Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems: Difference between revisions - Wikimedia Commons

Article Images

Tags: Replaced Manual revert Reverted

Tag: Rollback

Line 1: Line 1:

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

{{User:MiszaBot/config

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|archive = Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive %(counter)d

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|algo = old(7d)

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|counter = 109

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|maxarchivesize = 250K

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|minthreadsleft = 0

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|minthreadstoarchive = 1

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

|key = 434e13d517484f0c8c2c823c4f08dc9b

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

}}

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

* Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

* Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

* Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (<code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

* Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). <code><nowiki>{{subst:</nowiki>[[Template:Discussion-notice|Discussion-notice]]<nowiki>|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}}</nowiki></code> is available for this.

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

* 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.

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

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

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

__TOC__

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

== [[User:Kallerna]] ==

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

This is to ask for review recent (sysop) actions by {{U|Kallerna}}.

[[File:Angry Birds Stella Cinematic Trailer.jpg|frame]]

a) I had blocked {{U|Karelj}} for a duration of 3 days for uncivil comments. Latest was [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Trees_in_ICM_on_Myrstigen_hiking_trail,_Brastad_2.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=824517569 this one], which comes as very disrespectful towards the photographer, however Karelj is well known for other disrespectful FPC "reviews" such as [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:M%C3%BCnster,_LWL-Museum_f%C3%BCr_Kunst_und_Kultur,_Lichtkunstwerk_%22Silberne_Frequenz%22_--_2022_--_4266.jpg&diff=719607763&oldid=719482120 this one], for which I already had [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Karelj&diff=prev&oldid=719775236 warned him], which he opted to ignore completely.

b) Several users agreed on obvious incivility of such comments, such as: {{U|Aristeas}}, {{U|SHB2000}}, {{U|XRay}}, {{U|Radomianin}}.

c) Nonetheless, Kallerna came "out of nothing" and unblocked the user -- completely out of process, without seeking any discussion, neither with me nor on Admins' noticeboard, also there wasn't even an unblock request on Karelj's talk page.

d) The [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3AKarelj unblock comment] was "''Groundless block [...] Silencing user who do not agree with you?''", which I find <s>libelous</s> obviously false and uncivil, as neither did I ever discuss with Karelj in any sort of disagreement, nor did I vote or otherwise comment in [[Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trees in ICM on Myrstigen hiking trail, Brastad 2.jpg|the same FPC nomination]] whatsoever.

e) Similarly poor was [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=prev&oldid=824995647 their comment on my talk page] ("''Please do not block users who do not share the same views as you''", etc.).

f) Further discussion on my talk page with Kallerna on this matter [[User talk:A.Savin#Karelj|turned as useless]].

g) Therefore, Kallerna's behaviour should be reviewed in terms of: 1) incivility -- due to false claim of myself blocking a user because of contentual disagreement; and 2) obvious violation of [[Commons:Blocking policy]], in particular: "''To avoid wheel warring, another administrator should lift a block only if there is consensus to do so, even if there is no clear consensus in favor of the original block''".

The sysop Kallerna I'm going to notify on this thread.

Thanks --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 22:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

:+1 to what A.Savin said. I also find Karelj's refusal to communicate a major red flag – not just for the above but also for "But the image here looks, like from child, who receivd his first photoaparate and learns, how to operate with it". Kallerna should have discussed this beforehand, instead of unilaterally unblocking and making spurious accusations. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::I am not going to get involved here, as I am already part of the discussions about incivility on that nomination page. I just wanted to make people aware that Kallerna is one of only 3 people opposing this FPC nomination (which has more than 20 support votes), so when judging the possibility of a conflict on interest one should consider this fact. --[[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

:::This – thanks for mentioning it, as that too hasn't been mentioned before. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:56, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::Hi, I agree that 1. Karelj's comments are quite rude, if not disrespectful, 2. Kallerna's unblock is out of process. If you don't agree with a block, please discuss it instead wheel warring. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:27, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::: Hi Yann, thanks for your comments. I have explained my actions in the user talk pages of [[User talk:A.Savin#Karelj|A.Savin]] and [[User_talk:Karelj|Karelj]]. There is also a lot of conversation about the possible rudeness of Karelj in the [[Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Trees in ICM on Myrstigen hiking trail, Brastad 2.jpg|nom page]]. I reverted the block due to it being inadequat, as pointed by fellow admistrator [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKarelj&diff=825251450&oldid=825220599 Christian Ferrer]. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 09:18, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::{{re|Kallerna}} Would you also like to explain your possible conflict of interest as mentioned by Kritzolina above? --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:21, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::{{re|Kallerna}} I wouldn't have blocked Karelj at this point, but your hastily unblocking is nevertheless an issue. It sends the wrong message. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::: I agree with you, I should have contacted another administrator here and let someone else revert the block. However, the user had been wrongfully blocked for two days at that point, so I did not want to wait any longer. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 14:22, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::A showcase example how ''not'' to address a complaint about one's own behaviour. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::Kallerna, if you snarkily try to dodge attempting my question (or A.Savin's) by Dec 2, I '''will''' start a nomination to desysop you. Sysops need to be held accountable to their actions; not answering questions raised towards you about your potential misuse of tools is a red flag and is unsysop-like behaviour. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::::{{cmt}} I would support that. Kallerna is good photographer, but definitely not good for the sysop team. As a (possibly offtopic) side-note, look at their talk page (the QI promotions). They have uploaded masses of images of contemporary buildings in South Korea where there is [[COM:FOP South Korea|no FoP]]. Many have been deleted already. A sysop should have at least a very basic knowledge what to upload on Commons and what not. Kallerna seems not to have this knowledge. And this arrogancy is the final straw. Thanks --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 13:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::::{{ping|Kallerna}} courtesy ping – 2 days left to answer my/{{u|A.Savin}}'s question before I will start a desysop nom. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:19, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::1 day left, Kallerna. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:14, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::: Hi, I've been travelling the last week all over Europe (at the moment at airport) and have not seen these comments. I'm sorry, but I do not know why you have this motivation to de-admin me. All I did was unblocking wrongfully blocked user. You are not a admin, and you are not involved in the matter - I did not have any reason to communicate with you. I'm here to contribute to the project, not to discuss with trolls. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 08:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::::@[[User:Kallerna|Kallerna]] Are you calling [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] a troll here? [[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:52, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::::Wow, that's some serious baseless accusations right there, Kallerna. "I do not know why you have this motivation to de-admin me" – I want Commons to be a project with sysops that has sysops who know how to use their tools properly. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::::::Currently both sides seems to be rather over provocative. You all should cool down and try not to the escalate situation. -- [[User:Zache|Zache]] ([[User talk:Zache|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::::::It would be useful to know exactly how I'm provocative, however at least I didn't insult a long-term contributor and Wikivoyage admin a troll. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:20, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::::::::In this case you were from start threatening with consequenses [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=next&oldid=824995647], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=prev&oldid=825029652]. From that things did go in couple days from mishandled blocking/unblocking to deadmin vote. However, being admin not about competition, but co-operation and i would say that more fruitful course of action would have been just to explain why you gave the block and ask why it was lifted without any threatening. So that there would be understanding between admins why they did what they did. The discussion could have taken so much time that original three days block would have been irrelevant, but it doesn't afaik really matter. If initially blocked user continues bad behaviour there would have been new blocks because that, if not then problem was solved anyway. --[[User:Zache|Zache]] ([[User talk:Zache|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 19:05, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::"Silencing user who do not agree with you" is clearly disrespectful, uncivil comment, especially given the fact that it's also false. Kallerna, you still didn't response how come that I'm "silencing users". This block log comment should be hidden at the very least. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 13:25, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::Could a third admin please hide [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=block&user=Kallerna&page=User%3AKarelj&wpdate=&tagfilter=&subtype=&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist this comment]? Thanks --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::: {{d}} I hid the edit summary. [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

::::::Thanks. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 17:28, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

:::::::{{re|A.Savin|Kritzolina|Yann|Abzeronow}} Since it's December 2 and {{u|Kallerna}} did not respond, I started a desysop nomination which can be found at [[Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship)]]. Apologies in advance for any formatting errors (I'm new to this process). Pinging everyone involved in this discussion. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:04, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::I understand that one may see the edit summary as insensitive, but might it be worth keeping it public for the duration of the de-adminship discussion be worthwhile so that the log can be seen by participants? {{re|A.Savin|Abzeronow}} Would either of you have an objection to this sort of thing? — [[User:Red-tailed hawk|Red-tailed hawk]] [[User talk:Red-tailed hawk|(nest)]] 03:23, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::Yes, temporarily unhiding is no problem. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 03:47, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::I'd have no problem with temporarily unhiding if it is necessary. [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:34, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::{{done}} Per request/consent. [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 01:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

:I have closed the de-admin request as inadmissible per policy. [[Commons:Administrators/De-adminship]] states: "Please note this process should only be used for serious offenses in which there seems to be some consensus for removal;". From the above discussion I see nothing that can be called consensus. Personal comment: There should no room for uncivilty, there should be more blocks for uncivilty, and such blocks shall not be removed. Supporting a hostile environment should not be seen as acceptable conduct of anybody, especially not of an admin. --[[User:Krd|Krd]] 14:53, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

::Wow, Commons really lets sysops get away with such misuse of tools – I thought it was pretty clear from this discussion that Kallerna's behaviour was inappropriate. Oh well... --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:45, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Well, we can of course accuse Kallerna of lifting the block and ignoring questions on purpose, but we can hardly accuse anyone here on Commons of ''not'' having commented in this thread. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 04:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::::Yeah, I'll admit I severely overreacted when I wrote that comment above. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:13, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

::I think A. Savin hit the nail right on the head in the discussion above: «''{{teal|Kallerna is good photographer, but definitely not good for the sysop team.}}''». Well, sure. I mean, Kallerna might also be an excellent driver, a keen model railroader, or a loving spouse — but it doesn’t matter. Being a good photographer is only relevant for Commons in as much as they publish their good photography with a suitable license. It doesn’t follow necessarily that a good photographer would also be a good curator of photographs and other media, let alone a good sysop thereof. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Tuvalkin|✇]] 12:55, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

::For the record, I think A. Savin's block was harsh but within bounds of policy as Karelj was being disruptive by their behavior of making disrespectful comments. Kallerna's unblock was totally against policy, sends the wrong message as Yann said above, and I'm also concerned that they show no contrition for the unblock or the lack of communication beforehand. They also have not addressed that their COI in the matter. I also concur with Krd that we cannot support a hostile environment. [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:17, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{ping|A.Savin}} I would only suggest that the original post needs reworded per COM:NLT. There are many ways we can express our view without using legal terms like libel. [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 21:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

***Corrected. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 02:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

**Having had a bit more time to look into the matter... No, one admin should not reverse another's actions without discussion unless it is ''egregious'' misuse of the tools that leaves room for little interpretation, something of the type that you start looking for a Steward for an emergency desysoping. I would expect an acknowledgement of this standard as a ''bare minimum'' from {{U|Kallerna}}. Having said that, it's a little on-the-nose to be arguing over incivility and the response from {{u|A.Savin}} is "[https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=prev&oldid=825261400 bla bla]", which very much comes off in text as being frustrated and not super keen on discussing the issue on equanimous terms. [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 22:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

In broader terms: undoing a block is almost never (maybe literally never?) an emergency. Unless I'm missing something, in this case the block (whether justified or not) had one more day to run! Commons can do without any individual contributor, myself included, for a day. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 22:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

:{{ping|Kallerna}} Since you said you were travelling (see above), I waited before writing this. Hopefully you can answer now.

:Do you maintain you position, i.e. that your unblocking of Karelj was justified? Also do you apologize for calling SHB2000 a troll? Thanks, [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

::+1 [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 13:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

:::+2 --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:12, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

::::+3. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:46, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

* I've been informed privately that Kallerna will be indisposed until at least the end of the holidays. I would suggest that we have a touch of the spirit of the season and recognize that this can be resolved, but that waiting a touch doesn't necessarily constitute a crisis. [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 20:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

** {{ping|GreenMeansGo}} that's fine with me if Kallerna is genuinely taking a break; there is nothing emergent here if they are not actively using their admin privileges. When they are back, though, this needs to be on the radar. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

** I agree with Jmabel here, there's no rush to this. Hopefully, they will answer questions after they come back from their break. [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:48, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

**:I agree – a lot of people will be on break in the next 3 weeks, myself included. As long as they answer our questions and apologise to A.Savin, that's good with me. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

***:Agree with Krd that these tactics more look like "ducking away" rather than like real lack of possibility to respond. Nowadays, even when being on travel (as for most regions of the world esp. Europe), you don't have to stay offline all the time. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 15:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

***:* {{ping|A.Savin}} it's not a matter of being unable to access the net, it's a matter of someone choosing to take a break, which is an entirely reasonable thing for someone to do. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:02, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

***::::Yeah, very reasonable, especially if there are pending complaints about you and you don't have any arguments left in your defence, except "I don't discuss with trolls". --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 02:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

***:::::I agree. I'm only a little sympathetic because often I don't have internet access while travelling and plan these months beforehand, but I want a definitive date from Kallerna. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

***::::::But {{u|Kallerna}}, could you give us a rough date of when you will be back? --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

***::::::* {{ping|SHB2000}} Given that Kallerna literally hasn't edited any WMF project since 3 December, it is very unlikely that they will even see your question until they are back. Certainly they are doing no harm while absent. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 05:01, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::: As this seems to take indeed longer, I'm adding a 30 day archive blocker in code here -> (). Best regards --[[User:Schlurcher|Schlurcher]] ([[User talk:Schlurcher|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 19:53, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::On enwiki it's sometimes labeled "[[:en:Wikipedia:ANI flu|ANI flu]]". [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] ([[User talk:DMacks|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::I laughed my ass off when I read that article (and found [[w:Wikipedia:Oops Defence]]). [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

'''Counterpart'''

Hi everyone, it seems that my answer is needed here. First of all, I want to apologize everyone involved this waste of time - this is not the way we should spend time on Commons. I also apologize SHB2000 for my choice of words, I should have not called you a troll. I however still wonder your motives to use so much energy on this matter: I suggest focusing on more positive and constructive matters.

So to the case here. Karelj made a controversial comment, and he was blocked by A.Savin. Not everybody thought the comment was evil

[https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Trees_in_ICM_on_Myrstigen_hiking_trail,_Brastad_2.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=825217277]. I unblocked Karelj after two days of block, and did it without discussing about the matter or asking someone else to do the unblocking. This was obviously a mistake. However, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Karelj&diff=prev&oldid=825251450 some users agreed on lifting the block] and Karelj did only beneficial contributions to Commons while unblocked.

Then I guess we are in the actual start of the problems discussed here. I told A.Savin that I lifted the block, and got quite [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=next&oldid=825260550 rude replies] (and also [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:A.Savin&diff=next&oldid=825253179 removal of comments]). I did not want to waste everyones time, and I was passive. This was another mistake.

I see it rather odd that most participants here see controversial block with rude comments less harmful to the project than unblocking active editor. And I also want to emphasize that I do not agree with Karelj on most matters - I only reverted the block because I thought it was inadequate. And like said I should have not done it without discussing about it first. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 09:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:No satisfactory statement for me. The fact that this "waste of time" (which is actually true) had to be gone through we owe only you, Kallerna.

:''And I also want to emphasize that I do not agree with Karelj on most matters''... Let me reveal a secret -- I *do* agree with Karelj on most matters (at least on FPC), I just don't find it okay at all the way he writes it down, including shallow and often disrespectful comments, poor English, etc. So, here we go again: how did the block have anything to do with disagreement, as you noted in the unblock comment? {{U|Kallerna}}, may I finally have an answer please? --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:38, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:: I see, that was also incorrect assumption by me, I'm sorry. The comment was unnecessary. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 15:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Hm, I am a bit confused by what you think is rude and what is acceptable on Commons, [[User:Kallerna|Kallerna]]. On a scale of 1 to 10 - how rude was A.Savin's reply to you after lifting the block? And how would you place Karelj's comment that led to the block on that scale? [[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:::: Both are low on your scale, and either of those comments is worth of blocking the user. It is also noteworthy that the photographer herself was not offended, but the professionally offended around. The reason why I mention the coarseness of A.Savin is purely due to the fact he blocked another user due rude comments. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 04:40, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::::: {{ping|Kallerna}} I cannot even guess what "the professionally offended around" means. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 06:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::Hmm, I undestand it in this context like this: Other people in the community, those who are more sensitive or vigilant about offensive content, took issue with the comments. -- [[User:Zache|Zache]] ([[User talk:Zache|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::And where do you see a comment like "professionally offended" on this scale? I actually would love to hear numbers ... [[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:59, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:I also don't see any satisfactory statement. You explicitly pointed out that you were not personally involved, but you are also not an admin who is generally active in blocking or unblocking users. What was your business in removing this block, overriding the rationale of an admin who is generally active in blocking or unblocking users? --[[User:Krd|Krd]] 09:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:: Blocking an active user should not be made without discussion. Default position should be unblock, not block? Generally I find it again odd that blocking an active user without discussion is ok, but unblocking is not. You are correct that I am not a active admin, but I have done my share of blocking vandals in other projects. [[User:Kallerna|—kallerna]] ([[User talk:Kallerna|talk]]) 14:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Agree with Krd. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 15:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::::+1 to A.Savin. At least thank you for the apology, kallerna. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::If you were wondering why I'm spending so much time on this issue – well, that's because I want Commons to be a place where admins actually use their tools properly; not a place where admins get a snarky layer of protection for wheel-warring. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:39, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

It appears there is no more feedback, so it's time to conclude? --[[User:Krd|Krd]] 15:41, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, it seems like this thread isn't going anywhere. [[User:Killarnee|Killarnee]] ([[User talk:Killarnee|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:: {{ping|Krd|Killarnee}} It looks to me like immediately below there is a pretty strong consensus that we should have a discussion on possible deadminship for [[User:Kallerna]]. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:::I don't disagree. [[User:Krd|Krd]] 20:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

::::{{cmt}} Yes, anyway 14 support + 3 oppose votes would be a successful result if this were an RfA, so despite weak participation we can assume consensus. Pinging {{U|SHB2000}} and {{U|Jeff G.}} As said, I would support desysop although this is kind of a borderline case to me -- which is the reason that this time I wouldn't like to start such a desysop procedure myself -- however only Kallerna and no one else we owe the fact that this actually pretty minor issue had to come as far; so yes, after that half-hearted apologies I still stand by my opinion that Kallerna is a miscast as a Commons admin. Actually, it would be WAY better if Kallerna would spare us the timewaste and resign voluntarily. Thanks --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 22:19, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::Agreed. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:02, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::Agreed.   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 00:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::So, are we good to make the second de-adminship discussion? --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::As [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=838327806 stated above], I'd support. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 13:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::@[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]]: Reading between the lines of [[special:diff/838734061]], a Admin should close the following section so someone may start the second de-adminship discussion. I am hesitant to even close the following section because I opened it.   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 14:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::I think the desysop procedure should be started first, and then subsequently this ANU thread be closed; similarly as in [[Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 87#User:1989|the 1989 case]]. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 15:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::@[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]]: So what is stopping you from starting the second de-adminship discussion?   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 16:45, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::I'm hesitant to make the second as I flopped the first. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 22:35, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

=== Deadminship for [[User:Kallerna]] ===

*{{s}}. This subsection should clearly show Bureaucrats whether or not there is a consensus because [[Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship)]] [[special:diff/827190598|was deemed "inadmissible"]].   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 16:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} Had Kallerna written in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=827429443 this statement] sth. like "I've been travelling the last week all over Europe, no time to read this discusion, but meanwhile I see that it was my mistake, I shouldn't have unblocked Karelj without discussion, and it is also not true what I said that A.Savin wanted to be silencing a user who disagreed with him, I'm sorry for that", then we could have closed the whole thread straightaway and move on, but seeing what they actually wrote... No way. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 16:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} Defending uncivil behaviour by being uncivil and overriding normal procedures on the way is not what I expect from an admin. --[[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} as the nominator of the now-invalid thread; what Kritzolina and A.Savin mentioned. Thanks for starting this subsection, Jeff G.! --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:42, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} I'm not as extreme as A.Savin, but Karelj shouldn't have been unblocked without discussion, and Karelj hasn't even seemed to hear that the edit comment was as much of a problem as the unblock.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} not to discuss with trolls ... ouch [[User:Killarnee|Killarnee]] ([[User talk:Killarnee|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:51, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{comment}} Neutral on de-adminship, but in favor of starting a formal process to discuss it. It doesn't worry me as much that Kallerna did the wrong thing in the first place as that the way they've handled this (including apparently not understanding that non-admins are allowed to participate in this page, and calling another user a "troll" for doing so). If Kallerna believes this was fine on their part, then that's a problem. If they understand at this point that they blew this -- in more than one respect -- then maybe they are liable to grow into the job. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 22:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{o}} [[User:GreenMeansGo|GMG]][[User talk:GreenMeansGo|talk]] 17:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{o}} I do not believe this isolated incident rises to the level of a desysop. -- [[User:King of Hearts|King of ♥]][[User talk:King of Hearts| ♦]][[Special:Contributions/King of Hearts| ♣]][[Special:EmailUser/King of Hearts| ♠]] 17:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

*:At least an acknowledgement from Kallerna would be good, but no, they've yet to acknowledge ''why'' their actions were problematic. Had they done so, I don't think we'd be having this discussion. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{o}} per above. [[User:1989|1989]] ([[User talk:1989|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:04, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{Cmt}} terrible unblock on the basis of both procedure and what I'd call a degree of involvement (karel and kallerna having more or less the same style of participation at fpc, and this being about fpc participation), but to the extent this is about that one unblock I'd say this should be closed with an unequivocal warning. I'd prefer to see a pattern or at least another example of bad judgment with tool use to support here. Stopping short of opposing though, as I think it's reasonable to say "we should have a deadminship conversation" which is all this section is deciding. — [[User:Rhododendrites|Rhododendrites]] [[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]] |  20:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

*:Right, "we should have a deadminship conversation".   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 10:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{Cmt}} What Jmabel said. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} per OP and Jmabel. --[[:User:{{PAGENAME:Est. 2021}}|Daniele Fisichella]]{{#ifeq:{{lc:{{padleft:|5|Est. 2021}}}}|user:|[[Category:Commons User template with namespace]]}} 12:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} per above. -- [[User:Tuvalkin|Tuválkin]] [[User talk:Tuvalkin|✉]] [[Special:Contributions/Tuvalkin|✇]] 21:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} [[User:Jalapeño|Jalapeño]] ([[User talk:Jalapeño|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:23, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} [[User:Schlurcher|Schlurcher]] ([[User talk:Schlurcher|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 08:31, 13 December 2023 (UTC) . The following quote shows are huge misunderstanding of Commons policies: ''You are not a admin, and you are not involved in the matter - I did not have any reason to communicate with you.'' (the part before the comma should be irrelevant)

*{{s}} Their only block log entry is the one under discussion here, which has a taste on it's own. The attitude shown above, plus ducking away, holiday season or not. --[[User:Krd|Krd]] 08:52, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

*{{s}} Per Schlurcher. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 19:27, 14 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{n}} I agree with Jmabel above. I'm not there yet as far as thinking Kallerna should be de-sysopped, but the de-adminship conversation should be allowed to move forward. [[User:Abzeronow|Abzeronow]] ([[User talk:Abzeronow|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{s}} I have been reading this entire conversation for the last one hour and I could not find a "fair acknowledgement" without ifs and buts. KoH makes a sensible statement that this is kind of a rare incident but as SHB2000 has noted a clear acknowledgment from Kallerna is missing, plus per Krd. ─ [[User:TheAafi|The Aafī]] ([[User talk:TheAafi|talk]]) 13:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

* {{s}} I didn't originally think it justified action outside of a slap on the wrist, if even. {{strikethrough|But if Killarnee supports it themselves then I don't really see any reason not to take the tools away.}} Plus as others have pointed out it's not like they have acknowledged the issue. It's weird how unwilling admins are to admit they made a mistake sometimes. Totally a self-own. So whatever. Just take the tools away and be done with it. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:42, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

*:Me? [[User:Killarnee|Killarnee]] ([[User talk:Killarnee|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:48, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

*::@[[User:Killarnee|Killarnee]]: It appears @[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]'s mistake. Kallerna and Killarnee are too closely sounding names. ─ [[User:TheAafi|The Aafī]] ([[User talk:TheAafi|talk]]) 05:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::Yeah, I meant Kallerna. My bad. I struck that part of my comment. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{s}} despite Kallerna's comment above. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 22:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{s}} I can understand that A.Savin's block for Karelj's comment in the FPC nomination appeared harsh. Probably few admins would have blocked here. Still, the comment was disrespectful and I understand the desire to enforce a more civil communication within the FPC nominations. Few admins ever went ahead to enforce civility in FPC nominations. As Karelj had been warned before, this did not come entirely unexpected. It should be noted that A.Savin was not involved in the discussion of this FPC nomination but kallerna was with a [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Trees_in_ICM_on_Myrstigen_hiking_trail,_Brastad_2.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=824540972 comment] that was at least as disrespectful as that of Karelj. The subsequent unblock came without discussion despite being involved in the discussion of the FPC nomination. Remarkably, this is the [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=block&user=Kallerna&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpfilters%5B%5D=newusers&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist very only sysadmin action] by Kallerna blocking or unblocking any user since becoming an admin in 2009. In the unblock comment Kallerna asks ''Silencing user who do not agree with you?'' while giving much reason to question their own motives behind the unblock. All this could be a singular event during a long tenure as admin. Then, however, we need a clear path forward which allows us to hope that this remains singular. Comments like ''I'm here to contribute to the project, not to discuss with trolls'' are not helpful in this regard. Eventually, Kallerna apologizes for it but not without recommending to focus ''on more positive and constructive matters'' while finding it ''rather odd that most participants here see controversial block with rude comments less harmful to the project than unblocking active editor''. I do not find this convincing as it appears half-hearted and comes without any statements regarding a future approach to resolve such conflicts. I think a regular process where we see whether Kallerna has still the trust of our community as admin is warranted. --[[User:AFBorchert|AFBorchert]] ([[User talk:AFBorchert|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:21, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

*:I agree that the block was unnecessary, and that A. Savin was uncivil, but neither is the issue here. Cheers, [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 15:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{s}} An admin getting de-admin for admin abuse?...if only there were people with balls on that other project.....and they call us the inferior project..--[[User:Stemoc|Ste]][[User talk:Stemoc|moc]] 23:36, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm closing this thread, as [[Commons:Administrators/Requests/Kallerna (de-adminship 2)]] has now been started. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 01:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

== User:Marginataen ==

Marginataen has uploaded a large number of images of people associated with a Danish political party. None of the ones I have looked at have metadata, although Marginataen claims to be the photographer in each case. It is possible that they travel around Denmark taking photos at party events, but if so, they should upload the original images with metadata to prove their authorship.

Some are clearly not there own work. For example, [[:File:Peter Seier Christensen og Nigel Farage, 2018.jpg]] comes from Facebook, specifically [https://es-la.facebook.com/peterseierchristensen/photos/jeg-var-i-london-i-g%C3%A5r-hvor-jeg-havde-m%C3%B8de-med-nigel-farage-mr-brexit-himself-de/1888758904571234/ here]. Marginataen uploaded the original in April but recently uploaded a slightly cropped version without metadata.

The Marginataen account has been indef blocked on English and Danish Wikipedia for sockpuppetry. One of the sockpuppets, {{u|Zeitgeistu}} was recently involved in uploading AI "upscaled" images to Commons. It looks like the Marginataen account may have been doing the same thing, See [[:File:Jevgenij Prigosjin, 2023.jpg]]. [[User:Counterfeit Purses|Counterfeit Purses]] ([[User talk:Counterfeit Purses|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

:It is correct that am I currently blocked on the English Wikipedia. I don't get what is wrong about experimenting with the possibilities of AI image enhancement. I'll comment some more tomorrow. [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

::@[[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] Some of the concerns with "AI image enhancement" were discussed [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#The_possibilities_of_AI_enhancement here] after you uploaded an "AI enhanced" portrait of Adolph Hitler. There is nothing wrong with experimenting with such tools, but when you upload the results to Commons without identifying them as "AI enhanced", that may be a problem. Personally, I am more concerned about the possibility that your uploads are be copyright violations. [[User:Counterfeit Purses|Counterfeit Purses]] ([[User talk:Counterfeit Purses|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:13, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

::: In my view: "that may be a problem" => "that is a major problem". - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 01:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

::::Sorry, I'm real tired. Pls give me 48 hours to write a more through response where I'll commtent on [[:File:Peter Seier Christensen og Nigel Farage, 2018.jpg]] and more. In the meantime, you might want to read [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=prev&diff=770664905 this]. [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::{{ping|Marginataen}} I suspect that was the wrong link. You linked Steinsplitterbot archiving a bunch of threads. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 18:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::No, it was not. Scroll down to the discussion about "File:Lars Boje Mathiesen, 2023.jpg" [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:47, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::: (for anyone trying to follow this, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=770605505#File:Lars_Boje_Mathiesen,_2023.jpg this is a more useful link to the same content]. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:05, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::@[[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] I am sorry to hear that you are tired. I am feeling a little tired today, myself.

:::::Can you please explain how on 14 September 2023, you were able to upload a larger (less cropped) version of the [[:File:Pernille Vermund - Ny Borgerlige.jpg]] image that {{u|Ulla Højgaard}} uploaded as their own work on 9 May 2019.

:::::Can you also explain how you appear to be a photographer but are unable to provide the original images with metadata, even for very recent pictures? Thanks. [[User:Counterfeit Purses|Counterfeit Purses]] ([[User talk:Counterfeit Purses|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 19:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Considering their history of copyvios both here and on da.wiki (including a number of deleted files on this project spanning years), and their refusal to explain how they took these photos but don't have metadata, I have nominated all of their 'self' uploads for deletion [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Marginataen|here]]. Unless they're able to explain themselves, I'd also support an indef block on this project. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:First of all, many thanks to @[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] provide at better link .I will refer a lot of what I otherwise would have written here to that linked discussion as I really this is just a repetition of that one. As stated there, I regreabbly damaged by credibility by uploading files not belonging to me. When [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] pointed this out to me, I began adapting. With regard to [[:File:Vermund, juni 2018.jpg]], I was just a less cropped/higher resolution version of an imaag by Ulla Højgaard. If you go to that file, I under "Source" explicitly wrote (in Danish), "I didn't create this file, but assume it's okay to publish, as it's just the uncropped version of a file already released under a free license on Commons (see link)". I got it from a now removed blog post by Pernille Vermund about Lars Løkke on party's website (https://app.apsis.one/invalid-link). There is no way in which I would be able to prove this but you can see [https://nyeborgerlige.dk/blog/pernilles-blog/en-vaerdig-alderdom/ here] in a non-removed blog post where a similar image is used or [https://www.facebook.com/PernilleVermundNB/photos/a.113159506802884/273829957402504/?type=3 here] where she uses a cropped version of the image in a Facebook post. Again, I never claimed ownership or authorship over that picture. [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:31, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::@[[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] So {{u|Ulla Højgaard}} isn't another of your accounts? I notice that you seem to have accidentally linked to some kind of marketing company instead of the party website. [[User:Counterfeit Purses|Counterfeit Purses]] ([[User talk:Counterfeit Purses|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

:::No, it is absolutely not another account of mine. I simply found a better version of the file she uploaded. I wrote that I assumed (Danish: ''antager'') that is was ok because it was just a better version of that file. If that is not the case just delete it. If she uploaded the original file legitimately that has absolutely nothing to do with me. I explicitly write that I wasn't the author of that file. [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:07, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

::{{ping|Marginataen}} I don't have any opinion as to whether you're using multiple accounts, but I don't think that the statement {{tq|I was just a less cropped/higher resolution version of an imaag by Ulla Højgaard. If you go to that file, I under "Source" explicitly wrote (in Danish), "I didn't create this file, but assume it's okay to publish, as it's just the uncropped version of a file already released under a free license on Commons (see link)"}} is correct when it comes to Creative Commons licenses and Commons. My understanding is that the copyright holder has the right to release their work under a resolution of their choosing and of a size of their choosing; so, if a copyright holder releases a low-resolution crop of their work under a Creative Commons license that Commons accepts, then it's only OK to upload that file to Commons either at the same or a lower resolution and at the same or smaller size. I don't think it's OK to "un-crop" files and "re-resolution" files unless the license clearly allows it. In other words, it's not OK to upload a full-sized uncropped high resolution version of a cropped low resolution file unless the full-sized uncropped high resolution version has also been released under an acceptable free license by its copyright holder. I believe it's possible for a copyright holder to release a cropped low-resolution version of their work under one license (e.g. CC-by-sa-4.0), while at the same time releasing an uncropped higher resolution of the same work under a different license (e.g. CC-by-NC-ND) I think this is one of the reasons that Commons encourages those uploading their "own work" to upload uncropped full-sized high resolution versions of their work because then cropping or reducing the resolution of the work doesn't become an issue. -- [[User:Marchjuly|Marchjuly]] ([[User talk:Marchjuly|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:31, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Oh, that makes sense which using the word "assume" also kind of implies :) In that case, just delete the better version [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:12, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

::::Could we centralise the dicussion to either this threat or to [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Marginataen|here]]? [[User:Marginataen|Marginataen]] ([[User talk:Marginataen|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

{{d}} I've blocked Marginataen for 1 year for uploading non-free files after warnings, and for their extensive attempts to obstruct, distract, and otherwise prevent Commons from removing files they knew not to be theirs. I was vacillating on whether it should be indefinite or not, and would not object should another admin decide their conduct warrants a longer block. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:@[[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] You should probably block their alternate accounts, {{u|Zeitgeistu}}, {{u|Bubfernr}}, and {{u|LatteDK}}. {{u|Økonom}} can probablly tell you if there are others. Even today, Zeitgeistu is uploading. [[User:Counterfeit Purses|Counterfeit Purses]] ([[User talk:Counterfeit Purses|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::Thanks, I zapped those. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

== User:SchroCat ==

Abusive behavior in [[Commons:Deletion requests/File:John Dee's -Eyes Only- signature.svg]]. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

:Note that I [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SchroCat&diff=prev&oldid=838750582 duly informed them about this thread] and they [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SchroCat&diff=next&oldid=838750582 reverted the edit with additional abuse]. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

::I'll note that part of the problem is that there are some policies that can be claimed to contradict [[COM:INUSE]] and [[COM:NPOV]], so if we want to avoid having needless discussions from people vociferously and sometimes insultingly arguing that Commons should debate and delete files used in one or even numerous articles on other wikis, we have to make sure it's unambiguously clear that such deletion requests will never be considered here. I'm not up to starting that thread now, but it needs to be started on the appropriate policy page(s), and we will need to overcome our inertia and actually make the needed changes. Otherwise, this kind of crap will recur any time anyone points out why we don't even consider whether a file in use has incorrect content. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]])

::: The substance of the discussion is fine, but {{pinging|SchroCat}}: "Don't patronise me, sunshine" and "you are stepping away, which is a delight" are totally out of line. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:13, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

::::Meh. If someone wants to be passive aggressive with “What an irritating comment!" and then being patronising, I’ll pull them up on it. Passive aggressive nonsense is out of line, and it really ''was'' a delight when someone acting that unpleasantly decided to step away. I’m out: have fun bad mouthing me in my absence.- [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:05, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

:::: Aggressive aggressive nonsense is also out of line. Blocking for a month. (If the user is also out of here voluntarily, fine.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 23:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

::::: @[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] FYI User has already asked for an unblock [[User:Gbawden|Gbawden]] ([[User talk:Gbawden|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 15:21, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

* I see no abuse from SchroCat. A month's block here is a terrible decision. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 14:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

** {{ping|Andy Dingley}} Just to make sure: you'd have no problem with being addressed by someone with "Don't patronise me, sunshine" or referring to your departure from something as a "delight"? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:21, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

** If some admin agrees with Andy here, feel free to unblock. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:22, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

** I will point out though, that what he wrote now on his page, facing the inconvenience of a block, is very far from what he wrote on this thread. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:24, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

** But, [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] your "What an irritating comment!" was also unnecessary, even if less mean than the reply. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

** FWIW, I would have let "Don't patronize me" slide but, at least where I'm from, "Don't patronize me, sunshine" has the tone of the last words spoken before a punch is thrown. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

::* It's not about what ''I'' would have a problem with, it's about what our policy is, as represented by our regular practice. Now this isn't Wikipedia, but I regularly receive ''much'' worse than this, and from people (frequently admins) who are way above such a sanction as this. Even on this page and thread, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=next&oldid=839072795 look here] !

::: To be honest, I'd prefer this to the cloying politeness of Wikipedia's toxic back-stabbing.

::: But what's the root cause of all this? Ikan Kekek arguing against the deletion of such an obvious, and already widely disseminated, hoax image. How can you do this? To argue INUSE ''for a deliberate hoax''? I completely fail to understand that one, so I can certainly understand SchroCat's frustration over this. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:::: We delete copyvios without hesitation but if there is not a legal problem, we will keep all [[COM:INUSE]] cases without exception including hoaxes of which we have quite a [[:Category:Hoaxes|collection]]. We do not decide at Commons what other Wikimedia projects use or not use. Some might even consider to show that particular 007-signature as example for a hoax. Ikan Kekek refered patiently to the relevant policies within the DR and it would be better if everyone makes themselves familiar with these policies before continuing to discuss against [[COM:INUSE]]. --[[User:AFBorchert|AFBorchert]] ([[User talk:AFBorchert|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::::* But we do delete against INUSE, and not just for copyright. As an acrimonious example, look at the bulk deletion of AI images (where SCOPE had then to be redefined to suit) and an indef block was also given. [[User:Andy Dingley|Andy Dingley]] ([[User talk:Andy Dingley|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:47, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::: Indeed, we do, e.g. per [[COM:SPAM]]. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:39, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::: Note that [[COM:INUSE]] specifies "any use that is not made in good faith does not count [as in use]." Spam is not a good-faith use. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 04:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

{{comment|Support ''a'' block, neutral on duration}} SchroCat was being uncivil, but Ikan Kekek egged them on with "What an irritating comment!". I think a 72 hour block would have achieved the same outcome of forcing a deescalation, though SchroCat seems to have indicated that they don't intend to return regardless. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:26, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:+1. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:43, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:A block was warranted but one month is in my opinion far too long. I suggest to shorten the block to 72 hours. --[[User:AFBorchert|AFBorchert]] ([[User talk:AFBorchert|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{s}} a block, preferably between 72–144 hours. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{cmt}} I do find it irritating to be accused of supporting hoaxes, etc., etc., when I simply point out that we do not (or should not) debate the use of files on other wikis, per [[COM:INUSE]] and [[COM:NPOV]], and I don't consider expressing my feelings about that "egging [someone] on." I don't think SchroCat should be blocked for more than 3 days or so, though, as a first block. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{o}} Oppose a block, per Andy. I'd rather reprimand Ikan Kekek for the 'I'm not listening to anything you say' attitude and their eagerness to remove the opposition from a discussion. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Since this may have been lost in the shuffle, I want to repeat two things:

# I have no problem with another admin choosing to shorten this block.

# The block was ultimately not so much for the initial incivility as for the response here basically defending what he said, saying he would say it again, followed by flouncing. Up to then, I wasn't planning to block.

At this point, I think I've said what I can usefully say, and will only comment further on this thread if directly addressed. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 05:05, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

: {{done}} I think enough has been said on the subject. I have shortened the block to 72 hours - block will expire on Monday 8 January [[User:Gbawden|Gbawden]] ([[User talk:Gbawden|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

: @[[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] Please take note of the feedback about your behaviour. Comments like 'I'm not listening to anything you say' are not helpful and often make the situation worse. I consider this discussion closed [[User:Gbawden|Gbawden]] ([[User talk:Gbawden|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::[[User:Gbawden|Gbawden]], I didn't make that comment, and you ought to take note of that " before you "consider this discussion closed". [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] claimed I had an "'I'm not listening to anything you say' attitude," whereas I would say that I simply explained exactly what I find irritating. I would think you, as an admin, would understand that merely going by Commons rules and having others attack you for it is irritating. Maybe it's best not to say so in a deletion requests thread, but don't carelessly misquote me. I wouldn't make a comment like the one you misattributed to me. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:::Guido has a track record for behaviour like that – I wouldn't worry about it too much, {{u|Ikan Kekek}}, knowing it is an overexacerbated and misattributed comment. [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:06, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::::It is rather Ikan Kekek who has a track record like the behavior displayed here, and you who has a track record of making personal attacks against me. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::I've been dealing with Ikan Kekek for a while now and have never seen them say or do anything even slightly offensive. Whereas you seem to just be on here to participate in or stir up drama. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:11, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::I'm an experienced admin (no, not on Commons, but elsewhere). While I solved some cases that others wouldn't handle, you got yourself blocked here twice. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::{{ping|Guido den Broeder}} Which project are you an admin on? If your an admin somewhere then you should know people who are blocked in the past don't somehow lose the right to have an opinion about other people's behavior because of it. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::As a freethinker, I strongly believe that everyone is entitled to their own opinions, at all times, no matter how dark, irrational or illusory. However, expressing them is another matter. I have zero tolerance for cyberbullying. Then again, I also allow people to start over and do better with a new, unblemished account. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::I wasn't blocked for cyberbullying. So I'm not sure what your referring to. Allowing people to start over with a new unblemished account is interesting idea, but not really relevant to the conversation. So we probably end it there. Thanks for the response though. Even if you weren't willing to tell me what project your an admin on ;) --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::You could try writing a Wikipedia article about me and watch users fall over each other in their hurry to provide you with all the wrong answers :) [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 14:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::@[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]]: Guido imports drama from other wikis, harassing users via talk page messages and pings. [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=690553078&oldid=690545305 He falsely accused me of having "accused a user of fraud for no reason whatsoever"]. He countered my evidence of that fraud as [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=690575039&oldid=690570015 "Irrelevant"]. [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=690593342&oldid=690586535 He refused to take back the accusation linked above, opting to be left alone.] See also [[Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 100#Guido den Broeder]].   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 17:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::And yet somehow I came out on top. You lost, live with it. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::Which was a miracle. There's no need to get so passive aggressive when Jeff G was simply mentioning what ''you'' said. I'm sorry, mate, but you can't change the past. "Live with it." --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:28, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::::The reader can simply follow the links and judge for themselves. I'm living fine, as you can see, and feel no need to comment further. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::::::I can comment further as I see fit. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::+1 to the first part, I find [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]]'s comments in deletion requests always helpful, and by no means "offensive" (?). [[User:Strakhov|Strakhov]] ([[User talk:Strakhov|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:45, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::I have read hundreds or more comments by Ikan Kekek in FPC and QI discussions over the last years, and must state that he is one of the politest, most sensible users I know on ''Commons''. --[[User:Aristeas|Aristeas]] ([[User talk:Aristeas|talk]]) 20:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::: I wasn't saying that he isn't - I too appreciate his comments in DR's. A number of editors felt that their comments weren't helpful which I pointed out. All I asked is that they be mindful of how others interpret their comments. Can we move on and close this discussion? [[User:Gbawden|Gbawden]] ([[User talk:Gbawden|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 06:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::Yes, once you admit you misattributed a remark by a man who decided he's my enemy to me. Please be responsible. -- [[User:Ikan Kekek|Ikan Kekek]] ([[User talk:Ikan Kekek|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:52, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::This is the behavior I was talking about. As long as people agree with you, all is fine. But when someone disagrees even once, you see a lifetime enemy. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:26, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::I've worked with {{u|Ikan Kekek}} on several Wikimedia projects since January 2021 and they've been my biggest mentor to me; we've had minor disagreements, but not once have I ever seen Ikan attacking other users. You're the only one who claims they are, Guido. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 04:47, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::There are five users in this thread alone who agree with me, whereas all you can produce is personal attacks against me. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::Yet another exacerbated, unsolicited, and enigmatic claim from you. You claim we're the ones who are "personally attacking" you but there are countless examples of you attacking other editors time and time again. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::If you think so, start a discussion. But wait, that already happened, and it didn't confirm anything you say about me. Now, I would again calmly refute all your lies, no matter how often you try to have the last word, but <strike>you</strike> we have already been told to take it elsewhere. So here it ends. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::You call my (and {{u|Jeff G.}}'s) comments lies but have no backing evidence to say otherwise. [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::::I warned Guido den Broeder that he might be blocked soon, because of these allegations. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::::I'm not the one making allegations. But follow [[Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_100#Guido_den_Broeder|the link provided by Jeff G]] if you must, closing comment by Ellywa. Actually, we were all told to take it elsewhere. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:35, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Not done}} I'm closing, I don't see any point in continuing here. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 13:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

== [[User:CT69]] ==

Please review the userpage and its discussion, both smell like an attack on the depicted person. [[User:Denniss|Denniss]] ([[User talk:Denniss|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 22:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{d}} Looking at their contributions across projects, I think it's possible. At the very least though, it's inappropriate uses of user and talk pages, so I've wiped them. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:12, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

== [[Special:Contributions/JTulioPT|JTulioPT]] ==

{{user3|JTulioPT}} appears to be exclusively uploading columbian radio station logos, from what I've seen all tagged as {{tlx|CC-BY-SA 4.0}}, hovewer, there doesn't appear to be any evidence that the copyright holder agreed to release them under the terms of the CC-BY-SA. So far I have identified three distinct "groups" of files, so-to-speak:

* Complex non-free logos with no permission, e.g.

** [[:File:Radio Policía Nacional (Colombia) logo.png]]

** [[:File:Colombia Estéreo logo.png]]

** [[File:El Sol (emisora) logo.webp]] (deleted thrice by now)

* files tagged as CC-BY-SA 4.0 that could arguably be {{tlx|PD-textlogo}}, e.g.

** [[:File:Nequi Colombia logo.svg]]

** [[:File:El Gourmet logo.png]]

* even older files that are tagged as {{tlx|own}} (which I do not consider to be credible, given the rest of this), e.g.

** [[:File:Emisora Atlántico Colombia.png]]

** [[:File:Boom FM Colombia logo.png]]

** [[:File:Radio Red Cristal Colombia logo.jpg]]

** [[:File:Tolima Stereo.png]]

They appear to have been blocked by {{ping|Yann}} while I was composing this, however, I'm going to report this here anyway so someone with more experience on the columbian threeshold of originality can decide what to do with the uploaded files. [[User:Victor Schmidt|Victor Schmidt]] ([[User talk:Victor Schmidt|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

::At least 3 among the 4 last are PD-textlogo IMO. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

== 48Riyazyatir ==

{{user3|48Riyazyatir}} after the last warning given last December, the user continues uploading plain copyvios. [[User:Günther Frager|Günther Frager]] ([[User talk:Günther Frager|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:30, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{d}} Blocked for a week + [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by 48Riyazyatir]]. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

== User:Atatnoone ==

{{User3|Atatnoone}} uploads thumb photos of models of unknown source and claim their ownerships without META data to prove it. [[User:Pierre cb|Pierre cb]] ([[User talk:Pierre cb|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:01, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{ping|Pierre cb}} I warned this user. When you tag files, you should inform the uploader. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

::{{Reply|Yann}} I did. [[User:Pierre cb|Pierre cb]] ([[User talk:Pierre cb|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::It is above another notification, where you marked one of the files as personal. Why did you? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::Ah sorry, [[User:Netora]] tagged the files, but didn't inform the uploader. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

{{cmt}} SDG or SDGs stands for Sustainable Development Goals. These are pictures of some conference. A couple do have META data. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 05:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

== User:WC-QHS ==

以下三張照片：

*[[:File:Students of the National Chung Cheng University at the sports day 2008-10-31 01.jpg]]

*[[:File:Students of the National Chung Cheng University at the sports day 2008-10-31 02.jpg]]

*[[:File:Students of the National Chung Cheng University at the sports day 2008-10-31 03.jpg]]

標題是寫學生，但是卻被歸類為校友，這些都是由User:WC-QHS做出的編輯。可是，目前的分類只有學生歸學生，校友歸校友，並沒有將學生歸為校友的這種分類。因此，我將這問題曾向User:WC-QHS詢問過，等候23天，他還沒有回應，而他也沒有對照片做出修正，所以現在不清楚是標題Students打錯還是歸類Alumni放錯。最關鍵的是，照片中的人全部身穿便服，無法分辨是學生還是校友，這也就是為什麼需要將問題拿來這。如果是標題Students打錯，就需要將照片重命名。如果是歸類Alumni放錯，就需要將分類改為Students。--[[Special:Contributions/125.230.91.191|125.230.91.191]] 11:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{D}} 我已經為它們重新分類了。下次請您直接糾正明顯的錯誤，無須在此處報告。 [[User:0x0a|0x0a]] ([[User talk:0x0a|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

== User:Dolores sepiol ==

He continues to upload copyrighted images and appears to exhibit a pattern of behavior involving uploading other copyrighted images after previous ones have been removed.

*[[:File:Louisa-mak-black-dress.jpg]] copy from [https://www.hk01.com/%E7%BE%8E%E5%AE%B9%E6%89%8B%E5%B8%B3/520525/%E9%BA%A5%E6%98%8E%E8%A9%A9%E9%9B%A2%E5%B7%A2tvb%E5%BE%8C%E8%AE%8A-%E7%B1%B3%E8%8A%9D%E8%93%AE-%E4%B8%80%E6%98%9F%E6%9C%9F%E4%BD%9B%E7%B3%BB%E6%B8%9B%E8%82%A5%E6%B3%95%E7%82%BAol%E5%BA%A6%E8%BA%AB%E8%A8%82%E9%80%A0]

*[[:File:Louisa-Mak-2023-white-dress-jewelry.jpg]] & [[:File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg]] copy from [https://www.lukfook.com/tc/category/events-and-promotion/post/2023lukfookraceday]

[[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:07, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:So where did he get the META data? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:: {{ping|Guido den Broeder}} no idea what metadata you are referring to, but [[:File:Louisa-mak-black-dress.jpg]] was all over the web in 2020 and was a recent upload here. If [[User:Dolores sepiol]] is the author, even then she would have needed to go through [[COM:VRT]] to upload previously published work. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::Possibly, but a new user wouldn't know that. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:: {{ping|Rastinition}} when you bring up someone's conduct on this page, you are supposed to notify them on their user page. You didn't do that; if fact you wrote your post here in a manner that did not even mention them in a way that would give them a notification. I've now notified them. Please be more careful about that in the future. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 20:50, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]]Apologies, as the reported account engages in cross-wiki activities, I will make sure to copy information to various wiki versions in the future. Additionally, when copying that information, do I need to translate the text into the local language of each wiki version? [[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:::: {{ping|Rastinition}} Nothing about "various wiki versions" here. You did not notify her on her Commons talk page, '''and''' you didn't use a form on this page like <nowiki>[[User:Dolores sepiol]] or {{ping|Dolores sepiol}}</nowiki> that would automatically notify her. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:54, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]]I've simplified the issue. Never mind what I said about him on other wiki versions. I guess here, I just need to add @[[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]] and change the title to [[User:Dolores sepiol]]. [[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::I believe he did receive the notification, but he still chose to upload images with copyright issues (and it's the second time he uploaded [[:File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg]] from the same webpage to here). [[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::Sorry, I'm kinda new to this whole thing. I've just figured out how to view these messages here. All the photos I've uploaded was sent to me personally by the person who was photographed in the picture (who this wiki page belongs to), requesting that I help replace her original wiki photo. But as a public figure, a lot of her photos (which she took herself and might have posted onto her own social media) were stolen, or "used", by other webpages. And I believe wiki has even misidentified the source/copyright owners of some of these aforementioned photos that I've uploaded. Would any of you be so kind as to shine a light on the easiest way I could get rid of the original photo without going through a long-winded process of proving I do indeed have permission to use these images, or keep getting my photo taken down because Wiki is unable to identify the correct source of the image? [[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]] ([[User talk:Dolores sepiol|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::#If we consider the perspective of the original file size and the file information attached to the image [[:File:Louisa-Mak-Red-Dress-Event.jpg]], I might believe that it was taken around the same time as the series of photos from https://www.instagram.com/p/CXyKSdzpB6W/. However, the photos in that series have a non-square aspect ratio, while the version you provided is square. Therefore, the version you uploaded is very likely a cropped and reproduced product.

:::::::#[[:File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg]] is clearly not the original image; it has been compressed.And [[:File:Louisa-Mak-Portrait-Closeup-Cropped.jpg]] also shows clear signs of being cropped. It appears to be cropped from https://www.lukfook.com/tc/category/events-and-promotion/post/2023lukfookraceday.

:::::::[[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:43, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::::I have 3 questions regarding (1),

::::::::a. the photo in question was indeed taken around the same time as the post you linked. However, even the photos within the posts are cropped in different aspect ratios, what made you arrive at the conclusion that it was the photo I uploaded which was cropped?

::::::::b. the photo I uploaded ([[:File:Louisa-Mak-Red-Dress-Event.jpg]]) has not been published anywhere else on the internet, so why would it be a copyright violation?

::::::::b. assuming I am the owner of the photo, can I not crop my own photo, and then upload it to wiki? You are making it sound like it is forbidden to upload any cropped images onto the site. [[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]] ([[User talk:Dolores sepiol|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:57, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::::::#The image with relatively complete file information is not mentioned for deletion, and I am not asserting that it has copyright issues. I am simply stating the possible status of that image. If my statement is not clear enough, I am stating that the image not requested for deletion is very close to the original.

:::::::::#The image mentioned for deletion is clearly a reproduction. Regardless of who provided the image, it is currently being reasonably used by other websites, and those websites have not granted authorization to you. If the channel through which you obtained the image has already granted authorization for its use to you, you should also verify whether the provider holds complete copyright. Depending on the form of authorization, sometimes even the photographer may not necessarily possess complete copyright.

:::::::::[[User:Rastinition|Rastinition]] ([[User talk:Rastinition|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

: @[[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]]: Hello, if you are copyright holder, you need to go through [[COM:VRT]] to verify permission. If no, you may ask the author or copyright holder send an email [[Commons:Email templates|with copy of a written permission]] to [[Commons:VRT|VRT]] (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org). Thanks for your understanding. [[User:SCP-2000|'''SCP''']][[User talk:SCP-2000|'''-20''']][[Special:Contributions/SCP-2000|'''00''']] 13:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

: @[[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]]: I second what [[User:SCP-2000|SCP-2000]] says here: presumably you can have the author or copyright holder go through the process described at [[COM:VRT]] to '''explicitly grant an appropriate license''', and the deleted pictures will be restored. (This also goes for the one that is ''not'' deleted, given that you are not the copyright holder.) - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 18:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

And with that, I would hope we are done discussing here, unless [[User:Dolores sepiol|Dolores sepiol]] has further questions. Clearly there is no administrative matter here. The user may have been unaware of how some things work on this site, but clearly did not have bad intentions. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 18:53, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

== Prototyperspective and "AI Art Application and Improvements Handbook" on Wikibooks ==

I am noticing a pattern in DRs and I'm not sure if it warrants admin action or not. If it does, it shouldn't be by me, as I am active in many of these and related DRs.

The pattern is: an AI-created image is nominated for deletion as being out of scope, then {{user|Prototyperspective}} adds it to "AI Art Application and Improvements Handbook" on Wikibooks, and then someone notes in the DR that the file is [[COM:INUSE]].

Bluntly, the only thing any of the images on that Wikibooks page have in common is that they came up in DRs, and I am unconvinced that the page is anything other than an attempt to game [[COM:INUSE]].

Looking to get others' opinions on this. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

:@[[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]]: That looks fishy to me.   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 00:56, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:: {{ping|Jeff G.}} are you saying [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]]'s characterization of this looks fishy, or [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]]'s conduct? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::@[[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]]: The described conduct.   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 01:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

: If that is an accurate description, then that is certainly not OK. I'd like to see that backed up by diffs, though, so that we don't each have to go searching for evidence ourselves. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 00:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

: Convenience link: https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/AI_Art_Application_and_Improvements_Handbook - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 01:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:* I can explain it to you and I've been open about it:

:* that handbook is not a priority to me but when I see DRs I a) sometimes see the relevant AI images and think about how they could be useful in the context of the DR and b) may find spending some time to expand the wikibook worth my time.

:* Nothing at INUSE suggest that would be "gaming it" and if it is I didn't know but I'd then suggest this is made clear there, that page also says "realistically useful for an educational purpose" where the wikibook makes the application and realistic educational usefulness clear.

:* If you don't consider the uses in that book "INUSE" then you can always just ignore them which is already done. While I don't think deleting AI images even when clear usefulness cases have been clarified and remain unrefuted is within bounds of current WMC policy even if they were not used anywhere, if you agree that it would be then I guess it is.

:* Moreover, the book is new and so new images are added as I come across them now, I haven't substantially changed it again for quite a while. And for the Roman Kubanskiy images, those were some of the very few available for illustrating a section and I added all the good-quality images for that application to its section, not just these.

:[[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

{{ping|Jmabel}}: Sorry, here are the diffs:

* Prototyperspective [https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=AI_Art_Application_and_Improvements_Handbook&oldid=4348656 created the book on Dec 9] using images of Putin from [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Roman Kubanskiy]] (DR filed November 15) and images in [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Giovanna IV di Napoli by Bing Image Creator]] (DR filed December 6).

* Prototyperspective [https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=AI_Art_Application_and_Improvements_Handbook&diff=next&oldid=4350959 added an image of Sauron on Dec. 16], a day after [[Commons:Deletion requests/File:'Excuse me sir, where can I find the rings section?' – Fictional being placed into a contemporary realistic daily life setting.png]] was filed.

* Finally, though this one is not as strong a point as the others: On Dec. 13, the first [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hyju]] was closed as delete. On Dec. 20, Prototyperspective [https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=AI_Art_Application_and_Improvements_Handbook&diff=next&oldid=4351615 added a bunch more of Hyju's images], and then on Dec. 27, those were all included in the second DR for Hyju's files. Ordinarily, this wouldn't be suspicious - after all, Prototyperspective put them in the book before they were listed for deletion - but the section they put them in is under the text "Especially useful if no other or only low-quality images are available for the concept", and the things they added were vampires, prehistoric people, and vintage comic book covers, of which there is ample art of already. Prototyperspective was also the only person advocating for keeping the first Hyju batch.

Worth noting that when the Giovanna IV images were deleted, [https://en.wikibooks.org/w/index.php?title=AI_Art_Application_and_Improvements_Handbook&diff=4350358&oldid=4350061 Prototyperspective put the redlinks back in the book], calling it "unwarranted censorship deletions".

I think that all of this taken together paints a pretty clear picture of why the wikibook exists and how it's being misused. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 02:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:[[Special:Diff/832678467|I've voiced similar concerns.]] Nearly every image in that book is, or was at some point, the subject of a deletion discussion on Commons, and it's not because someone's been going through the book to pick images to nominate for deletion, and it certainly isn't just a weird coincidence either. [[COM:INUSE]] is meant to prevent the deletion of images which projects are legitimately using, not as a way to "game" deletion discussions on Commons. See also [[Commons talk:Project scope#Outdated (does not reflect current admin practices): policy amendment for in-scope exceptions]]. [[User:Omphalographer|Omphalographer]] ([[User talk:Omphalographer|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 04:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

::{{tq|Nearly every image in that book is, or was at some point, the subject of a deletion discussion on Commons}} Very false.

::I added images based on their relevance and quality so all of them should be high-quality for the described application. I wonder though why people complain about it here rather than replacing the image with a better one if there is one. In any case, current policy hasn't made clear that INUSE only applies to files that were INUSE before the DR but whether or not that is the case doesn't matter to my freedom to use images as I see fit. If you'd like to restrict this freedom then please add a note like {{tq|Images that are currently subject of deletion discussions are not allowed to be used in any other Wikimedia project. If they are used there they should be replaced by other users and are not legitimately in use.}} That would be something to discuss at the policy page. I apologize if my edits to the wikibook I started are considered problematic. [[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{cmt}} I share the Squirrel's concerns about misuse of Wikibooks, and overall advocacy of out-of-scope AI-generated images when they were told many times that such images are not welcome here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::* It's not a "misuse of Wikibooks", you and e.g. Squirrel just don't consider the file-uses in it legitimate which is fine to people.

::* Out-of-scope images made using AI software should be deleted.

::* The deletion requests – which usually nominated large numbers of different files at once – and village pump discussions that I think you're referring to had some people arguing for usefulness and use-cases of AI software in the context of images as well as some against such; there is no policy that says that images made using this novel technology are generally not welcome here but it's certainly the impression I get which may or may not be a problem or a good thing for a good future of WMC. I don't indiscriminately explain specific usefulness cases for images in deletion requests but only those where I can see a realistic educational value (e.g. for few images of a long list of files nominated at once) and voted for deletion in many occasions, while Squirrel wrote [[Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nude Red Fox Girl.png|here]] and [[Commons:Deletion requests/Files found with insource:%22 happy-looking Gandalf%22|here]] {{tq|Due to both the copyright and ethical concerns, I am always in favor of deleting AI art, especially when we have any non-AI generated images that don't have those concerns.}}. Again, if you don't see this Wikibook's file-uses or uses of files during DRs as legitimate then users have clarified that ignoring them is fine.

::[[User:Prototyperspective|Prototyperspective]] ([[User talk:Prototyperspective|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:24, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:: I'm uncomfortable with complaining about someone's advocacy in an actively discussed issue. I could appreciate him being less voluminous, but he's discussing on a live discussion.--[[User:Prosfilaes|Prosfilaes]] ([[User talk:Prosfilaes|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

== User ignoring COM:OVERWRITE when AI upscaling ==

*{{user3|Guise}}

Guise has uploaded a lot of good French literary artwork over many years. More recently they have been returning to files they uploaded themselves years earlier and overwriting them with "better res" versions: in some cases that better resolution has clearly been obtained through AI upscaling rather than taking or finding a higher quality scan of the original source.

For example, [[:File:William Nicholson (1872-1949) - Characters of Romance, Porthos.jpg]] is a scan of a 1900 drawing of Porthos the musketeer, originally uploaded in 2022. Guise replaced it this week with a double-sized "better res" AI version, improving the line quality but also replacing the simple dots of Porthos's pupils with detailed, glistening AI irises that William Nicholson never drew.

[[User_talk:Guise/Archive_3]] has four archived COM:OVERWRITE warnings from last November, including my attempt to explain why their replacements were going beyond "may be replaced by their uploader shortly after they are uploaded", and asking that they follow the guideline and make these AI versions separate uploads. I'm concerned that they haven't seen these messages, have misunderstood them, or wrongly believe that their edits are only "minor improvements" and not a form of digital restoration. [[User:Belbury|Belbury]] ([[User talk:Belbury|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, the supposed AI improvement is ultimately disappointing for this Porthos file due to the modification of the pupils. Note that I've read your messages since I'm gradually revising my uploads in order to cancel the files with such a problem (for instance [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Georges-Antoine_Rochegrosse_%26_Eug%C3%A8ne-Andr%C3%A9_Champollion_-_Salammb%C3%B4_-_M%C3%A2tho_dans_la_chambre_de_Salammb%C3%B4.jpg], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Georges-Antoine_Rochegrosse_%26_Eug%C3%A8ne-Andr%C3%A9_Champollion_-_Salammb%C3%B4_-_Sous_les_murs_de_Carthage.jpg], not to mention what remains to be done [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gino_Starace_-_L%27H%C3%A9ro%C3%AFne_(Michel_Z%C3%A9vaco).jpg], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Gino_Starace_-_Les_Deux_milliardaires_(Albert_Boissi%C3%A8re).jpg]), in addition to clearly distinguishing original scans from AI-retouched files (as in the [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:S%C3%A2r_Dubnotal Sâr Dubnotal category] or the [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maurice_Leloir_-_Les_Trois_Mousquetaires_-_D%27Artagnan_et_Milady_de_Winter.png Milady file]). Regards. --[[User:Guise|Guise]] ([[User talk:Guise|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:44, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:: This is almost a textbook example of something that calls for uploading under a distinct name, linked as an "other version" or "derivative work". Also: "better res" is an absolutely misleading edit summary for that upload. It should have said something like "sharpened and upscaled with AI" (and ideally with an explicit mention of what AI tool), which would also be the case if it were uploaded under a distinct filename. "better res" misleadingly suggests a higher-resolution scan, not upsampling. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 19:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

:::It is such a textbook example that it's the 5th example of what not to do in {{slink|Commons:Overwriting_existing_files|DO NOT overwrite}}. [[User:AntiCompositeNumber|AntiCompositeNumber]] ([[User talk:AntiCompositeNumber|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 03:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

== [[User:Bolitachan]] ==

*{{user3|Bolitachan}}

Uploaded 3 non-free files after a warning not to do so [[User:Kelly The Angel|Kelly The Angel]] ([[User talk:Kelly The Angel|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{ping|Kelly The Angel}} All three images gave as their sources journal articles under free licenses. In one case, it was the exact image. In another case, the image Bolitachan uploaded and the image in the article were nearly identical except for the color balance and the figure number, so I uploaded the correct version and hid the original. In the last case, Bolitachan uploaded a picture of an entire tree, while only the bottom half of that picture was in the source itself. I nominated that one for deletion. I'm not sure exactly what's going on here, but it would be nice to hear Bolitachan's response. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

::Most likely, Bolitachan uploads non-free files in good faith and just doesn't know how copyright works. [[User:Kelly The Angel|Kelly The Angel]] ([[User talk:Kelly The Angel|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

:I have informed Bolitachan about this discussion. [[User:The Squirrel Conspiracy|The Squirrel Conspiracy]] ([[User talk:The Squirrel Conspiracy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

== Guido den Broeder ==

* User: {{User3|1=Guido den Broeder}}

* Reasons for reporting: Tendentious, harassing behavior. In the discussion [[#User:SchroCat]] above, the user referred to the posts of [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] as "[[special:diff/839879918|lies]]". [[special:diff/839903625|Yann warned him that was "not acceptable, unless you back it up."]] After neglecting to ping Yann and me in his replies, the user went on to remove the warning as "[[special:diff/840123636|no vandalization, nor any other reason for a block; unhelpful warning removed]]". That is clear [[:en:WP:IDHT]] behavior. Everything I wrote above is included by reference.

— 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 23:42, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{strong support|Strongly support}} an '''indefinite ban''' once and for all for their continued incivility and personal attacks. All they do on Commons is stir up dramas; they're banned on 3 other WMF wikis – can we please end their endless blether once and for all? --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

*:In 2022 when you two tried the same but got nowhere, you claimed that I was banned on 5 wikis, that I had a slew of sockpuppets, and that I was evading a global lock.[https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems/Archive_100#Guido_den_Broeder] I guess this is progress. You also announced that you would keep coming after me on Commons, even after Yann and Ellywa told you not to. I don't think that repeating the same discussion with nothing new to report is constructive. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::I also don't think snarkily trying to avoid a discussion about your behaviour is constructive. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::For the record, I am not banned on any WMF wiki. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 02:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::::Sorry, mate, but [[Special:CentralAuth/Guido den Broeder|nice try]]. [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::::I get your point, however a block and a ban is not the same in WMF projects, although yes it's very often being confused. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 12:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:You neglect to mention that I did provide the requested evidence. I rarely ping, as most users (myself included) find that terribly annoying. But I was absent for a year due to medical complications. Did pinging become mandatory during that time? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 00:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:: Guido: no, in most circumstances pinging isn't mandatory, but it is customary. I take it from your remark above that you'd rather not be pinged.

:: {{ping|SHB2000}} when you say, "All they do on Commons is stir up dramas," is that intended to be taken literally? Offhand, [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:ME-CFS_Diagnostic_Criteria_Comparison.webp], [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Flags_of_micronations&diff=prev&oldid=835257374], and [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Alternative_outlets&diff=prev&oldid=832698626] look like productive edits. Are you saying they are not? It looks like he's had a pretty contentious couple of days, but that's a long way from "All they do on Commons is stir up dramas." I take seriously what Jeff G. says above, but please don't muddy the waters. - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 01:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:::No, not literally. [[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::::I think that during all the years that I have been here, I have started only two or three discussions on a drama board. On my own wikis (I have 6) we don't have such boards. We don't need them, and I can't even remember the last time that I blocked someone. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 02:22, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::@[[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]]: What wikis are those?   — 🇺🇦[[User:Jeff G.|Jeff G.]] ツ please [[Template:Ping|ping]] or [[User:Jeff G./talk|talk to me]]🇺🇦 04:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::I don't see the relevance. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:53, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::::::* {{ping|Guido den Broeder}} if it is not relevant, then why did ''you'' bring it up? - [[User:Jmabel|Jmabel]] ! [[User talk:Jmabel|talk]] 16:55, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::What happens outside of Wikimedia is irrelevant to what happens on Commons. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{cmt}} While I agree on repeated incivilities by GdB and that a warning message to stop incivilities is relevant, still a [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Guido_den_Broeder&diff=prev&oldid=839903625 "stop vandalizing" template] was clearly misplaced here. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 02:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{cmt}} Where I wrote ''I would again calmly refute all your lies'', this was in reference to a possible repeat of the discussion of 2022, where I did so, and not to the discussion at [[#User:SchroCat]]. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 04:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*{{s}} a block (3 months?), so that they get the message. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 07:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:Could you explain to me what the message is? Why should I be blocked when I am the one getting attacked? Are you still claiming that I vandalized this page or do you acknowledge that your warning was misplaced? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::The message is, that you should urgently stop uncivil comments like [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&diff=prev&oldid=839667594 this one]. The fact that a wrong warning template was selected does not make the intended warning from personal attacks null and void. The essence is the same, [[:en:Wikipedia:Gaming the system|gaming the system]] will not work here. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 14:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::This is the user problem noticeboard. If there is a problem with a user, it should be safe for everyone to report so. Do you think that the ad hominem by Ikan Kekek that I responded to, ''a man who decided he's my enemy to me'', was fine? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 14:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::If you're still reading this, you're the one who's attacking everyone, making Commons a less enjoyable place to edit. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 22:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*Back in 2022 there was a thread here about Guido. At the time, I had this to say: {{tq|The main concern I've had about Guido is that he seems primarily interested in two things on Commons: self-promotion and noticeboard drama.}} - This still appears to be true. Just glancing at his recent contributions they are largely dramaboards, a couple DRs, and edit warring with {{u|TU-nor}} to include a link to WikiSage, a website Guido founded, at [[Commons:Alternative outlets]], and then even giving TU-nor a [[User_talk:TU-nor#Alternative_outlets|"final warning"]] about it. We don't have a version of [[:en:WP:NOTHERE|WP:NOTHERE]], but basically this is a case of [[COM:NOTHERE]]. — [[User:Rhododendrites|Rhododendrites]] [[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]] |  16:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:And on Wikisage we promote Commons. Isn't that we we're supposed to do, support each other? [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::No. We provide the best resource we can to our users. That doesn't include linking to another wiki just because they link to us. There is no good reason to link to Wikisage, among all the hundreds/thousands of other online encyclopedic projects out there, as the sole link next to our sister project, Wikipedia, except for your own promotional interests. — [[User:Rhododendrites|Rhododendrites]] [[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]] |  17:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::When TU-nor finally took a look at Wikisage, he understood, and stopped editwarring. There the content dispute ended. That is how I solve content disputes, not by running to the drama board. And now [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Alternative_outlets&diff=next&oldid=840582431 you are editwarring] in violation of the prevailing consensus. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::::I removed an unhelpful external link added multiple times by a user here primarily to promote himself and his interests (and willing to issue warnings to those who get in the way). Edit warring is repeatedly making the same edit. You are the only one that has done that here. I find it shocking that even ''here'' you're still combative about your abuse of Commons for promotion. — [[User:Rhododendrites|Rhododendrites]] [[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]] |  17:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::::This here is not a dramaboard per se. You turn it into one, every singel time I have seen you editing here. Try to solve conflicts respectfully and without drama here as well. [[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*:::::Are you saying that I should ignore personal attacks against me? I'm not sure I understand you correctly. [[User:Guido den Broeder|Guido den Broeder]] ([[User talk:Guido den Broeder|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::::::And that is just one way you turn this into a dramaboard. You derail at every possible turn. [[User:Kritzolina|Kritzolina]] ([[User talk:Kritzolina|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

*::::I utterly resent the remark {{tq|When TU-nor finally took a look at Wikisage, he understood, and stopped editwarring}} at [[Commons:Alternative outlets]]. For one thing, I was not editwarring. I made 1 – one – edit to the page, removing the link to Wikisage with the edit summary "Rmv. self-promotion". My edit was immediately reverted. Even more I resent the creation of a totally unfounded and fictional reason given for my lack of further edits. No, I did not 'finally take a look' at Wikisage. I had already studied it enough to know that the English version is a completely useless arena for writing an encyclopedic article (at least if you want it to be seen). No, I did not 'understand' the reason for keeping it. Truth is, I just could not be bothered to waste time on it, since my main work is in other Wikis. --[[User:TU-nor|TU-nor]] ([[User talk:TU-nor|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{d}} I blocked Guido den Broeder for 3 months. I wasn't aware of the details, but the information given by Rhododendrites, and Guido's answers, clearly demonstrate that he didn't understand what are expected from contributors here. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 17:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::Indeed, he is now [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AGuido_den_Broeder&diff=840596476&oldid=840594975 trying to promote "an alternative to Commons, one without the hate and the porn"]. I wonder if they will, once launched, steal images from Commons, like the one meanwhile banned guy from the so-called "Ruwiki" did. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 18:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:::The message from him is clear: he doesn't belong to Commons. Reblocked indef. without talk page access. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::::Indef seems right per NOTHERE. I'll also say that I'd support an appeal down the road if it clearly articulated constructive activities he'd undertake and committed not to engage in any promotional activity. — [[User:Rhododendrites|Rhododendrites]] [[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]] |  19:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::Long overdue; thanks for the block, {{u|Yann}}! --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:::I feel, that if somebody will create a "hate-free" alternative to Commons or Wikipedia, it will inevitably become safeplace of racists, antisemites, neofascists, anti-LGBT propaganda and conspiracy theories. [[User:Taivo|Taivo]] ([[User talk:Taivo|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 15:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

::::In essence, that's what X has become after Elon wanted to promote "free speech" on the platform. --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::This guy already has a Wikipedia-clone with mostly copies of articles deleted at the Dutch Wikipedia and some attack pages. Good block. NOTHERE. [[User:Natuur12|Natuur12]] ([[User talk:Natuur12|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::In the likely case of launching a Commons' clone with stolen contents from Commons, the {{U|WMFOffice}} should urgently consider a ban, too. --[[User:A.Savin|A.Savin]] 00:06, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

:::::I think WikiSage only has like 38 users to begin with and its mostly garbage. So he probably couldn't even do it if we wanted to. Really his whole thing just comes off like a weird, badly done deep fake or something. I don't know, but there's almost zero shot him of making an actual alternative to Commons. --[[User:Adamant1|Adamant1]] ([[User talk:Adamant1|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 01:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

== request ==

Please block {{vandal|弟魯}} sock of globally blocked user [[Special:Contributions/14.0.174.246|14.0.174.246]] 09:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{done}} the other way round: Requesting IP blocked per [[Special:Contributions/14.0.226.128]] and [[:File:Victoria Harbour & Kowloon.jpg]] semiprotected for 1 year. --[[User:Achim55|Achim55]] ([[User talk:Achim55|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 09:27, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

::Neat response – I've reported the IP to [[m:SRG]] for long-term abuse (they're a known LTA). --[[User:SHB2000|SHB2000]] ([[User talk:SHB2000|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

== user:Komajo.jh.kouhou ==

* {{user3|Komajo.jh.kouhou}}

: they contributed same school pictures. those photo is include non public areas. maybe the contributor is school staff. those photo include due to law concerns. --[[User:Eien20|eien20]] ([[User talk:Eien20|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

:{{ping|Eien20}} You must inform a user when you report them here. I did it for you this time. [[User:Yann|Yann]] ([[User talk:Yann|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 16:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)