Shortcut: COM:AN

Note

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

Mass rename requested

For many years I published under the name D Ramey Logan, I use that in every other file I uploaded. My name is Don Ramey Logan, and I would like to run a script that does a bulk renaming of the files that remain under D Ramey to read Don Ramey. It is very personal to me that I would rather not go into detail here on. I have one thousand 700 photos, and it would save everyone a lot of time and effort if I continue to do it by hand. I have an associate that is willing to do the scripting and run CommonsDelinker to rename my files on projects I want to make sure no one complains and drags them to COM:ANU Anybody--Don (talk) 05:26, 9 June 2026 (UTC) have any concern?

FWIW, if this move is approved I believe it doesn't need a "script", just MassRename. I don't object, though I'd want to keep the old names as redirects. Leaving this here a bit longer to give a chance for other admins to respond. - Jmabel ! talk 13:52, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I now see this same request was posted in at least three places: here, Commons:Village_pump/Technical#Request_bulk_name_correction and Commons:Village_pump/Proposals#Mass_rename_request. That is really inappropriate, and inclines me against the request. - Jmabel ! talk 14:06, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

Jmabel, this results from User talk:Alexis Jazz#New question for you. I told Don to find some consensus, "probably on COM:VP". Don asked on VPT which I think was the wrong forum because there was no technical question. Only 1 user responded. So I suggested they put a straw poll on the plain VP or AN. I didn't say both..
I was unaware there already is a tool. No need to write any in that case. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 15:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

OK. That was not at all obvious, since he made no mention of prior discussion or someone suggesting he bring it here. - Jmabel ! talk 15:07, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I was just doing what I was asked to do, sorry to offend you. Don (talk) 18:26, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

I miss understood Alexis Jazz request. I will just do them all by hand. Request withdrawn. Don (talk) 22:36, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

We should either do the mass rename with User:Perhelion/massrename.js or deny the renames altogether. They should not be done by hand, this is wasteful of volunteer time. Current policy has no provision against these renames, so I  Support doing it. We might consider discussing whether Commons:File renaming#FR1 should have some sort of limitation, but that won't be relevant for this case. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 05:25, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I have very  strong opposing view for these types of requests. @WPPilot mentioned at Revision #1228210057 that they have "the right" to change the name as uploader (I quote – I have right to change that as the uploader). No, you don't have any such right. COM:FR says Unless there is a compelling reason not to, uploader requests should be honored. This is a courtesy, not an absolute right, however. If a file mover feels that a proposed new name is disruptive or inappropriate, they can suggest a different name or decline the request. The requester is not a Filemover and therefore can't perform the move themselves. (And I  Oppose creating them one bcoz of this type of request.) The proposal is not for a handful of files that someone can carry out. Yes we do have MassRename and other things to carry this out and save our time. But, why should we be compelled to? Just because the uploader wants their uploads to be renamed in a certain way bcoz of some personal preference. I'm sorry, I don't buy that. If there was some genuine reason, I would've carried this out by myself, but I don't see that here. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 05:59, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I respect your concerns, please let me explain. 1 I was born Don Ramey Logan Jr. All of my life I struggled with my father whom was Don Logan Sr. I don't want to go into details here in public, I have shared more details with Alexis Jazz whom might chime in to shed light on the topic. After my father's last misdeed and theft from me, he died and I did not want to be associated with his miss deeds. Every time I see the D Ramey Logan it takes me back to a very sad time in my life. I am 64 and faced a 50/50 battle with death over the last 2 years. D Ramey Logan is not the legacy I want to leave. I have contributed many fine images over the years, I am only looking to add 2 letters to my first name. I am sorry if this is a big issue. I should have just kept my mouth shut. Don (talk) 06:11, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Also what I meant was that when you apply the Rename template and use CAT 1 at original uploaders request, the request is completed. Don (talk) 06:14, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

 Support This can be easily handled with the tools we have at Commons. Cheers. // sikander { talk } 🦖 17:08, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@Shaan Sengupta: I understand why Don wants the files to be renamed and I'm willing to do it, but as it concerns a large number of files I didn't feel it was appropriate to simply go ahead because outside of COM:FR#FR1 we are often more reluctant to move files. So I suggested to Don to find some consensus, but they partly misunderstood my suggestion and ended up asking in multiple places. I've closed the threads on COM:VPT and COM:VPP. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 06:32, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Dear @Alexis Jazz, I am leaving pings for the participants (@Jmabel and @Andy Dingley). I know you guys have given your inputs, but let's centralise this discussion here. I have already explained my view above. I have full sympathy towards @WPPilot, but when it comes to this request going through, I don't see a way other than courtesy by the community. The technicality behind the request is not just the filemoves but across project replacement that will come along. And WPPilot, whether its two letters or two words or the full name, the process that has to be carried out is the same. Since I don't know the connection with "legacy" and "name", I won't comment on it. That's all from my side for now. Thank you. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:16, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

I would weakly oppose renaming the files, because I see it as unnecessary. We don't manage attribution by embedding names in filenames, and there are good reasons to not do that at all.

I'm fine about changing the licence tag, the thing that really matters, and would happily have done this myself days ago, if there had been a reply. It's pointless to do these by hand. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:21, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Shaan Sengupta, but across project replacement that will come along CommonsDelinker can handle that. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:32, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes it definitely can. But I see it more of as an unnecessary burden on CommonsDelinker. If there is consensus for this to be carried out, and since you are ok to do so, I think there must be some way or script that @you can use to do the global replacement by your account only. @Ziv might help with that. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:36, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

@Shaan Sengupta, no, it should be done by CommonsDelinker. CommonsDelinker has the bot flag so it won't clog up watchlists. And CommonsDelinker is a robot, so it's no "burden" for it. Generating the commands for CommonsDelinker is no problem. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:43, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Yeah, you are right on this point. My bad. If the request has consensus in favour, you may go ahead this way. Thanks. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:50, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Personally, I would fulfill Don's wish. But I have absolutely no experience with MassRename. I tried it once on some meaningless files, and the result was that I had to rename them a second time. Since then, I've steered clear of it, so I'd rather leave it to someone who knows more about it. However, I would be happy to manually rename files for the uploader without him having to make a request beforehand. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 14:01, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you. Don (talk) 19:42, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

If there is consensus to do this, I'll do it with MassRename or AWB. And, yes, presumably the much more important thing is to fix the attribution, which should be easily done with VFC and is uncontroversial if requested; for that matter, WPPilot should be able to do that himself. - Jmabel ! talk 04:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Now that Ziv supports and she and Jmabel have shown willingness to perform the request, I take back my objection. If that's enough, someone can perform the request and close this as successful. Thanks. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 14:25, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Yes, I think fulfilling the request should be ok --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:12, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Jmabel, Don wants it, I support it, Sikander supports it, Ziv supports it, Panthera supports it, Shaan Sengupta is neutral (took back their objection) and Andy Dingley weakly opposes.
You have experience with MassRename if I understand correctly. So it may be better if you do it. If you don't have time or changed your mind I could look into it. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 00:11, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

North Korea flag

The file File:Flag of North Korea (March 2026-).svg is technically a PNG. I uploaded an SVG equivalent here (generated using the limited data we do have), but it needs some whitespace trimming and some metadata edits. File:DPRK flag (2026 Constitution).svg DPRKUpdatedSVGFlag (talk) 07:08, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Trimmed. SVG viewBox="0 0 670 410" → viewBox="0 0 660 400". Flag ratio is 660/400 = 1.65. Glrx (talk) 13:46, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks. Metadata is still borked though, so I'm not sure how to edit that. But we have the file now. DPRKUpdatedSVGFlag (talk) 14:45, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks so much. The original File:Flag of North Korea (March 2026-).svg has been traced over, but it is inconsistent with the source, which I tried to follow in my own file. DPRKUpdatedSVGFlag (talk) 07:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Bumping this. I cannot overwrite the file despite being what I think is autoconfirmed after four days? DPRKUpdatedSVGFlag (talk) 19:21, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@DPRKUpdatedSVGFlag: you are a very' long way from the level of rights needed to overwrite someone else's upload. - Jmabel ! talk 23:54, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I do not think you are correct that File:Flag of North Korea (March 2026-).svg is "technically a PNG". Could you clarify the basis for that statement? - Jmabel ! talk 23:59, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I see, it's been overwritten since you wrote this. I think it is very tight now, not at all sure your version should overwrite that; take it up on the talk page of that file, ping anyone you think needs to be involved in the discussion. - Jmabel ! talk 00:03, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Abusive uploads targeting a living musician

A user is repeatedly uploading misleading and unflattering photos of a living musician to Wikimedia Commons, then adding them to the musician’s Wikipedia article. The images show the subject looking significantly heavier or unlike their current appearance, and appear intended to harm the subject’s reputation.

Problematic files: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mitchell_(musician)#/media/File:Lonely_Robot_(John_Mitchell)_live_at_Islington_Assembly_080223_-_52679513818.jpg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Mitchell_(musician)#/media/File:Lonely_Robot_headline_Trinity_Festival_2017_at_leamington_Assembly_Rooms_-_34921407261.jpg

User: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mewhen123

Behaviour: – Uploading misleading or defamatory photos – Re‑adding them after removal – Targeting the same profile – Pattern of harassment across Commons and Wikipedia

Request: – Delete the abusive files – Block the uploader if necessary – Apply protection to prevent further uploads

Thank you ~2026-34495-92 (talk) 13:57, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Several issues:

@Mewhen123: for starters

This is Wikimedia Commons, not Wikipedia. Different projects, different admin structure and management of users. You're talking here about a Wikipedia question of which photos to include. So that's on Wikipedia. It's their editorial decision, their policy as to whether they favour aesthetics over recency, their user to deal with. It's just out of our hands.

The uploads here are fine. The Flickr user who uploaded them to Flickr is well known on Flickr and I see no problem with their behaviour in creating these images. Transferring them to Commons was yet another person, and again, there's no issue with that.

The crux of the issue seems to come down to this version of the article vs. another version (current). Should we represent musicians by photos 'in their prime' or as middle-aged versions of themselves 20 years on, when they've put on some weight after COVID (I'm saying nowt, as I live in a glass house). That's a question of Wikipedia policy, not something for us here. It may involve using both sets (or one of each) and it may depend on whether an artist is 'active' at particular periods, or whether a long career should be covered by expanded text and then illustrated with dated photos. But you'll have to ask Wikipedia. Starting with en:user:Mewhen123.

Edits like this and even requesting page protection are likely to just get that editor blocked, especially as they've not tried to discuss this on either the article Talk: page or with the other editor. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:02, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

User:Uijtdewilligen gaming edits

Hello! I'm not that familiar with Commons' system, but I brought User:Uijtdewilligen to the en.wiki admins' board because they were gaming edits on en.wiki (they ended up blocked there). They seem to have done so the same here (albeit not as much), so I thought'd I leave this here incase any admin wants to action them. Cheers! LuniZunie (talk) 23:34, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

What would xe be gaming? Unlike enWP there are no user-rights here that are based on an edit-count; IIANM the only automatically granted right is autoconfirmed, which Uijtdewilligen has held for almost two years. And of course edit-counts here mean nothing on any other project (bar voting franchise for some elections on Meta).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 00:11, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Oops! I could have sworn there was an extended confirmed here... I suppose with that no action is required. Sorry! LuniZunie (talk) 00:15, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Question about updating image metadata

I am posting here because I cannot figure out how to correct the metadata to remove false information about a living person, so I am requesting help with the removal of the inaccurate information.

At File:Lee Weiner 1969.jpg, the metadata section currently states for the image title:

Portraits of the defendants in the "Chicago 8" trial for conspiracy to incite violence during the 1968 Democratic Convention. Although found guilty, all conviction in this trial were overturned on appeal.

As noted at the Getty website linked to this file, this is an untrue statement, including about living people, and the description for the image is:

Closeups of the Chicago Eight: (top L-R) Jerry Rubin (1938 - 1998), Abbie Hoffman (1936 - 1989),Tom Hayden, Rennie Davis, Bobby Seale, Lee Weiner, John Froines and David Dellinger (1915 - 2004), circa 1968. The Chicago Seven, as they were called after Seale was severed from the case, were indicted for conspiracy and inciting a riot during the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois. Froines and Weiner were acquitted on all charges. The other five were convicted of inciting to riot, but the convictions were overturned on appeal. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)

Please also note, as noted on my en-WP talk page and Talk:Lee Weiner, I have a general COI for this subject.

In addition, this member of the Chicago 7/8 appears to be the only one who has had incorrect information (stating they were 'found guilty' of 'conspiracy to incite violence during the 1968 Democratic Convention') added to an image that was then added to the infobox of their biography article on Wikipedia.

Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 00:30, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Beccaynr: I'm not sure what you are asking. It's a wiki. You can edit.

By the way, I don't see a "title" there, just a description. - Jmabel ! talk 03:43, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I attempted to edit the Metadata section, but this does not appear possible. The Metadata section is after the Summary and Licensing notice on the Commons file for this Getty image. Please let me know if this does not help clarify my request. Thank you, Beccaynr (talk) 04:04, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

@Beccaynr: The metadata is in the JPEG file (not the Commons file page), so you must edit the JPEG file. Download the file, edit its metadata, and then reupload it. Glrx (talk) 04:16, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Thank you, Glrx, but I am not sure about this as a fix, because I have questions about whether this is free content based on information at the Getty file, for this Commons image and the one it was derived from, which had its watermark removed before it was uploaded to Commons. Beccaynr (talk) 04:31, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

I have re-uploaded the file to remove the metadata. I have no comment regarding the copyright status regarding the original file File:Chicago Eight 1969.jpg, but would like to note that the lack of a watermark is indication that the image was purchased and published. As I noted on my talk page on the English Wikipedia, Getty does not necessarily own the copyright to this image if it was previously published without a copyright notice in 1969. ✗plicit 04:37, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Actually, I did a paste job using another copy to remove the main watermark on File:Chicago Eight 1969.jpg (see the small number in the bottom left), which is why the metadata issue is absent from that. I can say with reasonable confidence that that image is public domain due to formality shenanigans. Based5290 (talk) 06:57, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Ah, I missed the issue in the metadata. I usually don't read the metadata that autopopulates the description field in the Upload Wizard before I delete and rewrite it, which led to File:Chicago Eight 1969.jpg having inaccurate metadata. I cropped it to File:Lee Weiner 1969.jpg, so that had bad metadata too. However, I had to edit File:Chicago Eight 1969.jpg to remove the watermark, which also removed the metadata. It was not my intention to put a BLP issue solely on the Weiner image. I'll probably just excise the image title field in the metadata in the future. Based5290 (talk) 07:11, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

Revdel request

Please revdel User talk:Latzen taldea (Diff ~1228896299) as it contains email addresses. I've already censored them. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 12:22, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

 Done --Yann (talk) 13:14, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

SomeFancyUsername

WMF-banned PlanespotterA320/QazyQazyQazaqstan is coming back? Similar pattern of editing. ~2026-34784-96 (talk) 08:55, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

What do you mean at "Similar pattern of editing"? SomeFancyUsername (talk) 09:34, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Similar pattern is nominating Russian and Ukrainian files for deletion due to missing freedom of panorama. I do it as well often. Taivo (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I also nominated a lot of files (including Russian and Ukrainian FOP) for FOP deletion, am I a sock of these users? --A1Cafel (talk) 15:47, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I don't remember much of Planespotter, but EnvironmentalDoor's behavior strikes me as odd. I'm not saying that's 100% a sock, but I wouldn't be surprised either. And no, I'm not saying that only because they defended SFU. I could share my observations privately, if it is a sock I don't want to educate them. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 13:23, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

I am not a sock. I haven't heard of PlanespotterA320 or QazyQazyQazaqstan in any way before this, I don't really touch FoP related discussions much, and I've definitely never touched anything relating to the Russian/Ukranian war. I haven't even nominated any files for deletion, it's too much effort for me. I just thought "I was waiting for you to say that" was a concerning turn of phrase to use and wanted you to follow up on it to deconfirm my suspicions of you acting in poor conduct. I'm actually glad that I was proven wrong in that instance and that you were acting in good faith. I'd like to request two things, if possible:

1. Could you share your logic for me being a sock publicly?

2. How can I prove that I'm not a sock?

If you could grant either of these things, I would be very grateful. I've had a good time here and I don't want this to go kaput just because of someone else's problems. For clarity's sake, I have seen SomeFancyUsername around here and have interacted before, but I haven't thought of SFU as anything other than another volunteer who wants to improve Commons in their own way. EnvironmentalDoor (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Your comment doesn't come across as convincing as you might think it does. As I said, in the interest of not educating a possible sockmaster I'd rather not share that publicly. And as I also said, I'm not saying you 100% are. I mentioned it in case others have also noticed (potentially different) things but weren't sure if they should speak up. How you can prove you're not? On this platform that's virtually impossible for most people, but just keep contributing in your own personal way. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 16:27, 13 June 2026 (UTC)

Just to clarify for myself: is anyone seeing any evidence of the insulting other users or denying/downplaying genocide that were the reasons for that user to be banned? - Jmabel ! talk 05:05, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I don't remember what PlanespotterA320 was like, I have seen SFU robotically commenting "COM:PERNOM" on "per nom" votes. Technically not an insult, but (when done in volume) not really productive either, IMHO. If we wanted that we'd ask an actual bot to do that. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 06:21, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Regarding Kuzialook's ban on the Ukrainian Wikipedia

Hello, in March, I suspected there being permissions issues with Kuzialook's uploads, but then saw that the staff here have obtained permission for some of the images via email, so I apologized and retracted. Seeing that Kuzialook's image of Zlata Ognevich was recently removed from Commons, I looked into the user's history and found them indefinitely blocked by Mykola7 on the Ukrainian Wikipedia in April for being a sockpuppet of Alec Ruffle, who was said by Mykola to have been blocked here for uploading images without proper permissions. However, Kuzialook still appears to be in good standing here on Commons, uploading new images since Mykola7's ban. Shouldn't the ban extend to Commons, given that the reason I know about Kuzialook to begin with is that their files appeared on the English Wikipedia rather than the Ukrainian Wikipedia only? Daisy Blue (talk) 05:14, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

I blocked the account; if a steward concluded they are a sockpuppet of a blocked user this is good enough for us. Ymblanter (talk) 08:25, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: To be clear, I think Mykola7 was wearing his ukwiki Checkuser and Admin hats at the time. Reported the crosswiki abuse and sockpuppetry to m:srg#Global lock for AlexRruffle.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 09:55, 14 June 2026 (UTC)

Please process 11 author-request speedy deletions (Public Lands Institute – Black Hills National Forest)

Hi all. I'm the uploader of the files below and tagged them with {{Db-author}} earlier today, but they're still pending. Requesting an admin to process them.

They were wrong-location images uploaded in error and are being replaced with correct ones. Three of them (002.jpg, 004.jpg, 006.jpg) are also accidental JPEG duplicates of the 001/003/005 TIFFs.

• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 001.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 002.jpg
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 003.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 004.jpg
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 005.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 006.jpg
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 007.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 008.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 009.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 010.tif
• File:Public Lands Institute - Black Hills National Forest - 011.tif

No other pages use these files. Thanks. Pli-tate (talk) 02:58, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

@Pli-tate,  all deleted. _signed, Aafi ^(talk) 04:18, 17 June 2026 (UTC)