Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

↓ Skip to table of contents ↓
Skip to the bottom

Shortcut: COM:AN

  Community Portal   Village Pump
(copyright & proposals)		   Help Desk
(Upload help)		   Administrators' Noticeboard
(vandalism, user problems, blocks and protections)		   Graphics Lab  
Administrator's assistance
Vandalism
(edit | watch)		 User problems
(edit | watch)		 Blocks and protections
(edit | watch)		 Other
(edit | watch)
English: Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.
Suomi: Raportoi ilmeisistä vandalismitapauksista. Muut estopyynnöt jätettäköön estojen ja suojauksen ilmoitustaululle.
Italiano: Segnala qui le utenze responsabili di vandalismi palesi. Richieste di blocco per qualsiasi altra ragione vanno effettuate nella sezione Politiche di blocco e protezione.
日本語: 明白な荒らし利用者の報告所。それ以外を理由とするブロック依頼はブロックと保護へ。
한국어: 문서 훼손을 저지른 사용자를 신고하는 곳입니다. 다른 이유로 인한 차단 요청은 차단 및 보호 요청 문서에 남겨주세요.
മലയാളം: ഉപയോക്താക്കളുടെ ഉറപ്പായ വാൻഡലിസത്തിനെക്കുറിച്ച് ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കുക. മറ്റ് കാരണങ്ങൾക്ക് ഉപയോക്താക്കളെ തടയാനുള്ള അപേക്ഷകൾ തടയലുകളും സംരക്ഷണങ്ങളും എന്ന താളിലാണ് അറിയിക്കേണ്ടത്.
Svenska: Rapportera användare för tydliga tecken på vandalism. Begäran av blockering för någon annan anledning ska rapporteras på anslagstavlan för blockeringar och skydd.
Українська: Повідомляйте про користувачів, що явно займаються вандалізмом. Запити щодо блокування з будь-якої іншої причини повинні бути повідомлені на дошку для оголошень щодо блокування та захисту.
English: Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.
Suomi: Raportoi ylläpitäjän väliintulon vaativa käyttäjän ongelmallinen toiminta. Käytä käyttäjäongelmien ilmoitustaulua jollei ylläpitäjää tarvita.
Italiano: Segnala qui eventuali conflitti con altri utenti che richiedano l'intervento di un amministratore. In caso un amministratore non sia necessario si consiglia di utilizzare la sezione Risoluzione dei conflitti.
한국어: 관리자의 개입이 필요한 분쟁을 해결하는 곳입니다. 관리자의 개입이 필요하지 않다면 분쟁 해결 게시판을 이용하시기 바랍니다.
മലയാളം: മറ്റൊരു ഉപയോക്താവുമായുള്ള തർക്കത്തിൽ കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകർ ഇടപെടണമെങ്കിൽ ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കുക. കാര്യനിർവാഹകരുടെ സഹായം ആവശ്യമില്ലെങ്കിൽ തർക്കങ്ങളുടെ നോട്ടീസ് ബോർഡിൽ ആണ് ഇക്കാര്യം അറിയിക്കേണ്ടത്.
Svenska: Rapportera tvister med användare som kräver hjälp av en administratör. Använd anslagstavlan för användarproblem om ingen administratörshjälp behövs.
Українська: Повідомляйте про суперечки з користувачами, котрі потребують допомоги адміністратора. Подальші кроки показані на сторінці щодо вирішення суперечок.
English: Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.
Italiano: Utilizza questa sezione per segnalare problemi non riferibili al vandalismo. Qui vanno anche le richieste di protezione e sprotezione pagine.
한국어: 문서 훼손 관련 관리자 요청에 맞지 않는 차단 요청이나 문서의 보호/보호 해제 요청을 이곳에서 할 수 있습니다.
മലയാളം: വാൻഡലിസം നോട്ടീസ്ബോർഡിൽ അനുചിതമായ അപേക്ഷകൾ ഇവിടെ നൽകാം. ഒരു താളിന്റെ സംരക്ഷിക്കാനുള്ള/സംരക്ഷണം മാറ്റാനുള്ള അപേക്ഷകളും ഇവിടെ നൽകാവുന്നതാണ്.
Svenska: Rapporteringar som inte passar anslagstavlan för vandalism kan rapporteras här. Begäran för sidskydd eller borttagning av sidskydd kan också begäras här.
Suomi: Tällä sivulla voit kuuluttaa vandalismin ilmoitustaululle sopimattomat ilmoitukset. Tällä ilmoitustaululla voit myös pyytää sivun suojaamista tai suojauksen purkua.
中文（简体）‎: 这里可以报告不适合破坏行为布告栏的报告。这里亦可以请求页面保护/解除保护。
Українська: Повідомлення, що не підходять для дошки для оголошень щодо вандалізму можна залишити тут. Запити щодо встановлення чи зняття захисту зі сторінок також можна запитати тут.
English: Other reports that require administrator assistance (i.e. requested moves/renames) which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed here.
Suomi: Tällä ilmoitustaulla voit kuuluttaa muille ilmoitustauluille sopimattomat ylläpitäjän huomion vaativat tehtävät ja ilmoitukset, esimerkiksi suojattujen sivujen siirrot. Pyynnöt sivuhistorian yhdistämisestä tai jakamisesta tulee tehdä täällä.
Italiano: Segnalazioni varie, non ricomprese tra le precedenti, che richiedano l'intervento di un amministratore (spostamenti, ridenominazioni, etc.); Se il tuo problema riguarda l'unione o la separazione delle cronologie pagine, allora puoi rivolgerti qui.
한국어: 다른 관리자 요청 문서에 맞지 않는 일반적인 관리에 대해 관리자의 도움을 요청하는 곳입니다.
മലയാളം: മറ്റ് മൂന്ന് നോട്ടീസ് ബോർഡുകളിലും ചേരാത്ത അപേക്ഷകൾ (പേര് മാറ്റൽ തുടങ്ങിയവ) ഇവിടെ നൽകാം. നാൾവഴിയിൽ മാറ്റം വരുത്തി നാൾവഴി ഭാഗിക്കാനോ യോജിപ്പിക്കാനോ ഉള്ള അപേക്ഷകൾ നൽകാൻ ഇവിടെ ഞെക്കുക.
Svenska: Andra rapporteringar som kräver administratörshjälp (t.ex. begärda flyttningar/namnbyten) som inte passar i någon av de föregående anslagstavlorna kan rapporteras här. Begäran för sammanslagning eller delning av historik ska lämnas in här.
Українська: Інші повідомлення, що потребують допомоги адміністратора (наприклад, запити на переміщення/перейменування), які не підходять до жодної з трьох попередніх дощок оголошень можуть бути залишені тут. Запити щодо об'єднання або роз'єднання історії мають бути зроблені тут.
Archives
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45
English: 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.
العربية: هذا هو المكان حيث يمكن للمستخدمين التواصل مع الإداريين، أو الإداريين مع بعضهم البعض. يمكنك الإبلاغ عنه التخريب، المستخدمين الذين يسببون مشاكل، أو أي شيء آخر يحتاج للتدخل من قبل إداري.
Azərbaycanca: Bu bölüm istifadəçilərin idarəçilərlə ünsiyyət qura biləcəklər bir yerdir. Bir idarəçiyə vandalizmle müdaxilə ehtiyacı, problemli istifadəçilər ya da başqa bir şey ifadə edəbilərsiniz.
Català: Aquest és el lloc destinat a que els usuaris puguin comunicar-se amb els administradors, o viceversa. Podeu notificar edicions vandàliques, reclamar l'atenció sobre usuaris problemàtics, o indicar qualsevol altre assumpte que requereixi la intervenció d'un administrador.
Česky: Tato stránka slouží uživatelům ke komunikaci se správci zde na Commons, nebo ke komunikaci správců mezi sebou. Můžete zde nahlásit vandalismus, problematické uživatele nebo další záležitosti, které mohou díky svým pravomocem vyřešit jen správci.
Deutsch: Diese Seite ist für Gespräche mit Administratoren. Du kannst hier Probleme melden, die den Eingriff eines Administrators nötig machen, zum Beispiel Vandalismus oder Probleme mit anderen Benutzern.
Ελληνικά: Αυτή είναι μια σελίδα στην οποία οι χρήστες μπορούν να επικοινωνήσουν με διαχειριστές, ή οι διαχειριστές με κάποιον άλλο. Μπορείτε να αναφέρετε βανδαλισμούς, χρήστες που προκαλούν προβλήματα, ή οτιδήποτε άλλο χρειάζεται την παρέμβαση ενός διαχειριστή.
Esperanto: Ĉi tie estas loko kie uzantoj povas interkomunikiĝi kun administrantoj, aŭ administrantoj unu kun la alia. Vi povas raporti pri vandalismo, problemaj uzantoj, kaj ĉio alia, kio bezonas intervenon de administranto.
Español: Este es el sitio destinado a que los usuarios puedan comunicarse con los administradores, o viceversa. Puede notificar un vandalismo, reclamar atención sobre usuarios problemáticos, o indicar cualquier otro asunto que requiera la intervención de un administrador.
فارسی: این جا مکانیست که کاربران با مدیران، یا مدیران با یکدیگر می‌توانند ارتباط برقرار کنند. شما می‌توانید خرابکاری، کاربران مشکل‌ساز، یا هر آن چیز دیگری که نیاز به اقدام مدیران داشته باشد را گزارش کنید.
Français: Cette page est destinée à permettre aux utilisateurs et aux administrateurs de communiquer entre eux. Vous pouvez utiliser cette page pour signaler des actes de vandalisme, des utilisateurs au comportement problématique, ou tout autre fait nécessitant l'intervention d'un administrateur. Si vous ne maîtrisez que le français, la page Commons:Bistro reste cependant utilisable et vous y trouverez des administrateurs francophones.
Frysk: Op dizze side kinne meidoggers oerlizze mei behearders, of behearders mei inoar. Jo kinne hjir fandalisme, problematyske meidoggers en oare saken dy't oandacht fan in behearder freegje melde.
हिन्दी: यह वह स्थान है जहाँ सदस्य प्रबंधकों से, तथा प्रबंधक एक दूसरे से संवाद कर सकते हैं। आप बर्बरता, समस्याग्रस्त सदस्य या कोई और विषय जिसके लिए एक प्रबंधक के हस्तक्षेप की ज़रूरत हो, यहाँ बयान कर सकते हैं।
日本語: このページは、管理者同士、あるいは、利用者ユーザがJA:管理者,EN：administratorsと連絡を取るための場所です。問題のあるユーザを報告したり、荒らしユーザを通報したり、管理者の協力や仲介を必要とする事項などにご利用ください。
한국어: 이 문서는 사용자가 관리자, 혹은 관리자가 다른 관리자와 의견을 교환하는 곳입니다. 문서를 훼손하거나 문제가 있는 사용자를 보고하거나, 관리자의 중재가 필요한 사항이 있으면 이곳을 이용해주십시오.
Македонски: Ова е место каде што корисниците можат да комуницираат со администраторите, или пак администраторите меѓусебно. Тука можете да пријавувате вандализам, проблематични корисници, или било што друго кога има потреба од администраторска интервенција.
മലയാളം: കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകരുമായി ആശയവിനിമയം ചെയ്യാനുള്ള വേദിയാണിത്, കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകർക്ക് തമ്മിൽ തമ്മിൽ ചർച്ച ചെയ്യാനും ഈ താൾ ഉപയോഗിക്കാം. നശീകരണ പ്രവർത്തനങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചോ, പ്രശ്നകാരികളായ ഉപയോക്താക്കളെക്കുറിച്ചോ, അല്ലെങ്കിൽ കാര്യനിർവ്വാഹകരുടെ ഇടപെടൽ ആവശ്യമായ മറ്റെന്തെങ്കിലും വിഷയങ്ങളെക്കുറിച്ചോ താങ്കൾക്ക് ഇവിടെ അറിയിക്കാവുന്നതാണ്.
Bân-lâm-gú: 遮是予用者佮管理員、抑管理員佮管理員咧講代誌的所在，你會當報告破壞、製造問題的用者抑其他需要管理員處理的代誌。
Norsk bokmål: Dette er en side for å kommunisere med administratorer. Her kan du melde fra om problemer som krever administratorers inngripen; for eksempel vandalisme eller problemer med andre brukere.
Polski: Jest to miejsce, gdzie użytkownicy mogą kontaktować się z administratorami lub administratorzy ze sobą nawzajem. Możesz zgłosić tu akt wandalizmu, problematycznego użytkownika albo cokolwiek, do czego potrzebna jest interwencji administratora.
Italiano: Questa è la pagina in cui gli utenti possono comunicare con gli amministratori, o questi ultimi tra loro. Puoi segnalare qui vandalismi, utenti problematici, e qualsiasi altra cosa richieda l'intervento di un amministratore.
Magyar: Ezen a helyen üzenhetnek a szerkesztők az adminisztrátoroknak, vagy az adminisztrátorok egymásnak. Itt jelentheted a vandalizmust, a problémás szerkesztőket, vagy bármi más olyat, amihez adminisztrátori közreműködésre van szükség.
Português: Este é o local no qual os usuários podem se comunicar com os administradores, ou onde os administradores podem conversar uns com os outros. Aqui você pode relatar casos de vandalismo, usuários problemáticos ou tratar de qualquer outro assunto que requeira a atenção de um administrador.
Română: Această pagină este destinată comunicării dintre utilizatori şi administratori sau între administratori. Aici poţi semnala cazuri de vandalism, utilizatori cu comportament problematic, precum şi alte situaţii care necesită intervenţia unui administrator.
Русский: Это место, где участники могут обратиться к администраторам, а администраторы обсудить вопросы друг с другом. Вы можете сообщить о вандализме, некорректных действиях участников и всём прочем, что, по вашему мнению, нуждается во вмешательстве администраторов.
Suomi: Tällä sivulla voit keskustella ylläpitäjien kanssa. Voit esimerkiksi ilmoittaa meneillään olevasta vandalismista, ongelmakäyttäjistä tai mistä tahansa muusta joka tarvitsee ylläpitäjien huomiota.
Nederlands: Op deze plaats kunnen gebruikers communiceren met de beheerders, of de beheerders met elkaar. U kunt hier vandalen, of probleemgebruikers melden, of andere dingen die de aandacht van een beheerder nodig hebben.
Slovenčina: Táto stránka slúži používateľom na komunikáciu so správcami tu na Commons, alebo na komunikáciu správcov navzájom. Môžete tu nahlásiť vandalizmus, problematických používateľov alebo ďalšie záležitosti, ktoré môžu vďaka svojím právomociam vyriešiť len správcovia.
Српски / srpski: Ово је место где корисници могу да комуницирају са администраторима, или администратори са другима. Овде можете пријавити вандализам, проблематичне кориснике, или било шта друго што тражи интервенцију администратора.
Svenska: Det här är en sida där användare kan prata med administratörer, eller där administratörer kan prata med varandra. Du kan rapportera vandalism, problematiska användare eller någonting som behöver en administratörs ingripande.
Türkçe: Bu bölüm kullanıcıların yöneticilerle iletişim kurabilecekleri bir yerdir. Bir yöneticiye vandalizmle müdahale ihtiyacı, sorunlu kullanıcılar ya da başka bir şey bildirebilirsiniz.
Tiếng Việt: Đây là nơi người dùng có thể liên lạc với bảo quản viên, hoặc giữa những bảo quản viên với nhau. Bạn có thể báo cáo phá hoại, thành viên có vấn đề, hoặc bất cứ điều gì khác cần đến sự can thiệp của một bảo quản viên.
中文（简体）‎: 这里是用户能够与管理员或与管理员及另一个人沟通的地方。你可以报告破坏行为、问题用户或其他需要管理员干预的事情。
中文（繁體）‎: 這裡是用戶與管理員或管理員之間進行通訊的地方。您可以在此回報破壞、有問題的用戶，或其他需要管理員介入的事情。
Shqip: Ky është një vend ku përdoruesit mund të komunikojnë me administruesit, ose administruesit me njëri-tjetrin. Mund të raportosh vandalizëm, përdorues problematik dhe gjithçka tjetër ku ka nevojë për ndërhyrje të administruesve.
Important discussion pages (index)
Gnome User Speech.svg

Note

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



Anyone else have problem with opening user pages in Firefox?

moved to Commons:Village Pump#Anyone else have problem with opening user pages in Firefox?

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Aztec Empire (orthographic projection)

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Enjoy your time here on Commons, and Assume good faith. :-)--Steinsplitter (talk) 13:48, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if some Administrator can do something about this vandalism. On 10 January 2010, the user Keepscases upload this map (Aztec Empire (orthographic projection)) using a lot of references I suppose as everybody can find in internet [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] as maximum extension territoy of the aztec empire [8] but the user Sémhur "updated" this image with his own version of the aztec empire using only the "provinces tributary of the triple alliance" without a previous consensus on discussion page [9], map of the user Yavidaxiu, so I reverted to the original map and I told to the user to upload another image with his own version but now we have a R3R war, unfortunately the user El Comandante has also joined to this vandalism, so please I hope some Administrator can do something there. Thank you. --Giggette (talk) 07:05, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

I wanted to start a talk about this picture, but apparently Giggette already done it. But only with her point of view.
There is an edit war on this file. We need help. You can find informations about this on File talk:Aztec Empire (orthographic projection).svg. Giggette made 7 reverts, El Commandante 5, and me 2.
I explain now my point of view: the file was created by user Keepscases (blocked for sockpuppetry of Heraldicos, himself blocked fo copyvios & issues with disruptive behaviour). As he didn't mentioned any source, El Commandante ask me to made another version (I am working for the French Graphic Lab), sourced, in january 2010, and I uploaded it in february 2010. This version was accepted during 3 years, apparently without any problem. On april 2013, Giggette revert the version to the first one, with no discussion and no source. Since this moment, she still provides no source (she just gives pictures found on internet, with no indication from where they come: who made it? In which book?). Now, she started a section here without notifying El Commandante and me, and begin to insult us (since when using a source is a vandalism?).
Sémhur (talk) 15:07, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Three years of vandalism and unreported in COMMONS. On 11 February 2010, Sémhur replaced the original map with no discussion using the File:Provincias tributarias de la Triple Alianza (s. XVI).svg (the provinces when the empire started) by user Yavidaxiu, meanwhile the empire aztec is mostly shown with its maximum territorial extension, showing the principal conquests from the reign of Itzcoatl as we can see it in several maps on internet [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], please do something. Thank you. --Giggette (talk) 19:41, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Giggette just wants to impose her undocumented POV, but she doesn't know anything about Mesoamerica. The Aztec empire didn't begin in the XVIth century, as she pretends saying that Yavidaxiu's map shows the provinces when the empire started, and «Atzcapotzalco» (sic) didn't join the empire at his end, as she pretended there. Her answer there shows that she doesn't know the very famous Barlow and Berdan's maps of the Aztec empire in 1519, and that she doesn't want to know it! I can't understand why and how someone can try, like Giggette, to impose his undocumented POV without knowing anything about what he's trying to talk... El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 22:11, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Now are you insulting me?. --Giggette (talk) 23:29, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
No, just checking facts : you're trying to impose a POV undocumented (your « sources » are just a bunch of images randomly picked on blogs and based on fanciful or obsolete works) and ignoring basic informations about what you're talking about. Anyone who read a little about Aztec empire in the last 15 years know the Berdan's map. El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 11:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Your "Berdan's map" is unverifiable so then POV undocumented, where's the link?. --Giggette (talk) 00:46, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
This map (also published there and there and explained in both previous pages) is «unverifiable»? Are you serious? El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 08:53, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Well your three maps 1, 2, 3 were modified by Berdan for describing the Aztec Imperial Strategies of the Aztec Empire, areas listed in the Codex Mendoza tribute roll, made regularly-scheduled tribute payments to the imperial capitals in the Valley of Mexico. Unfortunately these threes maps are completely different to this map File:Provincias tributarias de la Triple Alianza (s. XVI).svg or this. Have any other reference? Your defense is still unverifiable and undocumented. --Giggette (talk) 09:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Completely different? LOL. Much less than the completely undocumented version you want to restore! Why? Because, as I explained it to you before, recent works show there wasn't any Aztec territory (i.e. tributary or "client" state, in the new and more accurate typology) between Teozapotlan and Xoconochco, at the opposite of what pretended old and obsolete maps like the one you want to impose. Your POV-pushing is disinformation. And you're completely dishonest when you're asking for another source : you know very well that Yavidaxiu's map is based on the Atlas del México prehispánico published by the reference review Arqueologia Mexicana. El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 12:26, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Where is link/page of Atlas del México Prehispánico to prove it?. --Giggette (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Do you realize what you wrote? Replacing a non-sourced version with a sourced one is vandalism... Do you have the same behavior in the articles? In that case, when you see someone replacing a non-sourced assertion (why not with a refnec) by another with reference, you'll revert him for vandalism? I hope not ! Sémhur (talk) 18:54, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

This is COMMONS, COMMONS is not a free encyclopedia, if this image can't be verified with a link/page/image so then it's gonna be targeted as fictional. That's simple. --Giggette (talk) 23:08, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

The map has a source, that you can easily check if you take the trouble to do it, since you live in Mexico. Perhaps in a university library. About verifications, where are your sources? Sémhur (talk) 16:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Your map has a source?, so then provide the link to verify.--Giggette (talk) 18:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Please stop your ad hominem attacks. This obsession to ask the number of the page does not hide your lack of sources. The source we gave you is a printed book that you can find in your own country if you ask in a library. If you don't want to see it, it's an other problem. Sémhur (talk) 09:32, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Admit it, you have not even seen the map in that "book", you just modified the original map by keepscases using File:Provincias_tributarias_de_la_Triple_Alianza_(s._XVI).svg by Yavidaxiu without verifying, please provide the page to check it.--Giggette (talk) 16:13, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
The source I used is indicated on the page description: the map made by Yavidaxiu. The source used by Yavidaxiu is mentionned is the page despcription: the Atlas del México Prehispánico. I have no reason to not trust him. If you have doubt about this atlas, please check it. If you find that the source doesn't correspond to the Yavidaxiu's map, tell me and it will be my pleasure to correct it. I always thank those who help me to improve the maps I made. If, instead of reverting without comment, you've started by talking with me by sending, for example, a scan of a more recent book that the one used, showing that the version I made was wrong, we would probably avoid a lot of irritation and loss of time. Sémhur (talk) 17:29, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Well. Please keep in mind that on Commons there is no reason to have only one image on a somewhat conjectural matter. Please, if you disagree on the substance of the image, upload the separate image under a different name. The original name should almost certainly stay with the image that was originally uploaded there, unless there are "friendly corrections." By definition, if the original uploader is unhappy with the corrections, they are not friendly. It is quite possible that more than two images would be useful if sources are in disagreement. Even if a source is "old and obsolete," it may still be useful to have a visual representation of the claims made by that source, as long as they are labeled as such.

And please knock it off with the mutual personal attacks (e.g. "completely dishonest"). Address the content, not the person. - Jmabel ! talk 15:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes I have been receiving personal attacks from user El Comandante, extremely uncomfortable. --Giggette (talk) 18:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
I'm agree, this dispute has lasted long enough. As the first uploader was active when I uploaded the new version and said nothing against that, we can assume that he wasn't disagreed. Giggette can upload an other file with an other name if she wants. But the problem is not about "old and obsolete" sources, it's about "no source". Each time we ask for his sources, he shirk the question... Sémhur (talk) 16:42, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Everyone please stop and have a read of Commons:Disputed territories before continuing, however strongly you feel about this map, others have been there and have had the same arguments you're having now with other maps. This is not an encyclopedia and this is not the place to have this discussion. Each of you go and create a map to your own liking, and make the case for why your map should feature in local articles, Commons is here to host them all.--KTo288 (talk) 20:13, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Edit war on File:Aztec Empire ME (orthographic projection).svg. Pleas stop edit warring and Assume good faith--Steinsplitter (talk) 09:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
To the commons sysops: Which map do you recomend to use in articles meanwhile this editar war is during? Do you recommend not using any map? I am a rollbacker fom catalan wikipedia and I hope this can be solved. --Lluis tgn (talk) 13:40, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
We don't recommend. What images to use in Wikipedia articles are solely Wikipedia's problem.--Prosfilaes (talk) 10:53, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I don't know how this choice was concluded, to let publish in Commons anything, even clearly wrong maps or documents not verifiable by reliable sources, but that's a big problem, when some intensive POV-pusher like Giggette is trying to replace a reliable map by an obsolete one on almost every Wikipedia. It's much more exhausting and difficult to resolve this problem one Wikipedia by one, in different languages, than if it could be corrected directly in Commons. El ComandanteSkull and crossbones.svgHasta ∞ 09:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
I blocked yesterday Giggette for an hour. - Pleas stop edit warring and Assume good faith! I think we can close this discussion with a lot o AGF.--Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
↑Jump back a section

Kolega2357

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Hi! I think right now we have a problem with this person and their permissions.

  • Patroller: For example here. The user don't know how to use deletion templates.
  • Rollback: An example: example. Used to remove a deleted template.

And his new request to License Reviewer... see here. This user is a permissions collector.

I request the action by an administrator for the sake of Commons. Greetings, --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

The user dos not know how to use this tools. The user seems to be a permissions collector. I suggest to remov the Rollback and Patroller right. The user is blocked infinite on the serbian Wikipedia.--Steinsplitter (talk) 22:08, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
I would have to concur - the editor has made two requests for rollback on Wikidata (1 week apart) and apparently quite a few on the Spanish Wikipedia. --Rschen7754 22:24, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

People you what, I was wrong? No one is not fallible. What's all the panic rising? --Kolega2357 (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm here, I do not agree with anyone. This aggression is arranged against me. --Kolega2357 (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Kolega2357, please note that here on Commons, {{delete}} is used for deletion requests; {{Speedydelete}} should be used for speedy deletions. I think we should extend AGF in regard to that, because on many projects {{Delete}} is used for speedy deletion. But now you know :) In relation to the use of rollback, the way in which you used it is not allowed on this project, as per Commons:ROLLBACK#When_to_use_rollback; the edit wasn't vandalism, and it wasn't a clear mistake. Rollback could possibly be revoked, but I would again AGF at the moment, but at the same time remind you to read COM:ROLLBACK and be aware that future misuse would result in it being revoked. russavia (talk) 22:31, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

This is a clear case of a permissions collector: diff1, diff2, diff3, diff4, diff5, diff6, diff7, diff8, diff9, diff10, diff11 and so on. In addition, it seems this is a sockpuppet of a globally locked user. See Velimir Ivanovic and Oliver Nedeljkovic. See also this. Greetings from Belgrade!109.92.21.151 18:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

I've removed their file mover right (see the user talk page for more detail) until some issues are resolved. —Mono 18:55, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Although it is true that this user is blocked indef on WP:SR, I can see no sock activity on Commons. However, this is an unusual user -- he or she has at least one edit on all but five of the 332 projects and ten or more edits on 65 of them. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This user under his previous and locked incarnation used to ask for global rights (and acted less than nice when his requests were denied), so I think that's the reason for the cross-wiki activity. Snowolf How can I help? 19:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Since the user had their filemover rights removed by Mono on April 30 already, and there haven't been any updates to this discussion except for Snowolf's addition above, I'm going to close it, assuming good faith. For now, let's allow Kolega2357 to have their patroller and rollbacker rights, and think of removing them the moment he appears to abuse them. odder (talk) 13:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
↑Jump back a section

Broken location template

One of the location templates seems to have been modified and screwed up - every image with geocoding I now see (in addition to the geocode) has in red {{#coordinates:}}: invalid latitude. I can't find what was changed though. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:15, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

+1. But I see this error message only on my two very recent uploads, and only when there are decimal places. All previous ones look OK. Very strange --A.Savin 19:25, 1 May 2013 (UTC) Update: now I see it on several of my older uploads as well. It also seems that the files are now automatically sorted in Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags which recently contains about 9.000 files. --A.Savin 07:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

see also Template talk:Object location#Decimals are an error? and Commons:Forum#Meckermeldung_in_Koordinaten
maybe caused by [19]?
i've left a notice on Commons talk:Geocoding. Holger1959 (talk) 02:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
{{#coordinates:}} seems to always complain about an invalid latitude when you give it a valid one. Would point to a problem with mw:Extension:GeoData? I imagine if you force any pages that look ok to be rerendered (edit or purge them) then they will show the error, but only pages using {{Object location}}. Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags currently has 1385 members –⁠moogsi (blah) 03:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
I undid the last edit on {{Object location}} to see if it has any effect (it doesn't seem to). Bit of a long shot because it's a bit old for something that people are only just noticing now –⁠moogsi (blah) 03:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
This has done nothing except make the error more visible as the template is rerendered across ~80000 pages, sorry :/ (Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags was already slowly filling as people rerendered pages by editing them)
This does however seem to rule out the template as causing the problem.
The strange behaviour of the parser function is shown at User:Moogsi/Invalid latitude. Probably. I'm way out of my depth so I'll leave it here –⁠moogsi (blah) 04:48, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

It's a problem in the GeoData extension. It was broken here and fixed on 11:14, 2013-05-02 (unknown timezone), but the latter isn't deployed yet. Lupo 10:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Deployed now. Max Semenik (talk) 10:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Pictogram voting keep.svgFixed by the lovely MaxSem, now deployed –⁠moogsi (blah) 10:10, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --A.Savin 10:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
thank you, too Holger1959 (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
To me it still appears to be broken. A few minutes ago my File:Stuyvesant Fish house 2013-04-29 12-17.jpg was showing "invalid latitude". When I changed the coords from DM.xxS to DMS.x it stopped complaining. Has DM.xxx with S=0 become an unaccepted format? If so, hundreds of my coords will show this error flag even though Google Earth is going to the correct location when I click. Jim.henderson (talk) 02:53, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Until the pages are "touched", they will continue to show the error (see #Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags below). The coordinates you entered are still fine, you don't have to correct anything yourself –⁠moogsi (blah) 18:48, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
It seems like we still have a small problem here, as Jim.henderson says above. Some pages that previously showed no error before the bug still do. It seems to be a case of co-ordinates in H|M|S format, where M is a decimal and S is 0. This affects far fewer pages than before but it's still a problem –⁠moogsi (blah) 01:05, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags

Picking up the above discussion (Broken location template): Any idea how long it will take until Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags will be updated? There are currently 12.000+ files in the cat, of which approx 11.500 are most likely without error. -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 08:47, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

{{object location}} was edited again after the fix was deployed. 80000 pages transclude the template, so at least another day until they are all done? –⁠moogsi (blah) 11:00, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
This kind of categories can take a long time to correct themselves, so I would give it a little longer than a few days. Last time someone corrected {{#coordinate}} when files did not clear from the category, after a week or so, I just run python "touch" code. --Jarekt (talk) 16:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
It's a couple of days now and nothing happend, still 10.000+ entries. However, the touch.py-Method (take each page and save it, without making any changes) does work. Can someone please trigger the bot? -- Wo st 01 (talk / cont) 10:41, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
My bot will processing on it.  @xqt 03:29, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done  @xqt 05:46, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

mass deletion, please

Special:Contributions/Segel_peter add screenshots again and again after deletion.--Motopark (talk) 17:42, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done Files deleted. User blocked. --A.Savin 17:55, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Fry1989

Could some please have a look at COM:AN/P#File:FIFA Logo(2010).svg and protect the file in its original version? Fry1989 keeps hounding me in this case, but currently I am really stressed in RL and my nerves are all on edge. Maybe an interaction ban or so? --Leyo 22:56, 7 May 2013 (UTC) PS. I won't be able to be online most of the time tomorrow and the day after.

✓ Protected by Bidgee, though probably in the wrong version. Trijnsteltalk 10:44, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

File:Labret phallic coddling.jpg

This file has been nominated for deletion 4 times, and kept each time. The last closure was one month ago. Today User:M0tty deleted it speedily on the grounds of the deletion request (again, which was closed as keep, though apparently the deletion message never got removed). I tried to restore it but got an error Error undeleting file: Could not create directory "mwstore://local-multiwrite/local-public/3/33". -mattbuck (Talk) 12:34, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

I don't know what that error means, but the file looks like restored. I removed the deletion template of it. Trijnsteltalk 12:38, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Labret phallic coddling.jpg result = Symbol keep vote.svg Keep--Steinsplitter (talk) 12:49, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Servers playing up

I'm getting the same error message and a couple of other ones trying to delete stuff.--KTo288 (talk) 13:21, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

status.wikimedia.org: API - Service disruption--Steinsplitter (talk) 13:39, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Need a section unarchived

re: Wikimedia Commons Village Pump/Copyrights
... a section prematurely archived, before response continued the communications thread.

Just visited that forum (not so briefly anymore...) today to make a note that I'd had a hardware problem on the computer for which this 'particular discussion' (link below) was suspended with the plan that I should put up a tutorial or two so could best be advised on clearing copyright hurdles, permissions I needed to get and so forth. (I've already begun making preliminary contacts to some parties who might be involved.)
  1. I had to proceed cautiously for the drive is the Windows boot drive. In the end, after much anxiety, turned out to be a loose power supply quick disconnect plug--the Hard Drive just sporadically disappeared... repeatedly working one instant, gone the next! (Having that happen when Windows is updating data or worse, it's registry would qualify as 'a very bad thing', so apologies for the delay, but I needed to make sure the 'fix' was holding before allowing potentially harmful disk writes. It's been stable now since Saturday, so can now risk using it again.)
  2. In any event, my post was delayed, I was hoping to get that together tonight... Whether Bot or human agency, the section was archived. Here's a Diff link with my last post.
  3. Can someone please restore the section to the /Copyrights page so we can resume the discussion tonight or tomorrow, that hard drive and real life vicissitudes permitting free time to work on it! Many Thanks! // FrankB 16:22, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello, any admins out there read this yet? I'm composing one of several tutorials to continue the discussion questions raised in the moved section, and in advance and instead of invoking Fair Use under US copyright law, want to upload images here and construct the tutorials there where all is in the right places. If you can reinstate and email me the new section link, that would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance! // FrankB 23:53, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Mass speedy image deletions without due process or rationale

Seventeen PD images, all used in articles, were just mass deleted summarily over just 14 minutes, without tags, warnings, notices, or any rationale of substance. I have asked User talk:Denniss‎ to explain, without comment yet. All of the deleted images had clearly verified non-copyright status. Any review would be appreciated. Thanks. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 21:51, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

"
  • mb 20:58 File:Walter_Matthau_-_1973.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:54 File:Dirk_Blocker_-_1974.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:54 File:Faye_Dunaway_-_1967_-_Bonnie.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:52 File:Woody_Allen_-_Diane_Keaton_-_1972.jpg, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)<br.
  • mb 20:51 File:Woody_Allen_-_Kup.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:49 File:Shirley_MacLaine_-_Yves_Montand_-_Geisha.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:49 File:Tom_Selleck_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:49 File:Robert_Redford_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:48 File:Alan_Alda_-_Mash_-_1972.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:48 File:Loretta_Swit_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:47 File:Uri_Geller_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:47 File:Hal_Linden_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)<br.
  • mb 20:46 File:David_Janssen_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:46 File:Jane_Olivor_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:46 File:Clint_Eastwood_-_1960s-hat.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:45 File:Richard_Chamberlain-publicity.jpg, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)
  • mb 20:44 File:Jack_Lemmon_-_publicity.JPG, it has been deleted from Commons by Denniss because: Copyright violation.)"
You might take that to Commons:Undeletion requests. --Túrelio (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
This isn't an undeletion request, but a request for due process. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 22:46, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
These images just had your usual claims - no copyright notice, not renewed, publicity still et al. But most/all of these images just showed the front page and not the back so impossible to verify your claim. One image even had a visible copyright notice. --Denniss (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Do we have a list of images that have been deleted or will be - trying to fix all the affected Wiki pages - hope its not in the hundreds. And have these images been added to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contributor_copyright_investigations/Wikiwatcher1? Moxy (talk) 22:10, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no basis for thinking a copyright notice for a publicity photo would be printed on the back. Quite the opposite: as such notices are in 99.99% of the time printed on the front. Anyone can scan eBay or any site with such images, and you will always see the photo described on the front with any notices. Unilaterally deleting valuable PD images based on totally illogical criteria, should not be allowed.
In fact, copyright laws have made this issue clear, with legal scholars having stated that publicity photos are "traditionally not copyrighted." In any case, the very first image on the list did have the reverse side showing. Can someone try to explain why an "Official Policy" of the Commons, the Precautionary principle, is being totally ignored? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:43, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Another deleted image, File:Gene Hackman 1972.JPG , as I review some, also had the full front and back. After it too was deleted without notice or rationale, User:Moxy immediately added a replacement to the article it was used in, as they did with the others. This "reverse-side" image rationale is erroneous. So not only are fully valid PD images being deleted, but there is no DR notice as required. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 00:18, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I was asked on my user talk page to comment. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought speedy deletion of images as probable copyright violations was intended for cases where we have solid reason to believe the image is copyrighted and that the uploader is not the rights holder. If we merely doubt that the image is in the public domain, but have no particular evidence, it should go through DR. No? - Jmabel ! talk 04:05, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

This user has a long history of uploading images with wrong claims of no copyright, not renewed etc, please see also the link posted by Moxy. And to have at least a minimum verification of the no-notice claim we need to have uncropped images of both front and back. Images without this get deleted without further notice. Then we have cases with claims of no copyright registered or not renewed, uploader does not seem to actually look for a possible registration but resists on the publicity still argument pasted all over the image pages. And the Matthau image has a copyright statement (although no date but sufficient to believe they have registered it later). --Denniss (talk) 06:25, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

  • Wouldn't {{PD-US-defective notice}} apply for Matthau? Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:49, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support due process, take this to a DR and use a process the community recognizes rather than making it up as you go along. Denniss, if your action is not unambiguously covered by a section in Administrators or Deletion policy, then the request here to follow "due process" seems entirely right, no matter how chequered Wikiwatcher1's history is. If Wikiwatcher1 is persistantly breaking Licensing then it would be better to follow the deletion process as stated, and apply Blocking policy if Wikiwatcher1 is not appropriately changing their behaviour. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 06:52, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
Denniss is incorrect on most of his statements. There is not, and never has been, any requirement that an image needs to show the front and back. That would be a complete waste of energy and server space, as copyright notices are rarely put on the back. You are also wrong about my not doing a copyright search when necessary, since I always use it when a search is necessary. Nor do I ever "rest" on the publicity still argument, but only add it as a "See also," with a link to the legal sources for added general information. And you are also wrong that the Matthau image would imply that simply because it was published between 1978 and 1989, that fact is "sufficient to believe" it would have been registered later. The exact opposite is true, as in the U.S. at least, per all the legal experts cited in film still, "Publicity photos have traditionally not been copyrighted." However, you are correct that I have a long history of uploading images. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 06:54, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
As WW1's en.wiki CCI points out, as of Dec '11 we need stronger evidence of PD-ness as affirmed by the Foundation's legal side (thus applicable to all foundation projects). That said - without knowing if WW1 is under any specific blocks or remedies on commons - the lack of due process to give time for WW1 to better demonstrate copyright was not done, and I don't see anything under speedy deletion for commons here that would allow these to have been deleted without the 7 day period. I agree there's reason to question their PD-ness but nothing that would allow speedy deletion. But again, I can't tell if WW1 is under sanctions here on commons or not. --Masem (talk) 14:09, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
I think what's needed even more is evidence of copyright-ness, since lack of it creates the PD itself. As Copyfraud shows, along with cases like Bridgeman Art Library v. Corel Corp., there are way more works that WP won't use due to simple fraud. As the author of the book Copyfraud (2011) explains, "The Bridgeman Art Library is not alone in claiming copyrights in digital reproductions of public domain art. Corbis, founded by Bill Gates, is a digital archive of art and photography . . . with over one hundred million images. . . Corbis's license agreement requires users to 'include a copyright notice and credit adjacent to each Image. . . " And, "seemingly undeterred by its loss in court, the Bridgeman Art Library continues to assert copyright in reproductions of the Mona Lisa and other public domain works."
A large percentage of images I uploaded years ago which were later deleted, were because User:We Hope saw the image on Corbis's web site, (example) where the web page itself had a notice. BTW, Corbis and Bettman have only filed actual registrations on a few thousand images, all newer ones, out of their claimed ownership of over a hundred million. In doing any further PD policy work, it wouldn't hurt to contact Mazzone for input. There's no reason that WP needs to submit to "overreaching," which he states "interferes with legitimate uses and reproduction of a wide variety of works, imposes enormous social and economic costs, and ultimately undermines creative endeavors." And FWIW, I'm willing to help on any research. I've had a few years of law school, took the copyright course at Boalt, and even consulted with the copyright attorney for Google when they were starting out, among other things. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 19:05, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

There is no need for speedy deletion here. Regular DR would be sufficient. I think the images should be undeleted and regular DR should be applied if still necessary. --Jarekt (talk) 17:35, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

If you follow this discussion you may also be interested in Commons talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 16:42, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

User:Mateusmoreira55

This user uploads the same copyrighted image even after many speedy delitions again and again. Actually his uploads are of different sizes and different names but otherwise are same. I suggest to stop him! -- Ies (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Blocked already 4 minutes ago. --Túrelio (talk) 14:04, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Open and transparent bot operation

I suggest that bot operation should be open and transparent, in so far as possible. I suggest when one sees a bot make a series of mystifying actions, the edit summary for an explanation, or for a link to a page where an explanation can be found.

Maybe there is a good reason why certain images don't belong in one category, and should really belong in another category? Fine. But a good faith contributor who made an honest mistake, they deserve an edit summary that is informative they can see why some other human being thought it was a mistake.

Here is a case in point. Yesterday I created Category:Union Station, Toronto, Tracks and Trainshed, and populated it with some new images I uploaded, as well as moving some existing images that I thought fit from the overpopulated Category:Union Station (Toronto). Today I find that someone I have no idea who directed SieBot to usurp all those images and put them in a narrower category -- Category:Train station platforms at Union Station (Toronto). Again, I have no idea why the mystery usurper directed the bot to usurp those images.

What I do know is that some of the usurped images don't belong in the narrower category, and neither do about two dozen related images I will be uploading, as time permits.

In my opinion mysterious and high-handed category usurpation is an ongoing problem -- particularly when it is standard practice for administrators to delete empty categories on sight, and there is no good way for an administrator to check to see whether a category was recently emptied through vandalism, or through an innocent, but controversial usurpation.

I suggest that bots, like apparently Siebot, that accept direction from a list, or reasonable equivalent, should leave edit summaries that leave an explicit audit trail to the real human being who directed an action. In this case, rahter than edit summaries that said: "(Robot: Moving category Union Station, Toronto, Tracks and Trainshed to Train station platforms at Union Station (Toronto))" is should have left one that said something like: '(Robot: Moving category Union Station, Toronto, Tracks and Trainshed to Train station platforms at Union Station (Toronto)) -- as per [[Commons:Recategorization lists/Categories that don't comply with XXX..." -- where XXX was a policy, or a link to a discussion with wide participation. At least that way one could learn why someone thought the recategorization was a good idea. Possibly the explanation there would be sufficient to convince interested parties that recategorization was as good idea. And, if the interested party wasn't convinced, they could directly ask the person who directed the recategorization to explain more fully.

In my opinion the WMF projects should not be run so insiders can do whatever they think best, without explanation. Those insiders may be corrrect, are probably correct, at least most of the time. But, since the projects rely on volunteer effort, and new volunteers are arriving all the time, I suggest the purpose of each bot action should be understandable to any interested party prepared to read and follow the links in its edit summaries. Geo Swan (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Geo, I was the one who moved this category. The name was inconsistent with the rest of its category tree, the form of disambiguation was inconsistent with the rest of the subcategories for this station and the capitalization was wrong. This is fairly routine clean-up work on its face, given that the category and its content were otherwise maintained as is. If you had a different intention for this category than was obvious from the content or the name, then you should absolutely raise that as an issue (as you have), and explain why you think the move was problematic and needs to be looked at. Unfortunately none of us always know what is going to be controversial or what is going to be routine, and in those cases the way to move forward is to assume good faith and discuss the issue. No disrepect was intended, and I certainly wasn't trying to make your life difficult.

Nobody here is entitled to do anything without explanation. There is so much category clean-up being undertaken every day that we can't initiate a CFD every time (although if there is some suggestion that something could be controversial, the move should be preceded by a note on a talk page, a CFD discussion, etc.). Images move using SieBot or by way of Cat-a-lot don't come with an edit summary (although for Siebot you can always see who initiated the move by looking at the edit history at COM:CDC). However, in such cases the clean-up of the former category should be accompanied by an edit summary (in this case I haven't even had a chance to address the former category yet as this move only just happened and Siebot did not appear to be functioning when I first added this request).

If you disagree with a move, start a discussion on the category talk page or the mover's talk page, or start a CFD. In all the discussions I have seen, I have never seen anyone not engage you respectfully when discussing a category you created. In this case, I think you may have started a discussion on the category talk page, so I will see what you have to say over there.

Third, I am not sure why you think someone "usurped" something here. That's not what happened. That's the second time this month I have seen you make such an accusation against someone who changed a category name you created to make it consistent, and it isn't an accurate or helpful accusation.

Finally, I agree with you about edit summaries for Siebot. I actually stopped listing reasons when I initiate a move at COM:CDC quite some time ago because it seemed pointless to do so. If there was some way to capture the rationale in an edit summary, or even just the initiator's name, that would be helpful. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

User:CommonsDelinker is not working

Hi, the Delinker is not working. No replacement and no deletion. Can anyone fix them? --Knochen ﱢﻝﱢ‎  08:40, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

The Toolserver is currently (mostly or completely) down, just wait for it to come back. --Nemo 09:20, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Commons:Requests for comment/Translate extension

This has some (unanimous) support but needs more comments, can you please link it from MediaWiki:Watchlist-details or sitenotice? Thanks, Nemo 09:18, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done at MediaWiki:Watchlist-summary (See talk page for the change from Watchlist-details). --whym (talk) 12:33, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Updating Licensing tutorial image in Macedonian

I translated the Licensing tutorial a while ago but failed to see that I had not used the option to make it propely legible. I have since corrected this, but cannot re-upload it to File:Licensing tutorial mk.svg in any way (there is a note to that effect where the re-upload link should be). What should I do? Can someone enable re-upload for a time while I do it, or? --B. Jankuloski (talk) 21:57, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I have just unprotected the file—go ahead and upload the corrected version. odder (talk) 22:14, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Done now. Thanks a lot for the prompt response! --B. Jankuloski (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. odder (talk) 22:53, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Promotional username

User:INaCAGE Music and User:INaCAGE (band)--Motopark (talk) 04:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done. I've blocked both accounts and deleted their contribs. 3 accounts of this user have been blocked on en.wiki for spam/promotion. INeverCry 05:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Toolserver down

Toolserver's geohack is not working, clicking on 'Camera location' on a file leads (after a tiresomely long wait) to a timeout. This is a long-lasting problem happening on-and-off (more often failing than not) for some time (several months). I note also Nemo's comment above (09:20, 12 May 2013) "The Toolserver is currently (mostly or completely) down, just wait for it to come back" - but how long must one wait? Days? Weeks? Months? Years? Any hopes of getting it working again? - MPF (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Category renaming

Is it possible to rename the following categories:

This is the new proposed name for our Thematic Organization. Thank you.--Arnaugir (talk) 12:57, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure this is the correct name? Just making sure that you don't want to use the è in Wikimèdia… odder (talk) 14:58, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
Yes, without the è. :-) see: [20]. Thank you. --Arnaugir (talk) 18:47, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done, please let me know if there are other categories that you want to have moved. odder (talk) 19:11, 13 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Zmaan-888

User has been uploading numerous copyright violations. S/he was warned on 14:07, 8 May 2013 but has continued. All uploads need to be deleted and the user likely merits a block. Thanks! --auburnpilot talk 03:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done. Uploads nuked, user blocked. INeverCry 03:10, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

MediaWiki page edit request

Coming here because I don't expect to get any input at the talk page.

Could you please edit MediaWiki:Uploadtext to add "identifiable" before "people taken without their consent"? The following sentence talks about identifiable people, but someone might be confused or might try to wikilawyer something by claming that all photos of people would need permission; I just want to ensure that nobody uses this statement as a result to ask for the deletion of images such as File:Paducah Masonic Temple site.jpg, which obviously shows living people but not in an identifiable way. Nyttend (talk) 04:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Undeletion of Armenian FOP-deleted images

Dear colleagues, Recently the (noncommercial) restrictions to the freedom of panorama in Armenia have been lifted. Therefore I think that most of the files deleted per Category:Armenian FOP cases can be undeleted. I have dealt with two cases, but I think I will not have more time to do so today. Perhaps some of you can help going through these. Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 08:07, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Try to be careful with adding {{FoP-Armenia}} in case someone has missed the recent change at COM:FOP#Armenia. If there is an FOP template there, there's a smaller risk that someone will nominate the files for deletion again. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

File:Marisa Pavan.jpg

Hi,

It has been suggested on English wikipedia that this image is in fact of her sister Pier Angeli. Google images searches tend to support this. If this is the case then the image needs to be re-named. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:43, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Inappropriately named images

I would like to humbly suggest that in this category it is inappropriate to use names like 'black cock' rather than more respectful terminology. I note as well the racist implications of using this kind of slang, when other photos are named in a more scientific manner. And finally I humbly suggest that you look with extreme skepticism on all human sexuality related images that are uploaded by single purpose accounts with no proof (nor even evidence) of the claim that this is 'own work'.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

1st part (4 images:[21],[22],[23],[24]): ✓ Done. --Túrelio (talk) 14:24, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Are you suggesting that "colored" is not racist, while "black" is? I know a lot of black individuals who would disagree with you. If you wish to make it even more racist than it is now, you can say "colored boy" (the term 'boy' needs to be pronounced with the southern accent) that will not only make a neutral (but non-pc) term racist, but will also get a rise out of "OMG CHILD PORN" croud. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 16:46, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
As I am not a native-english-speaker feel free to rename them more appropriately, though a bit less aggressive attitude towards other users would be welcome. --Túrelio (talk) 16:49, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry, I did not realise that you are not a native speaker of English. In many countries (USA included) the term "colored" is considered extremely offensive by many people. As for the question about the appropriate name I would go with either "Black cock" or "Black penis", preferably the former since the image is not medical in nature and there's no reason to apply medical terminology. But, of course, Jimbo doesn't like it. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 17:04, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Why the former? Penis is the default neutral term in English; it's not medical terminology. Cock is vulgar. Maybe it would be nice if English had terms between penis and cock in formality, but it doesn't.--Prosfilaes (talk) 20:31, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Typo in #3... unless it's a pacifist vegan penis.Clin — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 17:21, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Around server-time 18:13 UTC I have renamed them again, now to File:Penis8 uplByMs65876.jpg, File:Penis7 uplByMs65876.jpg and File:Penis3 uplByMs65876.jpg (I didn't touch the 4th file as it's subject to a DR), assuming that this is at least 200% pc. --Túrelio (talk) 20:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Jimbo, and welcome back to Commons. We welcome your comments, and this is something that could be looked at. Perhaps you would like to pitch in with this effort. You can use {{Rename}} on any image to request a rename. Your reasoning would be #7 from Commons:File renaming. If you would like to pitch in and do some of these we would welcome that. You might even find a few problematic images, for example copyright violations, that you could take to COM:DR for community review. We are of course a collaborative community and if everyone pitched in and helped, these issues would be dealt with in a much nicer time frame. In fact, scrub the use of {{rename}}; I've just given you the file mover right, so you can now move files to a more appropriate name; just be sure to get a quick grasp of that policy, and quote the rationale (in this case #7) in the reason, and you're set to go. If you run into any snags, we're here to help. Cheers, russavia (talk) 14:40, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
"And finally I humbly suggest that you look with extreme skepticism on all human sexuality related images that are uploaded by single purpose accounts with no proof (nor even evidence) of the claim that this is 'own work'." That's the default practice, unfortunately. There are countless explicit images that fit that description, and they tend to survive every deletion request unless you have absolute proof that the image is problematic. --Conti|✉ 16:00, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Using the word "Black" certainly is not racist, replacing it with "colored" is more likely to cause offence to the general public and replacing it with "African" or "African American" would be bizarrely inaccurate. As for "cock", yes it can be swapped to penis as a slightly more accurate word, however this is such a common English word for penis that Commons even redirects the category cock to penis. If there needs to be a discussion about what counts as defamatory language on Wikimedia projects, I suggest we move from the 1970s use of American English and move to modern international English by starting with the word "queer", which apparently has been determined to be okay to use to randomly describe gay contributors to Wikimedia projects, and the WMF actively defers to that consensus when interpreting its website terms of use. --Fæ (talk) 19:56, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Dominican fake flags

Hola.

Este usuario Cvkfekjf238 ha estado subiendo una gran cantidad de banderas falsas o creadas por él mismo a Commons. Las banderas fueron borradas el año pasado y resubidas nuevamente por el mismo usuario.


Hello. Sorry for my english.

This user Cvkfekjf238 is been uploading a lot of fakes flags to Commons. The flags were deleted the last year and reuploaded again by this same user.--Inefable001 (talk) 14:11, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

name change

please change name of this image File:Miodu Polish Rapper.jpg to "Miodu Polish Singer", he is not a rapper, and also fix the name of File:Czarny (Brat Squad).jpg to "Czarny (Beat Squad)" DingirXul (talk) 19:06, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done Next time please use Template:Rename. Thank you.--Steinsplitter (talk) 19:17, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section