|
__TOC__
{{clear}}
== Roermondernaar ==
* {{user3|Roermondernaar}}
Uploads copyvio ([[:File:SC Leeuwen logo.png]]) after having been [[Special:Diff/887153461|warned for it yesterday]]. [[User:Jonteemil|Jonteemil]] ([[User talk:Jonteemil|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:19, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{d}} Blocked for a week, file deleted. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
::I deleted some complex logos speedily and created one DR. [[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:16, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
== [[User:Laurel Lodged]] ==
*'''What was this even about?''' My bad behaviour? Bad categorisation? Annoyance that the Azerbaijani victory over Arksakh is not getting proper recognition? I refrained from comment here and on the categories because I have experience of the complainant: dialog is useless as his sole goal is to advance a political agenda. He's not that subtle about it. I'll continue the "discussion" in the above talk page. Thanks for your attention. [[User:Laurel Lodged|Laurel Lodged]] ([[User talk:Laurel Lodged|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
*:I think the user was objecting to your objection to the renaming of a category, and didn't quite know the proper channel to discuss it. The user has since been directed to it, and has [[Commons:Categories for discussion/2024/06/Category:Stepanakert|opened a discussion]] regarding whether or not to move the category. I feel like we can close this with no action. — [[User:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">Red-tailed hawk</span>]] <sub>[[User talk:Red-tailed hawk|<span style="color: #660000">(nest)</span>]]</sub> 04:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
== Please help removing category from a User page ==
Hello, I am currently working as committee for [[Commons:Kompetisi Penyajian Data 2024|Indonesian Data Visualization Competition]], which one of the tasks is writing article at participants' user page in Wikidata and uploading their work to Wikimedia Commons.
One of the participant (@[[User:Anazzahro129|Anazzahro129]]) misread the instruction and wrote the article in their [[User:Anazzahro129|Commons' user page]] instead. The problem is when they added [[:Category:Kompetisi Penyajian Data 2024|the competition category]] and [[:Category:WikiProject Indonesia|WikiProject Indonesia category]] to their user page and this messed up the category page for the competition.
When I tried to remove the category myself, my action detected and blocked by Abuse Filter since I tried to edit other user's page. I have tried to contact the user themself via email which they used for registration to no avail. Can the admin helped me remove the competition category, and also the [[:Category:WikiProject Indonesia|WikiProject Indonesia]]'s category ? Thank you. [[User:Athayahisyam|Athayahisyam]] ([[User talk:Athayahisyam|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 10:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{Reply to|Athayahisyam}} {{Done}}. <small>That did not need an administrator. Just an autopatrolled user.</small> -- [[User:Asclepias|Asclepias]] ([[User talk:Asclepias|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
::Thank you for removing the category. [[User:Athayahisyam|Athayahisyam]] ([[User talk:Athayahisyam|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
== Редактор СВА ==
{{user5|Редактор СВА}}
Deletes copyvio templates from files they upload, removes user talk page messages about their copyright violations and reuploads the same file again ([[:File:KITH Персонаж.jpg]]) after it was deleted for being a copyvio ([[:File:Kith персонаж.jpg]]). - [[User:Sebbog13|Sebbog13]] ([[User talk:Sebbog13|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 10:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{d}} 3 day blocked. They removed the warning so clearly they read it (or at least knew it existed). —'''Matrix(!)''' <nowiki>{</nowiki>''[[User:Matrix|user]] - [[User talk:Matrix|talk?]] - [[Special:Contribs/Matrix|<sub><small><s>useless</s></small></sub>contributions]]''<nowiki>}</nowiki> 20:00, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
== 通報しますた ==
{{user|通報しますた}} made an edit on User talk:Ktojsecgiioe, which is obvious Legal threat. [[User:Lemonaka|Lemonaka]] ([[User talk:Lemonaka|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:25, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{nd}} Already globally locked. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 06:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::{{done}}. I did not see global lock, so I blocked the user locally indefinitely. [[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
== IP address users on [[:Category:Reproducing piano recording]] ==
*{{user5|109.183.170.89}}
*{{user5|31.205.117.254}}
*{{user5|190.105.60.53}}
*{{user5|86.45.105.48}}
*{{user5|78.19.56.34}}
*{{user5|87.101.112.12}}
*{{user5|181.115.64.185}}
 Since June 24, 2024 on the [[:Category:Reproducing piano recording]], these IP address users have been repeatedly posting SPAM link to the abandoned comment-section of the unrelated external site, and also leaving the meaningless threatening message on each edit summary field (see [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Reproducing_piano_recording&action=history History] page).<br/> In my eyes, these IP address users may be the same person as an already blocked user [[:User:GraceMaryGrace]] and her IP address set through the proxy/VPN, because she have been caused same trouble on Wikimedia Commons [[:Category:Vorsetzer]] and [[wikidata:User_talk:Clusternote|Wikidata's my Talk page]] since February 2024, as a habitual stalker. --[[User:Clusternote|Clusternote]] ([[User talk:Clusternote|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{d}}, protected page, FYI this LTA is probably [[w:WP:LTA/GRP|GRP]]. —'''Matrix(!)''' <nowiki>{</nowiki>''[[User:Matrix|user]] - [[User talk:Matrix|talk?]] - [[Special:Contribs/Matrix|<sub><small><s>useless</s></small></sub>contributions]]''<nowiki>}</nowiki> 17:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
== Out of process closer by admin after threat on my talk page ==
{{discussion top|No admin action needed here. As I said below, there is no evidence for the DRs started by Adamant1. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:38, 27 June 2024 (UTC)}}
Earlier I opened [[:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Maîtresse-vitre de la cathédrale de Dol-de-Bretagne]]. A few hours later a user, {{ping|GO69}}, threatened to contact French administrators over it. The DR was then closed out of process and for no reason a few minutes later by {{Ping|VIGNERON}}. Clearly because they contacted by {{ping|GO69}} about it. The whole thing is clearly a conflict of interest, goes against the Universal Code of Conduct, and as well as being an abuse of the administrator privileges. [[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:I did close this DR thanks to GO69 warning as there is obviously no reason for deletion (per [[Commons:Snowball clause]]). If we talk about abuse, {{ping|Adamant1}} would be the one abusing the [[Commons:Deletion requests]] process ([[Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Ancien siège d'Ouest-France]] is also in the same case). Cheers, [[User:VIGNERON|VIGNERON]] ([[User talk:VIGNERON|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::What snowball clause? There was one delete vote and it had only been open for a couple of hours. There wasn't enough comments or time for there to be a snowball. You clearly closed it before the 7 days was over for no reason because a another user from France asked you to. Which is clearly an abuse of the administrator tools and goes against the Universal Code of Conduct. You can say my justification for the DR was wrong, but that's not a valid excuse to close it early and before there was any discussion just because another French user randomly threatened to contact you about it on my talk page. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::I did came to the DR because of GO69 (who made no threats just factual explanations) but I closed it because as a 13th century work it's very clearly in the public domain. « If an issue does not have a snowball's chance in hell of being accepted by a certain process, there's no need to run it through the entire process. » Cheers, [[User:VIGNERON|VIGNERON]] ([[User talk:VIGNERON|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::::This is what GO69 said on my talk page "I point out your ludicrous conception of copyright to administrators such as User:VIGNERON (A), User:Pymouss (A), User:Jean-Frédéric (IA/A)." That's not just factual explanations of anything and it's clearly a threat to contact administrators from France to deal with the DRs. Which is exactly what you did. Regardless, "the snowball test", which you cited, is pretty clear that something has to be ran through the process resulting in a unanimous decision for it to qualify as a snowball. There was no process or unanimous decision here though because you closed the DR after a few hours without there being any discussion. It doesn't really matter though because there's a clear consensus on Commons that DRs should be open for at least 7 days anyway. 2 hours is certainly to early to close a deletion request. Especially if it's being done as a personal favor for another user. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 11:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::The full message of GO69 in French is here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adamant1&oldid=888477761
:::::One need to run through the whole process in order to « no need to run it through the entire process » ? That's kind of defeating the purpose.
:::::DR don't have to always to stay open 7 days (see [[Commons:Deletion_requests#Closing_discussions]]), it's quite common to close them before. It's more common for close when the result is delete (cf. the page for today [[Commons:Deletion_requests/2024/06/26]] with a few DR already closed) but it's not that uncommon when the result is keep.
:::::Me closing the DR was clearly not a « personal favor », Adamant1 is clearly not [[Commons:Assume good faith|assuming good faith]] and I take it as a [[Commons:No personal attacks|personal attack]].
:::::I never thought that keeping a 13th windows would cause so much problem. I'll let my admins colleague decide what to do...
:::::Cheers, [[User:VIGNERON|VIGNERON]] ([[User talk:VIGNERON|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 12:34, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::::::{{tq|DR don't have to always to stay open 7 days}} "In general, requests can be closed by an administrator after seven days. Deletion requests for obvious copyright violations can be closed earlier." The guideline literally says they can be closed after seven days unless it's an obvious copyright violation. Which it clearly wasn't. Nowhere does the guideline say it's OK to close a DR after two hours because someone pings you about it as a way to threaten and intimidate another user.
::::::{{tq|Me closing the DR was clearly not a « personal favor »}} GO69 contacted you on my talk page specifically for the sole purpose of having you deal with it, which you then did seconds later. On top you didn't even bother contacting me about it before hand and I've never interacted with you before this, the last time you dealt with DRs was 2 months ago, and you clearly didn't just stumble on this one randomly because you were already working in the area. So I don't know what else to call it besides a personal favor. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck%20test If it walks like a duck]. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 12:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:{{cmt}} I think that the DR closure by Vigneron is adequate. Restoring an old stained glass window doesn't create a new copyright. The purpose of restoration of such old works is that they appear as faithful as possible as they were at the time of creation. It usually include replacing some broken glasses and straightening the structure, not creating anything new. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:08, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::It really depends on what kind of restoration work was done and how much personal creative liberty the artist takes while they are doing it. Some restorations are 100% recreations of the original and some aren't. Like in a similar DR the "restoration" involved the artist replacing like 30% of the window with their own artwork. So it really depends on the situation, which is the whole point DRs to begin with. You can't really find a consensus about an edge case or something that isn't clear if a DR is closed 2 hours after it's opened and before people can comment on it. It really just defeats the whole purpose of the thing if administrators can come along and close DRs after a few hours due to a personal opinion that they are invalid or because someone asked them to. The way VIGNERON went about it was clearly wrong to regardless of the merits of the deletion request. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::In France, you can't change whatever you want when you restore a piece of art, in particular when it is enlisted as an heritage building. Trust me, I have experience regarding this topic. :)
:::Okay, there are cases where a change is done. It was actually a topic today at the national French radio ''France Inter'', about Notre-Dame-de-Paris. For Paris, it is clearly for political reasons and the guests where like "that shouldn't be done unless we have nothing to save".
:::But trust me (again), it is not the case for Dol-de-Bretagne, ''at all'': we are lucky to have proper 13th century stained-glass windows that have been preserved and restored using similar techniques (what Yann described).
:::<strong>[[User:Trizek|Trizek]] <sup><small style="border-bottom:1px solid #FFC919;">[[:fr:User talk:Trizek|from FR]]</small></sup></strong> 17:11, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Trizek}} This has nothing to do with buildings and the example I brought up to Yann were the artist doing the restoration added their own artwork to a window was in France. It's a separate issue then VIGNERON's behavior anyway. Maybe familiarize yourself with the actual issue before commenting next time. Otherwise it just risks sounding like an off-topic handwaving lecture. Someone's personal experience in a particular usually don't matter if it has nothing to do with the actual problem or what's being talked about. Thanks. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:42, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::Adamant1, you're playing hopscotch on the line between acceptable disagreement and personal attack. There was no need to respond to Trizek like that. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
::::::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]], regarding familiarizing with a topic, you can apply your (rudely written) advice to yourself. If you knew a bit about restoration and heritage, this unpleasant thread would have never existed. VIGNERON did the right thing, as he knows about this topic. Also, your uncivil comments towards me or others, and the tone you use, is not what should be the norm on wikis: you have the right to disagree, but not the way you convey your message.
::::::Thank you @[[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]]. You very well summarized how I feel after Adamant's comments. <strong>[[User:Trizek|Trizek]] <sup><small style="border-bottom:1px solid #FFC919;">[[:fr:User talk:Trizek|from FR]]</small></sup></strong> 07:36, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::::{{ping|Trizek}} No offense intended, but I'm just not a fan of people commenting on a topic that they don't know anything about and like I said, this has nothing to do with buildings. Nor for that matter "restoration and heritage." It's purely about VIGNERON's unacceptable way of handling things. I get told all the time this isn't the place for content disputes, which I mostly agree with. This is the place to discuss user behavior. That's it and your attempt to make this about the particulars of "restoration and heritage" or "buildings" when that's not what the complaint is about just came off like bad faithed derailing. There just isn't any consistency with this though. I can be repeatedly told not to make ANU complaints about content disputes and no one ever takes issue with that. But then apparently it's a rude personal for me to tell you that this has nothing to do with buildings or heritage. Go figure. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
*{{ping|The Squirrel Conspiracy}} Let me ask you this since you seem like a semi-reasonable person. If someone nominated some of my images for deletion and I lived in the same town as Jmabel (which is also were the images are of), would it be OK for me to ping him on the users talk page and ask him to "deal with the DR because it's ludicrous"? And as a follow up to that, would it then be OK for him to immediately close the DR after I asked him to without any discussion or other processes involved in the action? --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 08:16, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}
== Adamant1 again ==
{{discussion top|1=See my closing comment below. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)}}
Started the above nonsense. — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 22:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:I'm not really sure what "above nonsense" your referring to. Can you be more specific about what the actual issue is and provide some actual diffs instead of just making a pointlessly vague accusation? Also, your under no obligation to indulge me on this, but since we're here I'm kind of interested to know what your sudden interest and issue with my behavior lately is about since this is the second time recently that you've made vague accusations in an ANU complaint about my behavior and I don't really think it's a productive way to go about things. So really, what's the axe grinding about? --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:48, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]: You started the above section in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=888481712 this edit] after trying to have an image of a 13th century stained-glass window deleted. You always seem adamant about something. — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 23:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::And? I didn't know it was against the rules to report an administrator for abusing their privileges. It seems your just drama farming. To the degree that I might or might not be adamant things sometimes people like you continuing to stir up drama for no reason really doesn't help it. I'm not going to drop things if other people won't on their end and your the one continuing it with the vapid nonsense. Like repeatedly hijacking old discussions on my talk page after I've told you multiple times not to. It's a little laughable that your reporting me for something when you can't even be bothered to follow a simple request like that for some reason. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:12, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
::::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]: Also, you made a personal attack in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=888521682 this followon] and forgot to ping me. — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 23:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::I'm not obligated to ping someone when I reply to them Jeff. Regardless, I think it was a personal favor and I presented plenty of evidence for why I think that. You can disagree, but its not a personal attack to have a negative opinion about another users behavior. Especially in an ANU complaint. Otherwise you'd be blocked for opening this. ANU is exactly the place to raise those types of issues though and its not like I'm going around making the accusation anywhere else or out of context. So I don't really see what the issue is. I've certainly been the victim of much worse on here that people like you never seem to have an opinion on for some reason. Be my guest and report the person when I get attacked next time. Then maybe I'll care about your opinion. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
{{comment|Closing comment}} Jeff, this is the ''administrators' noticeboard''. Ergo, it is reasonable to expect that administrators already see the discussions happening there (and indeed, participate in them). Creating a thread on this noticeboard to highlight the thread literally right above it on the same noticeboard doesn't seem productive. You seem to have it out for Adamant1 - this is the second thread this month you've started targeting them IIRC - and the back and forth sniping is doing neither of you favors. I don't see any reason for admin action here, but I suggest you two either work out whatever is going on between you two or avoid each other. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:03, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
{{discussion bottom}}
== [[User:Георгий Долгопский]] ==
{{user5|Георгий Долгопский}} Uploading dozens of derivatives, violating [[COM:FOP Russia]], every year since 2013, despite a good deal of warnings and blocks. [[User:Quick1984|Quick1984]] ([[User talk:Quick1984|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
== RfA standards? ==
What, if any, standards are in place for RfA here on Commons? Are admin hopefuls tested at all about their understanding of the five pillars or other rules and policies they will be enforcing? After a recent experience, I am genuinely concerned about an admin's future use of the tools after they have shown they do not fully understand the assorted policies they are supposed to be enforcing. I have asked two involved admins for mediation on my talk page, which appears to have gone unanswered, so I am asking for help here. - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:48, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
:It doesn't seem like there are any outside of the intuitions of whomever votes in the RfA at the time. Which is unfortunate but also understandable. It does seem to present a problem though where admins are usually above reproach and unsactionable for their actions once they are given the previlage. See my recent ANU complaint about VIGNERON as an example. The only thing you can usually do is either open an ANU complaint which risks blow back and bandwagoning by other admins (again, see my ANU complaint above for an example) or file a full request for rights removel. The last one has almost zero chance of going anywhere though. So at the end of the day all you can really do is take the L and deal with being a tool of someone elses power trip. Or just be an ever increasing passive agressive asshole until you get blocked because no one on here really actually gives a shit about civility and just plays favorites. That's my go to strategy for open source, "community" based projects like this one. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]: I do not agree that admins are some kind of superior class of users. It should not be. What Adolphus79 has forgotten to mention, though, is that this seemingly innocent thread they've started has a name within. I have given all kinds of explanations regarding their blocking and they do not accept them. Fair enough. I don't get though why they are restoring obvious personal attacks by some IP users on their talk page, even reverting me. I'll take Jameslwoodward's advice to keep away from this user, so (despite I have already said at least three times) this will be my last comment on them. Making a personal vendetta-stic campagin even after I apologized for my mistake is not fun. [[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]] ([[User talk:Bedivere|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 23:49, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]]: were the attacks on them (in which case I think it is their prerogative to decide they would rather keep them visible) or on others (in which case what you are describing would certainly be a problem, tantamount to making the attack themself)? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
::::I'm referring to these [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889408894 "non-vandalism IP edits for context"] (Adolphus' words) they restored, which included: "what a pathetic use of adimnship". [[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]] ([[User talk:Bedivere|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:45, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::Once again, Bedivere's statement is not quite accurate, and they are once again showing that they do not understand the policies involved. The [[COM:WIAPA|"personal attack"]] they are referring to is the IP's comment [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889425128 "what a pathetic use of adinmship, as an unrelated user, you should've kept quiet"], clearly not a personal attack. Also, I did not restore that comment after Bedivere removed it (from my talk page, mind you), I only restored the later edit from the IP after being blocked as a sockpuppet, saying they are not me, and asking Bedivere to do a checkuser. - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
::{{ping|Bedivere}} That's certainly the attitude a lot of them have and they constantly back each other in disputes no matter who's actually right. I've been pretty active on here for a long time now and can't think of a single instance where an administrator was either blocked, otherwise sanctioned, or threated with a sanction for their behavior. Not to say it's never happened but it's certainly extremely rare and the whole thing has a chilling effect that needs to be accounted for here.
::Most of their actions are done in far flung areas where users aren't going to report them because of fear of retaliation or just because it has no chance of going anywhere if they do. That was certainly my experience when Yann unfairly blocked a couple of years ago as part of a personal dispute. Realistically who's going to report an administrator for their actions after an unfair block, threat of one on their talk page, or other bullying behavior by an admin in an obscure area that has a low turnout to begin with? It's just obfuscation all the way down anyway. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::Yes, but then Bedivere decided to try it with an 18-year veteran of enwiki who clearly knows the rules and policies better than they do. Administrators are held accountable for their actions on enwiki, and there is Oversight and Arbitration. I expect the administrators here to be held to at least some standard, not just swinging that hammer wildly making decisions based purely on their own opinion or rules. I worry how many others Bedivere has done this to in the last 4 months since becoming an admin, that didn't know the policies well enough to stand up and say "wait a minute!". I worry about future new users this admin might come in contact if they are allowed to continue like this unchecked. - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:40, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
::::I don't know the technicalities of this particular case since you haven't provided any background information, but I've generally found Bedivere to pretty fair and knowledgeable in the short time they have been an admin. Plus they are still getting use to the role. So there's inevitably going to be some mistakes until their fully acquainted with it. I think it's reasonable to assume good faith and give them the benefit of the doubt here. Especially considering the lack of evidence. I do think there's a larger issue with admin behavior in general though that should be dealt with, but this probably isn't the right forum for it. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:52, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::I tried to assume good faith, when I was finally unblocked, I made a very [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889350775 clear and precise request] on my talk page, you can then see that Bedivere refused to respond with any discussion on policy, only saying [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889358264 "the whole point for the block still stands"]. Every new comment after that, they changed the reason for the block, personal attacks, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=next&oldid=889361571 "attempting to start an edit war" (with one edit)], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=next&oldid=889364886 incivility], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889366059 copyvio], each disproven by the policy itself. Never once did Bedivere want to discuss policy, never once did they quote any policy as a reason for the block. They even blocked me from my talk page without discussion or warning, so I couldn't try to discuss this with them or post an unblock request (I couldn't even email them, had to email another admin for help). My [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Adolphus79&diff=prev&oldid=889423934 final edit before coming here] summarizes it quite well, "That means.... when you blocked me... all you really had me for was one single edit of openly admitted vandalism, uploading this free piece of artwork over the other image (which you deleted instead of reverting the change)... one single use of the word "bullshit" on AN (which you also revdel'd for some reason instead of just reverting)... and me calling your actions "bullshit" on my talk page (for which my talk page rights were removed)? I wanna talk to your manager... right now...". - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:23, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::::There's two things here that I think you need to reflect on. 1. You committed vandalism of your own admittance. 2. You swore at an admin multiple times. Full stop that's a blocker offense no matter what other circumstances exist at the time. You don't go into a court room and curse out the judge. And I say that as someone who has an issue in that area myself. I'm constantly having to edit swearing out of my comments. Right or wrong you lose any ability to make an argument for your position after that though. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:02, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
::::::: I was about to say pretty much what Adamant1 just said. Going by ''your own description'' here, if someone came to [[COM:AN/U]], described what you just described, and I saw that it was accurate, then a 3-day block is about what I would have done, too. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 02:40, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::In the end, I believe [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=889437620 your original response] is most accurate, and at least the business I originally came for has been handled. Thank you Commons, it has been an experience that I have learned a lot from and will take with me to share with others... - [[User:Adolphus79|Adolphus79]] ([[User talk:Adolphus79|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:38, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] I have made my best efforts at doing the right thing. I have made mistakes, for sure. I have apologized. I tried my best at explaining Adolphus what was wrong with their edits and what led to their original three-day block. I don't really know what do they really want. I just really want to move on and would expect them to move on too. [[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]] ([[User talk:Bedivere|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:47, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
== Rare behavior ==
{{user3|Zeus2107}} continues copyvios upload even after warnings and blocks. Media that were uploaded by this user seems not own work, but copy from various sources and some looks like AI images and cropped and AI enlarge, and EXIF does not give enough data. I'd suggest to delete all uploads. [[User:AntanO|Ant<font color="red">a</font>n]][[User talk:AntanO|<font color="red"><big>'''O'''</big></font>]] 13:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
:{{d}} Blocked for 3 months. Please check their uploads. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:15, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
::The user blanked the page. Is it appropriate? I have tagged some images for deletion nomination, but they should have been tagged for copyvios. [[User:~AntanO4task|~AntanO4task]] ([[User talk:~AntanO4task|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:43, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
== Adamant1 and deletion discussions ==
{{atop|Closing with a two weeks block, see rational below. --[[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)}}
[[User:Adamant1]] has made a habit out of indiscriminately nominating every single file in a category for deletion, particularly if the category is AI-related, under vague rationales along the lines of “not educational”. They also seem to have a complete lack of respect and/or understanding of [[COM:INUSE]], both disregarding it in the first place and trying to argue it doesn’t apply after the fact. Examples of behavior:
*{{comment}} People are free to read through the multiple discussions on my talk page and the DRs that Dronebogus has linked to. The fact is that the same 2 or 3 users repeatedly messaged me in an extremely rude, lecturing way about something that I explained to them multiple times and refused to get the point that the guideline has exceptions for the "in use" clause. {{ping|JPxG}} in particular repeatedly tried to act like I nominated the images for deletion because I just dislike AI-generated artwork and think it's "low quality." When I told them multiple times that the quality of the images has nothing to do with the DRs.
::Nowhere did I say in any DR what-so-ever that they have anything to do with the quality of the artwork or my personal opinions about the quality. Yet {{ping|JPxG}} was clearly incapable of getting the point and dropping it. I'll also note that I told of them multiple times that I encourage them to ask about it on the village and get whatever they think isn't clear in the guidelines clarified. Which they refused to do. Instead continuing to message about it in an extremely lecturing rude way across multiple talk pages. This is 100% a made up issue though. I don't have a "habit of disregarding [[COM:INUSE]]." In fact rarely, if ever, nominate in use files for deletion. Except in extremely rare instances that I go out of my way to explain. Again, people like the commenters above (including {{ping|Dronebogus}} are just being opportunists and are just refusing to get the point that there are exceptions to the "in use" policy. Again, I encourage them or anyone else to get the specifics of when and how it applies or not clarified on the Village Pump. They clearly don't actually care about though outside of harassing me because I didn't just a bend a knee to their nonsense. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:50, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
::: How do you justify comments like [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AAdamant1&diff=890518883&oldid=890517885] and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons%3ADeletion_requests%2FFiles_in_Category%3AAI-generated_toys&diff=890545058&oldid=890523167]? I can't see any way in which they're acceptable according to our regular policies, they're far from exceptional for you and they would normally be seen as block-worthy. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 21:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
::::Frustration over him and others refusing to get the point and drop it. That happens sometimes. It was a multiple day thing across multiple conversations that he and the other people involved refused to drop and get the point about. The first comment was also made on my talk page. Where I'm under the understanding that we have more leeway to express ourselves. I wouldn't have made that comment anywhere else, but it's my talk page and I can say what I want on it. That's on him for engaging in the discussion in an extremely rude way and then refusing to get the point. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 22:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
== Repeated insults, threats and personal comments in DRs by Dronebogus ==
{{atop|No admin action required. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 20:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)}}
Just to quote a few of the many insults and personal comments from {{ping|Dronebogus}} out there.
::::What does someone's personal urge to report a user have to do with that users' problematic behavior? If it's really an issue, just report them. There's no reason to go off about how your thinking about doing it though. Maybe it's just me, at least IMO the place to have a discussion about another users behavior is an ANU complaint. Talk pages of DRs aren't usually the proper place for that or resolving personal disputes. Not to say I haven't used them that way, but it inherently does distract from the DR and get in the way of the normal process. Like if someone was committing vandalism by way of a DR I'd just report them for it. I'm not going to waste my time pointing a finger at them well I go off about how I'm considering opening an ANU complaint about it. Otherwise it just doesn't seem like a genuine issue. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 14:18, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
*{{comment}} Adamant1 is now blocked for two weeks per above. I think this discussion should be formally closed without action as a frivolous revenge report. [[User:Dronebogus|Dronebogus]] ([[User talk:Dronebogus|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
{{abottom}}
== {{user|Knowledgebyme}} ==
:He have never participated in any deletion request nor have he ever responded on his talk page regarding the copyright issues [[User:Trade|Trade]] ([[User talk:Trade|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
::{{d}} Blocked for a month. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 13:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
== {{user|Crimsonalfred2022}} again ==
User has previously been blocked for copyvio in December ([https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Blocks_and_protections/Archive_37#User:Crimsonalfred2022]), was reported again in January ([https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Archive_95#Uploads_by_Crimsonalfred2022]), they have plenty of warnings and notices on their talk page going back to 2022 ([https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crimsonalfred2022&action=history&offset=&limit=500]), and they were indefinitely blocked from Wikipedia on 22 June for repeated copyvios there ([https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crimsonalfred2022&diff=prev&oldid=1230412621]). Since then (i.e. even since 22 June), they've continued to mass-upload images with dubious licensing information, all of which are clearly grabbed from somewhere on the web. (They're likely also evading their Wikipedia block through IP edits which are adding some of these files to Wikipedia; see evidence [[:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Crimsonalfred2022|here]].)
In the recent uploads, the source is labeled "pinterest" (without a link), author is claimed to be "unknown", and license is tagged as [[Template:PD-Egypt|PD-Egypt]], but no evidence is provided to support any of this. Examples include: [[:File:Ayman Younes (Zamalek SC).jpg]], [[:File:Zamalek - Cairo (1972).jpg]], [[:File:Farouk Gaafar 1981.jpg]], [[:File:Ashraf Kasem (1984).jpg]], etc. Even if the stated dates of the photos are correct (no obvious way to confirm this), my reading of [[Template:PD-Egypt|PD-Egypt]] is that they are still too recent to be in PD in the United States and thus do not belong on Commons.
Some of their older uploads – images of old actors and movie posters, etc – are tagged as PD, but they've put themselves as "author" and the "source" appears to be their own Flickr account (Crimson2022 Alfred), which is merely doing the same thing as their Commons account. At best, the author attribution is wrong, and at worse, it's impossible once again to confirm the copyright status of the original work. Examples: [[:File:Abdel Halim Hafez.jpg]], [[:File:Bahiga Hafez.jpg]], [[:File:Kham El-Khalili (1976).jpg]] (this one even has a mysterious watermark in the upper right corner), etc.
The user has 200+ uploads, so I don't have the capacity to investigate, tag, and/or nominate for deletion all their problematic uploads, but this looks like a pattern of long-term ignorance of [[Commons:Licensing]]. [[User:R Prazeres|R Prazeres]] ([[User talk:R Prazeres|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 00:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
:{{cmt}} There are some problematic uploads, but the information provided is better than by many other users. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
== [[User:Joanmonito65]] ==
All of Joanmonito65's uploads are copyright violations and give no indication of free licensing [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListFiles/Joanmonito65&ilshowall=1]. They uploaded two files ([[:File:"$456,000 Squid Game in Real Life!" Thumbnail (Original thumbnail).jpg|1]], [[:File:"$456,000 Squid Game in Real Life!" MrBeast's video.jpg|2]]) to supersede [[:en:File:Mr Beast Squid Game YouTube Thumbnail.jpg|the free-use version on enwiki]], then reverted me three times on enwiki after I tried to remove it. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=$456,000_Squid_Game_in_Real_Life!&action=history]. They reverted me after I tried to speedy delete the two files on commons. They have provided no edit summaries and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joanmonito65&action=history blanked] my talk page notice on enwiki. They were also previously warned [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Joanmonito65&diff=prev&oldid=890830152 here] for their copyright vios. Thanks, [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|PerfectSoundWhatever]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 05:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
:Deleted all their uploads and left them a final warning. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 05:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
::I appreciate it. However, the file has been re-uploaded ([[:File:"$456,000 Squid Game in real life!" MrBeast's thumbnail.jpg|file]]) [[User:PerfectSoundWhatever|PerfectSoundWhatever]] ([[User talk:PerfectSoundWhatever|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 15:33, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
:::{{d}} Blocked for a month by The Squirrel Conspiracy. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
::::{{d|Extended to indef}} per evidence on en.wiki that it's a VoA. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 01:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
:{{cmt}} Now also globally locked. I deleted the user page. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 07:51, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
== Ominae ==
* User: {{user3|Ominae}}
* Reasons for reporting: For years, I have been railing against incomplete deletion requests, which are caused by malformed use of {{t2|Delete}} templates and lack of follow-through, and which are populating subcats of [[:Category:Incomplete deletion requests]]. This problem spurred the creation of that category [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Incomplete_deletion_requests&oldid=4256527 17:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)], over 17 years ago, and my tracking of it [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jeff_G./Top_Links&diff=512622471&oldid=511644567 18:16, 14 November 2020 (UTC)], over three years ago. As a precedent, {{noping|ColorfulSmoke}} [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User:ColorfulSmoke was blocked 17:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)] by {{u|Mdaniels5757}} with an expiration time of 3 days (account creation blocked) for "Continuing to make malformed deletion requests despite repeated instructions; not responding to concerns on talk page", pursuant to the discussion archived at [[Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 29#ColorfulSmoke]], and {{noping|Alex Neman}} [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AAlex+Neman was blocked 16:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)] by {{noping|Yann}} with an expiration time of 1 month (account creation blocked) for "Continuing to make malformed deletion requests despite repeated instructions; not responding to concerns on talk page" pursuant to the discussion archived at [[Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 34#Alex Neman]]. Ominae made [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:DFAC_vans&diff=next&oldid=753951311 this edit] 06:03, 25 April 2023 (UTC): omitting subpage, transclusion, notice to the page creator, year, month, and day. I reminded them of their mistake and warned them in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ominae&diff=prev&oldid=753994985 this edit 05:50, 25 April 2023 (UTC)] after two previous archived reminders and followed on six minutes later. They neglected to respond per [[User talk:Ominae/Archive 3#Warning]], and made such an edit again in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3APatch_C.jpg&diff=892002531&oldid=637381342 these edits 12:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)]: again omitting subpage, transclusion, notice to the page creator, year, month, and day. Please block them.
— 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 14:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
::{{not done}} I believe I've said this before when you've brought other users here for the same reason, but I don't see how this kind of thing raises to the level of warranting a block. This is clearly a user trying to G7 their own upload and not knowing the proper template. Commons can be very obtuse, is most users' second project, and is a multi-language project with a huge amount of documentation only in English or English and a few European languages. I'm more than happy to extend grace to people for not using the correct template when they're genuinely trying to contribute to the project, as seems to be the case here. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:05, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
:::@[[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]]: Yann and Mdaniels5757 appear to have different opinions. Also, the user uploaded the file in 2022, what gives them the right to G7 a redirect to it? — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 02:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
::::I have deleted the redirect as it was both unused and there is no harm in deleting it at all. Yes, the user should be requesting deletion as the procedure is, but although badly formed, intention was clear and it was easier to just replace with a {{tl|speedy|G7}} tag and warning them once again. They could have possibly just forgotten your previous message, which was over a year ago. [[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]] ([[User talk:Bedivere|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 02:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
:::::@[[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]]: Ok, I warned them again. Please don't forget that you yourself [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:AxelHH blocked AxelHH 05:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)] for "Continuing to make malformed deletion requests despite repeated instructions; not responding to concerns on talk page". My previous instructions (also not responded to) were archived at [[User talk:Ominae/Archive 3#Category:Toophan MRAP]] and [[User talk:Ominae/Archive 3#Reminder]]. — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 03:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
== Ыфь77 ==
{{user5|Ыфь77}}
User responded to [[User:Jeff G.]]'s perfectly reasonable request not to make malformed deletion requests with an accusation "Я обвиняю Jeff G. в преследовании по политическим мотивам. Прошу оградить меня от его нападок", which according to Google Translate means "I accuse Jeff G. of political persecution. Please protect me from his attacks." The accusation is entirely off-base. I cannot imagine how this could be "political persecution": it is a simple matter of telling the user to follow Commons' processes correctly, in a matter where Ыфь77's behavior can really only be considered either ignorant, negligent, incompetent, or (less likely) malicious.
I'm not sure what I want to see happen here, but at the very least if [[User:Ыфь77]] won't withdraw their charge of political persecution they should be blocked for a personal attack. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:12, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
:{{Done}} blocked one day. If they continue doing these accusations, groundless in my opinion, should the future blocks be longer. [[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]] ([[User talk:Bedivere|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 19:33, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
::@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] and @[[User:Bedivere|Bedivere]]: Thanks. I am not persecuting anyone except Vladimir Putin, who appears to be using the Russian military to aggressively wage war on the people of Ukraine without good reason. My signature and user page reflect my opinion of Mr. Putin. This has nothing to do with Commons users. — 🇺🇦<span style="font-size:115%;background:#FFA">[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]]</span> ツ<small> please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]</small>🇺🇦 02:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
:::Not that I am supporting disruptive edits but I can see why [[User:Jeff G.]]'s signature could be disconcerting to a Russian user. [[User:Commander Keane|Commander Keane]] ([[User talk:Commander Keane|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 05:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
== メイド理世 ==
{{user|メイド理世}} uploaded lots of copyright protected content, see their talk page. After I tag this photo, [[:File:Nanjing, 1 July 2024 (109).jpg]], they cropped out the non-copyvio one and just keep the copyvio character. <br>
Per their discussion on [[Commons:Deletion_requests/File:28码脚型飞机杯（右脚）_(cropped).jpg]], [[Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:後藤ひとり.jpg,_File:山田リョウ、後藤ひとり.jpg,_File:山田リョウ.jpg]] and current behaviour, I strictly suspect this one is clearly [[:en:WP:CIR|CIR]], both for using English and learning about copyright laws. [[User:Lemonaka|Lemonaka]] ([[User talk:Lemonaka|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 09:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
== Roberto9191 ==
Created account and immediately promoted 16 Quality Images (which was detected and votes stricken). Most of the falsely promoted images were poor-quality pictures by Marwenwafi. [[User:Plozessor|Plozessor]] ([[User talk:Plozessor|<span class="signature-talk">{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}</span>]]) 04:10, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
|