Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

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-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
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
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	127, 126, 125, 124, 123, 122, 121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 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	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	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

^{Translate this page}

Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

purge Admin backlog

---

Copyright:

• Copyright violations: ~63
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~2
• No permission since 29 December 2025: ~5
• No source since 29 December 2025: ~1
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2026-01: ~73

Other:

• Duplicates: ~195
• Advertisements/spam: ~6
• Personal photos/selfies: ~2
• Other speedy deletions: ~10
• Categories for discussion: 134 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~0
• Requests for unblock: ~12
• Undeletion requests: ~16

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~54
• Interface admin: ~15
• Technical: ~2
• Template protection: ~6
• Protection level: ~0

See also: DR, HMS, …

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

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.

User:Esperantoemilio

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

After receiving the final copyvio warning, this user didn't stop uploading same unfree portrait; File:Princehisahito2508.jpg, File:Princehisahito2025.jpg, File:Princehisahitoofjapan.jpg and File:Princehisahito19yrs.jpg . Netora (talk) 08:40, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week, all files tagged or deleted. Yann (talk) 08:46, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

• 日本守 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Suspicious sock. This user uploads the same copyvio photo without license information. Netora (talk) 13:13, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Please ban "User:FuzzyBot"

and unsuperprotect pages such as Template:YouTube CC-BY/i18n/en. The bot Special:Contributions/FuzzyBot is not doing its work, causing false complaints about template editors such as at Template_talk:YouTube_CC-BY#Change_text_to_reflect_dating_to_before_the_license_change:

> The requested change was not implemented. I do not know why you are saying "done."

When I try to edit the page myself I get either:

> The source language of this group is English. Please select another language to translate into.

or

> This page is an automatically generated mirror of the page Template:YouTube CC-BY/i18n and cannot be updated manually.

• Special:ListUsers/translationadmin
• Commons:Translators'_noticeboard#Pages_not_marked_for_translation

How long is one supposed to wait until an edit is approved? An ordinary user has to wait several months until a template editor looks into the issue, and after the template editor has acted, does it have to take several more months? The system makes it essentially impossible to edit templates, because a change can never be tested. Also the idea of having an "/en" subpage that is just a perfect copy is strange and wasteful at least. The translation system should be dropped, unless someone is able and willing to fix it. Taylor 49 (talk) 20:26, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

I don’t agree on unprotecting widely used templates. Bidgee (talk) 20:30, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

They are protected to the level template editor, and this is not questioned here. Unfortunately, template editors still cannot edit them (and possibly not even sysops can ...). Taylor 49 (talk) 20:48, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

That is because it is mirroring Template:YouTube CC-BY/i18n. Bidgee (talk) 21:04, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

I think you have realized it but FuzzyBot will only "do its work" after a translation admin (TA) has marked the changes at the source page. So, I don't see why FuzzyBot should be banned as it was just doing what it was designed to do. Also, the translation backlog (like many backlogs in Commons) are quite long, so if you are unable to wait for a long time, you should request it at Commons:Translators' noticeboard (which I see you have already done), and hopefully a TA will mark the changes. Thanks. Tvpuppy (talk) 21:06, 28 December 2025 (UTC)

I've temporarily granted myself Translation Admin rights and marked Taylor's changes for translation. Abzeronow (talk) 02:16, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Someone need to fix this wording because right now it makes it seem like Youtube does not let you use the Creative Commons license at all anymore and it has no information at all about the cutoff date or the new template that should be used for videos after July 2025

It should be the same like {{YouTube CC-BY 4.0}} but with "before August" instead of "after July" and contain the note "For videos uploaded after July 2025 use {{YouTube CC-BY 4.0}}"  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   19:06, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@999real: I've taken five minutes trying to understand, and cannot work out: fix what wording, where? Please either be more specific or ping someone who presumably knows what is going on. - Jmabel ! talk 22:26, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Sorry it is Template:YouTube CC-BY/i18n  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   23:32, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@999real: And you want what wording changed to what wording? Please, lay it out, don't make me take a bunch of time to try to guess exactly what edit you have in mind. - Jmabel ! talk 01:05, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Here I have copied it with the changes User:999real/YT  $999$REAL 💬 ⬆   01:11, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

edit proposal -- I am indifferent to that ... probably better wording, but link to archived source removed. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:33, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done Template:YouTube CC-BY and section resolved ... obviously I am not happy with the trans system installed at this wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taylor 49 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

User talk:SUN JIAYI's and User talk:LIUYIKANG

Same with User talk:Smyxhmcj, too many photos are from the internet. I saw these photos at https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/Hanyang_University/Understanding_Small_and_Big_Data_with_Wikis_(2025)/uploads , and it looks like many of them are also from the internet. MspreilsCN (talk) 03:43, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

 Doing… I will review all files from these users. 0x0a (talk) 10:02, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done I deleted all files with Screenshot in the metadata, and warned both users. Yann (talk) 14:42, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Personal attacks by GreggreenX77

Perhaps an admin can take a look at GreggreenX77? Their last two posts (1 and 2) at the Commons Help Desk were clear personal attacks directed at another user that violate COM:NPA. The intial post was also not really related to Commmons per se, but that could be perhaps understood as a simple misunderstanding of Commons and what it's for. The two subsequent posts, however, go beyond the pale and indicate NOTHERE type of behavior. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:30, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done. Indef'd after user directly insulted 2 other users on Commons:Help desk; obviously not here to contribute. --Túrelio (talk) 11:45, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: You should have notified the user of this discussion on their user talk page, as per the above. Pings are not enough, and "no ping" is definitely unacceptable.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 19:50, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: You should've checked GreggreenX77's user talk page's history before posting because I did notify them, but they blanked their user talk page. I've got no problem with people pointing out any errors I make, but people jumping to conclusions without checking the facts is definitely unacceptable. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I see that now, but what I saw then was that you used {{No ping}} in Special:Diff/1138466960. Why?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 00:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

The best time to ask why someone did something is typically before you imply/accuse them of doing something wrong. The same user was making the same personal attacks on English Wikipedia, and they had already been blocked there (the user talk page access was subsequently removed); so, they seemed to be clearly NOTHERE. I decided not to ping them because I knew I was going to add a notifcation template to their user talk page, which I did within a few minutes of my first post here. The {{no ping}} template was just an easy way to link to their user account without double "notifying" them. I normally use Template:Userlinks for such a thing but occasionally will use "no ping" if I don't see the need for the extra links. Your apparent desire to be quick to judge me without fully understanding what really happened is more of a reflection on you than me. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:29, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

This seems reasonable. However, it might have been helpful if you had explained this beforehand. Admins on Commons don't know the ins and outs of personal attacks, it's not always as clear cut as this one has been. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

There was nothing to explain beforehand. I notified the user in question as is required, and they removed the notification. The Commons administrator who blocked the user obviously had no issue the way things played out. Jeff G., who I've interacted with before without any issues, isn't a Commons administrator but, for some reason, just decided to assume the worst about me this time around. Moreover, when it was pointed out they were wrong in their assumption, instead of just saying "my bad" and moving on, they decided to double down and switch the discussion to the use of a "no ping" template that had nothing to do with anything at all. Any admin who looked at the two diffs I included in my OP would've almost certainly had no problem understanding the ins and outs of this particular case. Many admins might've even blocked the user without warning or notification given the brazeness of the personal attacks if they had stumbled upon them without anyone reporting them. I notified the user in question and they subsequently blanked their user talk page, which means they were aware of this discussion. That's the end of the story, and there's nothing more than really needs to be said. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:19, 30 December 2025 (UTC); post copyedited for some minor changes. -- 09:13, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I do agree you were blameless :-) It's rather unfortunately how this has turned out. - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 07:30, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Indeed, I did not additionally notify the user after blocking, because I had already noticed that he had removed the previous notification. --Túrelio (talk) 09:23, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@Marchjuly: I'm sorry, I didn't see the notification and blanking at first glance.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 10:45, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Generally: Should we have a filter blocking such talk page blanking? I think we should. GPSLeo (talk) 10:51, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@GPSLeo: Yes.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:52, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

How could a filter distinguish this from legitimate archiving? Or just removing notices that come down to "your template was broken" after you fix it? - Jmabel ! talk 18:59, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

It is about entire blanking, the page should ever have a link to the archive. GPSLeo (talk) 19:06, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

A page's page history is, in and of itself, an archive so to speak; so, anyone can check a page's history to see what, if anything, has been posted on it before. I don't know what Commons' policy is when it comes to blanking user page talk pages, but English Wikipedia's policy pretty much allows users to do what they please when it comes to user talk pages with respect to archiving/blanking. Users can remove any posts, warnings or other notifications if they want to do so; the only things they're not allowed to remove are declined unblock requests and certain types of deletion templates. On English Wikipedia, it's assumed that if you remove something from your user talk page, you read it and understood it; in other words, you can't try to play dumb later on if whatever was posted is brought up again. Prior to a user talk page being created, any links to it are red, and those links turn to blue after it has been created; so, even if a previously created user talk page is blanked, the links to it still remain blue, and the links will only go back to red if the page itself is deleted. That's the tell I look for when it comes to user talk pages; if I see a blue link to an empty talk page, then I kind of can assume something has been posted there before. The page was blanked, but there's record of what was posted on in its history. This is one way I am able to avoid adding redundant welcome templates, warnings, or notifications to what I believe is a new user's user talk page. The link color thing also seems to work the same here on Commons, at least that's been my expereince so far. You might argue that there was no link to GreggreenX77's user talk page in my OP here at ANU; so, there was no link color to check. However, the blue "Discussion" link at the top of the GreggreenX77 user's page is blue, and this indicates the same thing that a blue "talk" link in a user's signature would indicate: the user's user talk page exists (i.e., has already been created and posted on). -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:46, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Red links to user pages of existing users do not exist on Commons as every new user gets a bot notification. Yes, page histories exist, but old versions can not be found through the search. That makes checking if the user got warnings in the past unnecessary complicated. GPSLeo (talk) 22:58, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

@GPSLeo: I assume in that last, by "user pages" you mean "user talk pages". - Jmabel ! talk 01:01, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

I did not know that was the case with red links here on Commons; thanks for clarifying. I'm not sure, though, I agree with your assessment that searching for old warnings in the page history of a user talk page is unnecessary complicated. Can't you just clink on "History" and the top of the user talk page and see every edit that was made to the page? You can look for any recent blanking of the page and then check the edit right before that to see what was removed. If a page has been blanked more than once, you could do the same each time. A bit tedius perhaps but not unnecessarily complicated, at least not in my opinion. Unless you're advocating that all users be required to archive their user talk page, there's always going to be some effort needed when searching for old posts made to the page. Moreover, even if user's were required to archive their user talk pages, there are different ways to do so and some users just archive manually as they see fit. Regardless, it seems like this is something that needs to be further discussed at COM:VPP, isn't it? -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:03, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry

• NEW POWER YOUTH CLUB KALUTHAVALAI (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• KALUTHAVALA INEW POWER YOUTH CLUB (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Block evasion from blocks on other wikis. Evidence from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files:

Jonteemil (talk) 23:23, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: Can you explain what you mean by "Block evasion from blocks on other wikis"? How can an edit on Commons be evading a block on another wiki? (I'll block the latter account as a sock of the former because of the re-upload, but I don't understand whether anything here is a reason to block the former account, and if so for how long.) - Jmabel ! talk 01:17, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I mean, the master was blocked on two other wikis so I would assume that the sock was created to evade those two blocks. But the sock's edits here I guess don't evade any blocks since the master wasn't blocked here, so you are not wrong. Jonteemil (talk) 02:22, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Btw, you now blocked the master, not the sock. You also tagged the master as a sock of themself. I could have boldly fixed the second one but I can't change any blocks so therefore commenting here. Jonteemil (talk) 02:27, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

I'll fix this between master and sock. - Jmabel ! talk 08:18, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

Another Namest 2003 sock

• Zaragoza, La Ciudad De Las Dos Catedrales (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Category:Sockpuppets of Namest 2003

Seems quite blatant given the username. Further evidence from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files below:

Jonteemil (talk) 23:38, 29 December 2025 (UTC)

Already done Already globally locked. Yann (talk) 21:22, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Wiki 777000

• Wiki 777000 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

continued uploading non-free content and blindly marking them with CC licenses. 0x0a (talk) 22:31, 30 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for 6 months (3rd block). Yann (talk) 21:24, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

User:Akshourya

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

User kept uploading non-free logos, disregarding the final warning. 0x0a (talk) 06:30, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

My bad, my notifications weren't working, I will not do this again. I sincerely apologize for my actions. Akshourya (talk) 15:40, 31 December 2025 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 21:26, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

User:1926Bubi57

1926Bubi57 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions) Recent false 'own work' uploads after multiple warnings, including the last one. Romano1981 (talk) 14:15, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 21:34, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Deletion dispute:File:Egyptian Labor Law No. 14 of 2025.pdf

Hello,

I am reporting a misunderstanding regarding the copyright status of File:Egyptian Labor Law No. 14 of 2025.pdf. The file is being nominated for deletion due to a lack of "permission," but under Article 141 of the Egyptian Intellectual Property Law No. 82 of 2002, all official government documents are in the Public Domain.

The law explicitly states in Article 141:

In addition, protection shall not cover the following:

(1) Official documents, whatever their source or target language, such as laws, regulations, resolutions and decisions, international conventions, court decisions, award of arbitrators

and decisions of administrative committees having judicial competence.

Supporting References:

• WIPO Lex: https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/legislation/details/1301
• On-Wiki Copy of the Law (Page 53): File:Egyptian Intellectual Property_Law 82 of 2002.pdf

I have already added the correct license tag {{PD-Egypt-official}} to the file description. I request an administrator to review this evidence and close the deletion request as it fully complies with Commons policies.

Best regards, --مصطفى حماده (talk) 14:56, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Already done VRT has marked the appropriate permission as received. - Jmabel ! talk 21:30, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry (2)

• Attia.hakim (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Hakim Attia (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Kimo1981 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Block evasion. Evidence is the username similarities on the first two accounts and the rest from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files:

Jonteemil (talk) 19:09, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Added one sock above.Jonteemil (talk) 21:15, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Two socks blocked, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 21:20, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Geravelez

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

Reuploads a copyvio after final warning ({{End of copyvios}}). Jonteemil (talk) 19:25, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment The File:OcelotesU.jpg is approximately at the threshold of originality ... maybe a bit above. Taylor 49 (talk) 19:51, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Already blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 21:17, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Eroina David Moreno

• User: Eroina David Moreno (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: COM:NOTHERE.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 21:48, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

 Not done No edits since December 4, and before then, since April. Revisit if they return and have further problematic behavior. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:41, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Contest the indefblock of User:Gaty3000

• Gaty3000 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Artur2077 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

The user was indef-blocked immediately after had receiving their first formal warning {{File copyright status}}. This is too harsh obviously and only led them to create an new account User:Artur2077 (see Special:Diff/1139192686) to made a clean start. @Bedivere, Gaty3000, and Artur2077. -- 0x0a (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

 Comment I would reduce the block length, but creating a new account just after getting blocked is not OK. Yann (talk) 11:43, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Wouldn't mind shortening the block but sincerely the new account is making things worse. Bedivere (talk) 15:08, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@Artur2077 What do you make of this? Aren't you going to speak up for yourself? 0x0a (talk) 12:05, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

@0x0a, just to make things a bit clear, clean start isn't available for users under active sanctions. A clean start is not permitted if there are active bans, blocks, or sanctions in place against the old account. Even if that indef was "harsh", they should've contested the block. Making a new account is block evasion, which makes things worse (rightly said by Bedivere). Shaan Sengupta^Talk 13:56, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

Flagmasterhere

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

I can't believe that this is a new account. Any opinions? Yann (talk) 16:15, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Likely flag LTA sock. Definitely not here to contribute constructively. Should be blocked ASAP. Geoffroi 19:25, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Possibly a sock of User:Jurisdrew. Geoffroi 19:45, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

His upload of File:Flag of Cocos (Keeling) Islands.svg has "to avenge the old version" in the descripton. There are two deleted redirects in the log that an admin may want to check out to see what accounts edited the file that was previously there. Geoffroi 19:57, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

Here's what this account is "avenging": Commons:Deletion requests/File:Flag of the Cocos (Keeling) Islands.svg. This may be a reupload of the file deleted by Abzeronow. Geoffroi 20:03, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done OK, blocked. Yann (talk) 20:04, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

@Yann or any other admin, I would say there is enough material on TP to revoke talk page access. The first time he called Yann evil should've been the end of it. Shaan Sengupta^Talk 08:13, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done I thought I already did that. Yann (talk) 09:17, 3 January 2026 (UTC)

NOTHOST/sockpuppetry

• Taran Chowdhury (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Pion smmln (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Morsalin 1212 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Mehedihasan2026 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
• Alfinjaman2026 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

All uploading out of scope files related to a Taran Chowdhury which likely is the individual behind all accounts. See also w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pion smmln/Archive and below from User:SteinsplitterBot/Previously deleted files:

Jonteemil (talk) 21:03, 2 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done} see Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pion smmln. --Lymantria (talk) 08:19, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

WeatherWriter

"Well, you are just dumb then. Lol. WeatherWriter (talk) 03:18, 4 January 2026 (UTC)". I've resisted the temptation to take action myself so someone please may do something they consider appropriate in this case. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bedivere (talk • contribs) 04:12, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I apologize for the comment. I made it while being hot headed and worked up over a premature deletion currently under discussion at undeletion requests. Note, I was not alerted for this report and only discovered it after a comment was made by Bedivere on the undeletion discussion regarding reporting me. WeatherWriter (talk) 04:20, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

I'm fine with the apology. --Bedivere (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Bedivere (talk) 04:29, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

MaxxyFoxx

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

Continues to upload COM:NETCOPYVIOs after having one prior block for it. Jonteemil (talk) 04:14, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked 3 months, copyvios deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:01, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

File:Dragoljub "Drage" Nikodinoski in the army.jpg Repeated deletion nominations and targeting by user Jingiby

BEGIN moved from COM:AN - Jmabel ! talk 20:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

The user Jingiby[1] has repeatedly targeted multiple files I uploaded since 2023, including this one. Specific actions include:

Nominating several files for deletion, despite all being properly licensed and compliant with Commons policies.

Making threats to report me to administrators in relation to these uploads.

Making repeated edits on Macedonia-related pages that appear disruptive and have caused concern among other editors.

Evidence:

File deletion nomination: [2]

Related file deletion discussion: [3]

Edits to Macedonia-related page: [4]

This behavior demonstrates a pattern of targeting both my uploads and Macedonia-related content, rather than raising valid, file-specific policy concerns. Most affected files have been publicly visible since 2023 and meet Commons licensing requirements.

I respectfully request administrator oversight to prevent further disruption and to ensure that deletion processes and content discussions remain policy-based and constructive. Dime Dimeski (talk) 11:39, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

END moved from COM:AN - Jmabel ! talk 20:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jingiby: - Jmabel ! talk 20:38, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Convenience links for what is referred to above with blind URLs:

• File:Dragoljub "Drage" Nikodinoski in the army.jpg
• File:Dragoljub Nikodinoski in the army.jpg
• Revision history for File:Macedonian Y-Haplogroups.png

Jmabel ! talk 20:43, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello everyone and Happy New Year. I would like to object to the above accusations as completely groundless. On the contrary, I believe that the editor called User:Dime Dimeski is in violation. He repeatedly removed the template I have added, on which it is explicitly written not to be removed until the case is reviewed by an administrator. Otherwise, the genetic scheme in question still has no reliable academic source, and is based only on forums, private sites and the like. As for the 2 photos of the person called Dragoljub, the dates there were changed, but despite this it is still not clear who this person is and why he needs to appear on Wikimedia Commons. In addition, I suspect that User:Dime Dimeski uses a sock with which they edit only one and the same photos. I am talking about the editor called User:ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΑΣ. Jingiby (talk) 04:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

Dragoljub Nikodinoski is the son of WW2-partisan Category:Dimitrija Dime Nikodinoski according to Macedonian wiki. Note: I created that category after noticing that there are a number of files related to him. It looks like he received some kind of award for his participation in WW2 and was mentioned by name (at the minimum) in at least one book on the 1st Macedonian-Kosovo Proletarian Brigade, so that I'd say that Dimitrija is probably in project scope. As for the son Dragoljub, I also created a category for the sake of keeping all files in one place. While less notable than the father I'd still say the images are worth keeping for depicting things like 1970s military uniforms, school diplomas from North Macedonia, etc. The images have educational value even if the depicted guy doesn't. Nakonana (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

As for the two users being socks, I don't know. ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΑΣ has been active on mkwiki since December 2024. Dime Dimeski has been active on mkwiki since July 2023. From a quick look they both have edited the article on Dimitrija Dime Nikodinoski (partially on the same day a few hours apart, with one of them adding content and the other one removing content). Dime Dimeski has a much stronger focus on Dimitrija Dime Nikodinoski (only one other article edited) than ΜΑΚΕΔΟΝΑΣ who has edited several other articles on mkwiki. If they are socks, then they don't appear to be using the accounts in an abusive manner (e.g. they don't seem to try to sway discussions in their favor by using the accounts to vote twice, or anything like that). They could be just two Macedonian editors who are both interested in Dimitrija Dime Nikodinoski. Nakonana (talk) 21:04, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

W26

• W26 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)

Continues to upload copyvios despite two prior blocks. Jonteemil (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2026 (UTC)

@Jonteemil: you don't seem to have notified the user of this discussion; I will do that. - Jmabel ! talk 01:30, 5 January 2026 (UTC)

 Done 6-month block (third offense). - Jmabel ! talk 00:18, 6 January 2026 (UTC)

user:Nekkidjohann

Exhibitionist, not here to edit constructively Dronebogus (talk) 11:44, 6 January 2026 (UTC)