Shortcuts: COM:AN/B • COM:AN/P • COM:RFPP

Note

• For page protection requests, please state protection type, file name, and proposed protection time span. See also: Protection Policy.
• Before proposing a user be blocked, please familiarize yourself with the Commons' Blocking Policy.
• 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/B|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
• Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Dharshan Karthikeyan - continuing uploads of obvious copyright violations after final warning

Dharshan Karthikeyan (talk · contribs) has been uploading images of Indian television show title screens which have all been deleted. I've left them warnings here and a message on their en wiki talk page as well. They've continued today, uploading the same title screen image that's been deleted three times already. See Special:Log/Dharshan_Karthikeyan. Ravensfire (talk) 12:34, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, last file deleted. Yann (talk) 12:41, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

Request autoconfirmed protection for File:Primäres System.png

Although the volume isn't high, most of the edits on this image are either from vandalism or reverting vandalism. Likely a target due to its use in Category:Systems. Please let me know if this is below the threshold of protection so I can keep future requests in mind. Thanks, --Stux (talk) 22:35, 31 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done. 3 years autopatroller-level protection. Semi-protection was not enough, because some vandals were old users with a lot of edits (now indefinitely blocked anyway). Taivo (talk) 09:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

User:GOATlegroscaca

User: GOATlegroscaca (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Reason for reporting: Used for vandalism on fr-wiki, offensive name Nicolas22g (talk) 18:18, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user indefinitely, the only upload is deleted. Taivo (talk) 09:10, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Statistics about Italian places (semi-protection)

• Request: Allow only template editors and administrators for actions edit, move or rename.
• What: The all titles in Category:Datasets with Italy.
• Why: It's multi-wiki content using on more another pages.
• Why #2: Look the history of Data:Italian_municipality_populations.tab and the user was notificed (in Slovak language, he understand): User_talk:GreenWolfyVillager#Data:Italian_municipality_populations.tab.

Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 22:01, 1 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Full protection is not needed. Auropatroller-protection is enough. Taivo (talk) 09:23, 2 April 2026 (UTC)

Rikutyanman

• Rikutyanman (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• User continued to upload low quality nude photos despite warnings.

A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. 2 weeks block for uploading out-of-scope files after warnings and re-uploading content deleted per community consensus. All contributions are already deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:51, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Block User:Leirbag reib

• Renamed user e25e14424873e084be92fabad09abd83 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Leirbag reib (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

In 2012, the account Gabriel bier was blocked from Commons “with an expiration time of indefinite” for “uploading unfree files after warnings”. Over nearly 13 years, and assuming the basics of copyright were learned, no effort was made to request an unblock. In February 2025, Gabriel bier expressed, on the Portuguese-language Wikipedia, the intention to request courtesy vanishing for privacy-related reasons. Since vanishing requires the user not to be blocked on any project, I requested their unblock on Commons, which was granted by Bedivere “as the user is vanishing” .

However, in June of that same year, the person behind the account returned under the name “Leirbag reib” (“Gabriel bier” reversed; confirmed by CheckUser ), even violating existing editing restrictions on ptwiki, as noted by administrator Kascyo. There is an ongoing (un)block discussion for this account, in which no consensus seems to have been reached regarding the user’s return to the Portuguese-language Wikipedia (some administrators against the return argue that, for example, there was abuse of the vanishing process, and that it should be permanent). Since the account was unblocked here at my request solely for the purpose of vanishing, and considering abuse has been alleged in their case, I argue the original block should be reinstated on this new account until the user, acknowledging their prior misconduct, requests an unblock on their own and an administrator grants it (considering vanishing on Commons, unlike on the ptwiki, is not expected to be permanent). Yacàwotçã (talk) 08:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Bedivere (forgot to ping; will notify on talk page regardless as it’s mandatory) Yacàwotçã (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done. Leirbag reib has 0 edits in Commons, so he has not abused multiple accounts here. As he is unblocked by Bedivere, he is allowed to edit Commons. In my opinion vanished users are allowed to come back, if they want. But as his username "Renamed user ####" is difficult to remember, it's allowable to create a new user account, as long as he does not use the old account. Taivo (talk) 11:03, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

They were unblocked by @Bedivere to request vanishing, not to edit on Commons acknowledgeding the reasons for their block. Look, I’m not opposed to the unblock, but it should only happen once that requirement is met, which as of now at least isn’t the case here, since the user never cared about being unblocked normally Yacàwotçã (talk) 11:55, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Each Wiki has its own rules. For example, a user could be blocked on enwiki indefinitely for say disruptive editing or banned from say a certain topic area i.e. planes, automobiles. However, the ban/block behaviour in most cases does not apply here. We welcome constructive contributions. In fact, some users opt for clean starts/avoid harassments. So far as there is no active restriction in place then its all good. LuvsMG481 (talk) 13:33, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree in principle with Yacawotca. The only reason that led to their unblock was to allow them to vanish. But their troublesome history was not acknowledged and, even though I'm not opposed that they remain unblocked, at the very least they should acknowledge their past mistakes and move on. Bedivere (talk) 13:48, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I believe courtesy vanishing only applies to users in good standing not if they are blocked if i'm not mistaken. This new user could be a COM:SOCK - indef block I think was appopriate. Courtesy vanishing is not intended as a temporary measure, nor as a way to avoid scrutiny or avoid sanctions. and in this regard, the user was simply avoiding scrutiny for copyvio. This is unacceptable. LuvsMG481 (talk) 13:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Actually it's been 13 years since block of Renamed user. Maybe he has become more mature and responsible during that time. I would give him another chance. I agree, that renamed user is not allowed to return immediately, he must be absent for some time, but for me 13 years is enough. Taivo (talk) 09:58, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Be mindful if he socked within the 13 years... maybe... that could come into play. I trust your judgement, it is a shame that the en Wikipedia administrators don't have this much leniency to users who may have been blocked for a while (usually for simple things such as disruptive editing) to have no recognition of maturity from users. Yeah lets give the user another chance, why not. LuvsMG481 (talk) 10:20, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Commons:Twinkle/Preferences

Commons:Twinkle/Preferences (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

This should be template-editor-protected to prevent vandalism

It was already move-vandalised once (albeit years ago); the English Wikipedia page of the same title, which the Commons page was forked from, has the first kind of protection Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 12:31, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Won't Autopatrol protection be enough for edit? We can apply full protection for move though. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:49, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Well that's good too Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 13:51, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Taivo (talk) 10:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Block request for User:Future Freq MGMT

Future Freq MGMT (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user Username containing a commercial trademark LuvsMG481 (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

The account has been dormant ever since its first and only edit (which was to upload File:Super Flu Press by Falko Gerlinghoff 017.jpg, the image you nominated for F1 speedy deletion)

It doesn't need to be blocked right now since it's not a demonstrable long-term abuser, but it's worth a check Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 14:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Its the actual username, there's no where i mentioned it was a sock or long-term abuser. Read the facts carefully. My friend is an actress, usually these MGMT stuff would be commercial usernames. LuvsMG481 (talk) 14:45, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

There is possibly an implication of being the management of the musical act Future Frequency. If they stay active, and they make edits that are related to that, that could be a problem. But I don't see it as an automatic block, and I think if there is an issue here it would be better to take it up through COM:AN/U, inform them on their user talk page, and at least give them a proper chance to participate in the discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 18:00, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

For some reason, I was using an automated script. It directed me to this one. I'm so sorry, but as said I'm not some tech junkie to know all this. I actually should have put it there LuvsMG481 (talk) 18:28, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Hey, so I should change my username cause MGMT feels wrong ... is that right? Future Freq MGMT (talk) 20:07, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Its actually because you are presumed to represent a talent agency. My friend is an actress and she gets involved with MGMT talent teams. I highly suggest you should. It isn't too difficult, just use this tool and go from there. Once its all done, an admin will close the discussion and you are all in the clear. Let's talk about it on my talkpage. LuvsMG481 (talk) 20:10, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay ... never intended ... than it would be great if wiki would block this from the beginning ... anyways .. thanks for the info and the tool ... I requested a change. Future Freq MGMT (talk) 20:13, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

I think we can close this discussion. No action is needed. User resolved concerns. LuvsMG481 (talk) 20:14, 3 April 2026 (UTC)

User:JohnAdams1800 and continued copyvio issues

I previously reported JohnAdams1800 and that went stale. Since then he's uploaded a spate of others' work while claiming it as his own. Once explaining himself with This just combines two images--just use any photo-editing software--in one. I also used shading/contrast. and doesn't engage with the actual deletion process.

Since the last time he was brought up here he has uploade sixteen more images with copyvio or other issues. Eight of those came after a copyvio notice from Herbythyme. One of his recent uploads was his entire thesis. All of this is on his talk page. ~2026-18248-11 (talk) 06:59, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

For clarity the user has not uploaded any further copyright violation since my final warning. It's simply that we have found older images that are copyright violations. Herby ^{talk thyme} 07:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I'm happy to strike that then, I misread some as responses to uploads. Nonetheless, I still stand by the original stale filing. ~2026-18248-11 (talk) 11:56, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

No need to feel bad. We all start somewhere. I've only been here 2 months. Why not create an account and myself or Herbythyme or even Yann can give you mentoring! LuvsMG481 (talk) 11:58, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thesis can't be copyrighted, but they are for sure not within COM:SCOPE LuvsMG481 (talk) 10:01, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thesis can't be copyrighted. I don't think that's true, if I understand correctly. Yann (talk) 12:09, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Thesis if of own work can't be copyrighted, but for example say if i downloaded this and claimed as my own work, then 100% its copyrighted. Its no different to posting an image mate. LuvsMG481 (talk) 12:11, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

Nowadays, almost everything is under a copyright by default. Yann (talk) 12:36, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

If... its own work different story except if previously published on a website. LuvsMG481 (talk) 12:42, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

The above is a bit confused/confusing. If from the U.S. and not something relatively old (before 1 March 1989) is certainly copyrighted, so for anyone under about 55 their thesis is almost certainly copyrighted. It is also a virtual certainty that the person who wrote the thesis owns the copyright. Prior publication has no bearing on that, but if you think the account-holder might not be the same person as the author of the thesis, and if the prior publication did not include the specified license, then it would be reasonable to request COM:VRT verification. I'd recommend thinking about a possible scope issue first, though I suppose that anything legitimately accepted as a thesis or dissertation by an accredited institution of higher learning is probably in scope. - Jmabel ! talk 20:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

 Not done Seems like nothing here calls for administrative action. - Jmabel ! talk 20:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)

I agree... the copyright is not an issue, its the scope thats concerning. I think we have much better things to worry about than this LuvsMG481 (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)