Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcut: COM:AN

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.

Vandalism
[new section] 		User problems
[new section] 		Blocks and protections
[new section] 		Other
[new section]

Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.


Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.


Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.


Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.

Archives
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
Translate this page
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)

Note

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


New system message for UploadWizard

Hi all! This is a request for interface admins: we're working on a specific message for when users upload medias with a wrong title, that would appear as a pop-up message when clicking on a specific link.

We would like to create a specific system message, maybe called MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-filename-short, that only shows the examples for good and bad names taken from MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-filename. The reason for this is that the full text is too long to be shown in a pop-up, and may cause that the user won't read it.

Is it possible to do so? Thanks in advance. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure if it’s a good idea to not show the other information in that message, to be honest… do you maybe have some mockups or something similar (perhaps on Phabricator) to see what this would look like? Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mockup of new dialog message for wrong title of UploadWizard
Mockup of new dialog message for wrong title of UploadWizard
@Lucas Werkmeister: hi, sorry for taking this long to answer, on the right you can find the mockup of the potential message. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:34, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sannita (WMF): That looks ok, but doesn't mention the parentheses in the background. Will those be accepted? How about other matched delimiters like square brackets, braces, and quotes? Other punctuation?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:05, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G. We are only copying the existing examples in MediaWiki:Titleblacklist-custom-filename into the example (maybe not all of them in this mockup, but still this is the idea). Sannita (WMF) (talk) 15:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about the implementation for a moment – I’m guessing MediaWiki:Titleblacklist would need to gain support for something like |errmsg-short= in addition to |errmsg=? Or do you want to hard-code “|errmsg= + "-short"” as the title of the short message? Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sannita (WMF): MediaWiki messages should be defined in the extension (or in core) and can have a local override. Why are you not doing that here? Do you have a related phabricator task? Multichill (talk) 17:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just to let you know that we're still deciding which way to go. I'm in contact with the devs to decide how do we want to deal with this. --Sannita (WMF) (talk) 08:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T366323
Ok, so we decided to follow @Multichill's idea and show a generic error message that will in turn link to the correct notice. You can follow the implementation in the ticket I added. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 12:52, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request for Template:PD-RU-exempt

I want to add Category:PD-Gov license tags to Template:PD-RU-exempt but the template is currently protected. Please help me finish this edit, thanks. Whisper of the heart (talk) 16:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The template is included in a subcategory of Category:PD-Gov license tags. Abzeronow (talk) 16:59, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Images that needs reloading.

File:Ten Days of Weather (14184590652).jpg and File:New NASA 3D Animation Shows Seven Days of Simulated Earth Weather (14906862243).jpg are supposed to be animation of clouds by NASA over a period of 7 to 10 days according to the source. However, only the thumb images of the start of those loops have been uploaded. So the titles and descriptions are not related to what these image are. The images needs to be deleted and they should be replaced by the flicker loop at the source.

Pierre cb (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File moving request

A moving request for File:Kyrgyzstani eVisa.pdf has been submitted for a long time but have not been finished yet. Please move the file ASAP, thanks. Whisper of the heart (talk) 17:25, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done although this didn't require an administrator to do it. Abzeronow (talk) 17:44, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for revision deletion

Please delete old revision of File:MerryDove.jpg, as the photographer doesn't want it to be used. See discussion at here. 0x0a (talk) 05:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 07:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EC-Audiovisual delete request handling

The Category:EU Scopes - Information and education only is currently at 258 files with 11 uploaders, ranging from 203 files to 2 files. How do we handle mass deletion for these files? I feel a bit uneasy informing a user that 200+ files they uploaded are not allowed.

Also, the content for this category will keep growing as files in Category:EC-Audiovisual Center review needed are processed and possibly identified as problematic. Note that we have had delete requests processed (and pending) already because of disclaimer on source page.

How should we proceed with this?

Thank you, and regards. // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand that case. The linked copyright page on the sources makes clear that all content is under CC-BY unless otherwise stated. And the files I checked did not have a different license on their page. GPSLeo (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@GPSLeo: It is confusing, unfortunately. For example
That is the problem and VRT ticket discussion led to EU staff just saying read the copyright policy. // sikander { talk } 🦖 15:15, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mean they use the term scope as synonym for license or usage conditions? I would understand the term scope as the topic of the photo. If we have contact to them through VRT we should ask them to use a clearer term. GPSLeo (talk) 15:20, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think so. Of all the files I've reviewed the "Scope" text on individual photo pages is the only data that matches the "unless stated otherwise in the terms of use accompanying each individual file" declaration in Copyright policy. At the same time, User Zoozaz1 disagrees (see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:EU Scopes - Information and education only). What do you suggest next step should be? // sikander { talk } 🦖 16:06, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Withdraw: I will contact EC-Audiovisual staff again and ask for clarification about "Scope" text and whether Commons can host "Scopes: Information and education only" and "Scopes: Non-commercial use, Information and education only" files. Marking this as withdrawn for now and will re-create, if needed. Thank you. // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

User persistently removing DR template

Hey, I've recently nominated the file File:Noah D'castellano.jpg for deletion here. The uploader has repeatedly removed the template ([1], [2]) even after I warned them on their talk, and now is resorting to disruptive behaviour such as this Commons:Deletion requests/User:Cakelot1. I have repeatedly told them the correct way to prevent the file being deltead (providing rebuttalsat the DR), but they seem unwilling or unable to. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 22:03, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cakelot1: Semi-protected for 3 months to prevent further disruption. @Alisha Yvonne: This is not acceptable behavior. Further bad behavior on your part will result in a block. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:34, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked them for this + retributive DR filings (before I saw this conversation). The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:40, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Squirrel Conspiracy: I've just blocked Berkhey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) as an obvious sock. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 00:03, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr review stopped working

It looks like that the Flickrbot stopped working again today again for 3 hours now. Just to let you know. Best, --Leoboudv (talk) 11:54, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Stemoc who has helped get it rebooted the past two times: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_95#Flickr_Review_Bot_has_broken_down and Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive_95#Flickr_Review_bot_is_stuck. // sikander { talk } 🦖 13:24, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ok, told him to get it rebooted but yeah guys you need to find maintainers with developer access to atleast reboot it from time to time, this time it lasted 56 days...hopefully more than 100 days this time around.. I won't be around anymore after a few weeks so please find a better solution.. Stemoc 15:44, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Open deletion requests (FOP cases)

I wanted to point to some open deletion requests I have started a while ago and which are in my opinion clear cases due to FOP issues, but noticed that there are even more requests. The ones I’ve started are all in category French FOP cases/pending, but only two of them are from me (coincidentally the two first ones in the moment). There is also the parent category FOP-related deletion requests/pending with indicators for non empty subcategories (these indicators could be coloured by CSS, but the string needed for this is unfortunately language dependent, so I cannot post a suggestion). I would be pleased, if someone would get active. — Speravir – 23:31, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speravir: Commons is in a dire state. Every process is backlogged and several critical processes are dependent on a single user. At least DR is moving. It'll get there eventually. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request to mass-delete redirects from mistype

Wednesday I uploaded ~400 photos, typing in the wrong day in the filename. I mass-moved them, but the tool left behind redirects. I'm trying to upload photos from Thursday, which the Upload Wizard doesn't like that there are redirects. Could they please be deleted to make way for the new files? The files are titled NYC Trump court trial 2024-05-29 [000..399], and links to them can be found in my move log. Thank you, and I'm so sorry! SWinxy (talk) 22:11, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SWinxy: No worries, I deleted the whole lot with JWB (check your move log). Also shoutout to Ymblanter for doing everything before 041 and 397-399. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 14:05, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
omg thank you you two!!! Don't forget Jmabel! <3 SWinxy (talk) 18:14, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Renaming Template:GFDL-OpenGeoDB

Hi! Would someone be able to rename Template:GFDL-OpenGeoDB to Template:PD-OpenGeoDB? The template does not license files under the GFDL, so its name is misleading. I am unable to edit the template (and thus cannot tag it for someone else to move). Thanks, HouseBlaster (talk) 16:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Inactive" license reviewers

Quotation from Commons:License review

"There is currently no defined policy for removal of license reviewer rights. In case of clear abuse or gross incompetence, a request for removal can be raised on the administrators' noticeboard. Inactivity is currently not a valid rationale for removal of license reviewer rights. (underline added)

Commons:Flickr files/reviewers states (at the bottom of the page) that "There are currently 513 users who can review files." However, there are some unknown number of "inactive reviewers" in the image-reviewer list here: [3]

For example, This volunteer has not edited on Commons for over 5 years. This volunteer has been inactive, since 2014. There are other examples of inactivity for lesser periods of time.

  • Can there be a policy created to remove license reviewer rights after a certain period of inactivity? They could always be encouraged to reapply, if they again become active.
Given their significance I'd agree inactive license reviewers should be demoted. They could always reapply and be given the right immediately again if competent Bedivere (talk) 02:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is the harm this is intended to prevent? - Jmabel ! talk 02:25, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seconding Jmabel. This seems like a solution in search of a problem. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 04:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The only benefit would be that the statistic only shows the ones how are actually active. But for this we do not need to remove the rights. For the statistic we could just filter for thous how are active and not only active by regular edits but with license reviews. GPSLeo (talk) 04:57, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i think it's a matter of keeping the user groups (visualised as lists) current. it's also pretty easy to re-grant the user groups when they become active again.
imo all groups except autopatrol should be removed after being inactive (not a single edit, not a single log action) for 10 years. RZuo (talk) 07:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Category rename by overwrite

Please move Category:Families of Viruses to Category:Viruses by family.

The description of Category:Families of Viruses mentions Template:Taxonavigation populating that category, but the subcategories actually end up at Category:Viruses by family.

I'm posting this here following the suggestion by @Billinghurst [4]. Enhancing999 (talk) 10:24, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is there any reason this is not to be handled by a normal CfD? - Jmabel ! talk 19:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It could be, which was why I rejected the speedy deletion and asked for more detail for the assessment, as a move and overwrite seemed more appropriate. The two categories have now been merged, and tidied, duplicates removed, and he "... by family" is more inline with our current naming philosophy and therefore findable through HotCat.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Talk page fix please

For some reason a user modified my talk page and moved the welcome message from 2007. After that the Archiver bot archived the 2007 welcome message by Yann. Unfortunately I cannot undo this due to edit conflicts.

Can an Admin please revert the changes to so that the archiver bot doesn't archive the 2007 message in the next run? Thank you so much! // sikander { talk } 🦖 14:28, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I fixed it, without being an admin. Enhancing999 (talk) 16:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, Enhancing999, your edit is a new edit which the archiver bot will archive again the next time it runs. Please leave this for Admnistrators. // sikander { talk } 🦖 16:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sikander: The way to manage sections not to archive is through use of {{DNAU}}, or to remove a date in the last component of that section, as the archiverbot looks for the date in the sig for that identification.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PLUS this is not a task for busy admininstrators. Your talk page is yours to manage.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah ok, thank you, didn't know of that and thought reverting edits and deleting them would be the ideal way. I'll make the adjustments. Thanks and regards // sikander { talk } 🦖 23:04, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checkmark This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Sikander

Santhosh kumar 001 uploads

Hello. Can an admin check the uploads of a certain Santhosh kumar 001 (talk · contribs)? I have tagged for speedy deletion two of their uploads (File:இருசக்கர வாகனம்.jpg and File:குழிப்பணியாரம்.webp) because of being apparent copyvios. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 00:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard&oldid=880966407"