Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems: Difference between revisions
Ottawahitech (talk | contribs) m →Am I in danger of being blocked here?: format |
|||
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 | |||
---|---|---|---|
Vandalism [ ] |
User problems [ ] |
Blocks and protections [ ] |
Other [ ] |
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 | |||
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 |
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
| ||
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.
- 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)
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)
- Will this be ignored?--Iphoneuser88 (talk) 19:56, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
- Achmadmaulanaibr is stale. Checkusers won't open case.--Iphoneuser88 (talk) 16:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
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)
User:POS78
I will mentor POS78 in his native language for the next three months. 4nn1l2 (talk) 21:33, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- @POS78: لطفاً استفاده از این اکانت (POS78) را همین حالا متوقف کنید و دیگر با این اکانت ویرایش نکنید. به info-commons
- @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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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:
- 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)
- 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)
- I understand. Thank you, GMG. --Yuraily Lic (talk) 11:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
Info Dropped a quick note on the user's talk page. Yasu (talk) 15:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
User:Walter Grassroot
- Walter Grassroot (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
- Reasons for reporting: Continuous copyright violation by uploading videos from Chinanews.com's youtube while Chinanews.com's legal statement claims the rights. Mass deletion for *.webm please.--Zhxy 519 (talk) 02:25, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- According to the Youtube/Google FAQ, it's eligible for me to move these documents under a Creative Commons license. Again, YouTube allows users (i.e. China News) to mark their videos with a Creative Commons CC BY license. For these particular documents, they are allowed to be reused under CC license. Meanwhile, I did not move other documents without CC License (on Youtube) to Commmons. Walter Grassroot (talk) 03:29, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
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)
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)
Al.Massira persistently changing stable maps
- Al.Massira (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
- Al.Massira is changing the maps relating to the Morocco-SADR conflict to suit their obvious political POV, ignoring COM:OVERWRITE and edit warring (just like EdDakhla and their plethora of socks tend to do). Could someone please make them stop? Thanks. M.Bitton (talk) 21:53, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- Pinging Christian_Ferrer, an admin who's familiar with the never ending issue. M.Bitton (talk) 22:12, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @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)
- 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)
- 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)
- @Christian Ferrer and Koavf: Many thanks for responding to the ping and for your valuable input. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- Bitton got what they wanted, the files they wanted have been reverted back to the version they want. Their intent is beyond just getting those files reverted and is showing their clear intent which is to get me blocked, @Christian Ferrer: . And still carries on with the "personal attack" accusation without showing evidence I personally attacked anyone. This could maybe start to qualify as harassment at this point. Al.Massira (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Christian Ferrer: This unjustified revert (adding a fake SVG to boot), after everything that has been said, if the ultimate proof that they have intention of stepping back. M.Bitton (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- I blocked Al.Massira 3 days. Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:27, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- Note: Al.Massira has been blocked indefinitely for abusing multiple accounts. Christian Ferrer and koavf, many thanks once again. Regards. M.Bitton (talk) 16:27, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
- Color me not shocked at all. Thanks, M. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
This has been resolved with the consent of all involved. --AFBorchert (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
- 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)
- 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
- User: Bijay singh style creator (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- Reasons for reporting: Continues to advertise after warning, now as 103.49.233.60 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) .
— Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:30, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
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)
- @Taivo: Thanks! — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 04:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
User:Cvrgy isn't bothered by copyright and existing files
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)
Done blocked for 1 week. --Ìch heiss Nat. Redd mìt mìr.🥨 04:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- You are entitled to your opinion. Now let's see what others have to say. Ottawahitech (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
- 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)
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)
Blocked for a week. Thanks for reporting! -- CptViraj (talk) 09:40, 17 March 2021 (UTC)