Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Browse history interactively
← Older editNewer edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Davey2010 (talk | contribs)
210,149 edits
Line 278: Line 278:
:::* 2021''expiration time of 00:00, 6 March 2021'' reason: (Failure to address concerns about their comments on SE, disruptive comments on SE. Blocked until SE ends. (ElectCom member action))
:::* 2021''expiration time of 00:00, 6 March 2021'' reason: (Failure to address concerns about their comments on SE, disruptive comments on SE. Blocked until SE ends. (ElectCom member action))
:::* 2020 infin (email disabled) reason: (Disruptive comments, en:WP:IDHT, and failure to communicate) [[User:Ottawahitech|Ottawahitech]] ([[User talk:Ottawahitech|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)
:::* 2020 infin (email disabled) reason: (Disruptive comments, en:WP:IDHT, and failure to communicate) [[User:Ottawahitech|Ottawahitech]] ([[User talk:Ottawahitech|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 16:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

:::Andy's a very much respected editor here and as such I always take on board their comments - I've struck my original comment to you which can now be considered moot (IE you're free to post whereever you like). I still very much disagree entirely with you being here but it is what it is. COM:One strike exists for a reason. Prove me wrong is all I'm saying. Happy editing. –[[User:Davey2010|<span style="color:blue;">'''Davey'''</span><span style="color:orange;">'''2010'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Davey2010|<span style="color:navy;">'''Talk'''</span>]]</sup> 16:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

:::[[User:Andy Dingley|Andy]]'s a very much respected editor here and as such I always take on board their comments - I've struck my original comment to you which can now be considered moot (IE you're free to post whereever you like). I still very much disagree entirely with you being here but it is what it is. [[COM:One strike]] exists for a reason. Prove me wrong is all I'm saying. Happy editing. –[[User:Davey2010|<span style="color:blue;">'''Davey'''</span><span style="color:orange;">'''2010'''</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Davey2010|<span style="color:navy;">'''Talk'''</span>]]</sup> 16:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)


* Whilst Davey might see these as annoying and pointless, they're not repeated and so any real culpable annoyance is negligible. I can't see an issue here.
* Whilst Davey might see these as annoying and pointless, they're not repeated and so any real culpable annoyance is negligible. I can't see an issue here.

Revision as of 16:49, 17 March 2021

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
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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

  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • Notify the user(s) concerned. {{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.

User:Ymblanter

The following discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.

Violation of renaming policy [1]. Threatening by blocking after showing that the renaming was illegal because the used name is acceptable for Belarusian language. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 09:39, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(Note that the user did not care to notify me about this thread). Indeed, w:be-tarask:Русіфікацыя Беларусі says Русіфікацыя (w:en:Russification) is the same as маскаліза́цыя (moskalization, from w:en:Moskal, which is an offensive ethnic slur). However, be-tarask is a project usurped by a group of ultra-nationalists, who are in particular notorious for trying to push the Belarusian Latin alphabeth everywhere in Wikiverse. The Belarusian Wikipedia, which is a healthy project, contains this article as well, w:be:Русіфікацыя Беларусі, but does not mention any moskalization. May I please also note that this element in the name of the file is completely unneeded, and was only added to make the title sound offensive. If I saw this on the English Wikipedia, where I am administrator, this would likely result, after a discussion, in a site ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:49, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The filename is in Belarusian, not in English. So the provided reference to English language conventions where «moskal» is offensive name isn't related to the case. For example, Russian word ru:Жид (Zhyd, Žyd) is offensive slur but at the same time similar Polish :pl:Żydzi/Żyd is the only recognized name for English en:Jews. I also believe that insulting of another language project is totally unacceptable for a Commons administrator. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 10:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I should also notice that Belarusian "maskal" and derivative terms are widely used in Belarusian (not russificated) dictionaries. They are still used in Belarusian reliable scientific sources, which is shown in w:be-tarask:Русіфікацыя Беларусі. So the attempts of User:Ymblanter to restrict the usage of this term here are totally against the policies and can be considered as usurpation of this project by Russian ultra-nationalists. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 11:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hope, there are reasonable administrators who understand the simple true that English Wikipedia has nothing to do with internal questions of other languages. Belarusian name "maskal" and derivatives are widely used (scan)] as the only possible alternative for concepts related to Russification in the Belarusian-Russian dictionary of Dr. en:Jan Stankievič (NY). The access to this dictionary is provided by the en:Library of Congress [2]. The derivative of the word "maskal" is also claimed (scan) as the first alternative to the English word "Russian" in the textbook Fundamental Belarusian, published with assistance of the Canadian Federal Government. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 14:48, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Checked this out and neither user looks particularly good here. Kazimier Lachnovič blasted Ymblanter with an emotional demand over a seriously minor renaming issue. Ymblanter threatened to use his admin powers to block in a dispute in which he is involved. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:53, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If I am allowed to use an analogy which is closer to English speakers, let me try. A user uploads a file with the name "Barack Obama is the first nigger (African American) president.jpg". I rename the file into "Barack Obama is the first African American president.jpg". The user shows up at my talk page and argues that "nigger" is a Papuan version of English is fully synonymous to an African American. As a proof, the user shows that indeed in the Papuan English alt spelling Wikipedia there is an article on African American which starts as "African Americans, also known as Niggers, are ...", cited to three offline books, two books written in the 19th century, the script of the movie "Pulp Fiction", and a couple of article written by known KKK members. There is also the Papuan English common spelling Wikipedia, which has the same article but does not use the word. The user says that they "demand" to move the article back, and that the word nigger in the Papuan English is not offensive, it is normal usage. I refuse, and, having in the past dealt with the user, warn them again unilaterally moving this back. The user goes to the VPU. Here we are.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:08, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment NB! Ymblanter, please read this (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Equality). The issue you rise that some books are unavailable in the web is ludicrous (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Some_types_of_sources). Have you tried to go out in a bibliotheca? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Book_sources; If the book you are looking for is in a language other than English, you might find it helpful to look at the equivalent pages on other Wikipedias, linked below – they are more likely to have sources appropriate for that language.) Write a book himself/herself to become cited as a pundit. Until other books/researches written by pundits are made, the old ones are those to refer to. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 178.120.57.51 (talk) 20:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The analogy given by the opponent is ridiculous, totally irrelevant and can be regarded as an insult and provocation. It looks like the user with admin powers is still trying to insult one of the local Wikipedia communities — the Belarusian Wikipedia. First of all, Belarusian language is not a version of English. So English has nothing to do with the assessment of Belarusian words. And there are still no proofs (no references to reliable sources related to the Belarusian language) that the removed word is "offensive slur". Moreover, I've provided references to contemporary (published less than 50 years ago, not in the 19th century) totally reliable sources associated with the US and Canadian governments that deny the claim of "offensive slur". In the mentioned article w:be-tarask:Русіфікацыя Беларусі the references are provided to the modern publications (both from 2009) of Dr. Prof. Nina Barščeŭskaja (en:University of Warsaw) and Dr. Prof. Lidzija Savik (en:Belarusian State University of Culture and Arts). Is it OK to compare them with "known KKK members"? Is such an insult and provocation comparable to "emotional demand", which makes me (without admin powers) don't "look particularly good"? --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd like to ask other admins, is the comparison of the Belarusian language with the Pidgin version of another language (by the way according to the Russian Nazis, Belarusian is the Pidgin version of Russian) an acceptable format of discussion? --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    You may substitute it for Scottish if you wish. This is not the central point of my argument. I am actually surpriszed that we are having this discussion at all.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    So you suggest to replace in your analogy Papuan with Scottish? --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 18:47, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    If it somehow helps you, yes, please. I actually do not consider any languages being inferior to others.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:51, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    So you believe that English speakers should impose the English language conventions (e.g. meaning of the word "nigger") to Scottish filenames containing Scottish words which look similar to "nigger"? --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 19:14, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Let us see what English speakers have to say. It is pretty clear to me that you perfectly know that the name of the file would look offensive to every Russian speaker, and on purpose defend this name because you want it to be offensive to every Russian speaker. If this were not your intention, you would have apologized for oversight and certainly not demand to move the file back.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No, you are totally wrong about my intentions. Like I said before "Маскалізацыя" (that is accepted by Belarusian Wikipedia community, which you've already compared with KKK members) is a more traditional and precise Belarusian name for Russification. That's the only reason why I use this word along with the more common for russified version of Belarusian language word "Русіфікацыя". I should also notice that only a really sick mind can conclude, that a word in one language should be banned here just because it looks offensive for some users who speak another language. With such sick logic the Spanish word "negro" (black) should be banned just because it has the same origins with "nigger". I've already provided the example with Russian ru:Жид and Polish pl:Żyd, that actually have the same origin but the first one is an offensive ethnic slur and the second one is a totally legal name. And there is no evidence that the Belarusian word "маскалізацыя" shouldn't be used in Belarusian language filenames. It's not offensive in Belarusian language. Your attempts to restrict usage of Belarusian language (in our case not russificated version of Belarusian language) here just because it can offence Russian speakers is a clear manifestation of Russian chauvinism. Wikimedia Commons is multilingual project and media files can be uploaded with names in any language in any script + Commons is not Wikipedia, and files uploaded here do not necessarily need to comply with the Neutral point of view. So based on this guidelines I'm going to revert your illegal edits based on offensive statement about Belarusian language and Belarusian Wikipedia by any legal means. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 20:56, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I hope after this revert, an administrator will uphold the general Wikimedia policies, prohibiting ethnic slurs. Which means, well, a block of an indefinite duration.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:02, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In our case, a fictional so called "ethnic slur", because you didn't provide any evidence that your statements are true for the Belarusian language (not English or Russian). Insulting Belarusian Wikipedia and Belarusian scientists (comparing them with KKK) has nothing in common with such evidence. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    You consistently ignore my argument that the Belarusian Wikipedia actually is not using this ethnic slur. What is using this ethnic slur is the Belarusian Taraskevitsa Wikipedia, which is run by a clique of ultra-nationalists. We still remember very well how you guys canvassed people trying to impose your own version of Belarusian riomanisation on the English Wikipedia - and failed miserably.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:35, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    First, you must and you will answer for the repeated accusations of the Belarusian Wikipedia community of "ultra-nationalism" (without any evidence of this). Second, Belarusian (Taraškievica) is one of recognized Wikipedia communities, so like I said according to the current guideline media files can be uploaded with names in any language in any script including Belarusian (Taraškievica). Third, the absence of the name in the Wikipedia doesn't mean that this name is not used in Belarusian language and it definitely has nothing to do with the requested evidence of belonging to an ethnic slur. Fourth, the romanization problem is totally unrelated to this discussion and just for the record the majority of mentioned users were from "healthy" (like you said) other Belarusian Wikipedia. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Kazimier Lachnovič why are you so emotional about this? It's an image name. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:50, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not emotional about image name and file description. These edits are against the Commons:File naming and Commons:Project scope/Neutral point of view. To maintain order here, they should be reverted or the guidelines changed. But I'm not sure if this is the only problem now, because I'm really concerned about repeated insult of the Belarusian Wikipedia (calling "clique of ultra-nationalists" and comparing with KKK members) by the particular administrator of multilingual project. I don't understand why I have to tolerate such behavior. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 22:32, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In case of possible archiving the request without any reaction (like it has already happened before with a quite similar case here and here) I've opened a discussion on the Village pump (it looks like I had to mention this discussion here). --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 12:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If I understand this correctly this is a dispute on the name of an object in different dialects of one language. In such a case the original name by the uploader should always be kept. I also do not move Category:Berliner to Category:Pfannkuchen. --GPSLeo (talk) 19:04, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, it would be more like Category:Scheissdreck (Berliner), which I have moved to category Category:Berliner.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like Ymblanter really hates the capital of Russia Moscow (Belarusian "Maskva") from which Belarusian "maskal" and "maskalizacyja" are originated. That's the only possible reason to compare this city to wiktionary:en:Scheißdreck. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 09:10, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
having the same origin doesn't mean the same definition and I agree that it sounds offensive in Russian language. As Commons is an international project I would find a better neutral name: why not use it in English? rubin16 (talk) 14:43, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to the official policy, Commons is a multilingual project, so there's no reason to favor English over other languages. This also applies to any other language, including Russian. And as I pointed out earlier, the offensive connotation of w:en:Zhyd in some languages doesn't give any excuse to rename Polish filenames and file descriptions that include Żyd (or Żydzi, Żydowski) to English. As it has been shown here, there is no sound evidence, that Belarusian "maskalizacyja" is offensive (Note that Commons’ neutral point of view differs significantly from that of English Wikipedia. A file like “File:Taiwanese Tiaoyutai islands map.png” would be acceptable on Commons, even though it is not neutrally titled (see here). This does not mean that all non-neutrally worded titles are acceptable, however. An image of a person with the name “File:1BIGGest_nOSE_everS33n.JPG” would not enjoy the same protection.) --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 16:27, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kazimier Lachnovič: One thing: The mentioned user has global rollbacker flag, should their this flag be affected due to above problems? Revoke or not? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:03, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Liuxinyu970226: In my opinion there is no need to revoke the global rollbacker flag. At least until the facts of its abuse appear. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 08:59, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Kazimier Lachnovič: To be preceise, in Polish Żyd of course means "a Jew", Żydzi means "a nation or group of Jews". Although there is also żyd (written with a small letter) which first of all means "a follower of judaism" but also means "someone mean/cheap". The second meaning is pejorative, it is rarely used and is rather considered old fashioned. See https://sjp.pwn.pl/szukaj/%C5%BCyd.html. Attention must be paid to the first letter – in Polish a Żyd not necessarily must be a żyd (A Jew not necessarily must be a follower of judaism or a cheap person). --jdx Re: 10:33, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Jdx: Thank you for the clarification. Each language has its own features, some of which can only be known (and fully understandable) by native speakers. That is why I consistently follow the opinion that in case of ambiguous situations concerning some linguistic issues, the practice of corresponding local Wikipedia community should be considered first. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 10:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Publication of Dr. Prof. Nina Barščeŭskaja (w:en:University of Warsaw) (2009, w:en:Polskie Radio) (text with "maskalizacyja")
  2. Publication of Dr. Prof. Nina Barščeŭskaja (w:en:University of Warsaw) (2010, w:en:Polskie Radio) (text with "maskalizm")
  3. Publication of Dr. Prof. Nina Barščeŭskaja (w:en:University of Warsaw) (2007, w:en:Polskie Radio) (text with "maskal")
  4. Publication of Dr. Prof. Lidzija Savik (w:en:Belarusian State University of Culture and Arts) (w:en:Narodnaja Volya (newspaper) Nr. 17—18, 3.02.2009. P. 6) (pdf with "maskalizacyja")
  5. Introduction to the dictionary by linguist w:be-tarask:Юрась Пацюпа (2008) ("maskalizm" as accepted abbreviation).
  6. Etymological dictionary of Belarusian (Volume 6, 1993, p. 245—246) by the w:en:National Academy of Sciences of Belarus ("maskal" without any mention of slur)
  7. Belarusian-Russian dictionary of Dr. w:en:Jan Stankievič (Vilnia, 1921, p. 5) ("abmaskaleńnie" as Russification)
  8. Belarusian-Russian dictionary of Dr. w:en:Jan Stankievič (NY, 1989) provided by the w:en:Library of Congress [3] (a scan with "maskalić", "abmaskalić", "abmaskaleny", "abmaskaleńnie", "maskal")
  9. Belarusian-Russian dictionary by w:be-tarask:Сьцяпан Некрашэвіч (Minsk, 1925), the founder of the w:en:National Academy of Sciences of Belarus (236. "maskalizm", 237. "maskal", 238. "maskalka")
  10. Russian-Belarusian dictionary (scientific terminology of literary work) by w:en:Yanka Kupala, the greatest Belarusian-language writer of the 20th century (5. "maskalizm")
  11. Publication of Dr. w:be-tarask:Вячаслаў Ракіцкі (2001, w:en:Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) (text with "maskal")
  12. Publication of writer and journalist w:be-tarask:Сяржук Сокалаў-Воюш (2013, w:en:Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) (text with "maskal")
  13. Publication of linguist w:be-tarask:Юрась Пацюпа (2009, w:en:Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) (text with "maskalizm")
  14. Publication of linguist w:be-tarask:Юрась Пацюпа (2009, w:en:Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty) (text with "maskalizm")
  15. Publication of Dr. w:pl:Siarhiej Szydłouski (2000, w:en:Nasha Niva) (text with "maskalizm")
  16. Publication of w:en:Ales Bialiatski awarded by w:en:Right Livelihood Award (2002, w:en:Nasha Niva) (text with "abmaskaleńnie")
  17. Publication in the oldest Belarusian newspaper w:en:Nasha Niva (1998) text with "abmaskalvańnie" + statement, that "maskal" is the historical name of Russians in Belarusian language, without any insult to them)
  18. Publication of Dr. Prof. w:be-tarask:Леанід Лыч (w:en:National Academy of Sciences of Belarus) (2011, pdf with "abmaskalvańnie")
  19. Publication in popular science and literary journal w:be-tarask:ARCHE Пачатак (2013) (text with "maskalizacyja")
  20. Publication in popular science and literary journal w:be-tarask:ARCHE Пачатак (2013) (text with "maskalizm")
  21. Publication of journalist w:be-tarask:Глеб Лабадзенка (2012, w:be-tarask:ARCHE Пачатак) (text with "abmaskalvańnie")
  22. Russian-Belarusian dictionary by w:be-tarask:Сьцяпан Некрашэвіч (Minsk, 1928, republished in 2014), the biggest and the most fundamental Belarusian dictionary before w:en:Russification (gives "maskal" as Belarusian translation of "Russian", "abmaskalvać" — "to russificate", "abmaskalvańnie" — "Russification")
  23. Explanatory dictionary of w:en:Nasha Niva (2007, Volume 2, p. 522) by the w:en:National Academy of Sciences of Belarus (according to the dictionary, Belarusian "maskal" means Russian without any negative connotation)
  24. Electronic spelling dictionary by modern editorial office of w:en:Nasha Niva (2001, zip) ("maskalizm", a scientific term w:en:Russianism).
  25. Belarusian-Russian dictionary by lexicographer w:be-tarask:Мікалай Касьпяровіч (Viciebsk, 1925, p. 31) ("maskalism" as Russianism)
--Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 15:45, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to Kazimier Lachnovič. There are lots of pundits' we shall rely on works brought up. There are sources from back then, like Yanka Kupala, to modern publications in historic journals like ARCHE Пачатак. For admins like Ymblanter, it would be useful to visit these pages (assuming good faith and without taking advantage of an admin status (which can be revoked for its abuse) and refresh what type of language are gonna be used.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Use_of_gender_neutral_language

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Language_policy

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:File_naming

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators/De-adminship

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Assume_good_faith

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Ownership_of_pages_and_files

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 178.120.57.51 (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that the remarks of the IP constitute clear harassment addressed to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is now becoming more and more obvious that there are no administrators who actually carry about the guidelines (maybe apart from the ones concerned copyright). Just in case if someone realizes the shame of this situation, I give my last argument as addition to the earlier provided list of using the censored here Belarusian words. According to the publication of Dr. w:be:Уладзімір Уладзіміравіч Агіевіч (w:en:National Academy of Sciences of Belarus) a Belarusian term "maskalizacyja" (censored in here just because some Russian admins doesn't like it, that is very close to w:en:Nazism) is even more correct than an alternative "rusifikacyja" for w:en:Russification (Albaruthenica. Nr. 13, 2000, p. 72, which are the proceedings of the scientific center related to the Belarusian Ministry of education). --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 10:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    May be if you are right and everybody else here is consistently wrong, you should look in the mirror rather than to resort to personal attacks. I have already mentioned a few times that I am not Russian, I am Dutch. And accusations of me in nazizm is something you should get a block for. I am unfortunately can not do it myself, but normally users accusing others in nazism have no place on the Wikimedia projects, and my role as administrator is to make sure these users get removed asap.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:42, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Don't see a big difference, but it's not a problem for me to reformulate. The admin with the native Russian who just admitted to being involved in deliberate discrimination of the Belarusian language. + was previously seen in spread of pro-Russian propaganda (e.g. Russian is still the mothertongue of 95% of the population of Belarus [4]). And I have all rights to compare obvious aggressive linguistic chauvinism with similar type of discriminations including Nazism, especially during the rise of modern Russian Nazism. And you are the one who should has been blocked for calling the whole local Wikipedia community a a clique of ultra-nationalists and comparing with the the terrorists. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 14:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I invite you to come to the English Wikipedia and accuse me in Nazism there. I promise that this would earn you a block of an indefinite duration, possibly a community ban.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:15, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It is obvious that a reasonable person will never follows such inadequate suggestion (to accuse some user in Nazism) in any Wikipedia project including the Wikimedia Commons. But it doesn't mean that obvious national discrimination (from what Nazism has been started) should be tolerated, which I've already stated in the English Wikipedia [5]. And it was accepted because, as now, there is nothing to object. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed, you tried to come up similar bullshit (without accusing me in Nazism however) on the English Wikipedia a year ago, and were not really successful in convincing anyone over there.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Nevertheless, no objections of the claims were provided. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not have time and energy to follow your around and disprove every bullshit you write about me. Even here, I only concentrate on the most offensive ones. I do not feel like I should disprove your accusation for example that I do not respect Belarusian language. This is offensive bullshit as well, but I am not going to collect diffs proving the opposite.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Your latest recognition of censorship Belarusian language based on Russian one is quite enough for your accusation in not respecting Belarusian language. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 18:55, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure. And it is enough for you to issue a bunch of personal attacks here against me, even though I did not personally attack you at any instance. I started assuming good faith, you have consistently proven you are acting in bad faith. This is why I believe that you should not be editing Wikimedia projects. This is my last response in this thread. You can of course continue posting a personal attack every week, hoping it stays on top forever.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The absence of personal attacks on me is another example of lie from you. Any reasonable person can just read the first your message in this thread to find it out (be-tarask is a project usurped by a group of ultra-nationalists). And such behavior is a sound reason that you are the user who should not be editing Wikimedia projects. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And yes, I'm going to remind local administrators regularly (to prevent archiving this thread without any action like it has already happen with the similar case) about the lack of reverting the edits which were obviously against guidelines until these edits will be reverted or until the deceptive (for the users without admin rights) guidelines will be changed. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 19:35, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kazimier Lachnovič, you have repeated your point many times. The general opinion of uninvolved users who have commented is that no one's behavior here was admirable, but that there is not admin action that is needed in this case. Threatening to keep this thread open, when it is clear that a consensus for admin intervention is not going to suddenly emerge, is extremely poor behavior. Threatening to continue a discussion indefinitely until someone caves in to appease them is harassment, and a particularly noxious way of making it miserable for another editor. If there is a need for further discussion, either in regards to user behavior or details of file names, then a new thread without three weeks of accusations can be opened (preferrably by an uninvolved user).

Note: my original close stated If you do not stop your harassment, you will be swiftly blocked. While I will block if necessary to stop harassment or threats, this was overly hasty and too grouchy on my part. I hope this edit clarifies my close. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is closed, and will be archived soon.
Kazimier Lachnovič has chosen a different route and just reverted my change. Very smart - there is absolutely nothing I can do about this. In the meanwhile, I was called an abusive admin supported by my Russian friends (not sure what friends, but fine). Who cares that I have never misused my tools. Great. I am going back to low activity.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:42, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MesinKetik

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

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

I believe MesinKetik is used to bypass the indef block of Achmadmaulanaibr. Look at the file histories. The only purpose of MesinKetik is to transfer the files. For example https://id.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Berkas:A._A._Suhardi.jpg&action=history https://id.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Berkas:Rooseno_soerjohadikusumo_PYO.jpg&action=history .--Iphoneuser88 (talk) 13:45, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Will this be ignored?--Iphoneuser88 (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not necessarily, it is just not enough (at least for me) evidence to block. May be you can convince checkusers to look at this.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Achmadmaulanaibr is stale. Checkusers won't open case.--Iphoneuser88 (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Login not recognized

User: dgreusard

Hello,

Since that day, my login, recognized on Wikipedia whatever the language, is not recognized on Commons.

After several attempts, in doubt including with other login/passwords, I posted a reset request, twice, and didn't receive the announced mail.

Of course, I checked all folders with unread messages.

I even tried to recreate my user login, but was immediately stopped, the page answering that this login already exists.

I don't know what's going on.

Can you unblock me? What can I do?

Greetings,

Dominique Greusard — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 181.132.218.47 (talk) 07:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:POS78

NO ACTION:

I will mentor POS78 in his native language for the next three months. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

POS78 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

For several weeks this user is playing with categories naming, making numerous arbitrary redirects, ignoring the standardization and leaving the media in redirected cats. I asked him to stop three times (first, second, third), he said that it won't happen again, but then continues with the same practice again, again and again. He is doing the same disruptive redirects on other projects like English Wikipedia, so he get warned. Fixing his redirects on Wikipedia is easy, someone simple redirect it back, but here on Commons it is not. Numerous page histories have been destroyed because of his playing. Furthermore, it should be noted that User:POS78 has been blocked on Persian Wikipedia as sockpuppet of User:M.k.m2003, also blocked here on Commons. --Orijentolog (talk) 16:57, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I do not intend to sabotage And that I want to use a more accurate name, I'm ashamed if I made a mistake But I promise it will not be repeated and I will not moves an article without its correct name And that I was blocked about a year ago with M.k.m2003's username But I had forgotten, Can I apologize and be allowed to work on Wikimedia Commons? I am very eager to upload pictures of historical places and I was successful Without any violation, Please see my files[6] You do not see any violations, Please give me a chance to prove myself, thanks POS78 (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@POS78: لطفاً استفاده از این اکانت (POS78) را همین حالا متوقف کنید و دیگر با این اکانت ویرایش نکنید. به info-commons@wikimedia.org ایمیل بزنید و بخواهید دسترسی به صفحهٔ بحثتان (M.k.m2003) را باز کنند. بعد درخواست آنبلاک بدهید. شخصاً نظر مساعدی نسبت به باز شدنتان دارم ولی اگر بی‌کفایتی نشان دهید و مثلاً در کار کردن با رده‌ها دقت نکنید، دوباره برایتان دردسر درست خواهد شد. 4nn1l2 (talk) 17:22, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Orijentolog: Fawiki has its own problems. Let's not import issues from there. I have positive opinions about POS78. They are indeed trying very hard to learn making positive contributions. I can mentor them for a while if need be. Regarding "playing with categories", I have a different opinion. Ribat seems to be different from caravanserai. Although they are used interchangeably, ribat seems to be mainly for horses and the like, whereas caravanserai seems to be more generic.[7] I indeed don't know the difference myself (even after skimming [8]) but many of them are called ribat in Persian, for example see Ribat Mehr on Iranshahrpedia and its registration file. My point is further discussion may be needed. Thanks 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@4nn1l2: About fa.wiki, OK. I don't say everything what POS78 did is wrong. Personally I was "mentoring" him, giving him advices about categorization, even when he was asked about references on en.wiki, I sent him some tips. All I asked is that he don't make arbitrary redirects because of three reasons:
(1) in most cases, it was wrong or misleading. I spent a lot of time searching for proper names, namesakes of specific buildings (I even leave notices in edit summaries about it), and then POS78 come and redirect it. Without any notices, discussions or sources.
(2) He insists on "Castle of X" naming, instead of "X Castle". I told him that there are thousands of buildings, even counties and provinces, with such standardized naming, but he don't care.
(3) He never move files after redirects. That's why I called his redirects as playing.
Generally, "ribat" is very rarely used in English terminology, and registration data isn't always authoritative for naming. A fine example would be the "Seleucid Temple of Khvorheh" recently opened by POS78, here on Commons named as Parthian mansion at Khorheh. One Iranian editor already asked me why I reverted his temple category and asked me for sources, and he got it. POS78 can also ping me and ask anything, I'll respond to him, it's far better than making arbitrary redirect to "a more accurate name" which is in fact terribly outdated. When POS78 also recently opened Temple of Mehr and Temple of Mehri, I noticed him it's the same site and he should redirect one. There's no problem if someone makes such mistakes, last summer I added this categories for the same site, based on data from fa.wiki and news media, and two days ago I opened scholarly articles and realized all was wrong. You see, fails happen to all of us.
My general tip to POS78, you and other Iranian editors would be: if you see some category which I edited and something seems "wrong", first check the page history (for notices) and Wikidata (for sources). In most cases you'll find them. For example, take a look at this old dams in Razavi Khorasan, they all have tens of high-quality references inside. It took hours to find them, compare data, insert and so on. Overal result is (IMHO) beautiful: visual presentation with numerous reliable data in infobox, automatically translated to any selected language. It makes Wikipedia in general as "failed" project. :) Hundreds of other buildings have the same, so it can be highly frustrating when someone comes for several seconds and is making superficial edits. And finally, if you don't find any notices or sources, you can always leave message on talk page or contact me directly. --Orijentolog (talk) 20:19, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all your excellent contributions. My understanding is that he cannot speak English well and uses Google Translate. I will talk to him in his native language and hope that he will listen. I will mentor him in Persian. That's my point. I specifiaclly tell him think twice before changing your edits, because you indeed work perfectly :)
I know that he was treated poorly by fawiki admins and he may need some support now. Thanks, 4nn1l2 (talk) 20:42, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

User:H2kaz

H2kaz (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Copyvio after last warning. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Upload deleted. But I'm inclined to wonder if it may be more productive in the long run if someone like maybe @Yasu: could help us out in trying to explain things in ja. GMGtalk 11:49, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Thank you, GMG. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Info Dropped a quick note on the user's talk page. Yasu (talk) 15:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Walter Grassroot

This report is nonsense. I urge Zhxy519 to stop trolling immediately. Along with this post, Zhxy519 wrongfully nominated several files for speedy deletion - which is against relevant criteria and has been reverted by me. I'm citing this previous DR case regarding contents from Chinanews.com. --Techyan（Talk） 09:48, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Chinanews.com itself is claiming rights in the link I provided. It could be contradiction, but it will cause troubles.--Zhxy 519 (talk) 22:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The works are offered on YouTube under an accepted free licence. As long as the copyright holder offers their work under an accepted free licence at one source and it has been licence reviewed, it can be hosted on Commons. No action necessary here. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 23:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Al.Massira persistently changing stable maps

Hello, I'm Al.Massira , and I would like to make a few brief clarifications, regarding this report. This isn't about a point of view, let alone a political one, it's about the borders. Regarding the SADR/RASD diplomatic relations map and locator maps, no source remotely supports that they are/control the entire territory of Western Sahara, although they do claim it. The maps are there to indicate the location of the SADR, which controls roughly 1/5 of the territory, with the rest being administered by Morocco. The maps however, are not there to indicate the entirety of Western Sahara, so it is important not to get the the territory of Western Sahara and the self proclaimed nation of the SADR mixed up. One is an entire territory, the other is a mostly unrecognized state (only about 35 UN members continue to recognize the SADR as of 2021). Now as for the Portugal Morocco Locator, M.Bitton is absolutely not in the right to site COM:OVERWRITE as the reasoning to revert, when they had a chance to do that when that new version was first uploaded, that very much violated COM:OVERWRITE back in the end of December. Bear in mind that the file they kept restoring, is barely two months old, while the original long-standing version is nearly 9 years old. I took a look at that file history and I will also point out they reverted this file back to this version not one year ago when someone colored Western Sahara the same color as Morocco, so now I'm a bit confused. Anyways, I reverted it back to the original version how it was pre-December, and it should probably stay that way, being as its the long standing version and there is a clear disagreement with the other maps. Just wanted to clarify because I'm not sure if the editor who opened this report was showing the context as a whole or being completely truthful. It's not just "Al.Massira persistently changing stable maps". Best — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al.Massira (talk • contribs) 01:47, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted this file and this other file back to the version @M.Bitton wanted, now that a more adequate description for the maps has been provided, as suggested by another editor (IP) on my talk page. Personally, I am not a fan of how the SADR is shown on those maps as the whole Western Sahara because the land they actually control (primarily in a de-facto status) is barely any of that, however this really isn't that big of a deal and turning this into a giant issue does not seem worth it over a couple of maps. I hope that could be a good enough compromise, but we'll see if we can get some admin insight on this overall situation anyway. Best. Al.Massira (talk) 02:34, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, they need to revert all of them; though that's only part of the issue. Having dealt with many of EdDakhla's socks, my concerns remain the same. When a "new" editor starts by uploading this map before moving on to mess around with politically charged maps, then there isn't a shred of doubt about what their intentions are. Their This isn't about a point of view, let alone a political one, it's about the borders confirms it.
Another thing worth noticing is the fact that they too are uploading fake SVGs (like this one). @Jeff G., TommyG, and Koavf: Since you commented on the last report, could you please have a look at this one? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 02:49, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why we are even here in the first place is because they support keeping problematic pro-SADR maps and I've made them more neutral and now they reporting me and taking it several steps too far. This isn't my way or the highway, this is Wikimedia Commons. There is nothing "politically motived" when there is a map showing SADR-controlled territory, rather than the whole Western Sahara territory, which wasn't, isn't and will never be theirs. When they said before moving on to mess around with politically charged maps, then there isn't a shred of doubt about what their intentions are., I know very well what my intentions are, wish is to push a neutral standpoint, so with all due respect, I do not need them to vouch or tell me what my intentions are. I am starting to lose my temper with M.Bitton given his seemingly aggressive nature, his goal possibly to even get me blocked. But cool, if they would rather go the personal attack route, we can also do that too, although nothing coming from my behalf. Al.Massira (talk) 03:06, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
There's no excuse for overwriting all these stable maps and if this user isn't an actual sockpuppet, he's clearly doing the same inappropriate behaviors. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:34, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf, well of course you agree that what I supposedly did was "inappropriate". This speaks for itself. Al.Massira (talk) 03:44, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain your point, Al.Massira by actually using your words and not by using malformed links. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 04:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Koavf, Sure thing, and the link there is not "malformed" it's perfectly fine. I'm just saying in that WP article about yourself, respectfully, under "Activism" it states In 2005, at the United Nations Sixtieth General Assembly, Knapp advocated for the Sahrawi people and spoke about the situation in Western Sahara. He has also been involved in community organizing for a Restore the Fourth rally in 2013, which now clarifies and helps us give a perfect understanding as to why you agree with M.Bitton regarding some changes I may have made to Moroccan maps (I'm sure they were aware of that). If you are going to "advocate for the Sahrawi people" and speak about the "situation in Western Sahara", we have a pretty good idea of how you would want Western Sahara to appear on maps and now everything has become clear as crystal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Al.Massira (talk • contribs) 04:12, 11 March 2021‎ (UTC)[reply]
Al.Massira edit warring continues unabated and given the above personal attack, I am now convinced that they are a sock of Taha Khattabi (a.k.a. EdDakhla and many more, and whose latest known IP 71.232.135.186 is already blocked for 3 months on en.wp). M.Bitton (talk) 04:54, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be damned if what I said here qualifies as any sort of personal attack. But even in the slimmest chance that what said there were personal attacks aimed towards Koavf, then apologies as it certainly wasn't meant in that way. I simply came across their stance (found available on the WP article about them) and made the very clear connection here as to why they agree with Bitton and to show their opinion of what Sahara maps should look like. Bear in mind, no name-calling or accusations (which would have been undoubtable personal attacks) took place by me, however I do recall Bitton of describing me as a "sock" and accusing me of initiating personal attacks toward Koavf. Al.Massira (talk) 05:21, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Al.Massira: Your link is malformed: try clicking on it. I'm not going to get into some bad faith, personality-based argument with you here. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:01, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Al.Massira: as per COM:OVERWRITE the major and controversial changes are not allowed, and seeing the discussion above, this is clearly the case. I reverted File:Algeria RASD Locator.PNG and I'm going to check the other maps you edited. Stop to revert and to overwrite with your own versions those maps, specially if they are in use in many other projects, i.e. if they are used like this it's not for nothing and they have an educational value for the other project like that. If they are within our project scope your versions need to be uploded in separate files. I repeat stop to revert or to change the meaning of those maps. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • And also @Al.Massira: stop attacking other users in a conflicting manner, such as [9] or [10]. The goal of M.Bitton is not to "get you blocked", your behavior alone would tend to cause you to be blocked if you persist. Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:46, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No need to beat the dead horse and I didn't personally attack anyone. End of story. Al.Massira (talk) 07:51, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Fæ

This has been resolved with the consent of all involved. --AFBorchert (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The user is massively uploading articles from Jstor. The initial pages of his uploads contain information (that may be PD-simple) and Jstor logo which is unlikely to be free. The declared license {{PD-old-100-expired}} does not seem to apply to the logo. Moreover, the source pages (example) contain information that the logo is trademarked. I asked Fæ to explain what does he intend to do with this and to stop uploading until this is resolved. But he continues uploads. I suggest blocking the user write access to the File namespace until the issue is resolved. In my opinion, the initial pages should be removed; but this may be hard to do this en masse using free software. Any comments? Ankry (talk) 10:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Refer to COM:IA books#JSTOR where an explanation for removing cover pages of "JSTOR Early Journal Content" was written several days ago. The cover pages are being removed, ref Category:Internet Archive (JSTOR cover page removed). As is mentioned the copyright status of the JSTOR logo has not been determined. This collection is described by JSTOR as journal materials published prior to 1923 in the United States and prior to 1870 elsewhere. It is worth noting that it was JSTOR that released these files to the Internet Archive, some of that collection with no cover pages.
Ankry, the post to my talk page was at 8am my time. I was writing a response at 10am my time, when I saw that my reply had been preempted by escalating to ANU. Two hours for a response?
Your summary as "continues uploads" is an unfair characterization. The suggestion of blocking access to file namespace for the most active uploader to Commons would be an extreme and inflammatory action, especially considering that these uploads have been going on for several months without objection. A little more good faith, and recognition in my decade-plus of experience with these projects, please.
JSTOR's logo is a trademark, but the JSTOR page about it here, makes no specific claim of copyright but does make it clear that You can use the JSTOR logo on your website.
As a courtesy, please refer to User:Fæ#pronoun.
Thanks, I don't think there is any action needed here. --Fæ (talk) 10:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I came here due to lack of response on talk page. After the explanation, I think this can be closed. My doubt is still why to make the double upload: PDFs with and without the cover; especially as the original ones likely need to be deleted.
Thanks Fæ for great work. And I am sorry, for coming here. I should probably be more patient. Ankry (talk) 15:57, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I think that this could have been resolved outside of COM:AN/U. Secondly, I agree that the logos are a problem as they appear to be eligible for copyright and while Jstor permits users to reuse this logo under some restrictions this does not conform to COM:L. I think it would be helpful if those uploads which still display the cover page in violation of COM:L should be in a special maintenance category to make sure that we do not miss any of them. I would not object to a continued upload of original files including a cover page (keeping originals is a good practice) as long as we have an established process where we do not just upload a file with the cover page removed but where we also revision delete the original upload. We just need to make sure that this process is finished for each file in a reasonable time frame. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:08, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of this moment, there are probably 4,116 IA documents with relevant cover pages from this collection, there is some ambiguity depending on whether the Commons search engine is returning reliable results. 9,790 documents have already had the cover pages removed, as can be seen in the maintenance category above. The housekeeping is running faster than the upload rate.
FYI the methods used are unique, I don't know of any other project that has been detecting and amending PDFs in this way. Honestly, I doubt anyone else would invest the time needed to make this work. --Fæ (talk) 14:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Bijay singh style creator

  — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. I blocked the IP for a week. The named user hasn't edited since July, so at current state block is not practical. Thank you for reverting spam! Taivo (talk) 08:10, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Taivo: Thanks!   — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cvrgy (talk · contribs · logs · block log) keeps uploading files that are either copyright violation or are functional duplicates of existing files, all as Cross-wiki uploads from the Czech Wikipedia, where I explained to them why it isn't necessary 3 weeks ago and then asked and urged him to stop; no reaction, continuing their m.o. A few days ago they downloaded and re-uploaded the same file twice, once in the evening and the next morning for some reason. Some speedy deleted logos have been recreated multiple times, in some cases only hours after being deleted. They also never responded to any notices on Commons so it's hard to tell whether they are even aware of their talk pages.--TFerenczy (talk) 12:38, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done blocked for 1 week. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 04:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Am I in danger of being blocked here?

Question to all Commons admins: I have received a startling message fromUser:Davey2010 on my usertalkpage. I am not sure what to make of it, but it is obvious that the user believes my (very limited) work on Commons is counter-productive. I just want to ask admins here if they share this user's assessment.

Background info about me:I have been a low-visibility good-faith contributor to Wikimedia projects since 2007. I have never before posted to any AN to complain about another contributor, and have never visited AN on commons before posting this message. This is partly because I don't want to get another user into trouble, and also because I want to avoid a w:Wikipedia:Boomerang.

Since I do not wish to participate on sites where AGF is not assumed, I would appreciate it if I you tell me ahead of time whether my contributions are not welcome here. Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 22:33, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked on EN, Simple AND Meta for competence issues and for pestering people with your pointless comments and talkpage antics, You now come here and do the exact same stuff you were blocked for on those projects. This report is another point that you simply don't get it.
If anything I support indeffing Ottawahitech as per CIR.
[I'm sorry if my message to Ottawahitech seemed harsh however I got fed up with them doing this crap at EN and Simple and now I'm having to relive it all again here!. Ottawahitech has so far spent more time on peoples talkpages making childish posts than contributing here in any meaningful manner and this was the exact same problem at EN, Simple and Meta.] –Davey2010Talk 22:43, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
73% of my edits at enwiki were to main-space+cats and only 3% to usertalk. The remainder was spent on public discussion such as AFDs CFDs etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ottawahitech (talk • contribs) 22:57, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Still doesn't detract from the fact you were blocked there for essentially the same reasons as now. –Davey2010Talk 23:10, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are entitled to your opinion. Now let's see what others have to say. Ottawahitech (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
According to Davey2010 : You have been blocked on EN, Simple AND Meta for competence issues and for pestering people
This is incorrect. Here are my full block logs:
  • 2012 indef reason:role account
  • 2017 indef reason: long term failure to abide by basic content policies
  • 2017 indef (talkpage block) reason: Continuing to participate by proxy
  • 2020 indef reason: Violating the "one-strike" rule
  • 2020 infin reason: Not here to contribute constructively)
  • 2021expiration time of 00:00, 6 March 2021 reason: (Failure to address concerns about their comments on SE, disruptive comments on SE. Blocked until SE ends. (ElectCom member action))
  • 2020 infin (email disabled) reason: (Disruptive comments, en:WP:IDHT, and failure to communicate) Ottawahitech (talk) 16:21, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Andy's a very much respected editor here and as such I always take on board their comments - I've struck my original comment to you which can now be considered moot (IE you're free to post whereever you like). I still very much disagree entirely with you being here but it is what it is. COM:One strike exists for a reason. Prove me wrong is all I'm saying. Happy editing. –Davey2010Talk 16:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Andy's a very much respected editor here and as such I always take on board their comments - I've struck my original comment to you which can now be considered moot (IE you're free to post whereever you like). I still very much disagree entirely with you being here but it is what it is. COM:One strike exists for a reason. Prove me wrong is all I'm saying. Happy editing. –Davey2010Talk 16:49, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Whilst Davey might see these as annoying and pointless, they're not repeated and so any real culpable annoyance is negligible. I can't see an issue here.
It's also long practice here that editors are a "clean slate", whatever their history at other projects. This might be seen as unwise, but it's how it is and it's not going to change for one editor here. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

User:Lado85

Multiple copyright violations have been deleted in the past four years and still uploading copyrighted material. Doesn't seem able or willing to learn -- Discostu (talk) 09:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Blocked for a week. Thanks for reporting! -- CptViraj (talk) 09:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=543338389"