Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Vandalism

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Shortcuts: COM:ANV • COM:AVI • COM:AIV

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
22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

 create a report

To create a report please click on the button above and fill the fields. Alternatively you may copy the following template, replacing USER/IP and REASON with your content, and place it at the bottom of this page:

{{subst:Report vandal|USER/IP|REASON. ~~~~}}

Businessbarcodes12

[edit]

User: Businessbarcodes12 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: LTA spam, is there anything that can be done to keep this person from continually spamming us Gnomingstuff (talk) 23:39, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 09:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Militum professio scriniarii

[edit]

User: Militum professio scriniarii (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: User deleted a functioning category and replaced it with a redlink, despite my hint that this is wrong as long as no new one (blue link) exists:

This is a blatant malicious report of 'vandalism'. I have used the correct level of granularity of categories for RAF Lossiemouth. The category which Uli Elch inserted covers airports for entire world - when RAF Lossiemouth is very clearly a UK airport. As for the 'red link' issue - there is absolutely no reason to obliterate red links - especially as it is blatantly obvious that the red link cat is perfectly valid, follows an identical schema as other existing cats, and is absolutely obvious that the red link cat will soon be populated.
Furthermore, I noticed that Uli Elch has made malicious accusations of vandalism against other users on Commons.
I trust that Admins will realise this is a malicious report by Uli Elch, and dismiss accordingly. Regards Militum professio scriniarii (talk) 11:48, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Militum professio scriniarii: What you are doing here, is at least a violation of COM:OVERCAT (a.k.a. over-categorization). If ever this category "2015 at airports in the United Kingdom" shall be added, this is to be done along with a removal of the category "2015 in aviation in the United Kingdom", which is meant as its parental category of course, because airports belong to aviation topics too and hopefully I don't have to explain why. On the other hand, I don't see any inappropriate edits by Uli Elch, in ideal case "2015 at airports in the United Kingdom" should be created and replace the other one. --A.Savin 12:02, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@A.Savin: The reason why both categories are valid is because Royal Air Force aircraft - whilst being 'based' at one RAF station (i.e., a military 'airport') - they are frequently and regularly deployed to other RAF stations, overseas air force bases, and even civilian airports in the UK and overseas. So that is my justification for 'airport' and 'aviation' cats. Furthermore, I am following long-established convention for other air force categories which have used both airport and aviation cats.
Air force bases, and their aircraft, are very different to civilian aircraft and airports - civilian aircraft do not usually have a 'home' airport which they permanently operate from; air force aircraft do have permanent home airbase. Best regards. Militum professio scriniarii (talk) 12:17, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but then you should categorize the RAF under "year xxxx in aviation" and not under airports. Airports are commonly meant as passenger airports, not military. And take for example this category created by you: Category:1984 in the Royal Air Force. IMO this is wrong to sort it under "1984 at airports in the United Kingdom", solely for the reason that pictures of RAF aircraft and/or of RAF infrastructure, personnel etc.pp. are not necessarily pictures taken at airports. --A.Savin 13:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This probably needs to be sorted out on a talk page somewhere, or maybe the Village Pump, but whatever is going on here, it isn't vandalism. @Uli Elch, you should be much more cautious about making accusations of vandalism against anyone who is anything like a serious contributor to the project. Vandalism means willfully making edits to the detriment of the project, not honest disagreement, even if one of the parties to the disagreement might be misguided or even seriously wrong.

In short: take this somewhere else, it does not belong on this page, and certainly no admin intervention for vandalism is involved. - Jmabel ! talk 18:24, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done - Jmabel ! talk 18:25, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"somewhere else" is not extremely helpful. If I had reverted him again, I would have been accused of edit war. So, what else to do in such a case of destroying correct categories of files ? --Uli Elch (talk) 18:30, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

His user talk page (which you never tried)? The Village pump, as I mentioned above? or if you really think there is an admin issue here, COM:AN/U with an appropriate note on his user talk page to let him know. But, I'll repeat: honest disagreement is not vandalism, even if one of the parties to the disagreement might be misguided or even seriously wrong. And it certainly doesn't merit coming to the one administrator's noticeboard that is for things so egregious that there isn't even any point to notifying the person in question that they are being discussed. - Jmabel ! talk 21:29, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

小島26

[edit]

User: 小島26 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: Obviously non-contributor. All posts are vandal and unused personal files in any projects. Netora (talk) 14:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked, all copyvios deleted. Yann (talk) 15:07, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drunked Cactus

[edit]

User: Drunked Cactus (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: All uploads since their joining in 2019 have been copyvio images of John "Scatman" Larkin. They had a last warning at the start of August and uploaded another one. Belbury (talk) 15:51, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for 2 weeks. Yann (talk) 15:53, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

37.212.29.211

[edit]

User: 37.212.29.211 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: LTA XReport --Leonidlednev (talk) 17:05, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:28, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

82.59.114.139

[edit]

User: 82.59.114.139 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: Cross-wiki vandal. Thanks Parma1983 (talk) 23:50, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The First Omen

[edit]

User: The First Omen (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: Sock of Makks2010 XReport --Leonidlednev (talk) 06:22, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Indefinitely blocked. Taivo (talk) 09:40, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AllofmyFavoriteStuffReturn

[edit]

User: AllofmyFavoriteStuffReturn (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: SleepyHollowGuy1999 sock XReport --Leonidlednev (talk) 06:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While I was looking at those AN subpages on my watchlist, they were rather doing it again than going out and touching the grass. - THV | ♂ | U | T - 06:48, 31 August 2024 (UTC); edited: 06:59, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Leonidlednev and The Harvett Vault: ✓ locked thanks to Bsadowski1.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

‎2804:214:8686:994:1:0:c377:d34f

[edit]
 Not done The filter worked. I don't see the point to block an IP which hasn't really edited. Yann (talk) 22:22, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2001:fb1:116:185d:a895:e626:7a82:ab1c

[edit]
✓ Done 2001:FB1:116:185D:0:0:0:0/64 blocked for 3 days. Yann (talk) 22:20, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

195.89.26.154

[edit]
✓ Done. I blocked the IP for 3 days. Vandalism is reverted. Taivo (talk) 09:30, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MaríaAlejandraPP

[edit]

User: MaríaAlejandraPP (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: See that user's abuse log, where they tried to add webhost content to their user page. XReport --Codename Noreste (talk) 22:16, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done The filter worked. I don't see the point to block an account or an IP (see above) which hasn't really edited. Yann (talk) 22:21, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Имя участника1487

[edit]

User:Имя участника1487 Vandalism only. Bestalex (talk) 12:22, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Warned. No edit for the last 3 days, so that should be sufficient for now. Yann (talk) 12:41, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yuvizkvaf

[edit]

User: Yuvizkvaf (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 
Reason for reporting: Uploading redundant, duplicate images after being asked to stop. Descriptions also fail to attribute the source. Only other edit has been to issue a speedy deletion warning against a user whose file was not being deleted. Belbury (talk) 13:24, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for a week, all files already deleted. Yann (talk) 15:20, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Might perhaps be a sock of Hwsertgw (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) . Pinging User:Elcobbola who blocked them. --Achim55 (talk) 15:53, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 It looks like a duck to me. These are Salebot1, FWIW. Эlcobbola talk 17:47, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Vandalism&oldid=918720016"