛喝奶茶 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) Throwaway865432 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) Something looks fishy here. I found these while investigating File:Flag of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham.svg. Throwaway865432 reuploaded the file after it was deleted per this discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, and 愛喝奶茶 removed the deletion warning here. Files from these accounts look suspicious and need checking. Yann (talk) 07:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment So what exactly is suspicious about Throwaway865432's uploads? NorthTension (talk) 10:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The talk page says it all: User talk:Throwaway865432. Yann (talk) 10:48, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, no. You cited him and an unrelated user. NorthTension (talk) 14:44, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don't know if they are related or not, but they both have a bad record, and edited the same file, which is a copyright violation. They also uploaded similar flags: File:Flag of the Mutawakkilite Kingdom of Yemen (2-3).svg and File:Flag of Tanzim Hurras al-Din.svg. Yann (talk) 11:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on the accounts, but those flags are "similar" only in being white-on-something flags from the Muslim world, short on EXIF data. - Jmabel ! talk 17:09, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are literally completely dissimilar aside from having a sword on them. If you think they're related, do you not have the ability to see their IP, @Yann? NorthTension (talk) 16:02, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Smallworldclick

[edit]

Smallworldclick (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Newly created account. Per the guidelines, not allowed to vote at COM:QIC nor COM:FPC. I fixed the wrong edits at FPC but not at QIC. Perhaps just newbie's mistakes, still these weird edits: changing the signature, the timestamps or whatever arouses my suspicion. Thanks for your attention. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

O.k., I tried to correct the respective problems on Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 14:28, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orthographic reversion editor

[edit]

There's an odd user creating accounts that just revert various orthographic maps a few times. The first one I'm aware of is Trantrongnam~commonswiki (blocked), which was followed by Skibididopdop~commonswiki (also blocked), and since that block Skibididopdop~commonswiki_2 (not yet blocked). It's hard to discern a purpose, but given the names include Skibidi it is likely just testing or trolling. CMD (talk) 02:47, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked by Pi.1415926535. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
New one here. CMD (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

LeoBlanchette

[edit]

LeoBlanchette (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Hi, I feel this user is uploading his personal artwork only on Commons, as an abuse of COM:WEBHOST. Could someone please check if these uploads really have educational use? The first version of his user page very much looks like spam. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: It looks like a complete clip art set. I'm not sure it's an issue in and of itself - I could be persuaded either way. Their current talk page is fine. What is an issue in my eyes is that these images have previously been published on Alamy. I think we need VRT confirmation that the uploader is who they say they are, and that they didn't sign away the rights to these images when they uploaded them to Alamy. Also, they really should be renamed - it's a mess - especially that they're jpgs with "vector" in the title. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:54, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is an in-depth response.
I can rename them if need. Lets bring this issue to an end, and you guys can make decisions accordingly. Obviously I'm not experienced in commons.wikimedia.
First, deciding to make these public domain, and in consideration of the history this set has (having even been used extensively on educational site WikiAnswers back in the day https://web.archive.org/web/20090107025449/http://wikianswers.com/) besides many other places, I decided to put these in the public domain in the most authoritative way possible. That is why I brought them here rather than some silly spammy website that forces signups and tricks the users.
As for the few stock agencies they are left, on -- those agencies allow public domain works. So this really changes nothing (other than I will be making them free downloads where possible).
As for their uses internally here, I can think of plenty. I'd say adopt them here and make them the household pet. Otherwise, you can delete them, but I feel that would be a loss for the internet.
Its your call guys,
Thanks. LeoBlanchette (talk) 15:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LeoBlanchette: I think the one thing we need is an email (per COM:VRT; that small team will keep the correspondence confidential) by which you can establish that you are who you say you are, and assert that you still retain the copyright that allows you to release these. Yes, I think the files should be welcome here, and thank you for providing them. - Jmabel ! talk 17:14, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I am very happy over that. This marks a huge change for me.
I also took the paid versions down off of Alamy (they are marked for deletion, probably already gone).
Thanks everyone. LeoBlanchette (talk) 19:29, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The user already released a large set of images from these or similar series, and is in contact with VRT. I think this user problem can be closed. --Krd 03:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

please delete all these files / some of these files are uploader own picture and uploads for promotional use / others are taken from google image and are not uploader own works.

Thanks[[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 20:56, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I deleted personal images and posters, but for the rest, please provide an external source. Thanks, Yann (talk) 21:17, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Zhenghecaris

[edit]

Zhenghecaris (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) uploaded copyright violated image, File:Solza_margarita_fossil.jpg to Commons, which is considered as fair use image in other wiki,[1] (seems this user uploaded it from fandom wiki[2]), after warned by @Yann: .(see User_talk:Zhenghecaris#Copyright_violations) This user also have some problematic behaviors such as edit someone's image roughly to make it like what they claim (File:Zhenghecaris_with_setal_blades.jpg), and complain user's art style. (see here). Some of uploaded images are against w:WP:FRINGE (see this discussion). This user needs block now. Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 11:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked him for a week. Taivo (talk) 12:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Journalistes Anonymes

[edit]

Journalistes Anonymes (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information). This editor is uploading a series of photos of individuals in which the descriptions are defamatory - calling them racists, stalkers, etc. It seems to be some type of cyberbullying and that this editor's sole purpose here is to attack these individuals. In addition, the images of individuals are cut from a class photo (File:Photo de classe Secoonde 7.png) and unlikely to be "own work" as claimed anyway. Marbletan (talk) 15:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, everything's deleted. Yann (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Another sock

[edit]

VNM_EST.1976_02 is another obvious sock of Ssolbergj~commonswiki.

Is there anything that can be done to stop their disruption? M.Bitton (talk) 15:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked. @M.Bitton: You can create a request for check user. May be a blockable IP range could be found. Yann (talk) 16:58, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: I created the request. M.Bitton (talk) 17:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2A02.C7E.628D.8D00.6F78.9FB5.B5CD.35F5

[edit]

I don't know why this isn't done more automatically but please revert all the user's edits (and probably block the user), thanks. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prototyperspective: All done thanks to AntiCompositeNumber.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pammee help me !

[edit]

This editor has been warned about their copyright violations and notices have been placed on their talk page regarding the deletion of their images dating back to September. All messages have been ignored, and their copyright violations continue. Their most recent upload (File:Athenina 1.jpg) on December 1 is yet another copyright violation. They appear to have no interest in addressing the issues with their images, nor any interest in complying with our copyright policy. I recommend an indefinite block until such time as they agree to abide by our policies. Thank you, --Hammersoft (talk) 02:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, file deleted. If uploads continue, they should be blocked much longer, as they are also probably out of scope. Yann (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enhancing999, again

[edit]
The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
I am totally uninvolved, I have not participated in his discussions and even not voted in his RfA. Commons is a collaborative project, where users must hear each other and modify their behavior according to that. "I am the only correct here and all else are wrong" is not a proper attitude here. As we have clear consensus to block, the only question is lenght of the block. In my opinion one week is at moment enough, but if Enhancing does not change his behavior, the next blocks must be longer. Taivo (talk) 20:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Enhancing999 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  was brought to this noticeboard in October. Most of the users involved in the linked AN/UP thread supported a block, but the discussion was archived without any resolution.

In short, they have an extremely narrow interpretation of COM:CSD#C2 that other members of the community have repeatedly told them is incorrect, have taken it upon themselves to try to force their interpretation by attempting to police/micromanage other users, and have committed a number of conduct issues in doing so. Since that AN/UP thread, Enhancing999 has continued the same behavior (this AN thread, this thread on my talk page). Other conduct issues not directly related to categories were also raised in their recent, unanimously opposed RfIA.

In light of all of this, I think Enhancing999 has demonstrated that they don't have the temperament for working in a collaborative environment, so I am reopening the block discussion. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Pinging original discussion participants @Yann, Pi.1415926535, A.Savin, Bastique, Krd, Jmabel, Jeff G., L. Beck, Abzeronow, GPSLeo, SHB2000, and Enhancing999: The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:22, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
[3] and [4].
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 12:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neither of those appear to support what you claim. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He refers to his false statement without correcting it.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 13:08, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Link? You keep referring to 'his false statement' and 'deletion of this so that non-admins can't find it'. Yet you haven't linked to it, or linked to anything that supports such a claim. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:25, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wrote "this can't be verified by non-admins as the edits are deleted". It refers to Yann's statement accusing me of "edit-warring with Lukas Beck over deletion of Category:1922 in rail transport in Switzerland". That category is currently deleted so non-admins can't check it.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 13:34, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What problem is Enhancing999 causing here? What is the smallest action we can take to resolve that? I see blocking as excessive. I'm really not seeing much apart from the CSD#C2 issues, so maybe some topic-based restriction on that? Andy Dingley (talk) 12:14, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mhm, I think it's worth mentioning his approach and choice of words towards various users and the fact that he never misses an opportunity to defame and badmouth these users. Is there a rule for sensible and fair cooperation that could be used as a basis here? Lukas Beck (talk) 12:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We would hope that putting oneself up at RfA and that then turning into a discussion about blocking you instead would be a hint that there's some behavioural issue going on, such that you have to reconsider your way of working. We can only hope that this point makes its way through to Enhancing999. If it doesn't, then I'd be supporting blocking – but as yet, let's stay hopeful. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't remember Lukas Beck being up for Admin, but he was close to getting blocked for his badmothing.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And as predicted, you Enhancing999, have worked so diligently here in an AN posting all about you, that I would now definitely support a block. Well done. Result. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:29, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your cautious approach, but you should keep in mind that there was already a block request a few weeks ago that didn't come to a decision and the user hasn't improved much since then. How many warnings should a user receive before we start taking action? Lukas Beck (talk) 13:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here is this example too. I am taking part in this discussion and should be kicked out by the user in question because his block application against me came to the conclusion that no further action is necessary. The user is not insulting anyone, admittedly. But I also think that it doesn't always take any bad words to behave disrespectfully towards a person and Enhancing999 likes to use this approach. Lukas Beck (talk) 13:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide diffs for your accusation of defamation.
 ∞∞ Enhancing999 (talk) 13:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak support The user often contributes quite constructively it seems. Also had some fairly nonconstructive personal discussion experiences with the user. I don't think a quite long or indef block is due but there's other options such as topic-based restrictions and/or temporary block and I have not looked into it sufficiently to know which action would be due but some action probably is. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak oppose per Andy Dingley. I would support some kind of topic ban to end both these quarrels about deletion of empty categories and the resulting block discussions. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 14:17, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is much more than "deletion of empty categories". It is a general behavior issue. Yann (talk) 15:09, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak support per Andy Dingley. The unaniamously opposed RfA didn't seem to give them any hint that their behavior is at odds with a collaborative project. I reluctantly agree that a block may be necessary to prevent problems. Abzeronow (talk) 17:18, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support The last sentence of “The Squirrel Conspiracy” sums it up perfectly. --Msb (talk) 19:11, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


User:Oklahoma01

[edit]

Oklahoma01 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  : new user uploading fake images of the non-existant Federal Republic of East Africa and copyvio of others. Pierre cb (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Two more warnings, and everything's deleted. Yann (talk) 15:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Consuls.feints

[edit]

Consuls.feints (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) Continues to upload copyvios after warnings All the Best -- Chuck Talk 03:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I added source that permits resharing with terms for it. Please check again 2001:44C8:4050:197A:C13A:5D25:7577:B5F7 04:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please don't edit logged out. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 04:08, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You aren't blocked, so all that does is reveal your IP adress, as well as not helping your case. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 04:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass vandalism/falsification on 'Slavic' issues

[edit]

195.12.232.227 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
195.12.232.251 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
2001:9e8:54d4:7a00:e83c:352c:aa30:27f (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
2001:9e8:54e7:c400:6cd7:136:8233:5287 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
2001:9E8:54D4:E800:E17B:28B6:CD6D:F281 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
93.132.166.138 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
93.135.40.112 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
83.135.190.74 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Over the last couple of weeks, I have encountered a years-long (since 2022 at least) campaign of adding very dubious and POV-driven categories to a host of unrelated things. E.g. 'Slavic' and 'Church Slavonic' from Byzantine emperors ([5]), ancient frescos ([6] or [7]), Roman saints (1st-century saint is a Slav) that predate the arrival of Slavs to topics that concern the Turkic Bulgars ([8] or [9]) before their Slavicization, or the Arab Abgarids ([10]) as well as the wholesale invention of things like Category:Slavic astronomy, which should give you an idea of the POV at play. This activity also seems to very strongly overlap with attempts to add the term 'Lechitic' (almost everything in Category:Lechitic nobility was added by one of the IPs of this campaign, apparently per the Lechina Empire hoax/fringe theory) or 'Bohemian' or 'Varangian' etc (e.g. a momument to the medieval Bulgarian tsar Samuel has a Bulgarian lion, but this is a 'Ruthenian' lion) to a whole lot of different Slavic topics, presumably in an attempt to make all Slavs part of one 'Slavic' super-nation? (e.g. a Serbian noble family is now also 'Bohemian', while the founders of the Second Bulgarian Empire, who were of mixed ethnic origin, are now Slavs, Varangians and Volga Bulgarians all at once). The edits happen by different IP addresses usually originating in the Netherlands or Germany, but this does not have to mean anything; they correlate strongly with the blocked user Sibinia (talk · contribs) (cf. [11]) as well as Lchunter (talk · contribs), who in a similar spirit of ecumenical protochronism has added such things as 'Hun nobility' to a lot of pages (e.g. the Hungarian king Matthias Corvinus or the Byzantine house of Laskaris), only to also connect the Magyars to the Lechites ([12]), so in the end all are one, namely Slavs. This is a difficult case to address, as the edits have been on a massive scale, there is no single account, and every day there are one or two IPs going about this sort of thing (I have listed above a handful, there are many more). Pinging also @Future Perfect at Sunrise: and @Silar: , whom have seen engaged in reverting this sort of edits before. Constantine ✍ 08:49, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those appear to boil down to 195.12.232.0/24, 2001:9e8:5400::/40, and 93.132.166.138/24, and 93.135.0.0/16 in ASNs with ranges 195.12.224.0/19, 2001:9e8:4000::/35, and 93.132.0.0/14 (the last of which is too big).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for bringing this here. This is long-term abuser User:Kriestovo Nysian aka User:Sibinia (the latest named sock account I've been aware of was User:Vřetíle); I've been aware of them for a couple of years now but it's very tiresome to clean up after them. Their editing is a strange mixture of sometimes being merely pedantic (e.g. creating huge amounts of over-categorization), sometimes genuinely misguided (e.g. mislabeling Greek-language artifacts as Church Slavonic because of the similarity of scripts), often tendentious, and sometimes downright vandalistic (deliberate invention of artefacts and falsification of sources). And they are quite unique among the disruptive users I've known in that their vandalism and POV-pushing rarely manifests itself in article edits, but instead in creating "walled gardens" of metadata links, creating tangled webs of Commons categories, Wikidata entries, images, image metadata, and Wikidata-driven infoboxes, all of that with a view of pushing some bizarre POV notions about ancient Slavs. They are usually at least as active on Wikidata as they are here. We'd need a simple way of radically nuking everything they do and add, across projects and namespaces, for every new IP they use. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:34, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Bedivere, @Aafi, How much overlap (if at all) is there between the commons and wikidata admin corps? @Future Perfect at Sunrise, Global rollback and Writ keeper's Mass rollback script should do the trick. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 22:23, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I blocked 2 accounts. For the IPs, please create a request for check user. Thanks, Yann (talk) 11:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done: Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kriestovo Nysian. Constantine ✍ 15:45, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann @Future Perfect at Sunrise, I can do the cleanup (with massrollback) if needed. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 19:49, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sock of Solman9

[edit]

Honoor2 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  without any doubt a sockpuppet of Solman9 (see my previous report), a long-term problematic editor who is doing damage for years and is always coming back. The same edits, the same targeted subjects (Ahvaz), the same modus operandi like playing with categories and uploading copyrighted material... I suggest a block and deletion of uploaded images. --Orijentolog (talk) 15:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you insist on posting pictures that do not reflect the city's character but rather distort its general image with your suspicious photos? I will file a complaint against you for defaming an Arab city inhabited by Arabs in the Ahvaz region." Honoor2 (talk) 15:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Orijentolog: See COM:RFCU.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:52, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: I know about it, just this is too obvious to waste checkusers' time. --Orijentolog (talk) 16:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Krd, can you Handle this? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They require evidence in the form of diffs.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G. the contrib they linked is pretty damning, they literally just reverted Orijentolog. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 17:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Exceptionalmagic

[edit]

The two active confirmed members have been in the habit of adding all sorts of copyright violating pictures here, many of which are up for deletion independently. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 09:40, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Timtrent: I requested a global lock for you at m:srg#Global lock for Exceptionalmagic and socks.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:15, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G. I think that makes a great deal of sense. Thank you. It was either going to be that out a local decision here. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 10:23, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. The users are blocked. I deleted their contributions due to different reasons. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User:Whatthesigmaskibidifanumtax21

[edit]

Whatthesigmaskibidifanumtax21 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Obvious troll whose mass spam reverting files, has a deletion request out for my userpage for some reason. NorthTension (talk) 18:41, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I closed that DR as obviously frivolous. Abzeronow (talk) 18:46, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done I blocked this account, VOA, probably a sock. Yann (talk) 18:53, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yara Naziya

[edit]

Yara Naziya (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) This user uploading a copyright-protected TV posters. 茅野ふたば (talk) 08:27, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I mass deleted all uploads. No activity after your warning, so block is currently not needed. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uncivil behavior of Colin McLaughlin

[edit]

Colin McLaughlin (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  in a DR after I asked him to avoid personal attacks, he proceded insulting me using with the term "fussy kraut", see Special:Diff/967601123. Note that "kraut" is a racist slur to name a German, see https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kraut. After I asked not to insult me, he instead of apologizing said he meant to call me a "cabbage" and proceed again to insult me, see Special:Diff/967643915. Note that it is not the first time that Collin insults people when someone opens a DR, see Special:Diff/631048896. I understand that some discussions can get heated, but we should not tolerate this level of gratuitous uncivil behavior. Günther Frager (talk) 14:08, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Indeed. Blocked for 2 weeks. Yann (talk) 14:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=967673796"