Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 131

User:Reproaerticletech

Just a heads-up, this dude straight up doesn't own those smartphone photos he posted. He probably just jacked them from some tech news sites or forums and cropped them down super small.

Honestly, you can check google lens and catch him in 4K. That's wack👎, not gonna lie. ~2026-28389-66 (talk) 11:22, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@~2026-28389-66: you did not notify the subject as required when starting this report Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 11:44, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I have notified them for you this time Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 11:46, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done All files already deleted, one more warning. Yann (talk) 16:55, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Ian Stevenson777

Ian Stevenson777 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user Block evasion of User:Ngọc Lâm Trần, please see [1]. --Henry (dat) 17:42, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@Henrydat: Please report via COM:RFCU with evidence. Reported at m:srg#Global block for Ian Stevenson777.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:51, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. --Henry (dat) 18:00, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Already done Globally locked by A09. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 00:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Geoffroi

• User: Geoffroi (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Harassment in Special:Diff/1213465254 after I asked him nicely to withdraw his out of line comment in Special:Diff/1213463369.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:06, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

You're so awesome, Jeff! Why would anyone want to harass such an awesome guy? I'll avoid you at all costs from now on. Geoffroi 20:24, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

• Comment: Here's a good summary of my problem with Jeff G. today. All I was trying to do was to bring admin attention to a user who was blocked for socking on Wikipedia and who had uploaded some screenshots related to deletions of their drafts on that project. I figured an admin would delete the uploads and decide if a block was needed. Geoffroi 04:40, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

6D still uploading without properly categorizing

6D (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
Jmabel ! talk 05:05, 13 May 2026 (UTC) I took a quick look at his recent uploads, and the images are mostly still aren't properly categorizing what they uploaded. ThirdThink (talk) 03:20, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@ThirdThink: when you report a user on this page, you are supposed to link them, and to notify them on their user talk page. I will do both of these for you this time. - Jmabel ! talk 05:05, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

I am really sorry that I have best effort of categorizing images, but when I see something that I don’t know, I would put this at Uncategorised category. 6D (talk) 03:49, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

@ThirdThink: could you give three examples of file pages you think illustrate the problem, so we have something here as a basis for discussion? - Jmabel ! talk 04:12, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Jeff G.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by ~2026-29168-60 (talk • contribs) 10:48, 15 May 2026 (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.

---

Jeff G. (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

• User:Jeff G. has violated Commons:NPA "Accusations about personal behaviour that lack evidence." by repeatedly making false statements and false accusations about User @Mehuntu in Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:Cc-sa-layout and is also supporting deletion of free licenses for absolutely no reason he failed to give any reason at all and refused to apologize and retract his false statements and false accusations multiple times after I asked him

First false claim in Special:Diff/1192001403: "Per COM:L, we don't accept any CC-SA license without BY." There is NO where on the page that says that and {{Cc-sa-1.0}} has existed since 2004!!!

He then goes on in Special:Diff/1192003076 to falsely allege that CC-SA licenses without BY do not exist and falsely accused that @Mehuntu "appears to be making it up."!!

• After @JaydenChao pointed out the existence of CC-SA-1.0 he did not retract the above false accusation

After I asked him to apologize and cross out his false statements he did not do it but instead replaced them with a different false accusation "Mehuntu appears to be making up the existence of modern, supported, recommended such licenses" which is also false as no ever said these are "modern, supported, recommended" or tried to create templates for non existent versions

He then went on to suggest deleting a whole list of valid licenses while giving no reasons at all he still has not given a single reason for deletion after I asked him to identify where in Commons:Licensing or the Definition of Free Cultural Works that they are unacceptable and failed to identify any of the 4 Freedoms he thinks they violate he should be blocked unless and until he apologize for his false accusations and statements and retract them 999REAL 💬 ⬆ 21:36, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

@999real: Current such licenses do not exist. I'm sorry that I was unaware of the old, unsupported, not recommended licenses. I don't think we should be accepting such, especially with creation of new templates for them. I'm sorry if I offended Mehuntu or anyone else. My motive was to protect our reusers by only offering them supported, recommended licenses. CC-SA-1.0 was retired 13 years ago (25 May 2004; months before the creation of Template:Cc-sa-1.0, 23:38, 8 September 2004 (UTC)), for how long do we have to keep accepting new files that bear it?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:49, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

Your apology is "I'm sorry if I offended anyone"? Really? And you still did not retract your false statements and accusations in the DR and you still didn't give any reasons to delete or stop accepting these licenses. As Creative Commons website says these licenses was retired not because of any actual problems with them but because of inadequate demand. Still there are some people who want to use share alike license without attribution (There are more than 4,500 files in Category:CC-SA-1.0) which is more free that CC-BY-SA and you didn't suggest any solution to provide for that situation.

If you want an actual problem with most of these licenses it is the same problem with all of the 1.0 CC licenses that they contain a warranty from the licensor that they own all rights which can be dangerous and it doesn't have "later version" clause. However there was a discussion 5 years ago and there was no consensus to deprecate it and more importantly {{Cc-sa-2.0-jp}} is the solution to this problem as it is 2.0 version license that fix the above 2 problems and probably should be compatible with CC-BY-SA 3.0 and 4.0 999REAL 💬 ⬆ 01:29, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@999real: Here is your retraction.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:00, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

This is not a retraction, you instead bolded one of the false statements "Mehuntu appears to be making up the existence of modern, supported, recommended such licenses", again no ever said they are "modern, supported, recommended" and there is no policy that only "modern, supported, recommended" licenses must be allowed on Commons 999REAL 💬 ⬆ 13:11, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

@999real: {{Cc-sa-2.0-jp}} is retired and not recommended. We have nothing in Category:CC-SA-2.0-JP. It is also not listed as being compatible on https://creativecommons.org/compatible-licenses/.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:17, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Again: It was retired because of "Inadequate demand". You still did not give any actual problems with it. 999REAL 💬 ⬆ 13:11, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

We should continue to accept CC-sa licences on the basis that old content may be in circulation with it attached to it, and it's not contradictory to our requirement for a free licence. However we should also discourage its use, strongly discourage its application to new content and possibly prevent its application to new content creation here (subject to technical limitations in doing so).

CC-sa has been withdrawn for over twenty years. <meme of Elrond talking of the ancient times> I was there. It was withdrawn because it was hard to see any use for it, given that it didn't impose any obvious conditions as a licence, other than requiring these same unclear and imperceptible conditions to be preserved into the future! Andy Dingley (talk) 10:50, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

• @999real, I, and I expect other editors too, are already tired of your repeated baseless accusations and attacks on other editors. You seem to focus on pointless minutiae in search of an argument, then try to present this as some Great Wrong that others are trying to impose upon you. This is harassment, it's a waste of time for many constructive editors here, and the solutions for that are either for you to stop trying to invent such arguments, or else your editing here to be restricted until you stop being a time sink for others. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:45, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

  This is real rich, again you could not give even one example of any false accusation I made while I did clearly identified all the false accusations you and Jeff made...You all are the ones making baseless accusations not me, did you forget this baseless and ridiculous suggestion which you have never given a single explanation for? If I cared about what people say about me I would have reported you 1 year ago, right now I am trying to right the Great Wrong that some people are trying to do by deleting free licenses for no reason... 999REAL 💬 ⬆ 13:18, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

No administrative action is warranted here: This noticeboard exists for serious conduct issues requiring administrator intervention, not for escalating ordinary content or policy disagreements. The dispute here concerns obsolete Creative Commons licensing templates and their treatment on Commons, which should be discussed at appropriate forums (such as VP/C or the DR linked above). The comments cited do not justify sanctions. The matter has already been clarified and/or partially retracted. Continuing to relitigate these wording disputes is unproductive. All parties are advised to avoid personalizing disagreements and to disengage from repetitive argumentation. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 14:24, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

---

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:Mr.shanixx

Mr.shanixx (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user User has been uploading various copyright violations multiple times, including recreating deleted copyvio images. They've put the source as "own work" and tried passing off copyrighted screenshots as being under CC licenses, like in Special:Diff/1201047630 and Special:Diff/1173222568, including COM:Flickr washing for File:Marlon Lundgren Garcia.jpg.

User also removes all copyvio templates and tries to remove deletion nomination templates from their files: Special:Diff/1213174731, Special:Diff/1201047630, Special:Diff/1173222392.

reppop^talk 03:19, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

I apologize for the copyright violations. I was confused partly because I noticed some users bypass licensing requirements even when proper licenses were present. I have now nominated all my uploads for deletion to resolve this. Mr.shanixx (talk) 03:36, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Files deleted, DRs closed. Please do not reupload copyright violations. Yann (talk) 15:55, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Mr. Rasel Hasan

Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user This user uploads images sourced from facebook and other social media leading to copyright violations. This user has been warned several times and was blocked earlier but still continuing the same practice. Agent 007 (talk) 18:36, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

My Apology.

I will be more careful about this. Mr. Rasel Hasan (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Kindly consider the statement(s) made earlier at User_talk:Mr._Rasel_Hasan#Your_account_has_been_blocked also. Tagging previously involved admins @Elcobbola and Taivo: . Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 18:52, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 months. Previous short block was not sufficient. Yann (talk) 21:58, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I declined unblock request, because user confessed "I am unaware of the copyright rules". Taivo (talk) 22:30, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

S Navaneeth Krishna

• User: S Navaneeth Krishna (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam only, and an incomplete attempt to dispute a speedy. All of their Wikidata contributions like d:Q138049087, d:Q138049391, and d:Q139794976 have been deleted. Thanks in advance!

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:43, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 2 weeks. Still requesting to post personal images after warnings. Yann (talk) 21:55, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Poprace

Poprace (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Constantly flooding Wikimedia Commons with pictures without proper permissions and copyright marks, 90% of his recent uploads were deleted. Does not interract, apologise, or react, simply ignoring all notifications that call him out to stop abusing Wikimedia rules. Keeps on doing it anyway. Please, block him, his harmful activity is affecting dozens of Wikipedia pages, as people use his pictures with good faith and eventually - articles are left without a picture, because it was obviously deleted. And this is just a side reason. Deuwberst (talk) 14:43, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Why didn't you notify them of your posting here, as you're required to? (I've now done this).

If you think such sanctions are justified for someone being unfamiliar with the requirements here, then be careful of COM:BOOMERANGs. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:54, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Relevant DR by User:TimWu007: Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Poprace. Yann (talk) 15:57, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I closed the DR and blocked Poprace for a week for uploading copyvios after warnings. Taivo (talk) 11:47, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

The files they uploaded between the start and end of the original DR are also facing deletion. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:50, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

Shubhamshuklabjp and Shubhamshuklarudrapurdeoria

• Users: Shubhamshuklabjp (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user (master) and Shubhamshuklarudrapurdeoria (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user (sock)
• Reasons for reporting: Spamming. Vandalism. Sockpuppetry. Master removed speedy from sock's user page in special:diff/1215360391 and own user page in Special:Diff/1215368312 and Special:Diff/1215369445. Uploads many oos pictures of himself, which all qualify for COM:CSD#F10.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 03:22, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Page creations deleted; I haven't seen any further action. The accounts seem stale. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 15:43, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Hmm, not stale, edits dating today for both. --Lymantria (talk) 17:03, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

@Lymantria: They looked so obvious, should I file at COM:RFCU?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:03, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Indeed, this is a duck case, not a case to bring to RFCU. Blocked both. --Lymantria (talk) 20:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

@Lymantria: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:35, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Marking as Already done for archiving. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 16:44, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

MatthewDavid41

• MatthewDavid41 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

This user has repeatedly been told not to upload screenshots/low-quality derivatives of already existing images on Commons (see Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_MatthewDavid41 and the user's talk page) yet it seems they continue to do so. I'm not sure what to do from here on out so I would like to bring this to the attention of the administrators. Aethonatic (talk) 14:56, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Last I checked up on the issue, it seemed to only extend to being low-quality screenshots with minimal adjustments, now it seems to also include the utilization of generative AI (i.e. File:View to Welbeck Abbey along the Great Lake - geograph.org.uk - 1924129 amended 26.png), which I believe to be out of scope. Aethonatic (talk) 15:10, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

You seem to be targeting me, it appears quite aggressive. It’s best practice to discuss with me separately. I have added the sources. Or reverting images back to how they were. You have targeted me before. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 15:20, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

It's unclear what part you consider "aggressive", I am simply bringing up issues that conflict with how Commons operates; I would like to apologise if it does come across that way. It should be noted that we have had two discussions over these issues previously (Special:PermanentLink/1216165181#File:Market Hall Derby.jpg and Special:PermanentLink/1216165181#File:Derby towards the Corn Market.jpg). Aethonatic (talk) 15:24, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

If you had an issue with the work I produced. Professionally you would chat with me separately. The sources have been added to the images. And the Welbeck abbey image I am working on to look more reflective of its original image bit better. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

The issues are not with the lack of sources, it's that your uploads are low-quality duplicates of existing images on here, which I have already pointed out. We don't need to have a separate chat as you've had several chances to rectify these issues to no avail. Aethonatic (talk) 15:31, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

If you had issues with the images you should have sent a message to me on here. This isn’t fair or nice behaviour. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 17:38, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

And that's what I did back when I first noticed the duplicates, I even linked to COM:DUPE for you to read, but your uploads after that suggested you instead ignored that policy. And what about the countless other messages on your talk page alerting you of deletion requests of your uploads? That's why I'm bringing this issue up here, that's why this issue should be brought up here. Aethonatic (talk) 17:50, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

You've been contacted numerous times on your talk page about this issue. Clearly you don't respond to those warnings. "Chatting" with you there would be a waste of time. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Each of these images I own the copyright. The other images created I have added in the source from the person who it came from. I didn’t however add the source for these images and that’s my mistake. But I have now since done that. But the nature of the images are on my right only in UK Copyright Law.

thank you

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Memorial_Garden,_Exchange_Row,_Mansfield.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Odeon_-_Mansfield.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Carnegie_Old_Library,_Mansfield.png

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Memorial_Garden,_Exchange_Row,_Mansfield.png MatthewDavid41(talk) 17:28, 18 May 2026 (UTC) MatthewDavid41 (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

If that's true, you should have mentioned that when you were contacted several times before, instead of remaining silent and continuing to upload garbage files. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 18:08, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Is this a gang on me time? MatthewDavid41 (talk) 18:09, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

This appears like I’m being ganged up on. Or singled out which is against Wiki procedure or policy. I have corrected images. But I don’t think it is reasonable or respectful to treat me this way. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 18:34, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) @MatthewDavid41: Hi, Please calm down, and be civil. Nobody is targeting you. The concern about use of AI to edit images is real and should be addressed. I see that you added the source of the images, and that's good. You should also mention if you use AI to edit files. Yann (talk) 18:38, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I didn’t realise that I needed to do that too and I will add that into the files. It appears wiki may not be generally keeping up with the times. I will add that into the files now MatthewDavid41 (talk) 18:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Matthew, please read COM:AI. This isn't a matter of disclosure, it's a matter of you using it at all. Images edited with AI are out of scope for Wikimedia Commons and should not be used. You are advised to use the original, existing uploads on Commons instead. Aethonatic (talk) 18:52, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I used the original, the original I created myself. I don’t mind you advising me where I may have gone wrong but I need evidence to see it. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 18:54, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

I’m concerned that you are blaming me for something which I made a mistake before and realised that. These are not mistakes made on purpose. If I have made any. I don’t say anything about your images. But exposing things to this degree is to put me down. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

It's okay to make mistakes, we all do. Just be sure not to repeat them. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 19:07, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

These images I created. I owned the copyright, the original images were used within the AI edit. The source should have made added I agree but in any court case I own the copyright, so I’m not going to fight myself am I? MatthewDavid41 (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Again, this is about you using AI to edit photos other people have taken, not photos you've taken. Images you've edited with AI should not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons as they violate COM:SCOPE, especially if the original versions are already on here. Aethonatic (talk) 19:16, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I suppose I should also point this out, especially since you have used the AI-edited images over there: images edited with generative AI are completely prohibited on the English Wikipedia as per their policy at WP:AIGI. Aethonatic (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

What policy are you quoting this from? MatthewDavid41 (talk) 19:47, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

As I've said, WP:AIGI. It's linked at the end of my message. Aethonatic (talk) 19:48, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Where have you got the information from around generative AI, these are images that were actual images. That is a total fabrication or a mistruth with no evidence base. MatthewDavid41 (talk) 19:58, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

If you hadn’t noticed I’ve added in the source, on images I took photos off, I think we can all miss information out and I’ve realised but we are not all perfect like you MatthewDavid41 (talk) 20:00, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Images you've edited with AI should not be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons as they violate COM:SCOPE

I'm sure you'll be able to point us to that policy here on Commons (WP:AIGI is a Wikipedia policy, and this is not Wikipedia) Andy Dingley (talk) 20:02, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, my mistake. I believe images that were edited with AI are out of scope as they don't provide educational value outside of the original image. COM:AI mentions this under the "Are AI-generated media within the Commons project scope?" section. You can correct me if I'm wrong. Aethonatic (talk) 20:09, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Your belief does not create policy though. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:13, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Isn't COM:AI an established policy though? Or is there an exception for AI-edited images here? I'll let this thread wrap up if it turns out I've been bringing up the wrong issue. Aethonatic (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Yes, it is an official Commons guideline. Commandant Quacks-a-lot (talk) 20:45, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• It's useful to actually read the policy you cite, rather than just claiming whatever you prefer, then citing a policy (even one from a different project) to justify your own belief.

COM:SCOPE is unchanged. AI can affect how particular images fit within that. AI generation certainly gives opportunity to generate images way outside SCOPE. But here we're not talking about generation, but rather about the processing of originally non-AI images, such as cleanup or even colorisation. That's still a chance that they might move outside SCOPE, but it's far from implicit or applied to all such.

Images edited with AI are out of scope for Wikimedia Commons and should not be used. is certainly no clear-cut policy here. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:52, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for outlining where I went wrong here, I agree that I should analyse these policies more clearly before jumping to action as it seems I must've misinterpreted something or two along the way. Setting up a deletion request would've probably been a better route here. Aethonatic (talk) 23:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Назвуха

• Назвуха (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Copyright violation after a warning. — Tarkoff / 18:07, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, one file deleted. Yann (talk) 18:40, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Rap e still better person than morgan wallen

Just fort the record: I've indef-blocked Rap e still better person than morgan wallen (talk · contribs) as vandalism-only account. Was already blocked on :en and :simple. --Túrelio (talk) 06:44, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Now also globally locked. Taivo (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

FYI: This is the well known LTA ACV, not frequently seen here. --Lymantria (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Ah, got it. Gracias. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 02:41, 20 May 2026 (UTC)

VisualScienceLab and Traveling by the Sea

• User: VisualScienceLab (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: May be a rebirth of Traveling by the Sea (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user; tried to delete seven of their uploads incompletely without interconnection.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:18, 16 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Indefinite block for sockpuppetry. Taivo (talk) 14:52, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks. And the sock?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:36, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

I blocked the sock and give the master another chance. Taivo (talk) 19:24, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

File:Unit 731 victim.jpg

Bonjour, l'utilisateur Rosemeyer2022 veut imposer une description d'image qui ne correspond pas à la réalité. Son comportement négationniste a été signalé sur en/WP ([2]) et sur fr:WP ([3] où il n'y pas de demande faite car son POV ne s'exprime que sur sa PDD). En nommant le fichier : Epidemic prevention activities in Jilin Province in 1940.jpg il reprend la propagande du Mandchoukouo et des nationalistes négationnistes japonais qui ne sont pas des sources fiables. Si on estime que mettre File:Unit 731 victim.jpg est incertain, un renommage et une description neutres de la photo sont alors nécessaire. Amicalement, Olivier Tanguy (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment In view of en:Unit 731, renamed declined, edits reverted. I have also warned Rosemeyer2022. I am watching the file. Yann (talk) 09:21, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Any ideas on whether to revoke Rosemeyer2022's TPA? They're blocked and are now using their user talk page to complain that the Wikimedia movement is committing censorship Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 14:25, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

 Support.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:45, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I don't think it is necessary yet. I see no edit after Taivo declined the unblock request. Yann (talk) 15:19, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

I defer I guess Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 15:24, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Artmen Iliagtem 1426

This user has uploaded a big collection of out of scope files which were nominated for deletion by Didym at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Artmen Iliagtem 1426. The user removed most of the deletion request tags, which is directly prohibited by Commons policy, so I've retagged them. Geoffroi 22:18, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked as NOTHERE and closed DR. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

SoGuys881

SoGuys881 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

SoGuys881 has been mass uploading copyrighted content to Commons and refuses to listen to other editors asking them to stop, either out of incompetency or malice. Me and @Blue-Sonnet have been attempting to tag the content for SD, but SoGuys881 is removing them (example), which is simply a waste of time as they then have to go to discussion for an obvious case. They have been warned at the Teahouse on enwiki. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 19:05, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Sent 2 warnings. "Mass uploading copyrighted content" is quite exaggerated. I deleted 2 files, and closed a DR as Kept for PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 19:28, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Sorry about the exaggeration. I thought the files were being uploaded much quicker than what they actually were. What should be done about File:2011 Disney Junior logo.png and File:ScribblesandInk.png (sorry I cannot figure out how to link them). I am pretty sure they are above threshold of originality based on how stylized they are. ✶Quxyz✶ (talk) 19:39, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

Some Disney Junior logos were kept, but this one was deleted: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney Junior Logo.png, so deleted. I am not sure about the others. Some other people can weight in. Yann (talk) 19:56, 17 May 2026 (UTC)

@Quxyz @Yann the reported user has been locked as an LTA. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:57, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

OK, I daleted all files par DENY. Yann (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

LTA?

I don't want to cast aspersions but could someone who's familiar with LTAs and reading filter logs check this[4] one out? The user got on my radar for making a problematic edit on the photo challenge page, so I checked their other edits and they don't seem like a newbie, but replied to my copyvio notice on their talk page as if they are. And now they started to create galleries and templates? Those look like they were copied from somewhere. Nakonana (talk) 20:00, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Either an LTA or NOTHERE, judging by their edits so far. I will block if they continue. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:37, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

They have not continued on Commons (yet) but if you're curious, they earned themselves a block on enwiki for block evasion[5]. They also created a user page on enwiki that claims they are not a sock. Nakonana (talk) 16:21, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Enwiki block was based on this[6] report per the talk page of the blocking admin[7]. Nakonana (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done I've blocked the following accounts:

• SupertallSuper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
• HelloMyNameIsAlphabet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
• HelloMyNameIsAlphabet2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
• HelloMyNameIsAlphabet3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Someone more familiar with language categories than me may want to look at the contributions of HelloMyNameIsAlphabet2. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:23, 22 May 2026 (UTC)

Successive helper

• User: Successive helper (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Has removed my copyvio tag on File:CM C Joseph Vijay Official Portrait.jpg. The image is copyrighted to Government of Tamil Nadu [8]. The user has uploaded it under CC4.0. And they ignored my talk page message as well. Ganeshk (talk) 17:57, 15 May 2026 (UTC)
• He just reverted my report here on User problems diff. Ganeshk (talk) 18:10, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Former duplicate report

• User: Successive helper (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

• Reasons for reporting: The user has returned from a 1-week block for a similar issue and still has not learned the lesson. They have removed a deletion tag from this image, File:The_official_portrait_of_C_Joseph_Vijay,_the_Chief_Minister_of_Tamilnadu.jpg (diff). Ganeshk (talk) 06:58, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

  This was a former independent report; I moved it here as a continuation of the above content. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 07:33, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

  @Yann: FYI. Ganeshk (talk) 08:06, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

  Courtesy link: whatever™ Commons:Deletion requests/File:The official portrait of C Joseph Vijay, the Chief Minister of Tamilnadu.jpg is Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:14, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 months, file deleted. Yann (talk) 08:11, 23 May 2026 (UTC)