Commons:Administrators' noticeboard
|
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 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Vandalism [] |
User problems [] |
Blocks and protections [] |
Other [] |
|
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 | |||
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 |
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
| ||
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.
This is a meta question on where to position a much larger text about a serious fake problem we have
Very short: Since some months, I have come across a larger number of fakes/faux/phantasy-augmented uploaded political symbols, flags etc. (worse: produced in good faith, most likely) which are to a large part very hard to identify as such and are also not marked - hence many seem to be real. To lay this out, I want to produce a longer text with examples. Where should I post that when done? Pittigrilli (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- Commons:Village pump is probably the best place. Yann (talk) 20:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
- +1 - Jmabel ! talk 20:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks. (finished from my side here) Pittigrilli (talk) 21:07, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
DeletionsNeeded
Could someone please close here? SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:16, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
- No reason you should get to jump the line (I was doing deletion requests from November), but I'm on it. —holly {chat} 17:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
FYI: Spam articles at Hausa Wikipedia with images here
Hi. Just to note that Hausa Wikipedia is getting a steady stream of articles created on Indian subjects usually businesses or people, and typically with images uploaded here. I am assisting the admins at haWP, and deleting the images here as they are spam or vanity spam. Each of the accounts is new and gets one or two edits. The typical rubbish we see for paid editing. — billinghurst sDrewth 10:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
- Do you mind nominating the images for speedy deletion? Trade (talk) 00:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Trade: Where I can identify that they are out of scope, I have just been deleting them, or if I think that another pair of eyes or multiple pairs of eyes, I poke them into the respective queues. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
VRT removal request
File:Estación de Cotos. Tren de la Serie 442 de Renfe. España, Spain.jpg (hist • logs • abuse log)
Please remove the unblurred version of the file per ticket:2024012510012205. Thank you! Bencemac (talk) 16:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Bencemac,
Done and VRT request closed. Kadı Message 18:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! Bencemac (talk) 19:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- What's the deal with the ticket? Usually we dont blur faces because of that Trade (talk) 23:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- It was a courtesy request, fulfilled by the Graphic Lab. Bencemac (talk) 08:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
- What's the deal with the ticket? Usually we dont blur faces because of that Trade (talk) 23:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! Bencemac (talk) 19:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Admin move request
Please move back Category:Aryan Ghasemi (1985–) to Category:Aryan Ghasemi, as it was an error (per discussion hereL Category talk:Aryan Ghasemi (1985–)#Move). The move needs administrator access due to technical reasons. Thanks, HeminKurdistan (talk) 20:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
- Done - Jmabel ! talk 21:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
MCGAMER YOUTUBE
MCGAMER YOUTUBE (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
Anyone wanna tell me why this user were blocked for three months? As far as i know he haven't uploaded any copyvio since his first block --Trade (talk) 23:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Ideas wanted to tackle Freedom of Panorama issue
Hello all, I hope this use of the Noticeboard is still legitimate (if not, I apologise in advance). We are looking for ideas to tackle the problem of media deleted because of Freedom of Panorama-related issues, and we're looking especially for admins and people who are knowledgeable in this issue to intervene. If you are interested, please join the discussion. Thanks in advance! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 17:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Has there even been a serious discussion as to how to organize the contributions of flickr users?
Has there even been a serious discussion as to how to organize the contributions of flickr users?
I can't remember when I started following the examples of other contributiors, and putting images from prolific flickr users into categories like: Category:Files from jqpublic Flickr stream. It seemed like these could be useful categories, as those flickr people kept making new images available under free licences. So, I started creating new categories, of the form Category:Files from jqpublic Flickr stream.
Then I noticed that some people had started to move categories of the form Category:Files from jqpublic Flickr stream to Category:Photographs from jqpublic. They were doing so:
- Without citing a policy, guideline, or discussion.
- Without using {{Category redirect}} to make the old category point to the new one.
In my opinion, this was never a good idea, for several reasons.
Some prolific photographers, including myself, have directly uploaded some of our images directly from our homes, have had some of our images uploaded from flickr, and have ho other images uploaded from other sites, like Panoramia. I'm an example. In my own case I think the best organization would have been to have had Category:Files from booledozer flickrstream and Category:Files from old York guy Panoramia stream be subcategories of Category:Photographs from Geo Swan. Category:Photographs from Geo Swan should not contain images that are in its subcatories.
I think I have seen other categories structures, for flickr users, in parallel, or in competition with the Category:Files from jqpublic Flickr stream hierarchy.
Influential Unix Guru Henry Spencer had a button he wore to Unix conferences that said, "The wonderful thing about standards is that there are so many different ones to choose among.". Truer words were never spoken. We should have one standard for how ot categorize photos from flickr users.
My apologies if this has already been discussed, and settled, and I just couldn't find that guideline.
- and now, what to do about it?
Ted Nelson said that the purpose of computers is human freedom. Sorting photos from flickr, or at least those that were properly uploaded to use standard information templates, should have an author field that contains a link to the original flickr person's original flickr-ID. And we could set a robot to work that could work quietly, in the background, and take care of making sure every image from flickr was in the category we agreed upon. Is there some reason we haven't done this? Geo Swan (talk) 02:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- At least one reason would be that I, for one, don't want a category that somehow singles out which of my images came from Flickr, and I suspect I'm not alone in that. (If there are no significant number of others who feel that way, I guess I'll yield, but I've always tried to avoid having what seem to me to be "vanity categories" for my photos. The only one at all that I have is a user category for my few videos, just because I wanted to have easy access to them myself.) - Jmabel ! talk 03:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- I too didn't, initially, start a category for my flickr images, out of modesty. I think that is what you are saying here, right?
- But, a
Category:Files from jqpublic Flickr streamshould transclude{{Flickr user}}, and so supply links to jqpublic's flickr photostream, and to their albums. That link to their albums is extremely useful. Many flickr contributors have some albums of private events, like birthday parties, that include few, or zero, in scope images, while other albums to exotic locations, are packed full of in-scope images. It's possible your flickr albums, similarly, are a mix of highly in-scope images, and less useful images, or images of no use whatsoever. - If modesty is your concern, could you allow the rest of us to take advantage of the album sorting you already engaged in, so we can pick from your most useful photos?
- Cheers! Geo Swan (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
- Anything on my Flickr stream that I consider likely to belong on Commons (about 10,000 images) is on Commons. Some of the rest I have not licensed in a way compatible with Commons (either because it is more personal, would not meet Commons' strict scrutiny on derivative work, or because when similar materials made their way to Commons I disliked the objectifying categories added to the images); the remainder because either they are artistic rather than documentary images, or if I took (say) 70 pictures at a concert by a band, there might be a couple that I thought were worth having on Commons, but I put the whole batch on Flickr. I know there are people who are so inclusionist they'd want every damn shot I took to be here on Commons, but I don't see any reason to encourage them.
- For work I've put on both sites, it's close to random which they go on first. For work I first uploaded there I usually (though not always) do any copy with Flickr2Commons and then use VFC to batch-edit them to say something like "author=Joe Mabel, on Flickr as Joe Mabel from Seattle, US"; if I do a completely separate upload here but I did an earlier upload to Flickr then I'll credit along the lines of "Joe Mabel; first uploaded to Flickr on account Joe Mabel" so no one can mistake it for a copyvio. So I'm not hiding my Flickr account at all. I just don't see any reason to have a giant category (or several) for my work. - Jmabel ! talk 07:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)