Shortcuts: COM:AN/U • COM:ANU • COM:ANI

Note

• Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
• Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
• Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
• Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
• It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; Please try to remain civil with your comments.
• Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Oursana sorting by arbitrary number

• User: Oursana (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued sorting by arbitrary number after notification about the problem a year ago in Special:Diff/1028440547 and lying about that in Special:Diff/1218486714, and failing to document her methodology. See the discussion at Commons talk:Categories#Sorting by arbitrary number started in Special:Diff/1212899358.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:26, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

I endorse this report. In fact, this issue goes back over four years. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:22, 23 May 2026 (UTC)

• Also see Commons talk:Categories#Sorting of Monet cats by Wildenstein Nr and User talk:Oursana#Sorting of Monet cats by Wildenstein Nr Andy Dingley (talk) 18:50, 23 May 2026 (UTC)
• I would now support any action to stop this ongoing problem, up to long blocks or TBANs from problem areas. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:11, 24 May 2026 (UTC)
• What I find more problematic is that the user appears impenetrable to complaints by several other users signaling troubles with that way of editing and behaving. The user just keeps going, without even answering (neither here). --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 22:25, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

I recommend that a few more admins read Commons talk:Categories#Sorting by arbitrary number. I think there is a real problem here, and I would like to see at least something like a TBAN from cat sorting. I'd love to see them turn this energy into making good gallery pages (a far better way to accomplish what they seem to be after), and I wouldn't even object to Oursana being able to propose a cat sort on a given category talk page, but not to cat sort unilaterally. I am pretty convinced they are doing more harm than good. - Jmabel ! talk 16:13, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

I would agree with a TBAN. As a side note, we should have a standard template to put at the top of categories that are using well-defined sorting (such as by-date sorting while relevant). I could draft the language, but I have no experience making translatable templates. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:35, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Until now it is not forbidden to sort. On my disc you find also three positive reactions. Even the Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2022/02#Numerical_sort_keys#Numerical sort keys had no result. One can only get banned for something that is clear forbidden.

Many times also on my talkpage t talked with User:Wuselig for whom all sortkeys are not necessary, but he never told me to stop.

I was thanked for my sorting by user:FotoDutch

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=thanks&user=FotoDutch&page=&wpdate=&tagfilter=&wpFormIdentifier=logeventslist&excludetempacct=1

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AAmsterdam_photo_2023_-_a_modern_metal_arch_bridge_for_pedestrians_and_bikers%3B_location_is_at_the_west_side_of_Central_Station._In_the_background_the_Prins_Hendrikkade._Free_download_street_photography%2C_Fons_Heijnsbroek%2C_CCO_Netherlands.tif&oldid=prev&diff=1118402015[

Sorting by filename is the most unilateral thing to do

Commons:Forum/Archiv/2018/July#Parameter in Kategorien discussed sortkeys, whether practical or not, not forbidden

Sorting by arbitrary sortkey of photos of a creek was also discussed by another user Commons:Forum/Archiv/2022/March#Dateien werden nicht in Wikimedia Commons angezeigt, no word that this is forbidden - which really is not. Oursana (talk) 20:48, 26 May 2026 (UTC)

Coming from Commons talk:Categories#Sorting by arbitrary number, I find their latest comment here to be yet another in a line of being unable to see anything wrong with their approach. Multiple veteran users who explicitly express their concerns about this, are essentially dismissed as "but nobody really has had a problem with this". --HyperGaruda (talk) 04:56, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

There are two things, 1. to accept other users different opinions now, which I do and stopped categorizing long ago, 2. to accept a ban for something that was not cleared before. And for both you must accept that many did not have a problem, or didn't like but didn't care, and some even liked it. Even Jeff was not clear. Was the problem the sorting or the "failure" of explanation. For commons categories are not many rules. Some create cats for 1 file only, some do not bother about the chosen language by cat naming, some create ambigious cat names, specially in the arts without artist's name. Some say galleries must have two files. All is not fixed and there are endless discussions. And you must admit that the "discussion" was from the beginning very agressive, agf was missing, and sorting by arbitrary file names gives no better quality. There are no rules for file names and no rules for the size of categories. The longer commons exists, the more files have to be managed, and many editors and users are not convinced from commons category system which has to be improved. By sorting I often realize to create dividing categories like Remote views of Royal Palace of Amsterdam with 116 files from Royal Palace of Amsterdam, which contained ca. 500 files when I started, certainly unuseful. I suggest to keep open the possibilities to agree on a sorting system on the cat disk. By year in the arts is often useless. Oursana (talk) 07:36, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

the "discussion" was from the beginning very agressive, once again that's not true. People is kindly asking you to stop since years, you juste ignore everybody that does not agree with your idea, and keep repeating that a lot of people thank you for your sorting (which IMHO is greatly overestimated, this is the log of the "thanks" you received). It's true there are not specific regulations about sorting files, this is a wiki, and it's ok to be bold trying to improve the archive. It's not ok to just ignore everybody that is telling you to please stop. --Phyrexian ɸ 14:01, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

"Everybody's out of step except my Johnny!"

@Oursana: if you accept this now, and stop doing creating these arbitrary sorts, I don't see any reason for a block, but please stop insisting that no one ever said anything to you about this before, clearly several people did, they just didn't push the matter. - Jmabel ! talk 20:38, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

I stopped already, but let us be open for discussions. And you? When you read English and German (in some given links) you realize that I mentioned it myself and linked the discussion with Pigsonthewing and the unsuccessful Village pump in 2022, with two answers. Commons:Forum/Archiv/2022/October#Umbenennen von Dateien "Rename of file" to the end Ralf Roletschek cites my numeral sortings with this 17-04-15-Potsdamer Platz-RalfR-DSC 0028.jpg filename, which he thinks ridiculous and does not revert, and XRay talks about a discussion when he could not convince me, Raymond dislikes all sortkeys and says he simply ignores, with hope to wikidata.

So there are fans (perhaps still not to many), users who do not care, dislikers who do not care, dislikers who care but do not act and the famous group here. Together with the works on a Glam occasion I learned from Ralf Roletschek to use simple forthgoing numbers what I did to be transparent. Not convincing is to set arbitrary filenames over numeral sortkeys and that there is no regard of the often convincing better result of the category. What I told Pigsonthewing and what is true we had 10 years a community office in Hamburg. So I was in weekly real contact for ten years with many commons photographers, admins and editors. In our Hamburg community there were no complains (group 1 and 2 above) but strong dislikers of the commons category system. I sometimes actively asked them, when their photos were concerned. I remember there was a baloon flight over Hamburg with ca. 4 commons photographers everybody with his own naming system. So I helped with accepted categories and sorting. - I am not so happy, but happy we finish this.Oursana (talk) 23:36, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Dey H.E

• User: Dey H.E (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading after final warning 16:28, 18 November 2022 (UTC).

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 06:17, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done. One week block. Taivo (talk) 12:29, 29 May 2026 (UTC)

Ranwjyaaa and Raden liee alhidayah

• Ranwjyaaa (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Raden liee alhidayah (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Uploading personal photos for promoting himself in Wikidata:special:history/Q123448682. Please kindly delete all of those photos as here is not Instagram anyway. ~2026-32181-89 (talk) 06:23, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Both blocked indef., one for socking, and the other for reuploading out of scope files after warning. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:01, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Hugo.fr43

• User: Hugo.fr43 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading for years.

CoffeeEngineer (talk) 08:17, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

Delete the lot, block until they discuss and understand the problem here. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Some of the logos tagged by CoffeeEngineer are in fact {{PD-textlogo}}. I deleted some files, and sent the last warning. And files which are borderline the threshold of originality should get a regular deletion request, not a "no permission" tag. Yann (talk) 09:42, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Кумнац

Кумнац (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) recent copyvios after multiple warnings, including the 'last' one. Romano1981 (talk) 16:51, 30 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 04:39, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Kstorage

Kstorage (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
Despite their talk page being plastered in deletion notices they never participate in any DR discussion nor are they capable of ceasing uploading new files. This isn't going anywhere. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 04:16, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 04:37, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Yann, thanks for the quick action.
I forgot to notify her of this discussion, in this case it's unlikely that would have made a substantial difference though. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 04:57, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

I warned them on English Wikipedia against abusing their user page (btw they're indeffed on MediaWiki for spam) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 12:06, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Jeff G. reported them on meta-wiki and got the account globally locked for "cross-wiki abuse". I mean, technically using Wikimedia as a free webhost is a form of abuse, but it feels like a bit of an escalation. Whether they would have ever started contributing in a meaningful way I don't know, but maybe. We'll never know I guess. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:57, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Pornteleev again, and a bad non-admin DR closure

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Red–black tree (53424405220).jpg

Yacàwotçã, as the uploader, a non-admin, an obvious advocate for anything Panteleev, repeatedly indef blocked and blocked specifically in relation to Panteleev, should not be closing DRs related to this area.

At the very least, this is a contentious DR and non-admin closures should be avoided on that basis alone. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:16, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Reverted myself. You know you could have just talked to me on my talk page, don’t you? 🤷 Or even simply reverted me, I am not going to engage in any edit wars. What’s the point of this after all? Yacàwotçã (talk) 21:22, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Regardless, we all know a single TA-opened DR with the argument “uh, porn?” isn’t going anywhere. What a needless waste of time Yacàwotçã (talk) 21:23, 31 May 2026 (UTC)

Narpsyweatherlike

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

Looks to me like their uploads, all related to rapper La Fouine, are all AI fakes. Also, their conduct around File:La Fouine in a gym with boxing gloves and four other people.jpg looks very questionable, and I suspect this may be a sock of globally locked User:Verisurma. - Jmabel ! talk 00:11, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

I mass deleted all his uploads. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done This is Climater67 indeed. Together with a couple of other socks blocked indef (if not already) and global lock requested. --Lymantria (talk) 15:23, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

NoahTheBoa7868

NoahTheBoa7868 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

User is here only to disrupt. See contributions: File:Photo Of Charles J. Kirk circa. 2024.webp, File:Barack Obama.webp. - The Bushranger (talk) 04:11, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked and nuked. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:23, 1 June 2026 (UTC)

Konoara

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

This user is already blocked on frwp and on WD. He should be blocked here too. The last file he uploaded is an insult (and should be deleted) : File:PascalProut.png. The real name of this person is "Pascal Praud". Prout means "fart" in french. You can also delete File:JordanBardepasla.jpg (real name Jordan Bardela, "pas là" means "not here") Supertoff (talk) 07:41, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done, all files deleted and user blocked. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 09:49, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Saikat4

Saikat4 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

This user is only engaged in uploading copyright violation images. The user has been warned earlier, but they do not care. Now, to avoid scrutiny of images, they have started gaming the system by adding {{Permission pending|year=2026|month=June|day=1}} themselves. This need to be stopped. All their contributions are tagged for speedy deletions with proper rationale. Request any admin to take action. Thank you. Agent 007 (talk) 16:26, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

@Agent VII: Thanks for your report. Such additions will be removed soon, one way or another.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:36, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done All uploads deleted; blocked for 2 weeks. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:14, 2 June 2026 (UTC)

Karenlizreyes26

• User: Karenlizreyes26 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued oos uploading like File:Bobs normal appearance as a kid062026.png after warning for doing so.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 07:27, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I mass deleted her last remaining uploads and blocked her for a week, mostly for re-uploading content deleted per community consensus. Taivo (talk) 12:02, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Arcofdreams2002

Arcofdreams2002 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) After being banned for one week and one month for uploading copyright-infringing content, this user continues undeterred. A permanent ban is now likely in order. Stepro (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

I kinda agree but looking at it the previous blocks were last year. On that basis I've blocked for 6 months. However any alteration to that block won't bother me... Thanks for reporting. Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:17, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Reupload check

Is File:Javi Hoyos.jpg (description: "Javier de Hoyos en 'D Corazón'") a reupload of File:Javi Hoyos en 'D corazón'.jpg? - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 08:09, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

@Alexis Jazz: Essentially the same image; the other file was a "crop" that did not depict the whole person. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 08:59, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Wendy at AgenticCommons

Wendy at AgenticCommons (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) This user looks like unapproved AI/bot editing. See the discussion at enwiki and wikidata. HyperAnd [talk] 08:21, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi, I operate this account. I'm sorry for the disruption this caused. That's on me.

I just went through the Commons:Bots page (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bots) and realised I got it wrong: any automated task needs permission in advance, even without a bot flag, and it should run from a separate account. I didn't do either before running this. I've stopped it now and nothing more will run.

I'd like to set this up properly: make a dedicated bot account and file a request at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Bots/Requests , and explain openly what it does and where the data comes from. I won't resume until it's approved. Happy to answer any questions, and if people would prefer the recent edits reverted in the meantime, I'll do that. Wendy at AgenticCommons (talk) 09:34, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

@Wendy at AgenticCommons: Certainly something like that needs to happen. Question: how much are you reviewing (or planning to review) what it does? For example, I'm not sure adding depicts lake (Q23397) to File:Castilleja with Summit lake in the background, Clearwater Wilderness, WA (DSC 0577).jpg is useful. Yes, there is a category for what specific lake is barely visible in the background, and if we have a Wikidata item for that particular lake, that could be useful just in terms of implied location, but as a generic depiction of a lake it is useless. (FWIW, I only looked at what it did to three files before I found what looked like a questionable edit.) - Jmabel ! talk 14:43, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

I'd say (1) try to get your bot approved and (2) take the time to go through manually and revert anything you, as a human, would not stand by as your edit. You'll probably also learn a lot about tuning the bot in the process. - Jmabel ! talk 14:44, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Jmabel, I'm not sure about our rules for structured data, but should a file be tagged with both "flower" and "Castilleja" when the Castilleja is the flower? (I suppose a pre-flowering Castilleja could be photographed as well, so perhaps yes?) To File:Flowers on city walls of Dubrovnik .jpg Wendy added "stone wall". I mean technically yes it depicts that but..
@Wendy at AgenticCommons, please use the ToolSDC tag for your edits. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:13, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

"Flower" is not redundant to the species, any more than "root" or "stem" or "bud" would be. I suspect that there is some way the species and organ could be described in a single statement using or or the other as a qualifier, and I think that would be better, but I don't know what would be the appropriate Wikidata property to use for the qualifier. - Jmabel ! talk 02:58, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Jmabel, maybe biological phase, but I don't know. Would have to ask the Wikidata folks. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 03:26, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks everyone for the feedback.

In my earlier testing, I was mostly focused on whether something was visible in the image at all and filtering out things that were completely unrelated. What I overlooked was whether it was actually a meaningful subject of the image, which is really what matters most. That was a very useful observation.

I'll submit a bot request and adjust the algorithm so it only adds annotations for the main subjects of an image.

I'll also review the recent edits and clean up any annotations that don't make sense, especially those added for minor or incidental elements. @Jmabel

On the tags — thanks, Alexis. One question: ToolSDC tag is defined as a human-operated tool rather than a bot, so when I manually edit the earlier edits, I'll use ToolSDC tag for those. And if the bot request gets approved and it ends up running as a bot, should I switch to BotSDC tag at that point? Just want to get the tagging right. @Alexis Jazz Wendy at AgenticCommons (talk) 04:37, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Wendy at AgenticCommons, yes. All available tags can be seen at Special:Tags. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 04:46, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I do not believe that addition of both "flower" and "Inflorescence" is appropriate, see File:Lupinus polyphyllus in Canterbury Region 09.jpg. An inflorescence consists of flowers. So "flower" looks really superfluous IMO, in the way of overcategorization. However, I do not really understand how these structured data tags correlate and whether I might be entirely wrong because the database structure is really weird and "flower" and "inflorescence" do not have the proper correlation in the database because an inflorescence consists of "florets" for the Wikidata people, even though the term "floret" is explained as a small flower. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 11:01, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Дементьева Роман

Дементьева Роман (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) new batch of copyvios after three long term blocks. Romano1981 (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2026 (UTC)

Good afternoon! I welcome the discussion, but I would like to point out that the files that have been removed by a group are official photographs of members of the Azerbaijani Parliament and were taken from the official website of the Azerbaijani Parliament. These individuals are public figures, and the website is owned by a government agency of a sovereign state. I have taken these actions in order to illustrate the encyclopedic articles about the members of the Azerbaijani Parliament. If my account is blocked for an extended period, it will prevent the project from expanding its horizons, as I often post my own photographs on various topics related to geography, culture, and sports. If there was an error with the official photographs of Azerbaijani Parliament members, it was unintentional and did not have any criminal nature. Дементьева Роман (talk) 03:14, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I would also like to note that the previous blockages occurred in 2019, when I was unclear about the conditions and rules for uploading photos to this project. For several years, I have diligently followed the project's requirements. The issue with the official photos of Azerbaijani parliament members can be resolved with the help of the entire user community. However, my personal requests to the Azerbaijani parliament regarding the right to use official photos of members with attribution to the official website have not been answered. Дементьева Роман (talk) 04:03, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Indef: you cannot think that an image's availability automatically confers on you the right to upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 04:20, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I fully agree with you, but we are talking about a government agency and its official website, where each deputy is represented by their own portrait. In my opinion, this is the most reliable and high-quality source of information for illustrating a person's page. Дементьева Роман (talk) 11:16, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I would like to add that it is allowed to use any photos from the President of Azerbaijan's website, and there are no restrictions from the project. The Milli Majlis of Azerbaijan is the highest representative body of the Republic, and its members are elected by popular vote. meclis.gov.az is the official website of this government body. When posting photos, I always include a link to the source and the copyright. Дементьева Роман (talk) 11:25, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

@Дементьева Роман: About that batch that now is nominated for speedy deletion. Website has "© Copyright 2020 by Milli Majlis" in the footer. There is no indication that the files are actually available under {{Cc-by-4.0}}. I am willing to grant the requests for speeedy deletion. Please provide the correct link; otherwise, I will delete the files. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 12:36, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

@Дементьева Роман: I see no exemption from copyright for that body's photographers at COM:Azerbaijan. Where may I find one?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:41, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

I would  Support Whyiseverythingalreadyused here. It is very evident from the replies that the user in question has no understanding of copyright. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 12:41, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

So do I. After all these I see no chance the user will be able to understand what Commons is for and what Commons:Licensing means. Romano1981 (talk) 14:29, 5 June 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps after the standard offer.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 15:35, 5 June 2026 (UTC)