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

Note

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

Sock/meatpuppetry

• 4267salar moradi (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Bahoz ebrahimi (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Mehrdad ager (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Ager25136 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Wirmaple73 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Jabar4757 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Mehrdad ebrahimi 085 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• SarbZ2201 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• نادرقلی بیگ (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

The second account uploaded a lot of files which I which I tagged with {{No permission since}}. By pure coincidence one if these files I happened to find just now and I thought it looked familiar, didn't I tag this file a few days ago?, I thought. And looking at the history I did, but the first account removed by taggings from all files. Looking into the users I found w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/4267salar moradi and w:fa:ویکی‌پدیا:درخواست بازرسی کاربر/Mehrdad ebrahimi 0813, where I found all the rest of the accounts. Jonteemil (talk) 22:22, 7 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jonteemil Since they're causing issues on multiple projects (some are blocked on EnWiki as well, and now here), I'm going to go ahead and bring this to Meta:Steward requests/Global. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Okay. Jonteemil (talk) 17:03, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done All except SarbZ2201 are now blocked locally since the SRG is taking too long. SarbZ2201 isn't registered locally. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:11, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

User:Amir-Iran992/3

Amir-Iran993 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

• Uploading a bunch of copyright violations (excerpts from books by various authors) as his own work in the public domain:

  E.g., 1, 2, 3, 4

• This is the same user (per enwiki checkuser data) as:
  • (obviously) Amir-iran992 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
  • (no Commons contributions) Amir3219 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
  • (no Commons contributions) JFhistory (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Blocked on enwiki (most recently by me) , and he's been nonresponsive there or here to talk messages. SilverLocust 💬 07:15, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

@SilverLocust: Hi, and thanks for sharing here. Such information should also be helpful on cuwiki.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:55, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Sure, done. SilverLocust 💬 09:34, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

User:Jcb

I would like to request review of Jcb’s handling of copyright-related (speedy) deletion nominations. My concern is not simply that we disagree on the copyright status of a file, but that speedy deletion is being used in situations where the legal/policy interpretation is genuinely disputed.

In the case of File: Maurice Henri du Croo.jpg, I provided a detailed explanation on Jcb's talk page based on the source's own copyright information and the relevant anonymous-work provisions. Regardless of which interpretation is ultimately correct, the issue is clearly not an unambiguous copyright violation suitable for speedy deletion. A regular deletion discussion would have allowed the community to evaluate the competing interpretations.

Jcb's response did not address the specific evidence provided about anonymous works and publication-based copyright terms, but instead asserted that there was 'no indication' of anonymous authorship and treated the source’s copyright notice as sufficient evidence of continued protection.

I am concerned that this reflects a broader pattern of wrongfully filing deletion requests, particularly (though not exclusively) involving uploads by me. Examples of previous cases concerning myself where I believe similar issues occurred include:

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Louis Davids Kleine Man.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Herman Heijermans 1923.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Willy Corsari 1921.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Wijze Kater 1918.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tropenadel scene 1916.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Intieme Kunst Nap de la Mar.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:August Kiehl 1915.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:Henri van Wermeskerken 1929.jpg Commons:Deletion requests/File:August Theodoor Cornelis Kiehl.jpg

Given the number of disputed copyright assessments involving my uploads, I am concerned that there may be a personal element influencing the way these cases are being handled. I cannot determine Jcb's intentions, but I am concerned that the listed mistakes on his behalf may have contributed to the decision to now use speedy deletion to avoid the kind of community discussion that these disputed cases require.

I kindly request that you review whether the approach in the Du Croo case is consistent with the purpose of speedy deletion, and whether this case should instead be handled through normal deletion discussions. I would also appreciate a review of whether Jcb's approach in all of these cases reflects an appropriate use of editorial discretion and whether there is a pattern of dismissing reasonable copyright discussions.

My concern is not that Jcb reached a different conclusion than I did, but that disputed copyright questions are systematically treated as unambiguous and objections supported by policy-based arguments are not being meaningfully addressed. Goran.Mont (talk) 11:17, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Converted to regular DR: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Maurice Henri du Croo.jpg. Yann (talk) 11:46, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Jcb's own interpretation of copyright rules is indeed disconcerting. File:Maurice Henri du Croo.jpg may be deleted due to URAA, but other cases mentioned above are clearly in the public domain. Nevertheless, Jcb created DRs with weird arguments. Yann (talk) 21:00, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Just a reminder that anyone can contest a speedy deletion tag and turn it into a normal DR instead. - Jmabel ! talk 20:27, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Bildersindtoll

• User: Bildersindtoll (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Nuke grey dark.svg after final warning for doing so.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 18:27, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

There is no problem. In my opinion the file was PD-Simple. Now it's deleted and that's ok. So why are you reporting? Bildersindtoll (talk) 19:20, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

The other files are Requests because they weren't clear cases. Usually I always upload PD-Simple, and if a different decision is made, that’s fine too. Bildersindtoll (talk) 19:28, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Blanking your user talk page doesn't help matters. You also changed the {{Delete}} subpage parameter badly (including too much) and omitted transclusion in Special:Diff/977076192.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:54, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

Yes, because I just happened to notice it. That doesn't change the fact that this report is completely unnecessary. Bildersindtoll (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Last warned on 6 August 2023, but without effect. Yann (talk) 20:57, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

 Comment I strongly disagree with the deletion of File:Nuke grey dark.svg (this logo) as a copyright violation. It is in my view certainly below COM:TOO US, which applies here & it should not have been speedily deleted. COM:F1 states This does not apply whenever there is a reasonable possibility of discovering that the work is public domain through further research or a plausible argument that it is below the threshold of originality. - uploader correctly tagged using {{PD-textlogo}} & {{TM}}. Pinging User:Alno, User:ShakespeareFan00. ~TheImaCow (talk) 21:30, 8 July 2026 (UTC)

I'm not absolutely certain it is below TOO, but I am certain that it should not have been a speedy deletion on that basis. Speedy deletion over copyright should be used only in clearcut cases. - Jmabel ! talk 00:45, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

@TheImaCow, Jmabel, Alno, and ShakespeareFan00: OK, undeleted and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Nuke grey dark.svg. Yann (talk) 06:22, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, I decided to delete the file as the site from which it was reproduced clearly claims copyright on anything it contains. Apart from that, it's difficult for me to say whether this logo is or isn't below the threshold of originality, as for example the 'nuke' symbol in the logo is somewhat distorted in an artistic way, which seems to be an attempt of its author to provide some originality. I just hope I didn't harm by deleting the file... -- AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 15:16, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

FWIW, claim by the source site is irrelevant to whether it is above or below TOO. - Jmabel ! talk 22:04, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Do we have a list of sites that we don't trust to provide truthful info about copyrights, provenance, etc.?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:08, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Parallelepiped09

Parallelepiped09 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

I would like to report a possible pattern of copyright violations by the user @Parallelepiped09

Over the past year, this user has uploaded what appears to be hundreds of photographs, many of which are claimed as their own work. Based on my review, I believe that a significant number of these files are not actually his own photographs and have been uploaded with incorrect authorship information.

Last year, I contacted the user on their talk page regarding one specific file (File:Condominio La Casona Sc.jpg), which was a cropped version of File:Northern Skyline Santa Cruz.jpg, and asked them to correct the attribution or source. Unfortunately, I have not seen any change in his upload practices. Some of their uploads have already been deleted as copyright violations, but many others remain on Commons. I believe this may warrant an administrative review of the user's uploads and, if appropriate, further action.

– Ruditaly at COM:ANV § Parallelepiped09

I am bringing this to ANU per Jmabel's advice below that vandalism report. Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 06:48, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

مدحت ماهر الإدريسي

• مدحت ماهر الإدريسي (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Feels like spam only account. I created Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by مدحت ماهر الإدريسي yesterday which @George Chernilevsky closed as delete. Now the user has uploaded more OOS files. Jonteemil (talk) 21:06, 9 July 2026 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: I added to that DR for you.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 06:00, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Warned x 2, all files deleted. Not sure if a block is needed at this point. Yann (talk) 06:17, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. In my opinion currently block is not needed. All uploads are now deleted, that's enough. Taivo (talk) 13:31, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

@Taivo @Yann The user has uploaded a new file now that seems like out of scope as well. Jonteemil (talk) 17:03, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a month, file deleted. Yann (talk) 17:22, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Aegis0416

• Aegis0416 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Reuploads the same file a third time despite being warned not to. Jonteemil (talk) 10:25, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 2 weeks, most files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:58, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Agustin Hurtado M

Agustin Hurtado M (talk • contribs • block log • filter log) has continued to upload copyrighted files, despite being previously warned and blocked. --Ovruni (talk) 06:28, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user (second block). Taivo (talk) 14:59, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Malicovekiz

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

User reuploading a file that has been deleted several times ; previous DRs are Commons:Deletion requests/File:Old Coat of arms Todorovic.jpg, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Blason de la maison des Todorović.png, Commons:Deletion requests/File:Grb Kuće Todorović 2025.jpg. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 15:39, 10 July 2026 (UTC)

Graft from User talk:Jameslwoodward, about myself

A Wikimedian began the discussion below on User talk:Jameslwoodward. I have the opinion that that page is not the best venue to talk about the alleged issues, hence I'm grafting the mesage here. Grand-Duc (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

Begin of copy.

Grand-Duc (talk · contribs) He has been filing excessively disruptive deletion requests. I kindly ask that you have him cease this behavior at once.

Commons:Deletion requests/File:JA8183 B747-346 JAL Japan Airlines(Reso'cha) NRT 09JUL01 (7026968593).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Boeing 747-400 - JAL - JA8183 (5723644644).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:JA8183 Reso`cha Boeing 747-346SR Japan Airlines (JAL) (8637493082).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Boeing 747-346, Japan Airlines - JAL Reso`cha AN0309058.jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:JA8183 (8087571163).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:JA8183 Reso`cha Boeing 747-346SR Japan Airlines (JAL) (8639157327).jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Boeing 747-346, Japan Airlines - JAL Reso`cha AN0344534.jpg

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:JA8149 (aircraft)

Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:JA8183 (aircraft) --Y.haruo (talk) 22:31, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

Far from having him cease, I encourage him to continue. These are all copyright violations and must be deleted. As I have said many times, the rule on de minimis requires that the copyrighted work be unimportant enough so that an average reader will not notice if it is omitted. That is plainly and clearly not true in these cases.

If you continue to make unfounded accusations such as this, you will be blocked from editing on Commons. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:33, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

All of these are de minimis. I believe I have valid grounds for that conclusion, and I kindly ask that you refrain from directing personal attacks at me Y.haruo (talk) 22:45, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

So, it is all right for you to make unfounded personal accusations against Grand-Duc, but it is not all right for me to warn you that your behavior will lead to your being banned? .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:40, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

I got the ping, so I hope I'm not bothering Jim by writing here too.

First of all, I'd like to know how you, @Y.haruo, come to the conclusion that my DR are "excessively disruptive". Judging by how often my argumentation convinces an admin to close them by deleting, I don't think that my interpretation of Commons' policies on which I base the DR are too far-fetched and disruptive. It's much more of quality-assurance work to better the repositories, isn't it?

Furthermore, I've read and re-read your Japanese posting of law texts and its English translation. I think that the basic intention of the law is to make it legitimate for people to engage in exchanges about hobbies on social network services (SNS) and fan communities, up to and including Otaku ways, also using fundamentally copyright protected works (like Pokémon sculptures or vehicle liveries). The inclusion of that "socially acceptable" wording points to such an interpretation, it being facilitating common communication.

But this media use is quite different from an image hosting service and media repository like Commons is. On social networks, any image is bound to slip into the oblivion of the unseen depths of old feeds after some time, whereas Commons is hosting images in curated archives. The visibility there and the influence, the encroachment upon third-party intellectual property, is much more pronounced than in some random SNS feed.

Trudging on such a borderline between copyvio and OK is hardly recommended in the light of COM:PRP. Unless an appellate court or the highest court of law of Japan (or any other country, for that matter) is interpreting and concretizing the law, we IMHO can't boldly assume that such imagery is OK to host here, not when the wording is still fuzzy (by including both "socially acceptable endeavours" and " legitimate interests of copyright holders"). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:54, 11 July 2026 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation does not seek new restrictions. What you are doing effectively narrows the previously accepted scope of De minimis, and that constitutes a new restriction. How many of the administrators who deleted files actually understand this point? Moreover, I am aware that you have distorted the Commons guidance on De minimis and misrepresented Japanese law when filing your deletion requests. This is by no means quality‑assurance work. Y.haruo (talk) 19:18, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

End of copy.

@Y.haruo: Please elaborate on how I "have distorted the Commons guidance on De minimis" in your eyes; and what exactly constitutes a misrepresentation of Japanese law. Especially the first point is hard for me to understand, I don't see anything in the wording on COM:DM that I have distorted. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 19:46, 12 July 2026 (UTC)

This would only be disruptive if they were closed as keep and Grand-Duc continued to nominate similar images. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:59, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

You argued that the image does not qualify as de minimis because it is categorized according to Disney motifs, but that is not correct. File:Louvre at night centered.jpg is also categorized under Category:Louvre Pyramid at night, and yet it has never been considered problematic. Whether something is de minimis must be determined by examining the image itself, not by looking at its categories. Your statement — "COM:De minimis not applicable, image categorized according to Disney motifs." — is a distortion of the de minimis guidance. SeeCommons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:JA8904 (aircraft), Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:JA873A (aircraft) in R2-D2 livery and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:C-GWSV (aircraft). Y.haruo (talk) 16:09, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Did you actually read Commons:De minimis#Guidelines? The sentence about categorisation is directly taken from the page you're saying I'm distorting. And, while I stayed quite short with "COM:De minimis not applicable, image categorized according to Disney motifs.", I meant to imply that the whole image impression was not covered by DM. If that was not concise and explanatory enough, then it's on me, but otherwise, the point still stands. The Louvre pyramid example is something maybe worth looking into, but you can't conclude, simply because nobody challenged the legitimacy of imagery within Category:Louvre Pyramid at night yet, the set is assuredly OK. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:56, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

I certainly have read it. Although it has been in place since 2012, it is only a broad guideline and has not been applied as an operational basis for deletion. Claiming afterward that you “meant something different” does not strike me as a sincere or honest way to engage.

Moreover, in Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2025/07#Pokemon Jets deletion requests you stated that "a deletion from for instance JA8962 in Pokémon livery (that's the 747-400 example above) can be kept when it's from FRA and has to be deleted when it's made in Heathrow or Narita." This is an unfounded and factually incorrect view with no source whatsoever, expressed solely to strengthen your own position.

Disrupting discussions and making false statements are, of course, grounds for blocking. Y.haruo (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Actually, threatening people you're talking to with blocking because you believe disagreeing with you is making false statements and being disruptive is actually a way people have got blocked.--Prosfilaes (talk) 07:14, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

السيد الشريف الأمير إبراهيم العزي الأعرجي

• السيد الشريف الأمير إبراهيم العزي الأعرجي (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Sockpuppet of El-Naîmî El-Azzî El-Araji El-Hasani Vel-Hüseyni El-Haşimi. Evidence from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files and also their contributions:

Timestamp	File	Uploader	Deleted file	Uploader
Jul 13 2026 02:59 PM	File:File Milli - Milan Federasyonu.png	السيد الشريف الأمير إبراهيم العزي الأعرجي (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 2 edits)	File:Milli Aşireti Federasyonu.png (Und | Log)	El-Naîmî El-Azzî El-Araji El-Hasani Vel-Hüseyni El-Haşimi (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Jul 13 2026 02:59 PM	File:File Milli - Milan Federasyonu.png	السيد الشريف الأمير إبراهيم العزي الأعرجي (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 2 edits)	File:7 ABRİ-GAMREAN - GAMREANK HANEDANI - MİLAN FEDERASYONU.png (Und | Log)	El-Naîmî El-Azzî El-Araji El-Hasani Vel-Hüseyni El-Haşimi (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)

Jonteemil (talk) 16:44, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

•  Done Blocked. Referred to SRG. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

JannahBerdaiOthmaneAtos

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

As JannahBerdaiOthmane01, also a sockpuppet of IPhone17ProMaxSteveJobs, evidence from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files:

Timestamp	File	Uploader	Deleted file	Uploader
Jul 13 2026 12:30 PM	File:Adam and Eve from a copy of the Falnama Berdai Othmane.jpg	JannahBerdaiOthmaneAtos (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 6 edits)	File:AdamandEvefromacopyoftheFalnama.jpg (Und | Log)	JannahBerdaiOthmane01 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)
Jul 13 2026 12:27 PM	File:Islamic Adam & Eve Berdai Othmane.jpg	JannahBerdaiOthmaneAtos (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks | 6 edits)	File:IslamicAdam&Eve.jpg (Und | Log)	JannahBerdaiOthmane01 (talk | contr | dcontr | accounts | blocks)(different)

Jonteemil (talk) 16:48, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:28, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

Gpkp

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

Was tagged with {{End of copyvios}} on June 1 2014 by EugeneZelenko. Since then the user has uploaded a bunch of copyvios, see User talk:Gpkp and User talk:Gpkp/Archive 2. Some more forgivable than others. Some very obviously not PD-textlogo despite so claimed. Jonteemil (talk) 21:57, 13 July 2026 (UTC)

 Done. Since the warning was more than 10 years old, I warned the user again. But Gpkp was license reviewer. The user has really problems with own uploads. I do not trust his/her license reviews anymore and I revoked that right. Taivo (talk) 09:34, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Ryuji takeda

User: Ryuji takeda (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
Reason for reporting: Repeatedly uploading copyright violations and not properly indicating sources --grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 13:16, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Demonstrate? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 15:54, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Look at their talk page. Their rate of copyvios is too high imo, theyre not taking seriously enough grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:45, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Could have said that from the start of the report, but yeah, I see Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 23:46, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Don't snark please. Looking at talk page for this is normal. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Bro I get it Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 23:50, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

Also they keep using generative AI without disclosing it grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

I am also very confused by that page User:Ryuji takeda which seems to imply some official organizational status. @Ryuji takeda, can you explain what is going on there? - Jmabel ! talk 00:06, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Is anyone else interested in their re-uploads? Whyiseverythingalreadyused (t · c · he/him) 00:21, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Really? My first idea was that this user is living a kind of gamification of their Commons contributions; something like a fan club or deeper, as a Commons Otaku. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 00:24, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

I took about 10 minutes to look around. Definitely some positive contributions, but on the whole what I see does not leave a good taste in my mouth. I'm pretty sure this doesn't call for an indef-block, but some lesser sanction is probably in order. I don't feel able to evaluate in a timely manner quite what would be appropriate. Jmabel ! talk 01:06, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

The user has not participated in this thread or acknowledged past feedback about copyright and AI issues and keeps doing it. Could you block them indef but on condition of reverting if they acknowledge the feedback? Leaving them without anything will just make them keep doing this grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 02:27, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Dear Jmabel, grapesurgeon, and administrators,

I am deeply sorry for my late response. I was not ignoring this thread; as a newer contributor, it took me some time to fully understand the situation and translate the feedback here.

I completely acknowledge all the issues raised, and I take full responsibility for my mistakes:

1. Regarding Copyright & Licenses: I sincerely apologize for the confusion regarding the Ro Jai-bong photo and my past uploads. I am still learning the intricate copyright laws of Commons. I will not upload any new files for now and will focus on reviewing my existing uploads to ensure they strictly comply with free licenses.

2. Regarding AI: I want to clarify that I do not use generative AI to create fake files or images. I will be more transparent with my sourcing to avoid any future misunderstandings.

3. Regarding my User Page: I have completely wiped out the confusing layout on my user page (User:Ryuji takeda). It was meant as a personal gamification/joke ("Commons Otaku"), but I now realize it looked highly misleading and implied an official status. It is now replaced with a simple, standard user description.

I truly appreciate your patience and feedback. I want to be a helpful volunteer here and will strictly follow the community guidelines from now on. Please guide me on how I can correct my past mistakes. Thank you. Ryuji takeda (talk) 05:53, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

@Ryuji takeda: (1) would you please also be transparent here about the extent to which you used AI in composing this response? (I'm guessing from its style that at least some AI was involved.) Whenever you are using AI, it would behoove you to be transparent about that. (2) I'm not going to block you at this time; I can't prevent another administrator from doing so. What I'd like, and it sounds compatible with what you've written, is for you to: (a) take it upon yourself to nominate for deletion any of your remaining uploads that have copyright problems, so that no one else has to slog through them. (b) Get all of your sourcing and licensing as accurate as you can. You can hit me up with questions (ping or use my user talk page) if there is something where you are not sure. (c) Not do any further uploads until you've dealt with that. (d) Circle back here when you've done that, so that someone can review once you believe the issues have been fixed. If this thread is no longer open by the time that happens, please start a new one, and link to this one in the archives when you do so.

One further very specific question: what exactly is the relation between File:Prime Minister Kim Min-seok.jpg and File:Kim Min-seok 54826197712.jpg? It says it is "extracted from" which is clearly not the case, though I imagine it is at least in part "derived from" (and at the very least the file page should be modified accordingly). Where did that background in File:Prime Minister Kim Min-seok.jpg come from? - Jmabel ! talk 06:46, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Dear Jmabel, thank you for your patience. I want to be 100% honest and transparent about everything:

1. Regarding AI usage: Yes, I use an AI assistant to help me find reference materials for articles, and because English is not my first language, I frequently use it to translate my words into English. Sometimes I do not fully grasp the exact nuance of the translated terms, and I apologize for not being upfront about it earlier.

2. Regarding the Kim Min-seok files: I must apologize for making a major mistake. The background in File:Prime Minister Kim Min-seok.jpg is actually copied and composite-edited from the official background of File:Park Geun-hye presidential portrait.png. I combined them to make it look like a clean official portrait.

I was inspired to do this because I noticed that several high-profile infobox photos on the English Wikipedia (such as certain altered portraits of Moon Jae-in and others) used similar background modifications without any issues, so I mistakenly assumed it was a common and accepted practice on Commons. I now fully realize that doing this is a serious violation of historical accuracy and documentation rules here.

Since I know exactly which of my uploads are composite manipulations like this, I will self-nominate all of them for deletion immediately to clean up my gallery. I will never upload any edited or altered historical portraits again. Thank you for helping me understand the guidelines. Ryuji takeda (talk) 11:32, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

How did you get the pic of Kim Min-seok to be higher resolution than the original? The background transfer is easily possible with conventional image editing, but the upscaling is a lot harder. I don't believe your claim. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 13:46, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Kontributor 2K

Kontributor 2K (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

I have previously posted about the user Kontributor 2K regarding behavior which may fall under COM:HOUNDING. Many of my edits to SVG file pages have been reverted that do not fall under the scope of "fixing unambiguous errors." Previous comments from the user appear passive-aggressive in nature and have spanned across file talk pages and posts on my talk page within the span of two days. ForeverFlying (talk) 21:07, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@Kontributor 2K This is inappropriate. Passive aggressive and condescending. Don't treat others like this; if you have a problem with someone acting in good faith, explain yourself properly and treat them like a peer. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 23:55, 14 July 2026 (UTC)

@ForeverFlying: could you please link three examples of edits you consider inappropriate, so admins do not have to look through tons of history to work out what you might consider problematic? - Jmabel ! talk 00:03, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

1. Revision of File:Valle di Cadore-Bandiera.svg (other reversions of my edits discussed at file talk page: File_talk:Valle_di_Cadore-Bandiera.svg#c-Kontributor_2K-20260704195700-~2026-38108-30-20260704190800)
2. Revision of File:World location map (W3 Americas).svg (with the corresponding message on my talk page at User talk:ForeverFlying#Script)
3. Revision of File:Coat of Arms of the DAquino FAM ITA.svg (with corresponding comments at the file's talk page: File talk:Coat of Arms of the DAquino FAM ITA.svg#Display of the new source code on the description page)

ForeverFlying (talk) 02:22, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

@Grapesurgeon: Thank you for your notification; I admit that out of the context it could sound like you describe it.

By the way, I add the link to the said “previous post”: Link. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 00:31, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

Even with the context, stop treating others like that. So condescending. grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 00:47, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

@Grapesurgeon: It seems that, by “raising the voice”, somehow, and issuing injunctions, you are trying to show the effect that an aggressive behaviour can have on the person one is speaking to. Isn’t that right?

Or, more simply, is this authoritative tone merely a way of emphasising a certain firmness in the remarks? or a way of showing just how outraged one is?

For my part, I wouldn't say that “Welcome to Hugemessland” (i.e. heraldry & vexillology - in case it's necessary to point it out) is condescending, but rather humourous -this out of any context, in addition to the fact that it's can be grasped easily and sure can help to ease the tension - which, by the way, does not seem to be the direction this dialogue is willing to head in. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 01:17, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

My message is clear. Also please be more concise; could have been communicated in 1/8th the words grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 01:57, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

What I see in “the clarity” of the message is that I have a choice between the three options, from which I choose: “this authoritative tone is a way of showing just how outraged one is”, for which I'm sorry - which is not much, I agree. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 02:34, 15 July 2026 (UTC)