Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
(Redirected from Commons:AN)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcut: COM:AN

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-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
21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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 (index)

Note

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


The evil that men do... on Commons

The other day, I came across the contributions of Kukurydziarz (talk · contribs) (now banned) and discovered that he had transferred tens of thousands of files from Flickr without ever adding a category (I added a single, basic category for all the files from Warsaw, Kraków, and Prague). I also came across the contributions of 6D (talk · contribs), who may or may not be the same person, and who has also transferred gazillions of files from Flickr without ever adding a category. Of course, their instrument was the wretched Flickr2Commons, a tool that does more harm than good, because it does not invite to due diligence. I feel very discouraged by that state of things. To know that there are so many files floating around without anybody being able to find them by a category search, which is the most precise search. What's in store for nerds like us? More blows. Sad. Edelseider (talk) 11:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No one seems to have noticed this topic, because another one was posted at the same time... --Edelseider (talk) 11:00, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sadly this is not the only instance - there are thousands of uncategorized images on commons. Don't be discouraged - if we we keep working at it we will get there Gbawden (talk) 11:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed, a group of us are currently working on categorizing files that were marked uncategorized in 2017. Category:Media needing categories is where you can find things that don't have categories yet. Abzeronow (talk) 16:01, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Off topic but is there a way generate a list of images that lacks category by uploader? Trade (talk) 16:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Undeletion requests waiting

Hi, Some undeletion requests are waiting. I guess the requests about the videos are pending partly due to the number of files to be undeleted. There is no opposition, so I can take care of that part Monday if there is no objection. Yann (talk) 10:28, 9 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I undeleted all files of the videos requests. Some files can't be undeleted due to phab:T291137. Yann (talk) 13:14, 13 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Main Page

We may want to follow some other projects and ensure that the main page can't be deleted. GMGtalk 16:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GreenMeansGo: The Main Page is currently admin protected. Isn't that sufficient? Only admins can delete pages anyway. Yann (talk) 16:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It doesn't seem to give the normal prompt to provide a rationale, or maybe I have something enabled that I've forgotten about. Anyway, I deleted the main page for like four seconds. So mea culpa. GMGtalk 16:37, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Enwiki's main page has a sui generis bit of code that prevents it from being deleted. While it certainly prevents compromised admin accounts from deleting the page, it was primarily done because of extreme enwiki administrator stupidity.
I don't think this is necessary. If you're tempted to try to delete the main page on a live production wiki, you should be desysopped. If you have poor account security practices that leads to you being easily compromised, you should be desysopped. If you think it's okay to flood the servers with thousands of useless edits to try to get the page over the 5,000 revision mark to prevent it from being deleted, you should be desysopped. There's no need to annoy the sysadmins with stopping things that shouldn't even be considered by people entrusted with advanced permissions. —k6ka 🍁 (Talk · Contributions) 16:42, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I just restored it's protection settings. Just a friendly info note for admins: protection doesn't get restored automatically with a page undeletion, one will have to do it manually. -- CptViraj (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sorry again. I wasn't trying to be a jerk. Just having a discussion about protection levels above admin, and I figured it would give me a final confirmation prompt like I normally see. GMGtalk 16:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
GreenMeansGo reports that the confirmation screen where you are prompted for your reason for deleting the page never showed up. That is an unexpected software behavior that should 100% be looked into. I don’t think GMG actually meant to try to delete the main page to see if it would work. I don’t think it is productive to discuss desysopping or sanctions here in light of the apparent technical problems. Mz7 (talk) 21:19, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Let me (attempt to) confirm. Leaving this comment here so I don't get desysopped :). —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:05, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The confirmation page showed up for me. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 22:08, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Nice. I took a look at User:GreenMeansGo/common.js, and it doesn't seem to have anything unusual. Is there any gadget in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets that might provide a one-click delete button? If not, I suspect this is probably some kind of user error... like maybe GMG accidentally pressed the "enter" key when the confirmation page showed up. It seems some fish is likely in order. [1] works as well :) Mz7 (talk) 23:25, 15 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's very possibly purely user error. I did have a VPN open on the right for work and Commons open on the left. But I can't stress enough that it was definitely not intentional. GMGtalk 00:22, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible repeated copyright violations

I'm not sure why my delete nomination button and the talk page suddenly does not work today on my current device perhaps due to software issues, so I'll make my report here.

The user in question is Syazwi Irfan. Based on my observation, he is known to be truly notorious when it comes to editing or uploading to both Wikipedia and Wikimedia. Two of his work were previously removed due to copyright issues and his current problems might be the same. I guess he did not learn anything at all on the rules, and kept on repeating the same thing.

Current work which has potential copyright issues:

1. File:Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601.png - likely to be taken from an external site and poorly edited with obvious broken edges and small traces of the color black or other color can be seen on the right side which implies that it might be removed from the original source. And the other issue is that, he interpreted the yellow color based on an old sketch that depicts a ship with a flag, it sounds possible but there is no confirmation whatsoever.

2. File:Sultanate Of Sulu War Flag.png - I'm not sure where the original came from since I did not find anything through reverse search but it is likely that this could be found on websites, social media pages, or videos. The only thing that I suspected is that, why is the image blurry and poor quality which made me question why he uploaded it without mentioning the specific tools or software used to create his "own work". JellyLotus (talk) 07:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What?? i made all of this. I use pixlr e as my editing program. It always like that, if you don't believe me use it and make flag. You will understand. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 08:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well if you want to upload any forms of graphics, you should at least make it clear enough with the necessary details and less errors. Any tiny bits of errors or suspicious details could lead to presumptions. JellyLotus (talk) 08:26, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601 Flag should be kept just removed from the article main article and should be renamed as a Alleged Royal Brunei Navy Flag in 1601 Flag. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 08:21, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you can fix the broken details, then it might erase some suspicions. Other than that, renaming it sounds like a good idea since the original form is still unconfirmed. Thanks for the clarification. JellyLotus (talk) 08:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will try to remove all the broken details but it might be really hard. Syazwi Irfan (talk) 10:01, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please take your time. One of our aims is to improve any Brunei-related articles or media with quality while at the same time avoiding potential ethical and legal issues which may harm our reputation as editors. Any improvements in quality usually takes a lot of time and effort to be done. Take this opportunity to learn on how to provide the relevant details for current and future uploads to avoid any problems on both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. For the admins, I think this issue shall not be prolonged any longer and considered settled as the uploader came forward and offered his explanation. JellyLotus (talk) 10:29, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Inconsistent wording at policy and template

I noticed an inconsistency between the wording of the Commons:Criteria for speedy deletion policy and the {{No permission since}} template. Under F4. Failed license review the policy states "... or files tagged with OTRS pending for over 30 days, may also be speedily deleted under this criterion." But the template states "Unless this issue is resolved, the file will be deleted seven days after this tag was added ...". We should change the template to match the policy and also need to check the translations. GPSLeo (talk) 21:44, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GPSLeo: {{subst:PP}} gives the files 30 days plus the length of the permissions-commons queue to live, by invoking {{Permission pending}}, which invokes {{No VRTS permission since}} at the appropriate time, which sets Category:No VRTS permission and activates a {{Nuke}} link for Admins to use. The theory is that the VRT customer will get 30 days from the first reply by an Agent to get their permission together, and that first reply will likely not happen until the ticket containing their email message reaches the head of the queue. That queue length (or "Current backlog (oldest unanswered mail or ticket)" per {{Permissions backlog}}) is at Commons:Volunteer Response Team/backlog and listed at {{Permissions backlog}}, is currently showing 3 days, and is updated periodically by Krd. The queues for permissions-[languagecode] have different lengths, but those aren't considered here, which can bite some customers who write in under-represented languages.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How often do admins send things to OS?

Paradise Chronicle's suggestion that Kadı make 100 successful OS requests before applying to be an Oversighter seemed absurd to me; I have nearly 20,000 deletions and have only ever gone to the OS team four times - twice for people uploading sensitive personal documents (NOTWEBHOST stuff) and twice for personal attacks beyond the pale. Out of curiosity I was wondering if other admins had similar numbers or not. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, 100 successful OS requests doesn't realist. I don't think we lack Oversighters, so it doesn't matter much to me. There is much more need for Checkusers. Yann (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looks like I have made 10 requests, mostly CSAM pending action by Legal/T&S. 100 is unreasonably high IMO.
I haven't commented at Kadi's OS request yet, but I think that more oversighters in a more diverse set of timezones are needed; the current team has had 6+-hour response times just due to being asleep, causing me to flag down a steward instead sometimes. On one hand, an active admin who also already has the viewsuppressed right would probably be preferable (AntiCompositeNumber comes to mind :)). On the other hand, nothing says we can't appoint more than one new oversighter! —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:43, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mdaniels5757: They have to stand for election. Of course, ACN would be a shoe-in, but so would Martin Urbanec (for Admin first).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Martin had a RFA here in 2020 which was not successful and they'd have to be more active in Commons as far as admin-areas for a successful 2nd attempt. Abzeronow (talk) 16:12, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm at 18 requests, for the record, plus one emergency that someone else contacted me for but I passed off to another steward to handle. I count 7 emergency steward OS actions in the last year. (The query says 8, but one was no-actioned as local OSers got to it first). That's higher than most wikis with local oversighters, and is probably a result of timezone overlap as @Mdaniels5757 noted. As for me, it's unlikely I'd run particularly soon, but I might in the future if there's still a need. AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 00:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have never made an OS request and I do not feel any need for OS right. Regular deletion and version hiding are enough for me. Taivo (talk) 18:58, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Chiming in here as an enwiki oversighter, I feel that the Commons could use additional oversighters. While I have not kept a count of the number of OS requests I've made here, one of the most common types is when a minor reveals too much information about themselves, to the point of uploading a picture of themselves to the Commons. It is important for the safety of these users that these kinds of oversight requests be expedited, and I feel that the Commons OS team's response time could be improved with additional oversighters, particularly one in a region that overlaps with US time zones. Best, Mz7 (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I believe once on Commons, at least only one time that sticks in my memory. IIRC the WMF had to contact the police and he later went to jail. It was...unpleasant content. GMGtalk 01:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I do think @Mz7: makes a good point here though. It's not just about how many OS they have, but also what time zone they're in and what languages they speak. GMGtalk 02:17, 18 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Expediting a deletion request

I wonder whether one of you could expedite this deletion request. The reason for the request is that the image in question is desired for a Did you know nomination on the English Wikipedia. As you can see in the discussion on the nomination page, there is an unwillingness to wait any longer. I'd be grateful if somebody could close the nomination and I don't really care what the outcome is, I'd just like to see it being resolved. Schwede66 01:10, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

✓ Done -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:38, 17 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=831782484"