Jump to content

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

Add links
Add topic
From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

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

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

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

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


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


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


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

Archives
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
133, 132, 131, 130, 129, 128, 127, 126, 125, 124, 123, 122, 121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

Note

  • Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
  • Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using 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/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.

Unblock request

[edit]
Latest comment: 6 days ago11 comments10 people in discussion

In 2023 I was blocked indefinitely for my repeated incivility[1], In 2025 A.Savin randomly unblocked me, From 2025-now I took a year away from WMF to focus on my health, mental wellbeing, family and life,

It doesn't sit right with me that A.Savin randomly unblocks me and I get to edit freely here again so I'd like to ask the community for their input; mainly should the block stand or not?,

Having taken the year away I've realised that my incivility, comments, language and tone towards people had been unacceptable for a very long time and it's a miracle I've not been blocked 10 years sooner!, My core problem is I get angry and frustrated far too easily however that is not a justification for any of my comments and I really should have nipped it in the bud a long time ago!,

During 2025, I came to the realisation that I was a hair width away from being blocked on 3 separate projects and therefore begun to realise my incivility was much more of a problem than I genuinely realised and that I seriously needed to change that, If any newbie today made any one of the comments I've previously made they would be blocked without a second thought so why should it be any different for me?

Life is much different now and I've since had a new outlook on life, I'm not proud of the comments I've made and I know I can't undo the damage and hurt I've caused however I can try and be a better person for the future and without being soppy I'd rather be remembered as the "bus-mad guy who contributed here" as opposed to "the incivil a-hole who told everyone to FO", I would like to think it's not too late to change that, I very much know my past idiocy meant I was on borrowed time on WMF and that things really needed to change,

I'll get frustrated from time to time however I won't be telling anyone to FO nor will I be making stupid/snide/idiotic/rhetoric/incivil and quite frankly disgraceful comments or comments such as this,

I apologise for the comments I've previously made and If possible would like a second chance?, I appreciate these are just words and that actions speak louder than words, As I said I very much have no intention of being that nasty vile person I was pre 2025, (I also remember someone (Floq?) on Enwiki telling me that "You really have used your last FO" and that too has stuck with me ever since),

Thank you for reading,

Thanks

Dave // –Davey2010Talk 18:49, 20 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

 Support per above. Bedivere (talk) 01:10, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Support per above.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:16, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Neutral I saw A.Savin unblocking you, I did not protest and nothing bad happened in Commons, but I looked your block log in simple Wikipedia and your last, 6-month-long block expired only 6 months ago. Let's hope, that this will not repeat. Taivo (talk) 11:10, 21 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
  • Just wanted to say thank you to each and every one here for their support and comments it really does mean a lot and of course I appreciate it a lot thank you, Take care all, Many thanks, Warm Regards, –Davey2010Talk 23:06, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Bedivere (talk) 13:23, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Conduct concerns regarding User:Pelikana

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 hour ago6 comments3 people in discussion

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

I am requesting administrator attention regarding a pattern of conduct by User:Pelikana (aka Peli) that is making normal category work difficult in the topic area of horse-drawn vehicles and their subcategories.

The issue is not the content disputes themselves, but the behavior in how those disputes unfold: circular argumentation, use of insults and personal attacks, reframing my points to misrepresent what I wrote, refusal to acknowledge published carriage scholarship, repeated insistence that file-uploader captions outweigh expert sources, venue-splitting (dragging conversations across multiple pages), mixing unrelated discussions together, and confusing discussions where each reply is another "yeah, but" escalation.

Discussions never resolve. They only repeat, or go silent.

I have been dealing with this for the last two months. Two days ago, Peli posted (diff-nl) unsubstantiated and false accusations about me on Commons' Dutch-language Village Pump (Commons:De Kroeg), and two days earlier posted (diff-en) a hostile personal attack on his user talk page. These two egregious acts in quick succession crossed a threshold that compels me to bring the matter here to AN/U.

I apologize in advance if my examples go in circles, but that's how the discussions have been going.... in circles. For TLDR, just skim or skip the bullet points.

Details/examples/diffs
  1. False accusations: In a post (diff-nl) at the Dutch-language Village Pump (Commons:De Kroeg), Peli accused me of: stalking, obstruction, fallacies, insulting sneers, edit wars, destroying categories, taking categories out of use, and reverting one of his edits on his own talk page. None of these claims were accompanied by diffs or evidence. The accusations are serious and presented as fact, but Peli has not supported them. These are false accusations. The Village Pump post presents a one-sided narrative in a venue where I was not notified, am not present, don't speak the language, and where no diffs were provided.
  2. Talk‑page misconduct, insults: About Peli's accusation that I reverted on his user talk page: I posted a short instructional one-liner on his user talk page to explain why I removed 3 files from a category he had put them in, in the hopes he would not continue to miscategorize them. Peli posts directly above my thread a picture of a horse pissing; no edit summary. It was an irrelevant and irreverent image in response to my thread post (and should have been placed below, per talk page norms). Minutes later, Peli replaces the image with a photograph with the edit summary acting as his caption: "on the picture above you see...". I revert it with the edit summary "There are no "traps" in this image. Reverting to CORRECT [this] taxonomy". Note that by then we had been 'discussing' (unproductively) the use or scope of "trap" for days. He immediately restores the image, writes an actual caption below the image that re-asserts his argument, posts (diff-en) an insulting screed directed at me, and deletes it 3 minutes later. He then posts another screed, which I don't even notice for 2 days because I don't watchlist his page, he didn't ping me, he uses the minor-edit marker, and he edited the whole page (not the subscribed section), and created a new section so the old subscribe-ping wasn't activated. This sort of non-notification from Peli is common.
  3. Discussion fragmentation: Peli frequently continues ongoing discussions across multiple pages (without pinging me), including category talk pages, category pages, file talk pages, his user talk page, my user talk page, and now the Dutch-language Village Pump. This fragmentation makes discussion difficult and prevents consensus-building.
  4. Contradictory behavior: When Peli venue-switches mid-discussion, he sometimes writes escalatory screeds "for" me (without pinging me), and then scolds me if I respond to his post with accusatory "I told you not to ping me" type language—even if I don't explicitly ping him.
  5. Misrepresentation: Peli frequently reframes my arguments as something I didn't write. For example, I consistently argue that "trap" isn't useful as a category because it is predominantly slang, and was used for 3 separate and unrelated vehicle types, therefore the category (as named) would be unable to represent a coherent group or family of carriages. Peli interprets this in several incorrect ways: that I'm saying we should have multiple categories instead of one (diff1), or I want to turn them into a "hard redirect" or delete the categories that he recently created (diff2), then goes on to propose multiple other "trap" categories and a disambiguation page (diff3).
  6. Refusing reliable sources (IDHT): Peli repeatedly ignores standard carriage historians, scholarship, and sources in favor of his own interpretations and slang terms used by file uploaders who don't know what they have photographed, and endlessly argues on talk page in favor of anything but what reliable sources say... all without providing any sources at all to bolster his arguments. See the discussions at Category talk:Pony traps where I refer to the carriage sources, then paraphrase then, and finally have to quote the carriage experts, but to no avail, while he posts that because some image has a caption saying this or that, that it should be an actual category. He scoffs at standard carriage taxonomy from carriage historians as "using fashionable names", and calls their published books "dictionaries" (diff-nl).
  7. Multi-venues, same dispute: The discussions about "traps" have now spread from Category talk:Pony traps to Category talk:Trap carriages, then to Category:Trap carriages, then to his user talk page, then back to Category talk:Pony traps, then to his complaint on Commons:De Kroeg.
  8. Misrepresentation #2: I created a post on a category TALK page, and Peli copied part of it and posted it on the actual category page, continuing his argument there by placing a contradicting level-2 heading above my content.
  9. False claims: Peli falsely accused me of not giving good edit summaries where he asserts (without diffs) "There is not much text or explanation, only 'NOT a trap, away with it'." (diff-nl) However he's referring to two edits where I gave specific edit summaries: "removed factually incorrect and invented information; this is a governess cart, not a trap" and "removed factually incorrect categorization; not a trap". He reverted both edits, and his second revert edit summary indicates he knows that "pony trap" isn't a real designation, but plans on using it anyway—which circles back to his choice to ignore carriage scholarship.
  10. Burying files: Peli constantly moves files out of their correct main categories and buries them at least two layers deep in newly created "by country" subcategories. For example, instead of placing an image of a Berline in "Category:Berline carriages", he moves it into "Berline carriages in France" under "Berline carriages by country". Over time, this results in the main category containing only a small handful of files (today=7 files) while hundreds are hidden in country-specific subcats that casual users will never find (today=674 files). For quite a while, I didn't realize that the majority of images were under a subcat of "Berline carriages by country". This pattern makes images effectively undiscoverable, destabilizes category structure, and causes confusion... including Peli accusing me of "losing" his files when he probably just moved them into increasingly narrow or inaccurate subcategories.
  11. Contradictory messaging: My final example shows Peli switching rapidly from accusatory ranting to praise to excoriating complaint—in succession, with no responses from me in between (got no pings!). Peli posts an accusatory, inflammatory response, then he constructs a lengthy proposal for the two of us to co-create a carriage glossary in Commons, framed on his viewpoints. He praises me as someone who has "deep expertise in the literature" and says he "wants to collaborate on this". Immediately after that, he posts his diff-less complaint against me at the Dutch-language Village Pump (diff-nl).

Peli creates many contextual and regional subcategories daily, to which I rarely object. However, a bright line for me is the creation of categories for carriage types that do not exist, and elevating these pseudo-carriage-types to the level of formal carriage taxonomy based solely on slang usage. This week's confusingly circular discussions revolved around Peli's insistence on creating and expanding categories for "traps" (a slang term; not a coherent carriage type) while ignoring every published carriage expert I presented. Peli provided no sources, and his justifications boiled down to: "But so many people upload images calling them traps!" Yeah... still slang, and not a recognized carriage class. Peli's refusal to acknowledge published carriage scholarship in favor of slang usage without providing any sources to back him up, results in miscategorization, unnecessary cleanup work, and prolonged discussions driven by his personal insistence. Earlier similar disputes-with-discussions were also unproductive, and related to regional or foreign words that already had established English-equivalent categories, and centered around Peli's desire to create duplicate categories using those foreign or almost-identical carriage names—such as the earlier victoria v. milord and barouche v. caleche discussions.

I am requesting admin review of these conduct patterns. Repeated IDHT behavior, hostility, accusations, and circular discussions across multiple pages have made normal collaboration unworkable in the topic area where our work overlaps (horse-drawn vehicles). Administrative intervention is needed to contain these behaviors and prevent recurrence.

  ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:43, 27 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

I'll admit I didn't read through all of that. Two things do strike me, though and (@Grorp) you may want to strike through some of what you wrote above on at least the first of these two counts:
  • This is not a place to carry over conflict from the Dutch-language Village pump. If his complaints on the Dutch-language Village pump are about your actions on Commons, you should ask there for them to be dismissed summarily on the basis of importing drama from another Wiki. I Pelikana wants to raise issue about your behavior on Commons, he should bring it here. If his complaints on the Dutch-language Village pump are not about your actions on Commons, then you are the one who is importing drama fron another wiki.
  • "By country" categories are pretty normal. I would say that of all the dimensions along which one might split a large category, that is the least controversial.
Jmabel ! talk
To clarify, the Dutch-language Village Pump I referred to is on Commons itself, COM:De Kroeg, not on nl.wikipedia.org (I don't participate at nlwiki). He did not post it here at AN/U.
I'm not trying to defend myself here for what Peli accused me of on COM:De Kroeg, I mentioned that post only because it illustrates the conduct patterns relevant to this AN/U report. While he was posting a very flattering, collaborative message to me on a Commons cat-talk page, he simultaneously posted his accusations about me in Dutch, in a Commons venue I do not watch, and was not notified about. Since he provided no diffs or evidence or specifics (as required for such accusations, lest they be interpreted as personal attacks per COM:NPA#WHATIS) I could see no constructive way to respond to it, and so I didn't.
I would not have discovered it at all if I hadn't been checking his Commons edit history related to the flattery post, and discovered the COM:De Kroeg post was posted in the middle of it. The five-minute gap between posting praise and complaint in two separate locations shows contradictory messaging and venue-splitting, which is part of the conduct issues I'm asking admins to review. I'm not asking AN/U to adjudicate the Dutch post itself—only to consider the behavioral pattern it demonstrates.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:57, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
@Grorp: thanks, much clearer, including your rewording above; I presume you can see how I misread your original wording. - Jmabel ! talk 05:54, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Indeed I can. It took me a moment to pinpoint where the misunderstanding came from, but "from another wiki" was the clue. I've now clarified the first occurrence of Commons:De Kroeg in my post (removing the piped English title) so future editors reading this thread won't run into the same ambiguity.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 07:17, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Pelikana has not edited since this was posted. I hope they will will respond here when they are back. - Jmabel ! talk 01:03, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Thank you JMabel, I am complaining about a user producing an almost continuous stream of unexpected reverts, emptied categories, subtle- and grotesque manipulative personal attacks, harassment, hounding and belitteling as expressed right here on this page in this *self portrait in disguise*. The attacks are especially clear here in #10, the random rant about the (i.m.o. well done) subcategories of 'Berline carriages' (for which he produced one himself in sept 2024 Berline carriages in Portugal), followed by the wild assumption without any proof or relation to the context: (...) "he probably just moved them into increasingly narrow or inaccurate subcategories". Many times he made further discussions impossible by the use of belitteling PA's to discredit the opponent and their arguements, like the example he gives here on this page.
I am also very worried about - and protesting against edits which do place own visual POV interpretations above respecting original naming and cultural backgrounds as truely as they are printed on (or right next to) works, and which routinely doubts and disregards original titles and names by original coachmakers and art hisoricians from the best museum- and library collections. Adding lists of sources to discussions does not automatically grant that they are correctly represented. In some case they are used very much out of context like we can see on Commons where the Friesian sjees has become the only type of sjees in the Netherlands due to a redirect in a carriage book saying: "Sjees, see Friesian sjees", and skipping "Friesian" from the original lemma title of it. Experts in the Netherlands know many more Dutch types of regional chaises which are not mentioned or recognized yet on Commons. Yet presenting "the sjees" as always Friesian and the only sjees type of the Netherlands is a significant systemic error solely based on sloppy research and unfaithful quoting. The sudden removal of all available Kentucky breaking carts from Breaking carts in the United States speaks bookparts. Peli (talk) 16:45, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

User:Dhx1 uploading regular copyrighted file on wikimedia commons

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion
  • User:Dhx1 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
  • Reasons for reporting: Persistent copyright violations and misattribution of authorship despite multiple warnings.
  • Details: User Dhx1 has repeatedly uploaded commercial, copyrighted media (including TV broadcasts, streaming video clips from Prime Video, and commercial music videos) without valid licensing or permission. The user's talk page (User talk:Dhx1) contains numerous deletion notices and copyright warnings spanning several months, yet the pattern of uploading non-free media continues.
  • Examples of non-free uploads/warnings:
  • Commercial film/streaming clips: Rocky, Everything Everywhere All At Once
  • Commercial music videos and broadcasts: Wu-Tang Clan, Nicki Minaj, Jasmine Rae, Dua Lipa, Charlie Puth, Cardi B
  • Requested action: Administrative review and block/upload restriction to prevent ongoing copyright infringement. Noukayami (talk) 10:35, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
    @Noukayami, it is very clearly mentioned on the top of this page that you are required to inform the user on their talk page about this discussion. I have done it for you this time. Please take care in the future. Shaan SenguptaTalk 11:50, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
    @Shaan Sengupta Sorry for the inconvenience
    And thanks for doing it for me Noukayami (talk) 11:53, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Most of the examples you cite are 3 years old and have been reviewed multiple times through deletion requests and kept, to the point that someone has since created Commons:Free depictions of non-free works and others have now created templates such as Template:Official_Warner_Music_New_Zealand_YouTube_channel to deal with the low-effort knee-jerk view of "I can't believe Warner Music / whoever would publish promotional material for their copyrighted works under a CC-BY license".
    For the deletion requests which were successful, I would love those to be re-reviewed against Commons:Free depictions of non-free works now that it exists, although there is still significant ambiguity and community disagreement on this matter.
    The primary reason why a small number of deletion requests on my talk page have had adverse outcomes in previous years is because of lack of clarity at the time about which entities are trusted to be accurate on the copyright status of works. The "Rocky, Everything Everywhere All At Once" example failed because reviewers had worried that Amazon MGM Studios owning the Rocky franchise may not have permitted Amazon Prime Video (separate legal entity) to release promotional material for the 1976 movie on YouTube under a CC-BY license. Reviewers were second guessing Amazon Prime Video on whether their licensing of promotional material can be trusted, because perhaps these two parts of the Amazon business are in dispute with each other. In a few other cases, people were second guessing record labels or movie companies suggesting with no evidence that perhaps an official website or YouTube account had been outsourced to a marketing firm who made an error in releasing promotional material under a CC-BY license. Or some may argue that perhaps the record label in publishing a song had derived a sample from another copyright owner "ACME", and we'll never know if "AMCE" agreed to a CC-BY license now used by the record label because the record label hasn't provided documented proof (e.g. massive bundle of signed work-for-hire contracts).
    Even if you were to go through a VRT process of obtaining written permission from Amazon MGM Studios, Amazon Prime Video, Sylvester Stallone, Jeff Bezos and 578 other companies and individuals that may have a copyright ownership stake in some aspect of the production of the movie (music, sound effects, script, etc), I don't think you'd necessarily end up any closer to properly ascertaining every aspect of a 10 second movie clip being completely free of any future claims from copyright owners of "I didn't allow for my contribution to be licensed as CC-BY". See for example Horror Inc. v. Miller, 335 F.Supp.3d 273 (D. Conn. 2018) (https://case-law.vlex.com/vid/horror-inc-v-miller-884631893) where a screenwriter successfully terminated many years later a copyright license granted to the production company of the first Friday the 13th film from 1980. At some point everyone has to ultimately accept the claims of a record label, movie studio, etc that they've received all necessary permissions from all copyright owners who may be involved to publish the music, movie, etc, whether it be CC-BY or otherwise. And yes, even the most thorough VRT process and written records will sometimes get things wrong too, as the Friday the 13th case demonstrates. Dhx1 (talk) 16:10, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
    Additionally please provide examples where you believe "misattribution of authorship" may have occurred. Every example you cited has had the source website very clearly identified and I am unaware of any previous complaints or disputes about incorrect sourcing. The history of each file still existing or deletion requests in cases where deletion may have been chosen, will show the correct identification of source. Dhx1 (talk) 16:28, 28 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Not done No admin action required. Yann (talk) 09:26, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

Xenophobia

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

User @Wackboynwm: has opened a deletion request on my work based on the sole fact it's written in Ukrainian. — Ґайдечахв74Лпадаоо (talk) 04:39, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

So we can know that the Ukrainian source is more reliable and not misleading. I believe the Ukrainian source in the article about Belarus may be distorted. Let's then write articles about Ukraine based on Russian sources. ~2026-47153-48 (talk) 04:42, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
What "Ukrainian source" are you talking about? — Ґайдечахв74Лпадаоо (talk) 04:43, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Not done. No xenophobia here. The file is nominated for regular deletion, please discuss it there, not here. Taivo (talk) 11:21, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

User:Flashthomsom uploading regular copyrighted file on wikimedia commons

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion
  • Reasons for reporting: Persistent copyright violations and misattribution of authorship despite multiple warnings.
  • Details: User Flashthomsom has repeatedly uploaded commercial, copyrighted media without valid licensing or permission. The user's talk page (User talk:Flashthomsom) contains numerous deletion notices and copyright warnings spanning several months, yet the pattern of uploading non-free media continues.
  • List of non-free uploads/warnings:
  1. File:Dhanbad Municipal Corporation.png
  2. File:GCR LOGO.svg
  3. File:Jru-logo-ranchi.png
  4. File:HMC Hazaribag logo.png
  5. File:Hemant Soren 01.jpg
and so on
 Not done. No copyvios after last warning in March. Taivo (talk) 11:17, 29 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
[edit]
Latest comment: 2 hours ago5 comments2 people in discussion

User talk:AidansStuff shows around 25 copyright violation warnings etc. ; AidansStuff is clearly unconcerned with copyright law as they continue to upload copyvio images of living people. Despite a personal non-template discussion with them in early July, where I advised them to ask for advice at the Village pump rather than guessing an images copyright status (which is what they said they were doing), they continue to upload. Aesurias (talk) 09:09, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Aesurias: Hi, I don't see any current copyright violation. I still sent a strong warning for past violations. Yann (talk) 09:23, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
Yes, no current ones, because they're being continually taken down.
Is this kind of chronic rule-breaking (law-breaking, technically) unactionable on Commons unless there is an active copyright violation, even if there's been 25+ previous ones with zero changes or improvements? I ask this genuinely as I am nowhere near as familiar with Commons as I am with enwiki. Aesurias (talk) 10:18, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
There aren't 25 copyright violations, only 12. AidansStuff got a warning, hopefully they will care. If any new copyright violation occurs, they could be blocked. Blocks here are not punitive, but preventive. Yann (talk) 10:33, 30 August 2026 (UTC)Reply
 Not done No edit after warning. Yann (talk) 15:21, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Eduardo Gabriel569

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Eduardo Gabriel569 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

Continuous copyright violations (log). Uploaded image at 18:26, 2 September 2026 (UTC) with the {{CC0}} template and without a source; final warning was given at 2:44, 2 September 2026. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:33, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

✓ Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:20, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

Huihuangdesuiyue

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 hour ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Huihuangdesuiyue (talk · contribs) has been blocked due to sockpuppetry, however I'd like to ask for a review about their uploads, such as File:The symbol of China — Hanfu.png File:China's symbol – Han clothing (Hanfu).png, looks like something that F10 but I'm not very sure. Lemonaka (talk) 16:05, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply

✓ Done. I mass deleted all uploads as copyright violations. This user is a sockpuppet and (s)he is not trusted at all. Taivo (talk) 16:53, 3 September 2026 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=1271807687"