Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

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-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
Vandalism []	User problems []	Blocks and protections []	Other []
Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.	Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.	Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.	Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.
Archives
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	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	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	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}

Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

purge Admin backlog

---

Copyright:

• Copyright violations: ~25
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~3
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2026-01: ~158

Other:

• Duplicates: ~32
• Advertisements/spam: ~4
• Personal photos/selfies: ~15
• Other speedy deletions: ~27
• Categories for discussion: 134 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~1
• Requests for unblock: ~5
• Undeletion requests: ~15

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~53
• Interface admin: ~12
• Technical: ~3
• Template protection: ~6
• Protection level: ~0

See also: DR, HMS, …

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

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.

Contest the indefblock of User:Gaty3000

• Gaty3000 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Artur2077 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

The user was indef-blocked immediately after had receiving their first formal warning {{File copyright status}}. This is too harsh obviously and only led them to create an new account User:Artur2077 (see Special:Diff/1139192686) to made a clean start. @Bedivere, Gaty3000, and Artur2077. -- 0x0a (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment I would reduce the block length, but creating a new account just after getting blocked is not OK. Yann (talk) 11:43, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Wouldn't mind shortening the block but sincerely the new account is making things worse. Bedivere (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@Artur2077 What do you make of this? Aren't you going to speak up for yourself? 0x0a (talk) 12:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

All right, still no response from the blocked party. I agree to Yann's opinion. 0x0a (talk) 13:05, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@0x0a, just to make things a bit clear, clean start isn't available for users under active sanctions. A clean start is not permitted if there are active bans, blocks, or sanctions in place against the old account. Even if that indef was "harsh", they should've contested the block. Making a new account is block evasion, which makes things worse (rightly said by Bedivere). Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:56, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@Shaan Sengupta That said, some new users may not be aware of our blocking policy And our block message box doesn't explicitly state that creating a new account during the block period is not allowed, which might lead them into an endless cycle of block and block evasion. I found it necessary to clearly state this rule in the block message box. 0x0a (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

@0x0a, great suggestion. I have started a discussion. I think we can maybe do it. Please see Commons:Village pump/Proposals#Adding a thing in block notices. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 14:10, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Quicker than me. Thank you. 0x0a (talk) 14:14, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Did Commons add a policy for clean starts? GMG^talk 14:03, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Not yet. We just borrowed this concept from En wp. 0x0a (talk) 14:18, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

We all know that Commons:Sockpuppetry is a soft redirect to Meta:Sock puppetry which lists WP:SOCK in see also section. And tbh, only enwiki describes this topic the way it should be. That said, I am in no way am saying that means we should import enwiki policy here but if we want people to stop doing that, we better develop that page locally. And I quoted it only bcoz it was linked above. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 14:27, 7 January 2026 (UTC)

Resolved

plz see User talk:Yann, Gaty3000 was unblocked by Yann as a result of which Artur2077 was blocked for blocked evasion. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 06:36, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Talkingtomfan2221

Talkingtomfan2221 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) Repeat vandal and sockpuppet of prior banned users. NorthTension (talk) 14:59, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

@NorthTension, plz notify the user on their talk page in future. I've done it this time for you. Also consider using {{Template:User5}}. I've added it above, it helps a lot. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 15:21, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

My bad on the latter, on the former do I still need to even if they're just a repeat soammer? NorthTension (talk) 15:46, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

Well that's just a procedure. As for the report, you haven't provided any links or an explanation which can help an uninvolved person know the case. No diffs or who the sock master is. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 15:51, 8 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done blocked together with some other Jurisdrew / Nv7801 socks. --Lymantria (talk) 16:56, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I mass deleted all his/her uploads as copyvios or hoaxes. Taivo (talk) 10:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Ияд и Фирас

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

I just noticed File:Logo der Deutschen Konservativen Partei.svg in the article infobox - a fake insignia which this user tied to the wikidata item so it was displayed in multiple wikis. I checked their uploads briefly and they seem to fall under the same MO - uploading chatgpt-generated "insignia" with misleading names. I honestly don't have much hope in any attempts to tackle the spread of fictional insignia to wikiprojects, but this activity is clearly disruptive, and it must be prevented. Qbli2mHd (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. User is blocked for half of year and I declined unblock request. Taivo (talk) 10:21, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Today2026-33995

Today2026-33995 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

One more sock of Gondolabúrguer uploading the same copyvios as own work. This is a crosswiki LTA. A mass deletion can be due. Ixocactus (talk) 23:37, 9 January 2026 (UTC)

Now the user is globally locked, but I did not delete anything. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done no remaining uploads by this user. - Jmabel ! talk 21:38, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Yoophoria

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

Uploading copyright materials after final warning. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 08:58, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

 Blocked for 1 week. --Lymantria (talk) 10:44, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I deleted all uploads as copyvios. Taivo (talk) 11:05, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry on election maps

~2026-18659-0 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Recently, User:Sam11333 and other editors have done some nice work on organizing maps of United States presidential election results, but this anonymous user has been busy undoing their efforts. Based on their editing patterns, I think this is yet another sockpuppet of User:TylerKutschbach. Could you please stop their disruptive editing? Thanks! - Eureka Lott 17:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on this, I've begun to undo the damage they have done. Sam11333 (talk) 18:05, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:53, 10 January 2026 (UTC)

aaand they're back at it from a new account, ~2026-26559-0 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user. This is getting tiresome. - Eureka Lott 04:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Blocked this new TA. Given the large number of files, this might be a good case for an edit filter. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your swift action in blocking this latest sock and in undoing the damage caused. Sam11333 (talk) 09:44, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. Just spotted another edit this morning, which looks like a WP:DUCK to me. What might the edit filter look like? - Eureka Lott 15:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

~2026-27295-4 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user, is the latest one. Sam11333 (talk) 16:35, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Systematic copyright violation

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

Copyright violations: repeated uploading of inappropriately licensed media. Chronus (talk) 20:17, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

@Chronus: I notified the user of this discussion on their user talk page, as you should have done per the above. Pings are not enough. I also sent them a final warning.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:21, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Seeing the large among of copyright violations, blocked for a week, almost all files deleted. Yann (talk) 20:53, 11 January 2026 (UTC)

Threeholedwonder

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

This user uploads bunch of images with questionable copyright status. Not just that, this user re-uploaded the same photo (of Jodi Arias holding a "Survivor" shirt in a court), which was previously deleted as "copyvio". Fortunately, the re-attempted was thwarted when the same photo was deleted again. Then this user removes the "speedy deletion" tags and then tries to remove the DR tags numerous times. I can provide diffs if necessary. George Ho (talk) 11:19, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

This user is actively targeting my uploads when they are by no means violating any current copyright protection. He went from targeting my images cause they offended him to now constantly nominating deletions. My images are of public use and most news site use them freely. Please help me from this harassment. Threeholedwonder (talk) 11:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC) (Originally a separate thread (diff). George Ho (talk) 12:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)); fixed, 12:14, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Please read COM:AOHA before making accusations against me (again). All right? George Ho (talk) 11:38, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Take for example the website you uploaded several pics from, artbyjodiarias.com. It says, clearly: "Copyright © 2026 Art By Jodi Arias | All Rights Reserved."

Case closed. That you can see a pic online does not mean you can put it on Commons. Take the time to read and understand Commons:Uploading works by a third party, and until you do, don't upload anything else. If you keep doing that, an admin will block you. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:40, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

The reporter user is indefinitely blocked on English Wikipedia (oldid link). Hope this user isn't blocked here. George Ho (talk) 12:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

User @George_Ho is actively targeting my uploads when they are by no means violating any current copyright protection. He went from targeting my images cause they offended him to now constantly nominating deletions. My images are of public use and most news site use them freely. Please help me from this harassment.

Update: Now he even tries to edit my own report against him by putting it as part of his report. I want my own separate report. Threeholedwonder (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

(Someone else should be merged merge this report with my report about this user. Please feel free to remove this small-font note if merged. Thanks. George Ho (talk) 12:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)); edited, 12:10, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Ah, hell. Merging the section to a report on you... George Ho (talk) 12:45, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Boomerang block to Threeholedwonder for 2 weeks. Most files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:05, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yann I don't think the last one is worth keeping either:[1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

OK, gone. Yann (talk) 15:28, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Disruptive sockpuppet accounts

• KhanGoal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
• KhanGoal1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
• Sucker1001 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)

Please block all these accounts, as they are all confirmed sockpuppets already reported and blocked on the English Wikipedia for edit-warring, unsourced original research, and socking; see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Original Histories.

In addition to mindless edit-warring at some files with unsourced information that they've been trying to add en masse to Wikipedia projects (like this one and this one), they even go as far to edit or delete other people's discussion comments that they don't like ([2]). Meanwhile, one account has also been blanking the categories on some files en masse and without explanation ([3], [4], [5]) while another has been tagging them with frivolous "inaccurate" tags (e.g. [6], [7], [8]), as well as blanking at least one file description completely ([9]).

They'll probably make more sock accounts later (or already have), but blocking these would be a good start and make the next ones easier to report. R Prazeres (talk) 18:46, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

All blocked. @R Prazeres but I can't really handle much of reverting etc at this moment. _signed, Aafi ^(talk) 18:52, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you very much. No worries about the reverts, I'll clean up what I can later when I have a moment. Cheers, R Prazeres (talk) 18:55, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Hey there. For next time this user returns, perhaps you may wanna consider COM:Requests for checkuser. George Ho (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

Will do indeed, thanks for pointing me to it. R Prazeres (talk) 22:09, 12 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Браннкос

Браннкос (talk · contribs) continues to upload copyrighted images after final warning. --Smooth O (talk) 09:40, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. User is blocked for 2 weeks and all his/her contributions are deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:18, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Jerimee

I've asked Jerimee (talk · contribs) on their Talk page concerning line art again, this time because a whole range of items were added to Category:Line art despite not having any lines anywhere in the art. See for example the op-art imahe at right that was miscategorized with this edit as "line art".

I asked the user about this because there have been previous conversations about similar miscategorization with other users.

I received a response saying that "art resists categorization" and that the only criteria being used are: (1) repurposability of the image and (2) suitability of the image for conversion to SVG. Neither of these criteria have anything to do with whether or not the image is line art.

This is far from the only image miscategorized by the user. Thousands of images have been moved into the category at this point without regard to whether or not they are line art, making the category useless to to the community. At a minimum, the user should be chastised and the edits reversed, but this will take a monumental effort to accomplish. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:00, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Hawthorne at Wall, Lichfield

I share these concerns, having raised the issue a year ago, at User talk:Jerimee#Line art and, giving the above image (Hawthorne at Wall, Lichfield; relevant diff) as an example, Commons:Village pump/Archive/2025/01#Line art.

As I noted in the latter: The header of Category:Line art says "Line art is any image that consists of distinct straight and curved lines placed against a (usually plain) background, without gradations in shade (darkness) or hue (color) to represent two-dimensional or three-dimensional objects."

There is also related discussion at Commons:Village pump/Archive/2025/11#Category:Line art without P180, where Jerimee's less-than-helpful response to concerns was "perhaps you could point me to some past issues you have successfully resolved?"

I said to them in that discussion: "You don't appear to be taking this seriously.
If you don't stop voluntarily, until consensus is demonstrated, the next step will be to ask for administrative action to prevent you from continuing until it is."

@ReneeWrites and Jmabel: who were involved in the earlier discussions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:57, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

It bothered me that this user was unable to properly define the term "line art", and only answered after being pressed on it. Their answer was not satisfactory (no, it's not "art with distinct lines", and even if that's the definition they're going with, their application is much broader still), they then ignored the consensus to cease this activity. In my last comment in the discussion linked by Andy, I had pointed them to a different area they could apply metadata with less ambiguity (an area they had been active in as well), which they didn't respond to.

I don't understand why they continue to make these specific types of edits despite self-admittedly not really knowing what lineart even is, and after being told repeatedly, by numerous people at this point, that this is not helpful behaviour. ReneeWrites (talk) 15:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

If the intent is "monochrome images that could readily be converted to SVG," a template or maintenance category to that effect would be a lot better practice. - Jmabel ! talk 17:04, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I appreciate your input. I did create a maintenance category to help process some of these. As you may recall, Renee, Andy, and Petey complained about "category bloat" or some such thing. Every 8 months or so, the three of them coordinate one of these angry demands; I'm not exactly sure how to respond at this point. I have no other in[ter]actions with this trio of editors.

The intent is to structure the data on commons. That is useful for a variety of purposes, especially search retrieval. All the best. Jerimee (talk) 17:34, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I did create a maintenance category to help process some of these.

The maintenance category you made was for lineart with missing subject statements, not "monochrome images to be converted to SVG". If that was your intent, you can tag the image with {{Convert to SVG}} and have it automatically be put in a pre-existing maintenance category.

As you may recall, Renee, Andy, and Petey complained about "category bloat" or some such thing. Every 8 months or so, the three of them coordinate one of these angry demands; I'm not exactly sure how to respond at this point.

I think I've been very reasonable in the previous discussion, but if I said that you found unreasonable or that you didn't understand, we can hopefully properly address that here. I also don't remember ever "coordinating" with Petey and Andy on this topic, as far as I know I only took part in one Village Pump discussion Andy linked, but perhaps you could point to another instance of me having done that? ReneeWrites (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

This would be the third time yall (Renee, Petey, Andy) have raised a concern about my use of line art categories, so fair point. You are right; my statement every 8 months or so is hyperbole. This is only the third time.

I'm not sure what else I can say that I haven't already said in the two previous discussions. We have a difference of opinion in the categorization of art. What do you recommend? Jerimee (talk) 20:51, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

My recommendation would be to cease all activity having to do with "line art". In the the last comment I made in the previous Village Pump discussion I suggested other areas of metadata to work on that are not as ambiguous.

This would be the third time yall (Renee, Petey, Andy)...

I don't remember ever "coordinating" with Petey and Andy on this topic, as far as I know I only took part in one Village Pump discussion Andy linked, but perhaps you could point to another instance of me having done that? ReneeWrites (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

I have never coordinated anything with ReneeWrites, and the only discussion about the matter I recall ever having with EncycloPetey, outside of those linked above, is User talk:Pigsonthewing#Line art, again, which is hardly "coordinating" and certainly not "every eight months or so".

You offer no evidence to support "Renee, Andy, and Petey complained about 'category bloat' or some such thing"; what we actually said is in the November discussion, linked above, and is nothing like that.

Once again, your response to valid concerns is to attack and deflect. And once again, you offer no cogent justification for your specific and disputed actions. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:43, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel: Since you previously weighed in on these topics, I wanted to make you aware that the behavior under discussion is continuing, even though the thread hasn't reached a conclusion yet. Would you be able to take another look at this and help bring the discussion to a close? It would bring clarity for all people involved. ReneeWrites (talk) 21:06, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

@ReneeWrites: I really wasn't planning to comment further, but here goes, and I'm going to make no effort to be diplomatic. Jerimee's edits along these lines appear to net out to useless or slightly worse than useless. He is pretty clearly editing against consensus. It's not an important enough matter to do serious harm to Commons, but if I saw the same approach applied to something I thought was genuinely important, I'd block without hesitation. I certainly am OK with anyone who reverts some or all of these edits, but I can't be bothered to care enough to do it myself. - Jmabel ! talk 22:17, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

user:Ivan05041

All files uploaded by this user are AI-generated/AI-enhanced, often with obvious copyrgiht violations (see their talk page). There's currently a discussion on ruwiki about files uploaded by them, where they insist that everything is OK.

I think mass deletion (and perhaps a block) is required. Sapphaline (talk) 19:48, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment This user was already reported at COM:ANB#Ivan05041. Yann (talk) 19:59, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

That's not true, the discussion is about an already deleted file that is a real photo, just with improved quality through artificial intelligence. ALL THE FILES I'M CURRENTLY UPLOADING ARE REAL PHOTOS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN AFFECTED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. Ivan05041 (talk) 20:19, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ivan05041: When are you planning to clean up the old ones?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:25, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Why delete the old ones when I only processed 3 existing photos using artificial intelligence to improve their quality, and they have already been deleted? Ivan05041 (talk) 13:59, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ivan05041: "Currently" means after what date? File:Никодим Иванович Полянский.png is from only three days ago. - Jmabel ! talk 00:37, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

I PROCESSED only 3 photos that existed in reality using artificial intelligence to improve their quality. And all 3 photos were already deleted. Ivan05041 (talk) 14:04, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Ivan05041, please look at Special:ListFiles/Ivan05041 - these are much more than three files and they are not (yet) deleted at all. Emha (talk) 14:15, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Попробуйте перестать обманывать людей, делать смехотворные снисходительные заявления и наконец сосредоточиться, чтобы постараться понять: например, относительно File:Никодим Иванович Полянский.png: украв фото отсюда и проведя с ним некие манипуляции, вы не стали тем самым его автором и грубо нарушаете правило COM:L/ru. Удивительно, что вас до сих пор не заблокировали при явном отсутствии даже намёков на понимание того, что всё, что вы делаете, прямо противоречит задачам Википедии и Викисклада. Komarof (talk) 14:24, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

@Taivo: your warning definitely has no effect. --Komarof (talk) 14:33, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, some files deleted. Previous warnings had no effect. Yann (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

User:RaiymbekZh

RaiymbekZh (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) Recent copyvios after 2 blocks. Komarof (talk) 07:04, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

my works doesn't Protect by copyright ©️ by law of KZ:

".. ҚҰҚЫҚТАР ТУРАЛЫ ЖӘНЕ АВТОРЛЫҚ ҚҰҚЫҚ ТУРАЛЫ №7 ҚХА ЖАРЛЫҒЫ, 17.10.2017:

Авторлық құқықпен қорғалмайтын:

• Жақында (1 апта өткен соң) қайтыс болған адамдардың танымы, яғни:

Актёрлер;

Спортшылар;

Әкімдер;

Жазушылар;

Бишілер;

Әншлер;

және т.б. өнер-заң тексерһайдан адамдары.." RaiymbekZh (talk) 08:00, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 months. Several copyvios deleted. This user uploaded files from Yandex and Instagram after being warned and blocked. Yann (talk) 09:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done. RaiymbekZh requested unblock with reason "unfair block". After investigation I declined the request. Taivo (talk) 12:02, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Manvith111

• Manvith111 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

User kept uploading a non-free film poster, disregarding the final warning. 0x0a (talk) 13:41, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 months. Several copyvios, user uploaded files after being warned --Emha (talk) 14:12, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

User:KhameneiIsADeadman

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

Obvious vandal account with an inappropriate username. Consistently making vandalism edits, uploads, and deletion requests. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 00:51, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Comment removed by admin KhameneiIsADeadman (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Indef is needed. I've closed some DRs. I think maybe there is a need to delete the DR pages bcoz of the material there is on them. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 02:00, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

 Support an indef block. Edits like on Commons:Deletion requests/File:Niek Sebens in China.jpg or Commons:Deletion requests/File:Imam Khamenei met with the head and top officials of the Judiciary (28).jpg are straightforward vandalism. Could an admin nuke all the reported user's contribs? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked and upload deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:28, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

I've closed all the DRs and reverted (nearly) all of the edits. The only thing left to do is removing revision history, if any left. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 04:22, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done I've hidden everything that is at all egregious. - Jmabel ! talk 21:35, 15 January 2026 (UTC)

Bennylin

• User: Bennylin (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Jokowi-2005.png after final warning for doing so. Personal attack in Special:Diff/997485432.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:25, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Enough apparently legitimate uploads that I'm not blocking him for a copyvio like that (but have no problem if anyone else does).

Strong warning sent about the inappropriate edit summary. - Jmabel ! talk 21:04, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Zuck28

• User: Zuck28 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Trilochan Shastri.jpg after final warning for doing so.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:30, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

There must be some confusion, I didn’t upload copyvio images, most probably I cropped some existing image on Commons, and the original image is possible copyright violation. Zuck28 (talk) 15:35, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Zuck28: That file which you uploaded had no permission for 8+ days. How can you explain that?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:44, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

I didn't upload, maybe I just used the crop tool and used an existing file on Commons. I can't see the image now, so I am not sure. Zuck28 (talk) 15:49, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Duly noted. Any reviewing Admin should be able to independently evaluate our statements, possibly revealing your alleged licensing and the tagging.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:55, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Trilochan Shastri.jpg was indeed a CropTool edit on a file that falsely claimed a license. Ideally, someone would have gone, "That license doesn't make sense for this image," but failure to notice that doesn't call for any sanction, unless it was a much-repeated pattern. Original was uploaded by Lost in Sagar, and at the time had been on Commons over a year. - Jmabel ! talk 21:10, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Zuck28: Also, where is a license for File:Mohammad al Salhi.webp which is free enough for Commons? The one you presented restricted commercial use. You are responsible for your uploads.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:52, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

These issues are from the past and a long time ago, but I can promise that it will never gonna happen again in future. Thank you for notifying. We are here to contribute and learn through the process. Zuck28 (talk) 16:22, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

@Zuck28: I wouldn't call four months "a long time ago."

I'm not taking any action at this time, and will hope you are correct that this will not happen in the future. I presume that you now understand that you cannot "make up" a license for work where you don't own the copyright, as you appear to have done for File:Mohammad al Salhi.webp. If you plan to upload more third-party materials and haven't yet read COM:THIRD, I recommend you at least skim it to see if there are issues you haven't yet thought about. - Jmabel ! talk 21:15, 16 January 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for understanding. I will definitely keep these instructions in my mind and will be more careful about these issues. Zuck28 (talk) 21:19, 16 January 2026 (UTC)