Commons:ANU

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

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
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
130, 129, 128, 127, 126, 125, 124, 123, 122, 121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
Translate this page
Category:Commons administrators#*Administrators'%20noticeboard/User%20problemsCategory:Commons community

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.

User:Deltaspace42

Deltaspace42 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)  A user who received his autopatrol rights less than a month ago, yesterday closed more than a dozen deletion requests, mostly providing no reasoning beyond 'kept'. Please review their activity. Romano1981 (talk) 04:44, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Romano1981: please provide diffs. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 05:37, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Easily visible: , but okay: Romano1981 (talk) 05:54, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
I believe that the reported user was exercising an implication of "per above", but then they could have just said that Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:10, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
 Comment Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Calin Sebastian Catalin is an easy keep. Romania in that era had a very short duration of copyright for photos, all photos from Romania in that era are now PD. - Jmabel ! talk 06:05, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Surely many of these nominations could have been closed this way, but if you don't have to be an administrator to do this, demonstrate your experience and understanding of copyright issues, as well as explain your decision, then maybe such DRs can be closed by a bot? Romano1981 (talk) 06:11, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Romano1981, DRs should not be closed by a bot, otherwise this file Commons:Deletion requests/File:JP 日本 Japan 沖繩 OKINAWA 那霸 Naha Omoromachi Shintoshin 新都心 Naha Main Place 商場 Shopping Mall Tax Free Goods package January 2025 R12S 02.jpg would have been closed as kept. Please don't think that I just count Keep votes and close without reviewing the files myself. Deltaspace42 (talk) 11:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
On the other hand, I would certainly have blurred the larger images on the right side of the respective machines for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Food ticket vending machines in Yayoiken.jpg. @Deltaspace42: : did you zoom in on these to see how high-res they were before deciding they were de minimis? - Jmabel ! talk 06:08, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel, yes, I reviewed the files before closing the discussion. I believe de minimis can be applied for this file. So that you don't think that I close based only on existing votes, there was another file with similar vote Commons:Deletion requests/File:JP 日本 Japan 沖繩 OKINAWA 那霸 Naha Omoromachi Shintoshin 新都心 Naha Main Place 商場 Shopping Mall Tax Free Goods package January 2025 R12S 02.jpg, which I reviewed and came to the conclusion that de minimis cannot be applied to it. Deltaspace42 (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Deltaspace42: I think you got this one wrong. By the nature of de minimis is that it shouldn't be any harm to the overall image to blur that element, so when it's borderline (as this is), it's probably better to blur. If the de minimis argument was correct, no harm done. If the de minimis argument was wrong, problem solved. (I'll deal with the blur.) - Jmabel ! talk 17:34, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Done, but there seems to be a caching issue. See to bypass the cache; eventually it should "take." - Jmabel ! talk 17:42, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel my understanding of de minimis in this case is that if problematic images were blurred, the vending machines themselves would still be visible in good quality. Examples on COM:DM page do not have blurred areas, so I was under the impression that it's not critical to blur them. Also, when I zoom in on the images, they are not in good enough quality (if someone were to crop them out of the whole image). Deltaspace42 (talk) 17:41, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Schlafzimmer 14 1.jpg looks entirely correct. @Romano1981: what do you doubt about this? Third nomination of a twice-kept photo with no comprehensible new argument. - Jmabel ! talk 06:11, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Romano1981 (fixing ping for Jmabel) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:14, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
This is just among mass closings I've been asked to demonstrate. And you can find my doubts above. Romano1981 (talk) 06:17, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
I'm not looking through this entire laundry list. @Romano1981: is your objection just the lack of a clear enough closing rationale/ Or are there a significant number of these you think are actually bad decisions, in which case it would be much more useful if you would list those rather than everything he closed. - Jmabel ! talk 06:16, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
I appreciate it, that you wrote so many complaints against me without even bothering to look into the matter. Fortunately, there are other administrators who have already started reviewing: Romano1981 (talk) 06:24, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
For the most part, I haven't found much to disagree with their conclusions. The Sealand stamp seemed like a copyrighted object since I don't see any indication that people behind Sealand have put their works into the public domain and so I treated it as if it was from any British author. There was a close of a 1953 French photo in which the rationale was bad, but I'd have given the file more scrutiny to see if it was public domain in France. Abzeronow (talk) 06:39, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Thank you. And what about File:Starosta krośnieński Wincenty Karuga z chłopami z okolic Krosna Odrzańskiego.png? The file still has a false free license. Romano1981 (talk) 06:42, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
{{PD-anon-70-EU}} is a plausible license for that photo, I disagree with RAN about PD-Poland, no evidence that this photograph was published without a copyright notice. So probably public domain in Poland as an anonymous photo, but restored by URAA since this entered the public domain after 1996. Abzeronow (talk) 06:57, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Actually, for me, the problem is not about how many closings exactly are wrong now. I see a user with little to no understanding of copyright issues is taking on the task of closing DRs en masse, inexperiencedly selecting nominations where someone else has left a 'keep' vote. If tomorrow there are 20 or 50 such enthusiasts, the whole institution of deletion requests could be compromised. Romano1981 (talk) 09:54, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
While I agreed with the closure of Commons:Deletion requests/File:Юрий Васильевич Емельянов.jpg I don't think I would have closed it myself, but I may be overly cautious. Per COM:DR: "Non-admins may close a deletion request as keep if they have a good understanding of the process, and provided the closure is not controversial. If in doubt, don't do it."
There is, if I'm not mistaken, a bot or process that kinda expects DRs to be closed using delreqhandler. Deltaspace42 is doing it manually and typically closing with '''Kept''' instead of '''Kept:''' like delreqhandler does. This might cause issues. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 20:47, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz, I expect that placing {{delh}} and {{delf}} templates is enough for a bot to then archive the discussion, and it doesn't matter whether there is a colon symbol after Kept. At least it's how it works at CfD. Could you please clarify what issues you are talking about? Deltaspace42 (talk) 21:05, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Deltaspace42, I'm only repeating what Storkk told me in 2018: "Secondly, by convention DRs are closed either Kept or Deleted, which aids bots that do statistics." - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:17, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz, ok, but they didn't say anything about using colon after Kept. Deltaspace42 (talk) 21:26, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
Deltaspace42, true, I apologize for my memory being so terrible at recalling details of conversations I had 8 years ago. But as Storkk referred to bots it's quite plausible the bot code will expect the exact output from DelReqHandler, which includes a colon. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:30, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
FWIW, I almost never use DelReqHandler. - Jmabel ! talk 00:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
@Deltaspace42: FWIW, I do think just "Kept" is usually a little too terse. "Kept by consensus", "Kept, no valid grounds for deletion", "Kept per [User]", "Kept, strictly de minimis", etc. would be better and, yes, as a non-admin you probably should be keeping away from closing DRs where there is a gray area about which way they go (e.g. a borderline de minimis case that could imaginably go either way). On the other hand: closing clear-cut cases is very welcome, especially with a clearly stated rationale. - Jmabel ! talk 00:18, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel I've closed a number of requests since this discussion started, sticking to more obvious cases. I now write "Kept: per <reason>", though I want to point out that the procedure doesn't require writing the comment after Kept: "Add a line (----), then, on a new line, either Kept or Deleted, an optional comment, your signature..." (emphasis mine). Deltaspace42 (talk) 20:09, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
In cases that don't have obvious consensus, e.g. where the only vote is a "weak keep" like this one, if you agree with keeping the file, it might be better for you to add a vote yourself than to close the DR. -Consigned (talk) 01:33, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
+1, and even as an admin this is what I do unless the discussion is quite stale. - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
@Deltaspace42: perhaps that should change in the guidelines (though it's difficult, because there are cases where that little is enough). Romano1981 is correct that what you were doing is not in line with usual practice. - Jmabel ! talk 20:25, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Jmabel

Self-report. At Special:Diff/1206404027, Romano1981 states that I "wrote so many complaints against [them] without even bothering to look into the matter." I am not asking for any action against Romano1981, I am not even asking for an apology, but I am asking to be exonerated, because I believe I did nothing of the sort. And, unless explicitly addressed, I will stay out of this thread once I have stated my case once. Romano1981 is more than welcome to comment here. (Didn't want to derail the original discussion, which is why I am addressing this here, not on that thread.)

  1. I literally do not see anywhere I made a complaint against this user. I wrote the following addressed to them;
    • With reference to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Schlafzimmer 14 1.jpg, what do you doubt about this? Third nomination of a twice-kept photo with no comprehensible new argument.
    • (In general) Is your objection just the lack of a clear enough closing rationale[s]? Or are there a significant number of these you think are actually bad decisions, in which case it would be much more useful if you would list those rather than everything he closed.
    The former is a straightforward question, not a complaint. The latter is an effort to clarify what their issue is, and a suggestion that if it is about substance rather than process, it would be more useful to list only the DRs which they believe were substantively wrong.
  2. without even bothering to look into the matter: they gave a list of 23 cases. I looked at three of them more or less at random, found that two of the three were correctly decided and the third was mildly problematic (a borderline case about de minimis where I would have blurred the element in question), and figured that rather than look at 20 more I would ask for a clarification of the complaint (see above).

If other admins think I did this wrong, I would genuinely like to know that. If they they think this was appropriate of me, I would also like to know that. - Jmabel ! talk 17:29, 1 May 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I don't think you did anything wrong here. I understand Romano1981's concerns about the DR closures, but their response you linked in the diff wasn't very helpful. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:31, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel: I also don't think you did anything wrong here. Thank you for having the courage to self-report.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:36, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Romano1981: could you please clarify what "many complaints" means for you? If necessary, fall back to another tongue you're more confident in using (you're using the Cyrillic script on your talk page). As far as I can tell: there are literally no signs of complaints authored by JMabel and directed at you and even less "many of them", and there are some follow-up questions, perhaps with a really slight critical undertone, but well within the realms of polite and purposeful communication. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 19:13, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
That "wrote so many complaints" comment was confusing for me as well. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 21:23, 1 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel kudos for self reporting, but I don't see any issues with your conduct. All the Best -- Chuck Talk — Preceding undated comment was added at 01:13, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Jmabel did nothing wrong; the other user should be warned against casting aspersions Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:53, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Lorgia99

Lorgia99 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) I've deleted File:Lorenz Jakob Lollokauster.png as a hoax. (My apologies that this means non-admins won't be able to see it to weigh in.) Unless I'm wrong about that being a hoax, I believe this user should be indef-blocked on a NOTHERE basis.

See also closely related recent history of en:Lake Maggiore massacres (I know it's a different wiki, but it is part of the same apparent hoax). Jmabel ! talk 01:48, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

✓ Done. I feel hoax here, and I blocked Lorgia indefinitely. Taivo (talk) 07:52, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel, Taivo, the non-admins have another chance to see it: File:Lorenz Jakob Lollokauster.jpg uploaded by WSEULO (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information).
I had tagged the original following a report on Commons:Help desk (revision 1208807412) by @Squawk7700.
Just filed w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WSEULO. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 10:35, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
@Achim55 called for an indef of WSEULO back in December 2025: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ryad Idrissi.jpg. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 11:18, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Indef-blocked WSEULO. Deleted File:Lorenz Jakob Lollokauster.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 17:49, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Houtyuhn

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

User:Houtyuhn is causing absolute chaos with aircraft image categories, they are not heeding advice given to them. My contribs highlight the problems. The move of Category:Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom is very problematic, it is long established and the category would need to be edited in over 2,000 articles. The user is editing faster than I can correct. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Please accept my sincere apologies for the disruption and the extra workload caused by my recent edits. I have immediately stopped all category moves.My intention was to improve the category structure, but I now realize that I underestimated the impact on established categories (such as "Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom") and failed to seek consensus beforehand.I would like to learn the correct procedures to avoid such issues in the future. I will ensure that any major changes are proposed and discussed on the talk pages first. I am sorry for the chaos caused and hope we can discuss how to properly manage these categories together. Houtyuhn (talk) 12:14, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
The categorisation system for aircraft images has been established for many years, it does not need 'managing', all that needs to be done is to ensure that images are placed in the most appropriate category, the vast majority are already. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
Subject: Response regarding aircraft categorisation (XS235 and others)Hi Nimbus227,Thank you for your patience and for pointing out the issues. I have stopped all category moves immediately to avoid further disruption.I realize that my recent edits, especially removing aircraft like XS235, XV814, and XW626 from the "Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom" category, have caused confusion. My professional rationale was that these are scientific research aircraft operated by institutes (like RAE), rather than combat-ready military assets.However, I now understand that within the Commons structure:Military Serials: Because they carry military serial numbers, they are systematically linked to the military parent categories.Refine, don't Remove: I should have proposed a specific sub-category (e.g., Research aircraft of the United Kingdom) instead of simply removing the parent category, which broke the search path.l point-of-view (NPOV) for future descriptions.I would like to help fix these errors. Best regards, Houtyuhn (talk) 12:23, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) Can an admin please revert this serious move please? I don't believe I have the ability to undo it. There may be other similar moves, I am checking back through the user's contribs. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:24, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
I sincerely apologize for moving Category:Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom. I now realize that adding '/Government' to the title not only broke the naming convention but also caused a massive technical burden for over 2,000 pages. I was trying to be more precise but clearly lacked understanding of the system impact. I will not perform any more moves and am waiting for an admin to revert this safely. Houtyuhn (talk) 12:28, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
I realize I cannot undo this move myself because of the existing redirect and the sheer volume of images involved. I request an administrator to revert the move and delete the incorrect redirect. I will not make any further attempts to fix it manually to avoid more edit conflicts. Houtyuhn (talk) 12:30, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
My intention was to make the images more accessible (easier to find by registration). However, I now see that my 'convenience' caused technical redundancy and violated the COM:CAT policy on over-categorization. Houtyuhn (talk) 12:26, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
This category move also needs to be reverted, much too specific and uses an ampersand. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:33, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

I acknowledge the issue with the Comet category move as well. My intention was to include the RAE and simultaneously correct the ampersand to "and" per naming conventions. However, I now see that this move was unnecessary and created further disruption. I fully support a complete revert of all my category moves today to restore the established structure. I will wait for an administrator to handle this safely and will not make any further manual changes. I am sorry for the anxiety and extra work this has caused. Houtyuhn (talk) 12:38, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Category:De Havilland Comet of British Airways should be deleted, the Comet was not operated by British Airways, the category gives the impression that they did. The single image of an aircraft in that category is in a fictional hybrid BOAC/British Airways colour scheme and was used by apprentices as a ground trainer. Nimbus227 (talk) 12:58, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
"Regarding G-APDT, I am fully aware of its role as a ground trainer. My intention in creating the category was based on its visual appearance (livery) to help users identify the aircraft they see in photos. However, I now understand that using '...of British Airways' is historically inaccurate for the database. I will defer to the standard classification and avoid creating categories based solely on livery in the future." Houtyuhn (talk) 13:07, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
I would like to clarify once more: I am fully aware that British Airways never operated the Comet, and that aircraft like G-APDT served only as ground trainers. The creation of these categories was purely from a visual and livery-based perspective, intended to help users identify the aircraft as they appear in photos. However, I now recognize that this approach conflicts with the Commons' historical and operational classification standards and can mislead the public into believing these were operational fleet members. I accept the removal of these livery-based categories. My apologies for the confusion caused by this difference in classification logic. Houtyuhn (talk) 13:12, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
@Houtyuhn: Are you using an AI language model to perform edits on Commons? If so, please stop. We would also prefer that you use your own words to reply in this discussion, rather than using an AI model. Omphalographer (talk) 17:10, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
I checked the first three paragraphs of responses here, all indicating 100% AI generated. Another problem, that I have not so far corrected, is the insertion of random text and web links in the description area of images uploaded by others, an example here. Baffling, in time I will remove them unless a mass rollback can achieve this. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:46, 2 May 2026 (UTC)
And if your own words are in a different language, that is fine. We can deal better with Chinese written by a human than with English written by a machine. - Jmabel ! talk 20:27, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

There is quite a lot of text here. Is there a remaining task (or tasks) for an admin, and if so what? - Jmabel ! talk 20:28, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

Indeed, yes.
  1. Please revert the move of Category:Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom back to this revision. It should re-populate with 2,400 images.
    • Anyone can revert the text. Nothing here tells me what content to populate it with (though it sounds, below, like you say you know how to do it yourself: I presume the move of content is something that anyone (not an admin) can do with Cat-a-Lot? - Jmabel ! talk 18:20, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  2. Please delete Category:De Havilland Comet of British Airways
    • Can't do that without knowing what to do with its content. - Jmabel ! talk 18:13, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
  3. Please revert the move of Category:De Havilland DH.106 Comet (Royal Air Force) back to this revision.
    • Similarly to #1.
    So, please, exactly what admin actions are needed? I still can't work it out. - Jmabel ! talk 18:20, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
I can restore the first category to images it was removed from, thanks. Nimbus227 (talk) 04:32, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Okay, regarding the AI-generated reply, I want to be honest: I did use tools to help write my previous English reply. This wasn't to shirk responsibility or be perfunctory, but because my foreign language skills are limited, I was very worried that language errors would prevent me from accurately explaining my intentions to Nimbus227 or the administrator, potentially causing further misunderstandings. I intended to use tools to make communication smoother and the tone more precise, but I now realize that this has made people feel I lacked sincerity, for which I sincerely apologize. Houtyuhn (talk) 07:09, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
@Houtyuhn: okay, tell us, what do you define as a "tool"? I ask this because certain softwares rely on LLM output, even if they do not appear to be LLMs
Think Grammarly Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 11:11, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Their last reply was also 100% AI-generated. It appears that their English language ability falls short of COM:CIR which redirects to the Wikipedia competence is required guideline. The nutshell summary is apt Sometimes editors have good intentions, but are not competent enough to edit in a net positive manner. They create work that others have to clean up. Nimbus227 (talk) 15:38, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Arbitrary break/admin repairs

Not sure I can explain it much clearer what needs repairing, would it be easier if I empty the categories? This really is a terrible mess. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:25, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Let's tackle one problem at a time, Category:Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom was moved to Category:Military/Government aircraft registered in the United Kingdom.
Category:Military aircraft registered in the United Kingdom has a notice that this category has been moved but still correctly contains its content. I have screenshotted the few entries in the new category to ensure that those images are restored to the original category. The move needs to be undone and I can not move the category back as a redirect is in place. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:35, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
The incorrect category, Category:Military/Government aircraft registered in the United Kingdom contains the edit history and needs to be restored/moved back to the revision by Uli Elch Nimbus227 (talk) 18:40, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Category:de Havilland Comet of British Airways is now empty, I moved the single image it contained to the category for that aircraft's registration. BA did not operate the Comet. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:47, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
I similarly can not move Category:De Havilland DH.106 Comet (Royal Air Force & Royal Aircraft Establishment) back to Category:De Havilland DH.106 Comet (Royal Air Force) nor its content sub-categories, Hotcat will not accept the original category. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:55, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
@Nimbus227 I didn't know it was possible for Hotcat to reject a category. In that case, you could manually add the category using the source editor if you really need to. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 18:59, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Yes, if you type the original name of a category in to the Hotcat search box it automatically switches to the new name. I can restore the sub-categories manually as there are not that many. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:02, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
I think that's due to the catagory redirect template at the top of the old page, deleting that should resolve that issue. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 19:04, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Good call, have to say that my patience is wearing very, very thin with this situation. Thanks, I'll give that a go. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
I have also taken a screenshot of that last category to ensure nothing is lost. Nimbus227 (talk) 18:58, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Category:Military/Government aircraft registered in the United Kingdom is now empty but contains the edit history of the original category. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:20, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
Category:De Havilland DH.106 Comet (Royal Air Force & Royal Aircraft Establishment) is now also empty but retains the history of the original category. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:25, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
It is bed time in the UK, apologies if I have inadvertently introduced more problems but to be fair I wouldn't be here if the subject user had heeded the advice given on their talk page.
I see similar, escalating problems on Wikipedia, awfully hard to stay enthusiastic, cheerful and helpful sometimes. Nimbus227 (talk) 19:43, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Is there some admin to whom this is all clearer than it is to me? I think the only admin task implied by the above is that three categories (or category redirects) need to be deleted so that someone else can move three corresponding categories back to their correct locations and then use Cat-a-Lot or Delinker to move the files accordingly, but I have this sneaking suspicion that there must be more to this or Nimbus227 would not be writing these convoluted descriptions of what needs to be done. - Jmabel ! talk 20:36, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel I think they are trying to ask for a history merge, but there's some discussion they aren't linking to, or they just didn't know a histmerge exists. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 23:34, 3 May 2026 (UTC)
@Alachuckthebuck: (1) Is the history of a category page of much importance? It's not like it's likely that the wikitext for the category ever contained copyrightable material. (2) If the category page was moved, and is moved back, then all of its history comes with it. - Jmabel ! talk 00:54, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel (1) maybe? I don't know, but it's the only reason this would be described in the way it was unless there's something missing. (2) the more you know, but that concerns me even more that there's something I'm missing. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 01:12, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
Apologies for the convolutions, I thought that undoing a category move would be a straightforward admin task. A link to the category history could be added though I agree that attribution of category building is not as important as article history attribution is on Wikipedia. Nimbus227 (talk) 08:48, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Sippaat6

Also editing under: ~2026-26796-95. User blanked DR targeting their uploads, then proceeds to come to my talk page accusing me of national discrimination. User has not communicated within the DR in question. TansoShoshen (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2026 (UTC)

 Comment: the reported user refuses to respond; it's been 18 hours Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:12, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

✓ Done Uploads deleted, user indef'd. Thanks for reporting this. --AFBorchert (talk) 16:59, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! TansoShoshen (talk) 15:16, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

Honest truth seeker

Honest truth seeker (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

All uploads are part of a spam campaign for ctcjaipur.com (Spamcheck) that has reached here, Wikidata, and the English Wikipedia. I'll be requesting a global block but if an admin sees this in the meantime, a local block would be helpful and the uploads need deleting. Thanks, Harry Mitchell (talk) 10:17, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

@HJ Mitchell ✓ Done, indeffed and cleared up. signed, Aafi (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2026 (UTC)
"Truth seeker" lol Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:44, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

BEGIN moved from COM:VP - Jmabel ! talk 17:51, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
Hi, I suspect User:Depuyjeremias may have uploaded one or more copyrighted images. See this example, which is a screenshot from a Youtube video with a "Standard YouTube license". Worse, if you go to about the 10 minutes mark, you can see the actual image in question and an "All rights reserved" notice that was cropped out. The user also has a number of questionable (seemingly AI-generated) edits on Wikipedia, and I wouldn't be surprised if their contributions here were similarly problematic.

Sorry, I don't have the bandwidth/time to figure out the correct process to correct issues like this, so I am just lazily posting here. Next time I will try to read the documentation and do something myself.

Thanks, CommonsKiwi (talk) 15:44, 5 May 2026 (UTC)
END moved from COM:VP - Jmabel ! talk 17:51, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

@CommonsKiwi: instead of using external links for file pages, you could use wikilinks (e.g. File:Reluctance vs Induction force.png and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reluctance_vs_Induction_force.png point to the same destination)
Just do the colon trick ([[:File:Reluctance vs Induction force.png]]) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:14, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
On that note, I have nominated the file you specifically mentioned for speedy deletion as an obvious copyright violation; thank you Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:15, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Thanks for sharing! As you probably surmised, I couldn't figure out how to prevent displaying the image. CommonsKiwi (talk) 01:16, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
@CommonsKiwi, putting a colon in front of the filename prevents it from being displayed. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 01:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
Yep, got it, Thanks! CommonsKiwi (talk) 01:21, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
:)
(that trick works for categories too) Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:19, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
:) CommonsKiwi (talk) 01:49, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

There is still quite a bit in Special:ListFiles/Depuyjeremias, does someone want to look into this? (Doesn't need to be an admin). - Jmabel ! talk 19:40, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

User:Alptugsezgin

Alptugsezgin (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Had already collected various copyvio warnings. Turns out they collected more warnings plus a 1-day block from @Túrelio as Aksaalp and they reuploaded their AI-landscapes using the new account.
Request for an appropriate action considering the actions on the alternate account. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 06:02, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

How about a long-term abuse designation? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:58, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
I don't see any uploads in or very near May from Special:Log/upload/Alptugsezgin, but I did find this
From Special:Log/upload/Aksaalp, Aksaalp started uploading a stream of images at 7:12 on 10 April (UTC, 24 hours); at the time, Alptugsezgin's final upload was at 20:53, 9 April
Aksaalp would upload until 8:19 on the same day, after which Alptugsezgin made its first upload since that on 23:31, 14 April (its stream of images ended at 11:11, 17 April, and it hasn't uploaded since)
Following that, Aksaalp simultaneously uploaded many images, all deleted, at 8:37, 5 May; it was blocked at 5:24, 6 May as a sockpuppet
Of Alptugsezgin's live files, the vast majority are regional maps of Turkey and the one exception is an image, marked with {{CC0}}, of engineers working on a water pump Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 09:16, 6 May 2026 (UTC)
 Comment One more warning to Alptugsezgin. Yann (talk) 09:22, 6 May 2026 (UTC)

A more general discussion of the term "LTA"

@Whyiseverythingalreadyused, LTA designations are not given out lightly, and are only given if a sockmaster can be contained via abusefilter, when the LTA tag is given based on the filter number. (LTA 257 is special:AbuseFilter/257 and special:AbuseFilter/257a. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 19:12, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
That last (narrow definition of LTA) is news to me as a 15+ year admin! @Alachuckthebuck: is there some way I could/should have known this? Also, is there some page that should be linked from the entry "LTA" in Commons:Editor's index to Commons? - Jmabel ! talk 19:45, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel: en:WP:LTA, perhaps?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:05, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jeff G.: doesn't seem to correspond to what Whyiseverythingalreadyused [oops, Alachuckthebuck wrot that, but it also turns out not to have meant what I thought] wrote about abuse filters. - Jmabel ! talk 21:47, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel When @Whyiseverythingalreadyused said "long term abuse designation", I assumed they were referring to LTA numbers (257, etc), calling someone an LTA doesn't need a filter, but a formal LTA designation/number only comes from an abusefilter number (with some exceptions, Special:AbuseFilter/291 is tagged with the LTA number of 289) as a DENY measure. I hope that cleared up the confusion. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 01:38, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Alachuckthebuck: I never heard of the numbers
I should definitely be more cautious of what I say lol Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 01:56, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Alachuckthebuck: so leave "LTA" as it is at Commons:Editor's index to Commons, or follow Jeff G.'s suggestion, or something else? - Jmabel ! talk 03:49, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel: This new usage (naming with private filter numbers) appears necessarily limited to Commons Admins.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:57, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel and @Jeff G., I think there could be something that explains what LTA numbers are, but I really don't want to publicly list LTAs and their traits. "(unnumbered) LTA" and sockmaster are interchangeable terms in my book, Witch I think is what Joe had in mind as their definition of LTA. I'm really interested in what they thought the definition was before this thread, Something similar to enwiki's LTA page might not be a bad idea as something to link to (something that has each LTA number and editors who know the patterns). All the Best -- Chuck Talk 16:41, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
I've clarified the glossary slightly, just adding "Usually refers to the same person coming back with a different account," which has long been my understanding of the term. @Alachuckthebuck, while that narrower usage (numbered filters) may be correct in some contexts, I simply don't think that is how most people use the term. Previous glossary entry (which I believe I wrote) was just indicating what the initialism stood for.
By the way, it would be great if other experienced users would make a pass through Commons:Editor's index to Commons and see if they think anything is incorrect, out of date, or missing. - Jmabel ! talk 18:03, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel: I went through it once; if I had found anything glaring I would have changed it or started a discussion.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:45, 8 May 2026 (UTC)
@Jmabel that's basically what mine is for LTA, I think the confusion comes from a the difference betweeen numbered LTA vs just an LTA. If someone just says "LTA" as a reason for anything without any other context, that's just any problematic sockmaster. doing that with a numbered LTA (eg 257) could be a valid block reason. A major part of the confusion is probably the areas where we frequent. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 05:48, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Barefootboy2005

Misplaced post moved from Commons talk:Administrators/De-adminship Andy Dingley (talk) 18:30, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

Barefootboy2005 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

This user Barefootboy2005 has an inappropriate name. Infinite blocking of inappropriate images and photos. File:Male barefooter walking on a forest path.jpg, File:Male barefooter walking on a forest path (41543).jpg, File:Male barefooter letting his feet rest on a patch of moss (20628).jpg, File:Male barefooter letting his feet rest on a patch of moss (87448).jpg, File:Bare feet of a male on top of a blanket.jpg, File:Male barefooter letting his feet rest on a patch of moss.jpg Sifold (talk) 18:13, 7 May 2026 (UTC)

I cannot see any relevant issue here. No action needed. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
I'm completely missing what would be inappropriate about the username. @Sifold: can you elaborate? - Jmabel ! talk 19:46, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
Files are a little odd, but not obviously out of scope. - Jmabel ! talk 19:48, 7 May 2026 (UTC)
 Not done Nothing violates any rule here. GPSLeo (talk) 14:10, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

CFA1877

Hello. This user keeps posting inappropriate and rude comments in my talk page. It's very annoying to have to delete them. Can someone please stop him? This is a user that periodically has problems with other users and his behaviour is often unreasonable, disruptive and plain rude. Now he is going after my editions and deleting what I do just because I don't want his rude comments in my talk page. Regards, tyk (talk) 09:49, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

CFA1877 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Diffs please? Andy Dingley (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Some of thise seems to come down to a disagreement as to the value of categories like this Category:Mountains in Andalusia in June 2018, then handled rudely. I would have to say that I'm not seeing the value of a per-month time intersection with mountains! Andy Dingley (talk) 10:03, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Andy Dingley: A few days ago, the user Tyk undid several of my edits en masse (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) and marked a new category I created for deletion. He gave me no explanation and didn't even notify me of the deletion. I asked him for an explanation, and his response was simply to delete my message without any explanation. This morning, I confronted him about this behavior and reminded him that there are rules that apply to everyone, and that he can't act this way. His response was to delete my message again, without offering any explanation for his actions. From his actions I understand that he does not believe he owes me any explanation and, even worse, that he can do whatever he wants. I'm not going to make ad hominem attacks by bringing up the conflicts you have with other users, but I find it outrageous that you, who created this situation, have the audacity to complain. If you treat other users rudely, you can't expect other users to treat you kindlyǃ It's common sense. CFA1877 (talk) 10:06, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
  • So mountains are such a fast-moving group that we must categorize their appearance separately by month, yet nothing was ever built in Seville for an entire year? Yes, I can see why you might be frustrated by such an action! Andy Dingley (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
  • You can see his edits here
Regarding the actual category, there are hundreds already. Please see Category:Mountains by month by country. tyk (talk) 10:08, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
 Comment @Andy Dingley: I don't want to make ad hominem attacks and dredge up past conflicts, but I'm not the first user to warn Tyk against over-categorization. He's been warned time and time again, and after years we're still dealing with the same problem. As you can see, I've tried to talk to him (on several occasions!), and not only does he refuse to speak to me, he goes so far as to delete my messages. I find it's unacceptable that this user behaves this way and then has the nerve to post a notification against me! It is unfair that the user can sabotage my work and that, with the current outcome, their actions are untouchable. CFA1877 (talk) 10:20, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
he goes so far as to delete my messages.
They're perfectly entitled to do so. That is long-established practice here. On the other hand, it's also regarded as a recognition that they have read them and are aware of them, so it can work both ways. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
  • He estado siguiendo esto. Francamente, creo que ambos usuarios habéis estado por debajo de lo esperado. En primer lugar, CFA1877 creó una categoría de Category:Built in Seville in 1912 y Tyk sin mediar discusión alguna la vació y la mandó a eliminar por vacía. CFA1877 le preguntó por qué lo había hecho, sólo que... con mal tono ("cacicada"). A tyk le molestó el comentario y lo borró. Y a partir de ahí CFA1877 practicó un "donde las dan las toman" e hizo lo mismo que había hecho tyk con categorías como, entre otras, Category:Mountains in Andalusia in June 2018 (eliminádolas de varias imágenes subidas por Tyk). Y siguió la guerra de poner queja/borrar queja en la página de este último. Idealmente deberíais estar, por una parte, más abiertos a explicar vuestras ediciones (Tyk) y, por otra, evitar comentarios irrespetuosos (CFA1877). Pero dado que aquí no es obligado interactuar con nadie a quien no tragamos (y es legítimo por parte de Tyk no querer tratar con CFA1877 si pensara tal cosa) sugeriría que ambos evitarais en la medida de lo posible comunicaros con el otro, además de procurar no interferir en las categorizaciones del otro (os parezcan más o menos útiles), a menos que sigáis cauces comunitarios como Commons:Categories for discussion. En resumen, CFA1877: por favor, deja en paz a tyk y evita ataques personales en lo sucesivo (en inglés: "tone down a little bit"). Tyk: entiende que si eliminas una categoría sin explicaciones los demás se molesten. Si quieres borrar una categoría que no es obviamente incorrecta, abre una "category for discussion". Un saludo. Strakhov (talk) 10:23, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
    "Pero dado que aquí no es obligado interactuar con nadie a quien no tragamos (y es legítimo por parte de Tyk no querer tratar con CFA1877 si pensara tal cosa) sugeriría que ambos evitarais en la medida de lo posible comunicaros con el otro, además de procurar no interferir en las categorizaciones del otro"
    Gracias. Efectivamente no quiero tratar con este usuario para nada. Yo jamás interfiero en sus ediciones ni voy a su página de discusión y mucho menos para hacer comentarios maleducados. Si alguna vez he interferido en sus ediciones, como en el caso que se comenta, es porque se trata de ediciones mías previas, a las que él se dedica a vaciar de contenido. A mi me resulta muy extraño que vaya detrás de todo lo que yo hago. La mayoría de las veces lo ignoro pero puedo asegurar que no es coincidencia. Desde la última vez en la que tú intermediaste no ha dejado de venir a mi página ni de interferir con mis ediciones. Es más, las ha incrementado. Sinceramente no lo veo normal y me siento acosado. Llevo 18 años editando aquí, miles de archivos, y nunca me cruzo tanto con otros usuarios. Es imposible que sea solo coincidencia. Está metido en todo lo que yo hago y no le veo fin. Por favor ponedle un comentario en su página de discusión para que le quede claro que me tiene que dejar en paz de una vez por todas. Si no se toma ninguna medida va a seguir igual. tyk (talk) 11:30, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
es porque se trata de ediciones mías previas, a las que él se dedica a vaciar de contenido ¿puedes desarrollar esto? Porque lo que vi es él creando Category:Built in Seville in 1912 y tú vaciándola en apenas 5 horas y mandándola a borrar. Entiendo que con esas "ediciones previas" no te referirás a que creaste hace más de una década Category:Built in Andalusia in 1912 (14 años) y Category:1910s buildings in Seville (12 años). Como he dicho, sugiero que os evitéis. Creo que sois ambos suficientemente adultos como para llevar a cabo tal cosa sin necesidad de "comentarios en (vuestras) página de discusión". Pero vamos, si lo queréis lo repito: por favor, evitad entrar en conflicto y si una categoría (o rama de ellas) no os gusta: COM:CFD. Strakhov (talk) 12:14, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Bueno olvídalo, porque te juro que no entiendo nada de lo que hacéis aquí. Vengo a denunciar a un usuario del que he tenido que borrar hasta en 6 ocasiones comentarios ofensivos suyos de mi página de discusión, que ha deshecho sistemáticamente más de 60 ediciones mías simplemente por joder y eso se pone en un equal standing con que yo pedí el borrado de 1 categoría que tenía unos cuantos archivos de una categorización en la que yo sí llevo trabajando años y no se toma ninguna medida contra él más que decirnos a los 2 que no peleemos. Entiendo que tenéis que ser diplomáticos pero esto no es comparable. En fin, te agradezco la intermediación pero este va a seguir acosándome, ya verás. Un saludo, tyk (talk) 13:34, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
No es mi intención poner en "equal standing" nada, no soy una balanza. Simplemente me parece que esto, salvo que me aclares en qué sentido no sería así, se ha iniciado por tu blanqueo de aquella categoría. Donde no has followed procedure. Que después ha escalado y vista tu negativa a responderle a CFA1877 (que como te he dicho estás en tu perfecto derecho de no hacerlo), éste se ha puesto extremadamente pesado, sin abandonar el tono faltón, además de aplicar una especie de "venganza" con las montañas. No me he puesto a evaluar, al peso, quién se ha comportado peor, porque ni es mi intención bloquear a nadie (siéntase libre cualquier otro administrador de hacer lo que estime oportuno, que yo aquí no he cerrado ni decidido nada), ni dar ultimátums ni poner crucecitas, sino simplemente sugeriros, a ambos, que hacéis un montón de trabajo valioso en este proyecto, la salida obvia: dejad de interaccionar y tragad por lo general con las categorías del otro, que no seréis ni los primeros ni los últimos a los que algunas categorías que crean otras personas les parecen absolutamente innecesarias (a mí me ocurre cada día que entro aquí y accedo a mi lista de seguimiento, como supongo le pasará a mucha gente con las que creo yo). Strakhov (talk) 14:22, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Automatic translation courtesy of Google Translate, with minor edits,: I've been following this. Frankly, I think both of you have fallen short of expectations. First, CFA1877 created a category for Category:Built in Seville in 1912, and Tyk, without any discussion, emptied it and had it deleted for being empty. CFA1877 asked why he did it, but... in a rude tone ("cacicada"). Tyk was annoyed by the comment and deleted it. And from then on, CFA1877 acted in a "what goes around comes around" fashion and did the same thing Tyk had done with categories such as, among others, Category:Mountains in Andalusia in June 2018 (removing them from several images uploaded by Tyk). And the battle of filing complaints and deleting complaints on Tyk's page continued. Ideally, you should both be more open to explaining your edits (Tyk) and avoid disrespectful comments (CFA1877). However, since interacting with anyone we dislike isn't mandatory here (and Tyk is perfectly entitled to not want to deal with CFA1877 if they feel that way), I suggest that you both avoid communicating with each other as much as possible, and also try not to interfere with each other's categorisation (whether you find them useful or not), unless you use community channels like Commons:Categories for discussion. In short, CFA1877: please leave Tyk alone and avoid personal attacks in the future (in English: "tone down a little bit"). Tyk: please understand that if you delete a category without explanation, others will be upset. If you want to delete a category that is not obviously incorrect, open a "category for discussion". Best regards.. Strakhov (talk) 10:24, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Yet again, I find myself questioning why @Túrelio: is so willing to assist by deleting an evidently valid category on the basis of a dubious speedy deletion request, which was actually made on the specifically rejected basis of "It's empty because the nominator just emptied it". An enthusiasm for deleting things beyond any reasonable scrutiny of the request is still not a constructive or useful admin action! Andy Dingley (talk) 10:34, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Aside, independent of the conduct issue (where I think Strakhov is entirely correct): we have a grand total of 58 images in Category:Mountains in Andalusia in 2018 and its subcats. That is a perfectly tractable size for a category. I can think of no good reason to break it down by month (though I'd be open to hearing one); to my mind, even breaking this down by year is a bit excessive, though maybe justified by sheer number of files. I am trying (and failing) to think of a case where someone would be looking for mountains in Andalusia in May 2018, but not in June. Could Tyk spell this out? - Jmabel ! talk 00:07, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment Jmabel, but this is not why I came here, you can delete the category altogether as far as I'm concerned. I came to denounce an issue of harrassment, but apparently another user can leave offensive comments repeatedly on your talk page without consequences. But never mind, I have already been to Meta and they can offer me to close my global accounts and give me a new identity. It's not great but it does solve my problem. Kind regards, tyk (talk) 18:06, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Changing identity seems excessive to me, but it is your prerogative.
Also, I clearly prefaced my remark as an aside. - Jmabel ! talk 20:51, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

Shoebill897

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:54, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

It's low level silly stuff but I do agree. Blocked to give them a chance to reflect... Herby talk thyme 11:34, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
Thanks, Herby!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:17, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
✓ Done. I mass deleted all his uploads as likely copyvios. Taivo (talk) 14:39, 9 May 2026 (UTC)
@Taivo: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:50, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

Socks?

Users with similar usernames uploading similar/same images (and then nominating them for deletion), see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Biorreactor.jpg. They don't appear to be super disrupting, but the duplicate uploads and following DRs for their uploads seem odd. Nakonana (talk) 17:10, 9 May 2026 (UTC)

@CC1984USA: you recently nominated for deletion an upload by CC1986USA, in which you conjectured about the possible corporate affiliation of the latter account. Does this mean that you are entirely separate from this similarly named account, or are you being coy, or what?
There is no rule against having more than one account on Commons, but except where personal safety issues arise you are generally supposed to acknowledge that; involving both of your accounts in the same matter is definitely a problem. If that is what is going on here, we are still at the stage where this all can be readily addressed and solved, but conversely, with these similar account names, we are also into terrain where this is all a bit weird. - Jmabel ! talk 00:15, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
en:WP:GHBH perhaps? What is this, the case of XtraJovial and Chyutokuu-Shinsei? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 04:39, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
I'm a different person, I just wanted to copy his name changing my year of birth ~2026-28320-95 (talk) 11:09, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
@~2026-28320-95: Are you @CC1984USA, then?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:07, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
I think we should just block all these accounts and delete all files, because of obvious trolling and suspicious copyright situation. GPSLeo (talk) 14:07, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
@GPSLeo: They do have a strange affinity for bioreactors.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:46, 10 May 2026 (UTC)
Hi, I would like to clarify the situation. CC1998USA and CC1986USA are two different people working in the same company. We uploaded freely licensed images intended to illustrate biotechnology/bioprocessing concepts, not to advertise the company.
As far as we know, CC1984USA is not affiliated with us. The similar username has caused confusion, but it is not one of our accounts.
We have also noticed that this account has been nominating or challenging our uploads and edits, which contributed to the confusion. We do not know the reason for this, but we would appreciate it if the situation could be reviewed based on the files, their licensing, and their educational value.
I understand the concerns about duplicate uploads and possible promotional appearance. We will avoid duplicate uploads, make the file descriptions clearer, minimize visible branding where possible, and provide permission evidence if needed. Our intention is to contribute useful educational media within Commons scope. CC1986USA (talk) 08:25, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
@CC1986USA: I believe that you and 1998 should be monitored for some time, just for the sake of ensuring that you are indeed not promoting anything (you two do have a conflict of interest, which is not a judgement of a person's character or intentions, but rather a judgement of situations)
I will seek a global lock at m:SRG against 1984 for impersonation Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 08:34, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. We understand the concerns and are fine with being monitored. We’ll keep descriptions neutral and non-promotional, as we always try to do. Thanks also for checking the other user issue. CC1986USA (talk) 08:39, 11 May 2026 (UTC)
 Comment These 3 accounts are indeed highly suspicious. Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by CC1998USA, but other files may need the same. Yann (talk) 08:45, 11 May 2026 (UTC)