Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

Shortcut: COM:AN

• 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
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	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	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: ~48
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~0
• No license since 27 August 2025: ~47
• No permission since 27 August 2025: ~118
• No source since 27 August 2025: ~51
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2025-09: ~54

Other:

• Duplicates: ~10
• Advertisements/spam: ~0
• Personal photos/selfies: ~9
• Other speedy deletions: ~46
• Categories for discussion: 84 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~1
• Requests for unblock: ~0
• Undeletion requests: ~12

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~19
• Interface admin: ~12
• Technical: ~0
• Template protection: ~4
• 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

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

Grand Duc

It was said: @Grand-Duc: : it would be good if you would not comment on Phyrexian's QIC content in the future, because if you continue it is likely to be considered harassment.

He continued. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 23:51, 22 August 2025 (UTC)

Noted. @Lvova: are you asking for a sanction (in which case COM:AN/U would be a better place, and you need to notify the user), or what? - Jmabel ! talk 04:40, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

This talk was started here, so I continue here - I'm not good in Commons bureaucracy. You pretended previous time that it is not harassment; it is, so stop the user with tools you have. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 09:26, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lvova: "pretended" meaning I was lying? I just lost any interest in helping you out here. - Jmabel ! talk 18:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Pretended means that you did a mistake previous time, so well, I didn't wait for your personal help this time. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 18:38, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

I think she uses "pretended" as synonymous to "claimed" (a common mistakefor Russian speakers). Ymblanter (talk) 16:40, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

@Lvova you are expected to notify the user on the their talk page as per above. Pings are not enough. I've done it for you this time. Please take care in the future. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 05:00, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 09:27, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Well that's not great. Worth mentioning that all three of those images Grand Duc opposed have gone on to be overwhelmingly supported in consensual review at QIC. Hard to reconcile this judgment with the portion of the closure that Lvova quotes above. It's not like Grand Duc is particularly active at QIC. Their only edits were this one, and one immediately before and after, and that's all. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  13:53, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

• Grand Duc has targeted for deletion images uploaded by a specific Wikipedia editor, apparently thinking they are irrelevant. For the most part they are in Wikipedia articles, although a few of the articles have not been assessed yet.

• Grand Duc has also listed for deletion other images that are part of our culture e.g. Hollywood Walk of Fame stars, Los Angles Dodgers players, now dead famous people like Theodore Bikal, E. G. Robinson and others.
• This editor apparently thinks that they are helping the Commons. Perhaps more help would be to categorize images of the many thousands with no category, rather that spending time listing useful, or at worst trivial images. Images used in enwiki articles have been deleted in this process, images that were not considered under copyright by Wikipedia assessment teams. Krok6kola (talk) 13:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

  @Krok6kola: there's a mistake here - you're confounding redactional scope questions (not raised with images that are used on Wikipedia) and challenges of copyright situations (where usages of files are irrelevant or even aggravating a case). Please study COM:CRT and COM:CSM, so that you will become able to voice more founded opinions. Thanks and regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 20:32, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

  You did exactly that (nominating image in use as out of scope) as well as a public domain photo as copyright violation in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Unkownanylast  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   21:17, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

  If any uploader fails to provide sufficient info about a PD status when it's not obvious even to a child, then it's up to them if a DR gets opened. Furthermore, the DR you linked was not purely a SCOPE thing, but also having a behavioural part - the uploader did some weird things. It's also interesting that you're partaking in the thread highjacking by Krok6kola. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:24, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

Indef blocking of Dronebogus

Dronebogus (talk · contribs) has a problematic history here and was unblocked in June by Bedivere (talk · contribs). Who has just indeffed them, on request, by RodRabelo.

The specific complaint was to not interact with RodRabelo7, which they clearly breached here and here. Except that RodRabelo7's history here is so toxic that they've just requested a rename to a name that needs a Wurlitzer organ to type it: Yacàwotçã (talk · contribs). Dronebogues can hardly be held responsible for interacting (their edits are not problematic) with a user who has gone out of their way to hide their identity, and is now seemingly using it to entrap editors they have a grievance against (and not the only editor they're against).

This is a bad block and should be reverted. Life here would be simpler and more productive if all three of these were blocked (yes, three). But this has no justification at all. Andy Dingley (talk) 19:54, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

OK, I retract all of this. Apparently Dronebogus was aware of the account rename.

User talk:Dronebogus#COM:AN

en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yacàwotçã/Archive

Andy Dingley (talk) 20:18, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

 Comment: For context, as far as I remember, I had never interacted with the account Dronebogus in this project. There may have been one or two minor interactions, but nothing beyond that—as with a complete stranger. Then one day I woke up to dozens of deletion requests for files I had uploaded, which came across as harassment. (And this was not limited to me; it also happened to Tm.) In fact, the user himself admitted that he had acted improperly, although he did not withdraw the nominations. I should also mention that, contrary to what is stated on his talk page, I have no fondness for Exey Panteleev (though encyclopedically notable) and actually find his photographs rather dull; what I do object to is censorship, and I find the Streisand effect interesting. That, as far as I can recall, is what motivated me to start uploading his images in the first place—as a way to counter what I see as the unreasonable puritanism of a few individuals who occasionally open deletion requests for his work.

As for what happened in another project, I don't personally think it is relevant here, but if it is brought up, then everything should be mentioned for the sake of fairness. Dronebogus WAS RECENTLY BLOCKED on the English-language Wikipedia for harassment, specifically for following another editor's contributions. He did the same to me, repeatedly making changes to articles I had just edited (for instance, HERE after my edit HERE, and HERE after my edit HERE. This even happens here on Commons, such as when he favorited several images I had uploaded while he was in a feud with me (THIS ONE, THIS ONE, THIS ONE, THIS ONE, THIS ONE, and many others; ONE OF THEM apparently was favorited after my renaming, when he already had an interaction ban with me). If what happens in other projects is raised here, then fairness requires acknowledging that this account has engaged in harassing behavior that has already been sanctioned and that seems to be at the root of this entire feud we are now witnessing—which, by the way, only exists because of the dozens of deletion requests; as a side note, I recently found out that Dronebogus IS BANNED (not just blocked) from AfDs on the English-language Wikipedia, which to me seems to connect the dots here in this project. I should mention that, with the exception of one very particular issue on my home wiki, I had never been blocked anywhere at any time. Everything began when the account Dronebogus decided to persist in a behavior that had already been sanctioned in another project years ago, and which still occasionally resurfaces (that's precisely why I, by chance, happened to discover it).

Returning to myself and my conduct—for which I offer my apologies here—it has already been sanctioned. I have been, and still am, contributing productively here for years, quietly, without seeking conflict with anyone. I can count on one hand the disputes I have ever had, all of which were fortunately resolved. I repeat that I deeply regret the reasons that led to my past blocks here, and if I could, I would approach those issues differently. I have not interacted with Dronebogus since I returned, with no need for interaction bans—even though the informal interaction ban seemed to be only one way (I personally do not agree with permanent blocks, but that was the condition the account accepted in order to be released from a block of just one week). I have no intention of resuming any interaction with that account, as their presence does not appeal to me, provided they leave me in peace.

Regarding what happened on the English-language Wikipedia, it should first be emphasized that what one account claimed here is untrue. At no point did I create an account to harass Dronebogus. That is simply false; this is my only account and will remain so until the day I voluntarily stop editing. What happened is that, in the middle of a renaming process, I was logged out and could not log back in for a while, and I personally have no problem editing as an IP, which I do both on my computer and on my phones. I can even point to a recent edit I made on Wikipedia as an IP. As for the single comment made there, which led to a block for sockpuppetry (although I repeat that the "sock" was an IP), I think the fact that I am not a native English speaker played a part; more recently, a fellow Wikipedian privately pointed out to me that the adjective "hideous" is somewhat offensive and should be avoided at all costs. For this, I apologize, although this is something specific to Wikipedia and should ideally be addressed there.

I am open to questions, and I hope they will be based on reality rather than distortions aimed at pushing a particular point of view. I also hope that this discussion, if it is to take place, will be confined to a single page. I do not receive pings, but from what I have seen, there are at least three pages involving it, to be conservative. By the way, could someone point me to the policy regarding interaction bans on Commons?

At home, I will look for the countless diffs to prove that what I am saying is true.

Best regards,

Yacàwotçã (talk) 18:50, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

The first paragraph seems to just reiterate what has been said before about how both of you have acted badly towards one another.

Actions taken against Drone's behaviour on some other project are irrelevant- the only reason the harassment was brought up was because it was connected to conduct on Commons- especially given that you did not disagree to the sock investigation on en.wp then.

As far as I can see, iban proposals are so rare that they seem to be proposed with the same conditions as on en.wp, as in

Editors subject to an interaction ban are not permitted to:

• edit each other's user and user talk pages;
• reply to each other in discussions;
• make reference to or comment on each other anywhere on Commons, directly or indirectly;
• undo each other's edits to any page, whether by use of the revert function or by other means;
• use the thanks extension to respond to each other's edits.

I don't think the "countless diffs" are necessary- they are unlikely to do anything but accelerate the process for a 2-way iban. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 19:21, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Comment (Just to be clear, I'm not an admin-just someone who usually looks through long DRs and ANU) Perhaps Commons does need an ArbCom, or perhaps U4C oversight- because this is a mess. Additionally, my read of the situation is- Bedivere slightly overextended themself but did nothing else wrong, Andy seems to be involved in trying to "solve" every drama, usually through mild but unnecessarily aggressive methods, Dronebogus needs a 2-4 weeks block to get themself calm(they really should have informed an admin about RR's harrasment), and RR needs a longer block, because they also need to calm down, but way way more.And finally, stop fighting folks. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:26, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

I've read Drone 's unblock request and it seems reasonable to me, but it's true this definitely needs a larger compromise from both parties (Drone and Rod). Bedivere (talk) 21:36, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

I read it too- mostly the reason I think Drone needs only a short block to sort themselves out. Perhaps a compromise between the two is needed, but honestly, Rod is much more reckless, destructive, and illogical in their behaviour (like seriously, who created sockpuppets to harass someone). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2025 (UTC)

•  Comment I've blocked Dronebogus twice, most recently for a week in July specifically for continuing to interact with RodRabelo7 after being told not to. The fact that they continue to interact with RodRabelo7, no matter their reasoning, shows either a flagrant disregard for the restrictions placed upon them, or a catastrophic failure in judgement or self control. Looking at their block history, I do think a long block is appropriate, though I'm not sure I'd have gone for indef myself. The question is: is there an admin that's not so sick of dealing with Dronebogus that they're willing to be the one to reduce the block length? I won't object to any that do, but it won't be me. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

• Is there an interaction-ban going the other way too? If not, I think there needs to be. Ideally a global one (see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Yacàwotçã/Archive and w:sk:Špeciálne:Príspevky/2804:388:A03C:212A:0:65:9B1B:BC01), if that's at all possible. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:25, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

   Comment as far as I have seen, the the iban seems to be one-way (and also informal, as it just consisted of "don't interact with RR" being the unblock reason). DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 15:33, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, it was a de facto interaction ban on Dronebogus, but it should have been two-sided. Bedivere (talk) 16:44, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

•  Comment I have added a discussion for Yacàwotçã's behaviour on ANU. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Image deletions

Images (for example: File:Комарова Н.В., Артём (военнослужащий из Югры), Пушилин Д.В.jpg or File:Наталья Комарова поздравила с юбилеем Народного учителя России Валерия Салахова 1.jpg) downloaded from the site https://admhmao.ru/ where at the bottom of the page it says "Все материалы сайта доступны по лицензии(All materials on the site are available under the license): Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International" however they were deleted, but I understood why. Can anyone clarify whether it is possible or not to download materials from this site? Fenixs-ru (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

My issue at the moment is that I get an error "447 No Reason Phrase" when trying to access either https://admhmao.ru/ or https://depobr.admhmao.ru from your upload commentary in the page log. So, it's not possible to confirm any license.

So, while I cannot say for certain, it is possible that the deleting admin Yann viewed this source as one where license laundering is happening. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

There may be a problem with access from some countries outside of Russia, so it seems WebArhive does not save the current version of the site. Perhaps YandexwebCache will open (https://admhmao.ru/ - YandexwebCache), (1 file YandexwebCache) (2 file YandexwebCache). And at the time of loading the site https://admhmao.ru/ had a different design which is still available at https://old.admhmao.ru/. It can't be license laundering because it is the official website of the government of the Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug. Fenixs-ru (talk) 08:53, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Can you save the (old) site now in Internet Archive? Maybe it'll become accessible that way. Nakonana (talk) 15:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

I tried but https://web.archive.org/save/ gives "Save Page Now browser crashed on https://old.admhmao.ru/." Fenixs-ru (talk) 06:14, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Worked with another service and https://archive.fo/jvufc/ (https://old.admhmao.ru/.) Fenixs-ru (talk) 07:24, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Danone5

Danone5 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Hi, I deleted this user page as it was clearly not appropriate. I wonder if the account should be blocked or not, and if it should be reported somewhere. Opinions? Yann (talk) 12:29, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done. If the user had had hundred or more edits, then things could be different, but Danone had only 3 edits, which makes him vandalism-only account. I blocked him indefinitely. Taivo (talk) 15:10, 1 September 2025 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/2600:4040:5A54:1100:F907:74A8:BD8D:96E8/64

There are some ... questionable edits here. I'm not comfortable reviewing it due to my current physical setting. If someone else could review and/or block that would be helpful. (TW: sexual photos/text) —Matrix(!) _{ping one}^{when replying} {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 09:37, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done Looks like everything has been reverted (I got the last few).

I'm imposing a one-month block. If an admin with more experience blocking IPs thinks that is not the correct duration, feel free to adjust accordingly. - Jmabel ! talk 00:15, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Datasets about potential logos - August 2025 uploads

Hi all, we have released a new dataset of potential logos uploaded in August 2025, together with another one of those which have already been deleted as of 2025-09-02. We are sharing them with you for your consideration.

This is part of our current work with the logo detection tool. We hope it will be useful for your moderation activities.

If you encounter issues with the datasets or have comments/requests, please reach out to me or to Sannita (WMF).

Thanks for your attention! –-MFossati (WMF) (talk) 11:19, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Question about the Main Page announcement

Hello, not sure if this is the correct place to ask, but I noticed that the Main Page still has the “Wiki Loves Earth 2025” event announcement, which I believed has ended already. Shouldn’t it change to announcement for the “Wiki Loves Monuments 2025” event instead since the event has just started recently? Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 01:50, 3 September 2025 (UTC)

Fix JavaScript error

I was asked to look into a programming bug in some code supplied by the late User:Sarang. The request and diagnosis is at

• User talk:Glrx:#dies und das

Could somebody edit the file User:Sarang/simpleSVGcheck.js? There is a line

href = 'https://validator.nu/?doc=' + file + '&group=1&schema=http%3A%2F%2Fs.validator.nu%2Fsvg-xhtml5-rdf-mathml.rnc+http%3A%2F%2Fs.validator.nu%2Fhtml5%2Fassertions.sch+http%3A%2F%2Fc.validator.nu%2Fall%2F&parser=xml',

The + file + should be + encodeURIcomponent(file) +.

Thanks. Glrx (talk) 04:20, 3 September 2025 (UTC)