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
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	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	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: ~16
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~2
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2025-09: ~310

Other:

• Duplicates: ~2
• Advertisements/spam: ~23
• Personal photos/selfies: ~17
• Other speedy deletions: ~25
• Categories for discussion: 84 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~0
• Requests for unblock: ~5
• Undeletion requests: ~9

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~25
• Interface admin: ~14
• Technical: ~0
• 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.

Worvandae

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

I would like to report an account suspected of block evasion here. I accidentally got this [1], [2] so they can be Musée Annam, Tarchivum, Unserefahne, they are all the same and assume Chu An instead of Chu Van An. Another case is [3], [4] nón tơi instead of nón lá.

Examples from other project [5].

Information about them can be found Category:Sockpuppets of Đăng Đàn Cung. Henrydat (talk) 17:46, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

They made non-consensual edits like the examples above. They wrote Chiến-kiện Hà-nội 1946 instead of Trận Hà Nội 1946 (this is the old way of writing mixed with Chinese). They got mad when I rollbacked/undid the LTA IP range edits [6] is locked by EPIC year by year. I think the WMF community has reached a consensus on blocking their global edits, they were blocked on every project viwikipedia, enwikipedia, commons with different sock masters. They passed the test on wikidata for some reason so I guided them as newbies but they do not follow instructions but harass and attack individuals [7]. I think they intentionally harass Mxn (CU of viwikipedia) with such edits. I retired from wikidata still worried about their edits here.

User:Jeff G. Do you have any comments about this user, they deleted talk page two times, refuse to use HotCat and Cat-a-lot so edits without edit summaries? Henrydat (talk) 04:11, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Henrydat I agree that the user is problematic. Ajraddatz locked Đăng Đàn Cung and Martin Urbanec globally banned them, perhaps those Stewards have an opinion.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:18, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I am asking someone. Henrydat (talk) 15:22, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Henrydat: The user continues with ownership issues over the user talk page assigned to communicate with them, and edit warring to create incomplete DRs like this and that.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

It happened again. Instead of addressing the issue on their talk page, they question the person who raised the issue. Henrydat (talk) 18:20, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

@Greenknight dv, @Băng Tỏa Do you have any comments here based on your work at enwikipedia and viwikipedia [8]? Henrydat (talk) 18:36, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

From my encounter with Worvandae, I think he is most likely Musée Annam. In any case, I am convinced he is another sockpuppet of a long-term abuser. He is familiar with technical wiki procedures yet pretends to be innocent while slandering other users. Whether due to his broken English or his irrationality, I find his arguments nonsensical. These are my observations. Greenknight dv (talk) 02:21, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I see rename requests of that user quite often. While I dont mind doing renames in general, the number of rename request from him give the impression he is rather careless with initial uploads. Also, the majority of requests I would classify as only minor improvements.

Another issue is that he often uploads the same image with only slight differences (Example 1, Example 2, Example 3). --Isderion (talk) 18:42, 12 September 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: This user is still a problem. Yesterday I turned down a requested move that would have changed perfect English grammar into a mess. His requests are primarily changing the word at to in. When filemovers turn down a request he just requests the move again hoping someone else will do it. Geoffroi 19:27, 17 September 2025 (UTC)
• This discussion has now gone on well over two weeks. I see the user in question has not seen fit to speak for themself (Pinging @Worvandae to give them another explicit invitation to respond). If we don't hear from them in 48 hours, I think some admin needs to make a decision based on what we have so far, and either take some action or explicitly say "not done." - Jmabel ! talk 04:35, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: Most of this user's rename requests are unnecessary and some basically ammount to vandalism. Having requests turned down and then just repeating the request is a problem. His new rename request rationale is that the new name, with a very minor change, is "exactlier". This guy is disruptive and a net-negative for Commons, and needs to be blocked. Geoffroi 17:40, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
• Disruptive rename request repeated: See the history on File:Caught in a downpour on Tú Mỡ Street 14-08-2025 E1.jpg. This is vandalism. I'm thinking of just blanket declining all his requests if no admin will deal with this troll. Geoffroi 17:52, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked indef. Yann (talk) 18:45, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Yann!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:30, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

WP:CIR and User:Drbogdan

Drbogdan was CBANned from en Wikipedia for, among other things:

Here we have a science expert mass-adding content based on low-quality popular science churnalism to our science articles, expecting that other editors will review it and determine whether to improve or remove it

Recently I noticed that Drbogdan was adding images with inappropriate copyright tags, listing images from JPL as Public Domain (despite the NASA public domain tag containing a link to the JPL rights situation). When notified of this, Drbogdan slapped a second copyright tag on one image, then essentially said I was free to deal with it but that he didn't have time to.

Notification (diff)

Response (diff)

Edit to image rights (diff)

I looked through the complete history of the uploads Drbogdan has made. In addition to an extensive history of images removed as either not free or promotional spam (diff), it appears of the 2365 images he's uploaded which haven't been removed, 1833, or 77.51% of his total contributions to Commons, are incorrectly tagged as public domain despite coming from JPL. He has also routinely reproduced entire blocks of text from JPL in the image descriptions, which I'm simply uncertain about the rights situation around. Considering his "remedy" was to mess up the rights templates on one image than insist he doesn't have time, I'm going to have to quote the closer from the ANI filing:

"A mess created in a sincere effort to help is still a mess that needs to be cleaned up."

Full disclosure that I am the filer of the en wp ani. Wikibreaksock (talk) 11:15, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

It took me a few minutes to fix all the templates with VisualFileChange  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   12:14, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Excellent, not sure where that leaves the image descriptions. Older copies of JPL's use policy specifically note that it may require use permissions.

JPL authored documents are sponsored by NASA under Contract NAS7-1407. All documents available from this server may be protected under the U.S. and Foreign Copyright Laws. Permission to reproduce may be required.

Wikibreaksock (talk) 12:18, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

It seems that's not exactly a workable solution here. Drbogdan appears to have assumed every image from JPL is free to use. For example, this image has rights beyond just JPL; also assigned to the Max Planck Institute, UCLA, and the German Aerospace Center. This image has a rights situation beyond the standard JPL release, and this is just a vanity image of his own publication history in an unreadable format. There's dozens of space images removed for copyvio reasons linked on Drbogdan's talk page; I think there's going to need to be a manual review of the uploads. Wikibreaksock (talk) 10:20, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Reply - Huntster, Randy Kryn and Viriditas (and others) - Seems my recent post on my related discussion page ( https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Drbogdan#JPL_images_and_copyright ) may be relevant here as well =>

Thanks for your recent comments - my edits on all wikis were always made in good faith - and based on the best information and procedures I had at the time - regardless of comments and outcomes presented by some others for some reason - my contributions (over 18yrs/98k global edits/306 articles/2.5k uploaded images/11k watchlist) depended on my interest, time and circumstances - which may be different these days for one reason or another (mostly real-world) - regardless - thank you for your comments - and understanding - Stay Safe and Healthy - Drbogdan (talk) 15:40, 4 September 2025 (UTC)

hope this helps in some way - in any case - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 12:27, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Drbogdan, please familiarize yourself with the policies around canvassing. Those editors aren't party to this issue, they're just historically editors who like you. That's not appropriate in this context. Nobody here has made any accusations that you've engaged in bad faith, just that there are issues with copyvio content and rights tags. I've fixed your noping tag. Wikibreaksock (talk) 12:41, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

No - not canvassing - just seeking other opinions about all this from other editors - nonetheless - seems some related earlier posted comments may be relevant here as well I would think:

Comment re ANI NOM (re: User:Warrenmck) about Wiki-Editor Randy Kryn (20250421):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1185#Randy_Kryn,_WP:CIR,_WP:STONEWALL_and_WP:HOUND

What is going on is that an editor whose most edited page is ANI and who constantly gets into disputes/arguments is once again dragging someone to ANI to cause more drama. I have to ask what has Warrenmck contributed to this encyclopedia besides drama and conflict? 206.83.103.251 (talk) 22:49, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

. You mean the IP may be right, that most of your edits are ANI? Jeez, hopefully this nonsense will end that. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:31, 22 April 2025 (UTC)

Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 13:36, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Seeking the opinion of a select pool of editors who have historically come to your defence when they're unrelated and uninvolved with the current dispute is textbook canvassing. I fail to see how this isn't the textbook definition of an aspersion. This is a baseless accusation relating to an old incident report that has no bearing here and the quoted section appears to be quoted only in the context of a personal attack. Feel free to strike it. As with the ANI ad en.wp, you've elected to nothing of substance here. You've added thousands of images with rights issues, many of which cannot be simply addressed en masse as above. Do you have any plans to address that? Because this report isn't about nothing, and you're refusing to do anything other than flail at me with personal attacks or try to involve a group of friends. Wikibreaksock (talk) 16:06, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

@Wikibreaksock Welcome to commons, I'm assuming you are Warren. Commons doesn't have any dramaboards like ANI, and we like to keep it that way. please stay civil. This is a valid report, and I don't think canvassing those users will help anyone's case. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:01, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments - Yes - *entirely* agree - no problem whatsoever - as to substance re image descriptions and related - my understanding, mostly from User:Huntster, an administrator on Commons, was that the image descriptions and related as currently presented were *entirely* ok - and may still be *entirely* ok afaik - Drbogdan (talk) 17:40, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

I have no intention of causing drama, though I think attempting to ping a whole bunch of friends was exactly that. That was a baseless aspersion there and it is again here, which is why I asked it to be struck. I’ve been quite active on Commons. :) Wikibreaksock (talk) 18:50, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

• Drbogdan should be indeffed. He was banned on enwiki for a reason and that reason is clearly applicable to Commons as well. --Dronebogus (talk) 12:06, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

  Unfortunately I agree with Dronebogus here. This pattern is an exact duplication of the behaviours that got him CBANned on en.Wikipedia, and if he hadn’t just explained to me in response that he has neither the time nor the interest in cleaning up his messes, which right now number in the thousands, I wouldn’t have even brought it here. As it is I think this is the same mix of extremely poor editing, an unwillingness to reflect, a willingness to engage in personal attacks (which, to be clear, is what the above contextless screed about drama boards was), and most importantly a willingness to treat commons as a personal web host for dozens of now-removed personal images (link) and his personal “biography” (link) it’s pretty clear these issues will be intractable, or else some lessons would have percolated to commons from his en.wp CBAN.

In the time this thread has been active he’s posted more images using the incorrect rights template (diff diff) and continues to fully reproduce non-free descriptions (JPL's permissive policy is specifically about images, the full text recreated as descriptions is an ongoing copyvio issue which he's repeating after being made aware of it). He later fixed the rights part, but I do not understand why he is still making messes on commons given this active filing and what is certainly a backlog of hundreds of images with incorrectly labelled rights. It isn't acceptable to leave a file up for hours with the wrong rights tag, and either editors will need to babysit him or Dronebogus has the right idea. Wikibreaksock (talk) 15:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)

New info - I don't know if any admin is intent on looking at this, but Drbogdan is apparently content to ignore the issues raised here. He is still uploading non-free images as public domain (diff), then changing the rights afterwards to JPL (diff) despite the rights in this image also being assigned to MSSS. MSSS's image use policy makes it clear this image is not free for the purposes of Commons (link).

Drbogdan is functionally, though unintentionally, a long-term vandal. He's uploaded thousands of images, hundreds of which are not cut-and-dry non-free images. This is going to continue being a timesink for editors in the way it was at enwiki. A decade plus of people asking him to fix bad editing didn't work there and being made aware of the issues appears to have had zero impact here. He continues to make messes while pretending the old ones don't exist. Wikibreaksock (talk) 11:51, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

I  Support blocking.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:29, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

At a certain point, if we assume good faith, the only explanation left is incompetence.

I don't want to rush this, because there is no emergency, but unless someone (including Drbogdan himself}} can come up with a plan in the next day or two as to how Drbogdan can contribute without continuing to add copyright violations to Commons, I think an indef-block is the only solution. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Reply - Thanks for your comments - based on my experiences over the years, wiki-culture seems to have improved in some ways since earlier times - I've encountered many, many good-faith collaborators along the way - unfortunately, a few detractors as well - seems to come with the territory - nonetheless - my understanding, mostly from User:Huntster, an administrator on Commons, was that the image descriptions and related as currently presented were *entirely* ok - and may still be *entirely* ok afaik - as before, my contributions (over 18yrs/98k global edits/306 articles/2.5k uploaded images/11k watchlist) depended on my interest, time and circumstances - which may be different these days for one reason or another (mostly real-world) - regardless - thanks to all those who commented (esp constructively) over the years - and to all those who provided me the opportunity to contribute to Wikipedia - Wikipedia is a truly great project for the very best of reasons in my opinion - at the very least, a worthy beginning step to the responsible literature - in any case - no problem whatsoever - back to regular stuff - plenty on our plate these days - Thanks again for your comments - and - Stay Safe and Healthy !! - Drbogdan (talk) 21:38, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

•  Done User indefinitely blocked per discussion. --Bedivere (talk) 22:20, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

User:越前太郎

• 越前太郎 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

After receiving copyvio warning, this user didn't stop uploading copyvio photos. See user's log. Netora (talk) 22:37, 16 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done. All contributions are already deleted. I blocked the user for a week. Taivo (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Block evading user

Blocked user Huynhthiminhngoc99, who has previously socked, has returned as User:SOAP Bot is not good, Thcsphuninh2006 is best - redoing the same edits. @Pi.1415926535: who blocked them before. - The Bushranger (talk) 21:00, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done blocked. GPSLeo (talk) 21:20, 17 September 2025 (UTC)

Removal of speedy tag and sockpuppetry

WhereDeadSing (talk · contribs) has uploaded the image here, first listing it as their own work. Later they changed this to being an image by Lionel Hahn for Getty Images and added a creative commons license. This appears indeed to be sourced from Getty Images which means it's licensed and not free to use. So I tagged it for speedy deletion as a copyvio.

Nosghxbrd17 (talk · contribs) then came in to remove the speedy tag, without contesting it in any meaningful way.

From both their editing patterns, I believe them to be the same person running both accounts. I don't believe they are Lionel Hahn who is the author of the image. Also, I have not yet checked the other image uploads from these accounts.

SudoX7 (talk · contribs) is a third account which I believe to be used by the same person based on their editing patterns here and on enwiki and simple wiki.

I'm not here often so I'm not really well-versed in Commons policy. If I made some mistakes in this report, please let me know. Thanks! Atlan (talk) 12:37, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

Hello, I want to clarify that I am WhereDeadSing. I am not connected to the other usernames mentioned.

I am new here and uploaded the Getty Images file by mistake. I now understand it cannot be used. Sorry for the confusion. WhereDeadSing (talk) 13:14, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

These three users are Confirmed to be the same. Blocking and tagging. --Lymantria (talk) 14:56, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

@Atlan; When it concerns suspicion of abuse of sockpuppets, next time it is better to turn to Commons:Requests for checkuser. --Lymantria (talk) 15:41, 18 September 2025 (UTC)

User:TE(æ)A,ea. not taking no as an answer over the last 48 hours

TE(æ)A,ea. (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Recently, at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Epstein Files Phase 1, Part C – Contact Book Redacted.pdf, @User:TE(æ)A,ea. refused to take no as an answer to the deletion request, which was not opened by this user. Very short timeline (all within the last 48 hours) of disruptive behavior, which also easily explains it:

1. DR begins from Based5290 (not involved in this report — Mentioning only for timestamp for the start of this DR).
2. DR closed as Keep by Administrator @Bedivere.
3. TE(æ)A,ea. reverts closer with the edit summary, “Reverting absurd closure”. !VOTEs Delete in same edit.
4. Administrator Bedivere recloses DR, noting TE(æ)A,ea. did an “invalid revert of my closure”.
5. Administrator Bedivere warns TE(æ)A,ea. about not reverting closures.
6. TE(æ)A,ea. begins a new DR (3rd one on same file within 48 hours). They also add the edit summary threatening to take this to AN if the DR was closed for a third time.
7. Bedivere does not reclose the 3rd DR, but rather comments that TE(æ)A,ea. is wrong.
8. TE(æ)A,ea. adds a comment with the edit summary “Adding response to inappropriate administrator comment”.

I think it is clear TE(æ)A,ea. has disruptive and battleground behavior, is willing to ignore administrators, essentially taking a attempting to right a great wrong-attitude. They also believe anyone calling them wrong is an “inappropriate” comment. WeatherWriter (talk) 02:08, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

...why are the Epstein files listed as a work created by the US government? What is the implication here? Trade (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

...The redactions are done by the US Government? Are you implying Epstein redacted the lists himself? That's something for the file's talk page, not here since this is a report for disruptive behavior. WeatherWriter (talk) 20:22, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I think it might be part of the reason why the user got frustrated so i can see the relevance

My suggestion would be to simply wait to see if this is a recurring pattern or just an one-time event Trade (talk) 20:53, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I doubt that observation. The user's deletion reasoning was that it was copyrighted and that it was out of scope. Nothing regarding US gov license was mentioned or discussed by the user. WeatherWriter (talk) 20:54, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

MBC3 Fan 2022

• User: MBC3 Fan 2022 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Mushaf Thematic Division (Page 50).jpg, File:Qur'ān Thematic Division (Page 42).jpg, and File:Eriko Tamura (Eroka Shizo) Version II.jpg after block for doing so. Potential CIR issue about being unable to put together an unblock request.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:38, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 3 months. All files need review. Yann (talk) 16:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, Yann.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

Request for Review and Restoration of Removed Contributions by User:The Squirrel Conspiracy

Hello Administrators,

I am requesting assistance regarding several of my contributions that have been removed from Wikipedia, Wikidata, and Wikimedia Commons, including files uploaded with proper VRT permissions.

User User:The Squirrel Conspiracy appears to have deleted multiple contributions that I had added, including:

- Wikipedia article "Onix Renewable" and related pages that I had created or contributed to. - Files on Wikimedia Commons uploaded with VRT permission emails and tagged with {subst:PP}.

Unfortunately, I no longer have all the URLs for the removed content, as they were deleted, but some of the affected links include:

- Wikidata item: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q136168210 - Commons files:

 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:RojgaarResult.in_Logo.png
 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Divyesh_Savaliya_receiving_an_award_from_Gujarat_Chief_Minister_Bhupendra_Patel_at_GPBS_2025_Expo.jpg
 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Divyesh_Savaliya

- Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Onix_Renewable

All removed contributions and files were compliant with Wikimedia copyright and content policies. The removed Commons files were uploaded legally with VRT permission emails sent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org.

I kindly request that administrators review these actions and, where appropriate, restore the deleted content. I can provide additional verification or documentation if needed.

Thank you for your assistance. @Odder:

OnixWikiEditor (talk) 20:41, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

@OnixWikiEditor: You must stop at once using Wikimedia Commons as a place for advertising services. Please read COM:ADVERT. Yann (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

I've indef-blocked this problematic user. Bedivere (talk) 21:33, 20 September 2025 (UTC)

User:Dipongkorofficial

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

Repeatedly using this platform for advertisement/self-promotion purpose only. Agent 007 (talk) 08:24, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked indef., was warned before. Yann (talk) 09:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Bidgee copyright trolling

This user has demanded payment through Pixsy, for photographs that they've have free licensed on this site. They demand we pay $3000. This user needs to be stopped! Gto2567 (talk) 10:17, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Extended content

And you and cohorts need to be stopped doing license infringements. If you didn't pay attention to en:Creative Commons license or other en:FOSS terms for whatever reasons, then it's on you. Pay your learning fee, feel free to (try to) negotiate a reduction, but trying to put the blame elsewhere will not work. Thank you. Grand-Duc (talk) 10:24, 21 September 2025 (UTC) // EDIT 2025-09-24 GD Lest the following comment seem an excessive reaction, it should be noted that at the time it was written the now-edited remark above included the phrases, "If you're too dumb or inattentive to pay attention" and "shut up your aggressive tone." - Jmabel ! talk 02:53, 24 September 2025 (UTC) wow, how rude!! You must be there friend to defend such disgraceful behaviour over a minor error they gave no notice to fix. We had a apprentice who made a minor mistake. Bidgee clearly uses this as a business model and must be dealt with. Gto2567 (talk) 10:50, 21 September 2025 (UTC) It's still up to the supervisor of a trainee to check for errors. You fail at it, you pay for it. Furthermore, you're claiming that a rights holder has to get stopped, but you're not offering any more details about the case whatsoever: no link to the Bidgee image, no company name, no statement where and how it was used... FYI, omitting the creator's name or wrongly crediting "Wikipedia" instead is not a "minor mistake", but a serious violation. A minor one would be to state the license wrong like saying "Creative Commons", but not specifically which version, for instance. True "minor" violations aren't fined with 3000$, that looks more like a kind of complete copyfraud (meaning: no reference to the actual creator and claiming "all rights reserved" on the publication). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 11:07, 21 September 2025 (UTC) @Grand-Duc This is definitely not a proper tone to respond. I suggest you to retract your statements and/or rewrite them properly. Bedivere (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2025 (UTC) Seconding Bedivere here. @Grand-Duc: You're not an admin, but you are an experienced enough user that you should know not to take that tone with people who come to a board like this. - Jmabel ! talk 04:43, 22 September 2025 (UTC) I don't think Bidgee is doing this as a business. I'm not quite sure I understand or even like that he's charging for images (if this is, indeed, what he is doing) but he may be within his rights. I probably gave a very negative viewpoint of Bidgee below as we've had run-ins, so I feel I must correct the record. Bidgee is (was?) an excellent contributor to all aspects of the Wikimedia movement, and I would not in any way support punitive actions against him. He is the last person I know of who would want to harm any Wikimedia project. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 04:17, 22 September 2025 (UTC) I notified Bidgee --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 10:41, 21 September 2025 (UTC) Which are the images involved here? Andy Dingley (talk) 13:00, 21 September 2025 (UTC) And on which page/site where there image(s) used? Was there any good-faith attempt to attribute or follow the free license? --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 13:51, 21 September 2025 (UTC) It wouldn't be a page on a Wikimedia project, as our technology links back to the image page and that is long-established as being adequate to meet any CC-by requirements. If the image was uploaded with an incorrect licence, that's a different problem and would be on the uploader, rather than the user. It would be a trickier legal case to then hold a user liable for events dependent on the actions of a 3rd party uploader. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:59, 21 September 2025 (UTC) (I'm asking which website/page Gto2567 used the image on, not which wiki-article it was used on. As to find out if the usage was commercial in nature or not.) --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 14:02, 21 September 2025 (UTC) after how I was treated, I will not disclose our site or business. How can you allow such threats such as this money grab over a minor mistake Gto2567 (talk) 23:13, 21 September 2025 (UTC) Note: Since we have not identified the photo in question or the usage in question, and as I do not think Bidgee discloses their real name here, I have removed a link to an external document which includes a real name. Still happy to review/comment per what I said below, but I understand if the repellent welcome you received dashed any hope of support here. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC) Bidgee has been very open about who he is on Wikipedia, and has disclosed his name in the past as part of the WMF Australia chapter. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 00:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC) Did not know. You're welcome to undo my removal. — Rhododendrites talk |  00:49, 22 September 2025 (UTC) There is no need to do this. It's just not much of a secret is all. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 05:26, 22 September 2025 (UTC) So, we can't even verify if the image in question is even hosted here on Commons nor how it was used by you? Not sure what you want us to do here, unless you're able to show cause for administrative action, as User:Rhododendrites explained below. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 00:09, 22 September 2025 (UTC) So you want to protect a grifting leech who is violating the copyleft trolling policy? 1.129.111.134 00:56, 22 September 2025 (UTC) That is jumping to conclusions. There is absolutely no clear indication in any of the above that Bidgee has in any way violated the copyleft trolling policy, let along anything to justify characterizing them as a "grifting leech". - Jmabel ! talk 04:54, 22 September 2025 (UTC)  Comment, perhaps this issue is related to these two discussion here User talk:Bidgee#Your pictures on the website www.hellomondo.com and Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2025/08#Concern about CC-licensed uploads used for repeated legal claims. Tvpuppy (talk) 15:15, 21 September 2025 (UTC) If it is (and I understand that it may not be), then this is not even anywhere near copyright trolling. If someone publishes copyrighted images and refuses to acknowledge the source, there cannot be a much more blatant sort of copyright violation. - Jmabel ! talk 04:54, 22 September 2025 (UTC) First, can some admin take a look at Grand-Duc's replies above and determine if they should be responding to requests here? Second, Gto2567 we need proper context to comment. Link the photo and your usage of it. What steps have you taken to try to resolve this issue, if any? Like any image hosting site, we cannot control how copyright owners enforce licenses. What we have control over is what we choose to host. So we cannot intervene with Pixsy, but if (and that's a big if) it is abusive (see Commons:Copyleft trolling), then we can choose not to host such photos moving forward. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:28, 21 September 2025 (UTC) What is going on with that guy? He has been passive-aggresively taking his bat and ball and gone home, now he's decided to charge for photos? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 00:25, 22 September 2025 (UTC) Your the best Chris! He hated that you better at category and photos than him! Hope he get banned for life. 49.186.196.63 00:46, 22 September 2025 (UTC) Whoa! I'm not advocating for this, and nor do I think that my photos were any better than his. Bidgee's photos are vastly superior to the ones I take, and Bidgee has many good ideas about categorisation. I don't think I want to encourage or even suggest he be banned. Bidgee is an excellent Commons contributor. I just don't like some of the way he does things, but I am not in any way anti-Bidgee. You can dislike aspects of a person but still see they are, by and large, excellent contributors. I'm sure he feels the same about me. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 04:13, 22 September 2025 (UTC) Wait, you can charge money to people to post images here? why the eff have i been doing this for free?? :/ need a better agent... Stemoc 02:19, 22 September 2025 (UTC) @Stomac: an awful lot of your recent posts here have been at least very close to trolling. Unless you are actively trying to get blocked, I suggest you knock it off. - Jmabel ! talk 04:54, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Most of the above is a bunch of vituperation in various directions, and warnings from and to various people to knock off the vituperation. There is no substantive accusation against Bidgee, just an accusation that he threatened to sue the owner of some unspecified website for making unspecified use of an unspecified photo. From what little evidence there is, it may simply be a case of Bidgee pursuing damages for a blatant copyvio, which would be entirely in his rights.

That, said, if there was substance to the original complaint, any intelligent discussion was headed off by a non-admin with no obvious connection to the matter making rather abusive remarks to the complainant and driving them away from the discussion, and by other users (mostly IPs) being comparably abusive toward Bidgee. I'd have no objection if some other admin wants to pursue some blocks or other sanctions of the various disruptors.

 Not done No administrative action taken. If there is something substantive here, start a new thread. & thanks to Chris.sherlock2 for suggesting I come back and close this. - Jmabel ! talk 05:39, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Thanks to the user who contacted me privately to inform me of this unfounded allegation.

I will keep this brief, since I’m making this comment during an unpaid break at work.

I do not use Pixsy to deal with any licensing infringements, I do not have and have never held an account with them. I have in the past requested for those who fail to follow the Creative Commons license requirements to address them, only in extreme cases I will take it to a copyright lawyer.

The OP is either lying or is being duped (fraud). I would like to know more, since there would be stolen identity fraud if it is a real claim. Bidgee (talk) 06:11, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Since there's a closing mention, I don't know whether any edit is still needed; nevertheless, I rewrote my comments above. Still, an individual who's, by all appearances, representing a company ("They demand we pay[..]"), finding the ANU board (instead of the help desk or village pump) with his first edit after registration on the same day and leveraging accusations that also look by all appearances as a try to shift blame will IMHO never become a contributor that can participate in building a good media repository. I am aware that it may be usual to express denials or refusals in a roundabout way in English-speaking regions, that's at least the content I recall from essays about different company cultures I read in media outlets over the years, but calling out ineptitude still felt right. Or do you want to bother with a new guest who's waltzing in, claiming having suffered some torts and asking for punitive measures in the third sentence they ever wrote? This behaviour is much much more closer to classical internet trolls populating the commentary sections on news outlet sites or social media offerings than to people genuinely requesting assistance. Last but not least, there weren't any indications whatsoever of Bidgee engaging in intensive defence of his IP rights on his talk page. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:27, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

I’m a bit weirded out that one of the anons knew that I had a bit of a dispute over categories with Bidgee. Something didn’t seem quite right. Whatever animosity or troubles I have with Bidgee, he doesn’t deserve whatever these folks are dishing out. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:16, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Personal attack from Rachuri Bhanu Prakash Datta (talk · contribs)

User:Rachuri Bhanu Prakash Datta is personally attacking me, see my talk page. I don't take it seriously, but this user should be blocked. Also this user re-uploaded deleted files. -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 11:56, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

 indef'd for direct threat against other user, which is inacceptable. --Túrelio (talk) 12:16, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

IP vandal User:193.207.178.219

See here and repeated invalid rename requests. Geoffroi 23:46, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked multiple IP-s and protected some files. Taivo (talk) 15:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Now the user has been blocked again at 79.40.236.98 because of speedy requests for category redirects without special characters at Category:Sanjiro Sawaguchi and Category:Tatsujiro Sato.

Would it be possible to protect these two redirects for all non-autopatrollers? Then bots can move automatically all files that get into the redirects to the target categories with those special characters for Japanese language, also the ones that are protected for non-autopatrollers. Without the redirects, this is not possible for the bots, and files would stay in the red, deleted categories. Also, most people don’t have Japanese keyboards and can’t type those characters. Therefore, they better shouldn’t be deleted. —176.1.2.134 06:39, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Done, after another 2 speedy requests for those redirects, they are protected now. The user has some complete different ranges. This time it was IP 95.233.236.196. —176.1.2.134 09:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

IP socks of globally locked LTA Category:Sockpuppets of GMatteotti. They use to switch their IPs once a minute if necessary. --Achim55 (talk) 10:44, 24 September 2025 (UTC)

Lhoussine AIT TAYFST

• User: Lhoussine AIT TAYFST (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:ⴰⵎⵏⴰⵢ ⴰⵎⴰⵣⵉⵖ ⵜⴰⵙⵏⴰ ⵜⴰⵎⴳⴳⴰⵔⵓⵜ.jpg three blocks for doing so. Not addressing concerns on user talk page like bad DR creation.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:27, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done. As Yann said giving previous block: next time it will be indefinite. It is now. Taivo (talk) 15:55, 23 September 2025 (UTC)