Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

Shortcut: COM:AN/U · COM:ANU

Community portal
introduction		 Help desk Village pump
copyright • proposals		 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-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.org.
Vandalism
[new report]		 User problems
[new report]		 Blocks and protections
[new report]		 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 here.
Archives
11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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 (index)

Note

  • 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.
  • It is usually appropriate to notify the user(s) concerned. {{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:Shizhao[edit]

There is a severe problem with User:Shizhao who is running the Panoramio upload bot. As this user is swiftly hiding his user talk page by pushing it every few days into an archiv, it might have been slipped for a long time out of the administrators board attention, that his constant upload of garbage from panoramio without respecting copyright issues and personalty rights is putting a severe load of grievance to the project and to those other users, who have to deal with that nonsense. The more, this user is showing zero responsivness - a no-go aspect in a community project.

It will be observed, that a very huge amount of his uploads have to be deleted on account of bad categorization, disregarding FoP issues, copyright violations and personality rights problems. A majority of the photos do not have an educational value or are of the lowest quality that can be imagined. This is for sure not, what Commons aims to be.

The whole thing is consuming the valuable time of serious Commons contributors, a time which much more could be used in *serious* work at the Commons project.

Such users, if not stopped in time, have a potential to be the undertakers of the project. The whole thing reminds me to the russavia problem.

My general perception of this user is, that he is not working in the spirit of WikiCommons and that he is abusing his possiblities as bot operator. Hence, my suggestion is, to withdraw his rights as bot operator. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I agree! --Hubertl 10:29, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
As far as I understand, Shizhao is trying to rescue third-party-uploads to Panoramio, which all will be deleted by Google in less than 1 year, per en:Panoramio#Closure. So, overall saving these images is a good thing. On the other hand, it's also a fact that a portion of these uploads are out-of-scope or violating copyright, which produces additional work for our recent-upload patrolers and other users, who care about upload-quality. IMO, in all bot-processed uploads of large image collections, a share of to-be-deleted "garbage" files seems to be unavoidable. In my experience, Shizhao has never complained about uploads which were tagged for deletion by others. To the contrary, Shizhao often[1] deletes nominated Panoramio-files by himself.
However, Shizhao should provide a statement about whether a more effective pre-upload sorting-out of clearly out-of-scope- files might be possible. --Túrelio (talk) 10:28, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree too. There are many photographs with low quality from non Commons user. They aren't preselected and flooding a lot of categories. Too much garbage. All the uploads should be selected and all the images with always the same content should be deleted. To see all the garbage is frustrating and a lot of categories became confusing. --XRay talk 10:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
My general opinion about Panoramio and flickr photos is, that Commons does not need them. We have so many skilled contributors and Commons should focus on it's own possibilities instead of hoover-like getting questionable photos from somewhere. The principle "first get it all and then throw the grievance of sorting things out to the own personal" is stupid. As a matter of facts, this work is sticking to those experienced user which rather could contribute much better images to Commons. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:43, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Do not forget that Panoramio images are usually not properly categorized: They go at best to the general category of the city and wait there for years until someone categorizes them. And most of them we do not need anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
+1. --A.Savin 12:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
+1. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:54, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
We get lots of useful images as well from these uploads. But there are also some panoramio photographers whose work tends to be below average or even downright weird, and categories that used to be well maintained get flooded with junk. So my first idea is to create and bot-add user categories for every Panoramio user. (That should be useful in multiple ways, so why don't we start immediately?)
Another idea is to upload all the images to hidden categories exclusively until somebody picks out the files that should be deleted or added to some categories. The user category could already be that hidden cat. We could use Cat-a-lot there for quick re-categorization, without the need to delete tons of nonsensical categories added by the bot. There has been a huge problem with overcategorization, see User_talk:Shizhao/2017-04-05#Please_stop_adding_multiple_categories_for_municipalities_to_bot_uploads. As all the files are geocoded, the next step might be to automatically add the category of the municipality that corresponds with the coordinates (if that's possible), and drop all the tags that belong to different locations or root categories like "Animals" which are far too general. Before we delete too many files that are considered insufficient for illustrating articles, we shouldn't forget the Commons on OSM layer [2], where a rather humble image may still be useful. On the other hand, we can use the OSM layer to find images on the map that require better categorization. --Sitacuisses (talk) 11:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

We should consider a policy where every mass upload should be presented first to the community and must not start without the approval of the community, possibly subject to restrictions and rules. Shizhao follows here previous mass uploads which have likewise generated problems. In my opinion, Wikimedia Commons is a curated resource and not an archival site for free pictures that are threatened by a close-down of another site. If we flood our collection with mass uploads of low quality shots with unsufficient descriptions we make Wikimedia Commons harder to use. Look at Category:Valdaysky District which has been flooded with more than 2,000 photographs. Who is expected to sort this out with useless pics like File:Valdaysky District, Novgorod Oblast, Russia - panoramio (1886).jpg or File:Дерево на углу шахты - panoramio.jpg? --AFBorchert (talk) 12:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

There are also thousands of cases where this bot places WRONG categories in its uploads. See File:Ayia Napa, Cyprus - panoramio (98).jpg for example, where the photo clearly doesn't belong into the Famagusta category. This rubbish has to stop definitely; if necessary, by indefblocking the Panoramio upload bot. And please stop telling be about potentially useful uploads from Panoramio: the damage for Commons that Shizhao is causing with all this upload mess is very, very much larger than the usefulness of a handful of Panoramio images. This is what should be actually taken into account. --A.Savin 12:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Honestly I find it hard to find any useful shots among the crap. And these are entirely lost like many other valuable shots that have been uploaded before. I know what I am talking about as recently I tried to manually clear a category that was misused by another mass upload (this time not by Shizhao). In my opinion (and this is just my opinion) we make Commons less valuable and usable in case of such misguided mass uploads. The real problem is here, however, that we most urgently need a policy for this kind of problem. It is not just a problem of Shizhao's Panoramio uploads but a more general problem that needs to be addressed. --AFBorchert (talk) 13:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
I agree with user:CEphoto and User:AFBorchert. In fact, I am no fan of bot uploads at all. We are already years behind categorizing images, not to speak about cleaning up top-level categories. We can't keep up as it is!
Most comments above do not support this bot upload. But there is some concern on missing out on some useful images (I have been able to add many images to WP articles). As a viable solution I support the idea by User:Sitacuisses to put all bot uploads in a special category. --P 1 9 9  ✉ 12:59, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Agree with A.Savin above. Apart from that: Looks like 70% of Panoramio has been uploaded yet to commons, but there are still hundreds of thousands images not yet uploaded. Do we really want this? Checking/Categorizing all files will take decades. --Steinsplitter (talk) 13:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi, I came here from User talk:Hubertl on my watchlist. I think the Panoramio upload bot is an excellent bot and should definitely be allowed to continue to run as it is. Panoramio is a website that documents what specific geographical locations look like. That is almost always an educational pursuit; such photos are used on Wikipedia and Wikivoyage all the time even when they do not show anything especially remarkable, and it would be short-sighted of us to fail to upload geographic photos that may still have historic value and may be lost if not uploaded before Panoramio closes down. I've categorized many of the bot's uploads in my own hometown, and found most of them very illustrative. Panoramio isn't a website full of selfies and other snapshots of dubious value like Flickr, it's a repository of geotagged photos of specific locations, and I would estimate that over 90% of everything on there is educational enough for COM:SCOPE. Categorizations (clearly now based on Panoramio tags) can always be fixed in the long term, but maybe adding a "cleanup" category in addition to what's now there would be useful? Or even categorization based on the geotag, not just the Panoramio tags, so that at least broad (country or city) categories are always added. darkweasel94 13:07, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
If you really consider 90% of the Panoramio stuff useful, then you definitely misunderstood the goal of Commons. Fortunately, people like you and Shizhao are in minority here. --A.Savin 13:16, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The bot uploads create a few interesting photos but most bot uploads are just tourist snapshots of well known tourist sites. These spots are already well documented and additional photos of questionable quality are not needed. I very much support a "sweep" of the useful pictures from Flickr and Panoramio, but these pictures must be evaluated before upload. It requires time, but keeping city categories clean from spam takes even more time. --Pugilist (talk) 13:31, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The bot has uploaded many images of remote rural areas that hadn't been covered yet in the project. It's certainly not just the typical tourist attractions. Thanks to the geotags, I've been able to add the first files to some of the empty nature reserve categories of my region. One of the panoramio photographers is a glider pilot who provided many aerial photographs. Unfortunately, it's the same person who uploaded dozens, if not hundreds of pictures of his Rottweiler dogs. So, yes, we do get lots of useful files, and we also get lots of spam. And I wish we had a way of sorting this out without flooding well-maintained categories. --Sitacuisses (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I would support pulling the plug on this bot. There are most certainly pictures at Panoramia that are worthwhile but we don't need their huge collection off snap shots. Importing those seems to be demotivating for our own photographers. Though I also agree with AFBorchert that we should consider a policy for mass imports. Natuur12 (talk) 13:43, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I just saw this discussion. the bot has filtered some low quality photos and no geotag photos, I also quick checked all the uploaded photos, created a category blacklist, distinct images used 10000+. Because Panoramio is about to close, I had to speed up the progress of the upload. If the community does not need to upload photos from Panoramio, I will stop the bot--shizhao (talk) 14:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

  • I don't see the issue to have backlogs of images needing categories (or needing better categories), even if that takes several years to sort the images. In the extend the images are not copyright violation, some of the images are clearly in scope, are free and have geotags, and depict geographic (or urban) areas for which we do not have so many photos. If Panoramio is about to close it will be a pity to lose an occasion to have these images. And for who don't want to work in the categorisation of these images, then...don't do it, that's all. I'm fine with the BOT. Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:12, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
It is not that simple. Categories which were flooded by such mass uploads are rendered unusable. And categories are quite important to find images at Commons. --AFBorchert (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
As the bot just takes the proposed categories from Panoramio, there is no supervision of OVERCAT. For example, nearly all photos that have gone to the category Sabah also went to the OVERCATS Borneo and Malaysia. Second: No one needs photos which are only some few kilobyte in size. We are encouraging people to provide full size resolutions because Commons not only serves its own sister projects but are accepting tons of unusable small images. How silly is that? --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • So they should be added in a specific category (exemple "Media needing category uploaded by Panoramio upload bot"), waiting to be well sorted manually or deleted. Maybe the BOT should not use the Flick tags to put the images in a specific category as for File:Valdaysky District, Novgorod Oblast, Russia - panoramio (1886).jpg in order to avoid potential categorisation issues Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:38, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • As it is not upon me to decide how the Foundation is financing the space for several millions in the majority useless files, I would be fine if all files go directly to the Category:Photos from Panoramio without further categorization. If someone is looking for a special photo, he will find it with the search function (given that the photo has a suitable description, which, I have to mention that, is almost not given). --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 14:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
May I repeat that a User category for each Panoramio photographer will often help to find images of similar scope or region. --Sitacuisses (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Full ack to those who ascertained the huge mass (or the huge mess...) of bad quality snapshots that are flowing in through the Panoramio bot. What about tackling these quality issues by postponing if not outright blocking the upload of every still image shot by mobile phone, a simple and cheap point-and-shoot-camera or lacking EXIF? It would reduce the amount of bad quality (blurred, noisy...) files and ease in curating the remainder, as I expect that those people offering EXIF and using more dedicated photographic equipment at least care a little bit about meaningful (and bot-readable) descriptions of their images. I think that it wouldn't be such a large task to write down a blacklist of camera entries in EXIF data "to be avoided". Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 15:03, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
An elitist answer to a minor problem. Do you know, globally how many people have money to spend on dedicated photographic equipment? This is not Germany were the salaries are compatible with the purchase of a fancy camera and equipment, this is a global project, even in countries were the medium salary is 1/20 1/50 of the german one. Tm (talk) 15:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
This answer is at least appropriate to an automated data processing. Of course, there are people interested in photography using their mobile phone camera, and who care about decent quality (composition, clean lens...) But these photographic results aren't accessible to automated filters (save for an IT setup akin of the Google image search...). And even if Commons aims for a global reach, I do not think that one who is fighting to make his everyday living cares much about any free media repository. The uploads from non-industrialised countries will surely come from the respective upper socail class who won't care about any considerations of medium salaries and who ideed do have the money to spend on dedicated photographic equipment (and I do not specifically mean "DSLR", a well made compact digital camera will do well, too. As every device that ranges above the stuff sold for 30-60 EUR at ALDI-type discounters, here, in Germany...) Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 15:32, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • User:Cccefalon asked me to comment. I've probably categorized about 300 of these myself (mostly Seattle-related). I'd say about 20% of these are useful, and the bulk of the rest are harmless. That's enough to make it worth doing, but it would be nice if these were put in special categories for sorting instead of dumped into place categories. - Jmabel ! talk 15:06, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment As it seems this is the day to bash at User:Shizhao, and the hard that he does, i´ll also "bash" him. First he created a tool to upload images that, given that Panoramio will close at the end of this year, will be lost forever. As user:darkweasel puts it "Panoramio is a website that documents what specific geographical locations look like. That is almost always an educational pursuit; such photos are used on Wikipedia and Wikivoyage all the time even when they do not show anything especially remarkable, and it would be short-sighted of us to fail to upload geographic photos that may still have historic value and may be lost if not uploaded before Panoramio closes down." As him, I´ve categorized thousands if not tens of thousands of Panoramio uploads without a category, and i say that
1- The medium quality of Panoramio images are reasonable to good, per my experience of categorizing tens of thousands of that images.
2- Most importantly, what none of the bashers seem to know or care, is that User:Shizhao regularly deletes the images of bad quality, out of scope and copyright violations, so he does, in a very systematic and thoroughly job of cleaning his uploads. Given that he already uploaded 1 861 944 images, the problematic ones are a minority. So to the ones opossing him, give a quantitive explanation of your pretensious problem (how many images are problematic, a percentage based in facts and not state or spirits of mind.
To terminate i will say to User:Shizhao, thank you for your hard work, keep it up and uploading and do not care to some users unfounded complaints. Tm (talk) 15:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
Honestly, me too I sometimes categorize such images and I tend to agree with Tm above, some images looks at first view as "random snapshots" but are in the facts media "that specific documents what specific geographical locations look like". Except the images that shows peoples on vacations or the images with very bad quality, or very big number of similar photos taken by the same person about the same subject, they are IMO fully in scope in the extend the geolocation is correct. Where some persons see flooding, some others see the EV or a potential documentary value. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:13, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
About the value of Panoramio images i was just quoting what Darkweasel said :). And the images that are out of scope or of bad quality are delete regularly by User:Shizhao anyways. Tm (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
  • An exemple, the last one I categorized two days ago from the "media needing categories" File:M.Á.V. temető - panoramio (3).jpg, I'm wonder why this image is not fully in scope, and why we should lost the images not yet uploaded in the extend Panoramio is going to close. I really don't understand. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
The problem with this types of bots are not the uploads; but dumping files in all possible auto detected categories. The bot can be instructed to avoid it and add them only to maintenance categories. Jee 17:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
But those auto-detected categories have been very useful to me when categorizing! For example, I watch Category:Vienna, so I see on my watchlist when anything gets in there and then I can categorize it. If the bot had only put them into maintenance categories, I would not have found them anywhere near as quickly. Broad auto-detected categories where at least somebody can find them are always preferable to no categories or only maintenance categories that far fewer people will ever look at. (Also, tools like User:OgreBot/gallery will pick up many broadly-categorized files, but not uncategorized ones.) darkweasel94 19:38, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
This is fine, but this category should be different from the actual Category:Vienna and be hidden. You could still watchlist it, but folks who are looking for a nice picture of Vienna for Wikivoyage should not be forced to go through thousands uncategorized images.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
darkweasel, I understand your argument. But we should aware that these main categories (not maintenance and hidden categories) are primarily for viewers and reusers. It is not the place where I maintenance volunteer needs to find files which needs maintenance. The category becomes cluttered and useless if it occupies more junk than good. Jee 02:40, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Summarizing the different views, I would like to repeat my proposal to put all further uploads into Category:Photos from Panoramio without further categorization and leave it to the discreation of brave categorizers to pick the suitable ones. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 00:43, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

About photo quality: has filtered out <300k photos (now changed to < 500k size)
About category by user: user name on Panoramio is often used with some strange characters, Commons' category system is difficult to support them all

--shizhao (talk) 01:05, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

If the user name contains strange characters, use the ID number instead. The user name can still be added to the category description. If it's too complicated to sort out only some names, then use the ID number to name all Panoramio user categories. It's more important to group the files together than to replicate the user name. --Sitacuisses (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I've stopped your bot for the next 7 days now. The reason is, that I find it pretty uncalled for to continue running the bot as nothing would have happened, whereas there is some consensus here that it cannot go on same way as before. --A.Savin 01:18, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Btw: AFBorchert kindly requested Shizhao to pause the bot white the issue is being discussed, but Shizhao ignored it completely. The bot was running all the time and stopped only after I blocked it. Do we really need such ignorant sysops here? Shizhao should resign their admin flag voluntarily or a desysop request should be considered. --A.Savin 01:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Well, such a desysop would be an overkill to me. Shizhao didn't abused their admin tools, and in fact deletes images uploaded by their bot which are copyvios and out of scope.. ★ Poké95 01:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
"there is some consensus that it cannot go on same way as before"??? At least 4/5 people are in part or totally in favour of thus uploads continue as is and 7\8 against! Is that a consensus now? Consensus is when there is, at the minimum, a clearly supermajority in one side and i see none. Also blocking a bot just because? In what policy is this block based? Create a maintenance category if needed be like in the Category:Images from the Geograph British Isles project needing category review if such action is needed, but this block is uncalled for and against policies and there is no consensus for such action. Tm (talk) 01:50, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
This bot was never authorized by the Commons community; I don't see any bot request which approves this bot task (correct me if I'm wrong). COM:BP says that unauthorized bots are not allowed to operate without approval. ★ Poké95 02:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Anyway, @A.Savin:, can you please enable account creation and disable autoblock in your block? Otherwise, Shizhao won't be able to comment here for 1 week due to autoblock, and possibly innocent anonymous users would be complaining at us that they can't create an account nor edit here on Commons. ★ Poké95 02:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Search is your friend! Yes it was authorized by the Commons community in Commons:Bots/Requests/Panoramio upload bot. So this is not a valid argument to block. Tm (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@Shizhao, A.Savin, Pokéfan95: I've removed the autoblock from the block of User:Panoramio upload bot. --AFBorchert (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I strongly agree that this bot must be stopped now, as it creates a lot of problems, like those in DRs. It would be better if a wiki would be created for this. I already requested at Miraheze to create the wiki. Then after the wiki is created, Shizhao's bot can continue the work there, and we can find some useful images there to be uploaded here on Commons. @Shizhao: Is this solution ok to you? ★ Poké95 01:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

  • All Panoramio uploads should be stopped altogether - If there's images worthy of being here they'll be uploaded by various editors, It's no different to having a "Flickr-bot" that uploads thousands of flickr images a day - In short the bot isn't needed and neither are the 90% of images uploaded so I strongly support the motion of pulling the plug on this bot altogether. –Davey2010Talk 01:56, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Source to 90% percent of Panoramio images not being needed? Or are you speaking without knowning, as you only made a few edits related to this images since january 1 2017 (a few moves and less and 50 categorizations). I´ve categorized tens of thousands and not that maybe, in a bad day, are, even before Shizhao cleans the daily uploads (that almost no one mentioned or cared) at most 5/10% are out scope, bad quality, copyright violations, etc. Tm (talk) 02:03, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

That is to say no longer need to upload photos from Panoramio? or Create Category:Photos from Panoramio by tag continue uploading?--shizhao (talk) 03:17, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I think it is fine to continue as far as no main categories are added by the bot. All files should go to a maintenance category or its subcategories (as Sitacuisses suggested). If the bot is already blocked, wait for some more opinions. Jee 03:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I think we should let the bot continue to upload. As has been mentioned, this is a race against time - the photos will soon be gone - whereas categorisation is not. Perhaps some form of "check if A is a parent cat of B, and if so, don't add A" could be included in the category generation? -mattbuck (Talk) 07:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
In the light of the above opinion, I think the idea is feasible: create a maintenance category Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories by date, daily uploads of photos into subcategories under this category (Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories as of 2017-04-18). Bot don't add main categories (The Panoramio tags on the image page can be used for manual categories and searching)--shizhao (talk) 08:31, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
As suggested above, I would also recommend to add a per-Panoramio-user category. We have a similar approach with Geograph images. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
You still didn't explain why it was me and not you (after this request) who had to stop your bot. I don't like sysops who treat their colleagues like shit. And: You still didn't explain what to do with all the mess already uploaded, and with categories hopelessly spammed. --A.Savin 12:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
I can proove that for at least 3-5 monthes it became almost impossible to maintance some categories (for example Category:Moscow). There are not so many active users who would categorize all of the uploaded images. The second problem is that the amout of really poor photos is enormous. I don't know what to do with all of that really useless and bad (IMHO) quality photos of really-hard-to-understand-what-it-is-and-where-it-is. And the third - I have to spent all of the time here only to categorize panoramio images (it's not so interesting, because photos are banal and usually bad). --Stolbovsky (talk) 15:58, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
sorry, I did not notice your message. Also, I do not think these photos are mostly spam--shizhao (talk) 12:28, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
Not what you think is relevant, but what people think who try to do some maintenance. There were times I managed to keep categories like Russia, Moscow etc. clean, but today no chance due to thousands of your bot's uploads (pinging Stolbovsky who can confirm it).
Btw, when you don't notice messages on your own (!) talk page, I really don't know how to help you any further. --A.Savin 12:53, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I can only speak for the many photos from Germany (as I have re-categorized thousands and thousands of them in the past weeks just for my own district). The only really helpful way would be to only add one categroy per picture (a maintenance category "Panoramia images to be categorized from Landkreis...", or even "... from [city/community]", derived from the pretty good geo-localization that comes with the images. The most annoying thing about those uploads of photos from my region is that the Panoramia uploaders didn't just give one tag per photo, but instead tagged their wohle albums and all the photos within with numerous city names if they uploaded photos from a tour that went through numerous cities. That makes it really hard to recategorize, because you have to follow every single geo-tag to find out what is depicted (the descriptions and filenames are mostly totally useless and utter crap), if you don't know what is depicted (and if you do know, those photos are mostly highly redundant...). That said, there are indeed photos well worth preserving among them, and some that are very good additions to the Commons. They just clutter the existing, well groomed, categories too much, in too little time for anyone to cope with tidying up. --Anvilaquarius (talk) 09:20, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

  • To add my opinion to this discussion:
    • Considering that Panoramio is about to be shut down and its collection of geotagged imagery will not be available elsewhere, uploading its contents to Commons wholesale is advisable. The offscope clutter can be deleted at its own pace with priority for cases of FoP and other copyvios.
    • Using Panoramio tags for categorization is only as good as the tagging itself — therefore it would be better not to convert them directly into categories. (On the subject of categorization of mass uploads, some really good ideas, old and new, were stated above, along with some really bad ones. The matter should be discussed elsewhere though.)
    • I for one would like to thank and congratulate User:Shizhao, even if there’s less-than-perfect aspects to his bot run. Considering this matter an user problem, calling for blocks and desysoping — it’s ludicrous and frightening, although not surprising. There’s indeed two sides in the Commons community and a deep and widening chasm divides us, but it is clear which side has all the big guns and ain’t afraid to use them.
-- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 19:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree with those requesting that this bot does not automatically add to any normal category, but that there is a special category created for the bot, with sub categories for user and possibly tag. Preserve information on the file page. I think that generally we should not use bots to add images to categories, other than maintenance categories, or "uploads from XXX" categories. -- Colin (talk) 19:45, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • I would like to note that the Internet Archive already has a whole archive of all Panoramio images, so if this bot's purpose is to save photos from Panoramio, then that may no longer make any sense since another website already fulfilled that purpose. We could just download one gz file from that collection and pick acceptable images to be uploaded here. On the other hand however, a gz file may contain thousands of images, and that would be very hard if they would be picked one by one. Also, I am not sure if they have information for each image, so that's another problem. But the best solution I see here is to upload them instead to another wiki willing to host a large archive, since not only the Panoramio images would be saved reliably, it would also preserve information for each image and categorization is possible, which makes reviewing easier than uploading them to Commons and wasting valuable volunteer time. I tried to request a wiki at Miraheze, but they are concerned that their storage might burn out, so I withdrew my request. ★ Poké95 00:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
    Internet Archive would be interested in such data, but this is just my guess. — regards, Revi 00:40, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
If you meant the information about each image, then yes of course. IA is interested in all data, as long as it is valuable and important. That information of course meets that. The problem here anyway if IA would be used for that purpose is that Shizhao might have no knowledge on how to mass upload such data to the Internet Archive, and doing it manually on the other hand would be tedious. ★ Poké95 07:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
comment from a "simple maintenance user": In my opinion the material from panoramio ist average to good, I don't see any problem with the pure number of images BUT the only big issue: categorization! Categorization of these images is very poor and tends to massive overcategorization which has held me busy for weeks now "downcatting" the files. Some groups of files even all share same cats but completely differing in geo-location. If we can solve this, it's fine. --Joschi71 (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

Well, let me summarize. The 7 days block of Panoramio bot is soon expired, but it seems that NOTHING has been done by Shizhao so far to adress the issues. The uttermost participants in this discussion have the opinion that at least something has to be done with the way the bot puts its uploads in categories (only maintenance categories, not topic categories). But it seems to me that after the block is expired, the bot will continue same way as nothing would have happened. Given that, a longer block for the Panoramio bot will be necessary to prevent further damage on Commons. --A.Savin 09:03, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

I think he know very well that the bot has no permission to run now. But I propose to give it the permission if he agree that the bot will be programmed to upload files only with maintenance categories (not topic categories). Jee 09:30, 24 April 2017

(UTC)

I have already said above: my bot create a maintenance category Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories by date, daily uploads of photos into subcategories under this category (Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories as of 2017-04-18), If so feasible. The main category is no longer add--shizhao (talk) 03:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Then A.Savin, AFBorchert, could you approve the bot to run (with these restrictions) as we don't have any serious oppose? We're on a deadline as that site is closing. Jee 03:10, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Ok, using just maintenance categories without flooding regular categories would be an important step forward. In addition, I would like to see per-photographer categories as it is done for Geograph images. If the user names appear to be weird (as described above), the suggestion by Sitacuisses should be considered to use the numerical ids instead. Take for example 1, 2, 3 from the most recent uploads which are all copyvios per COM:TOYS and come all from the same user. The most effective way to weed them out would be a per-user-category which would help to mass-delete them. In addition, there were also concerns voiced above regarding copyright issues (like those I just refered to or missing freedom of panorama as, for example, in the most recent uploads 1 or 2), personality rights (recent example: File:Let's take a break now. - panoramio.jpg), and out-of-scope stuff (recent examples: 1, 2). How is this to be sorted out? Is there a team who is willing to check uploaded photographs at least in regard to such issues within a reasonable time frame? --AFBorchert (talk) 05:26, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Agree. --A.Savin 10:11, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
already add category by ID--shizhao (talk) 08:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
I am not sure if I understand you correctly. Do you mean you did this before? I am missing such a category with most recent uploads like this one. Or do you intend to add per-user-categories when the bot resumes its operation? --AFBorchert (talk) 11:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
when the bot resumes its operation, add category by ID and category by date, no main category--shizhao (talk) 02:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Might I ask for the status of the above mentioned decision? Is the bot running again? I cannot see any new subcategories under Category:Photos_from_Panoramio --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 09:59, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

bot have re-upload begin, see Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories--shizhao (talk) 06:53, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

I checked a few files. Seems fine. Jee 13:15, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
In my opinion the "Photos from Panoramio ID" categories, like any category of photographs by user, should be permanent and should also be bot-added to the files uploaded earlier. So they can't be placed below Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories, as they will remain even when the categories have been checked.-- Do we need parallel categories Media needing categories as of 4 May 2017 and Photos from Panoramio needing categories as of 2017-05-04? Shouldn't the latter be a subcategory of the first? -- Is there a way to search files only within Category:Photos from Panoramio needing categories? Otherwise it would be handy to have provisional subcategories there created from the tags. --Sitacuisses (talk) 13:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

As I'm working for some months now (since Nov. 2016) on part of the images uploaded by the bot, please allow me to make some more general remarks beyond the bot in question.

  • I have found some useful images, even images of protected monuments in Austria & Bavaria, we did not have any image before. But I consider this the needle in the haystack.
  • I have a quarry-statement that finds images located in Austria and some kilometers off borders: https://quarry.wmflabs.org/query/14334 (everyone can use it). It finds uncategorized images and images needing check, most of those are created by the panoramio bot. Results are stored from time to time in this gallery.
    • The quarry-statement can be adopted to different location areas.
  • I'm working hard, but the number of files is almost constant (it dropped only last weeks when the bot was blocked). Some others are helping. It is not possible to keep the categorization at same speed as the bot uploads more and more.
  • I asked for help on the Bavarian side and the Bratislava side just across the Austrian border, but there was not much response.
  • You can check the gallery, this is getting more and more a collection of difficult to identify and difficult to use images. At least it is difficult to find somebody who cares.

Problems:

  • Except flooding the categories for various locations, the bot also floods various maintenance categories (like All_media_needing_categories_as_of_2017 and Media_needing_category_review_as_of_<date>). This makes it difficult to find rare manual uploads in between such categories that are waiting for proper categorization. The reason why maintenance categories are getting more and more clumsy, is IMHO that we just have this one level process. It would be better if we would consider images having only hidden categories (or certain hidden categories) to be sufficiently categorized and if we could move uncategorized images after some time (=hard to categorize) to some second level maintenance category. Or to a non-hidden category like Category:Uncategorized on purpose.
  • Flooding is not only done by this bot, but also by non-bot users, who upload many similar images or many low quality images or many uncategorized images. (the strategy IMHO should be to select at home and upload only the very best few images of a view of an object)
  • Flooding is intrinsic to mass uploads. Provided we get some thousands of images properly categorized and well described in multiple languages on a small scope (e.g. a single building), it is quite impossible for the user to select one of those many to illustrate an article.
  • In general we do not have an idea on how to stop adding more and more of the same.
  • Deletion
    • We do not have a working policy, that allows to get rid of images that do not contribute much to the educational value of commons. COM:SCOPE is a bit to wide. Blurry images can be useful to show blurriness, etc.
      • Best would be not to upload those at all, but this could be difficult for a mass upload like this (how to select?)
    • We do not have a policy, that allows to easily get rid of third party images uploaded by bots (like the panoramio fotos) just because they do not add value, just because we already have a lot of similar images (main tourist attractions) and the like. This is different from images uploaded by the photographer, where the images are uploaded on purpose. Deletion policy should differ between third party uploads and own images.
    • Having said that deletion policy does not work on the low end of the image spectrum (only at the very low end), I'm moving such images to a low quality subcategory like Category:Votivkirche - low quality images, Category:Zentralfriedhof,_Vienna_-_low_quality_images. Images are not deleted, but buried there (hope forever or until deletion).
    • By keeping all those images of less value, at least when a user tries to move them to the right categories this will flood these categories again. Ok, not everything goes to the city, but for main tourist attractions it is quite similar. See de:Wikipedia:WikiProjekt Österreichische Denkmallisten/Commons Bilder for a count on some of the main tourist attractions in Austria (I know it is depending on the subcategory structure and not precise).

regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

More comments from Illegitimate Barrister[edit]

The user was previously reported and warned in December 2016 for his attacks. Since then, he continues to make uncivil comments: January 2017, March 2017 (FU remark), March 2017 ("blah blah blah"). --George Ho (talk) 07:13, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

George Ho, Why are you just reporting this now since the last comment was in March? Wikicology (talk) 08:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I couldn't find any other comment from April. Shall I withdraw the report then? --George Ho (talk) 09:23, 2 May 2017 (UTC); ooh... 15:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Wikicology - I don't care that there's nothing newer than March, the behaviour George Ho has reported is problematic, and I'm quite prepared to block Illegitimate Barrister if they continue to reply to people with comments such as "fuck you motherfucker". There is absolutely no place for such behaviour in a friendly, collaborative project such as ours. I look forward to hearing from Illegitimate Barrister on how they intend to modify their behaviour going forwards, to bring it back within the norms we expect from our community here. Nick (talk) 09:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Nick, of course Illegitimate Barrister's behavior is troubling and they need to be strongly admonished if not blocked. I'm just wondering why that horrible comment was not reported then, perhaps it was not noticed. Well, I support a week block with the undrstanding that they would tell us how they intend to modify their behaviour going forwards in the unblock appeal. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 10:03, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
I looked at his talkpage and found stuff like this (exp) and this. This is absolutely a no-go. I am cinlined to block Illegitimate Barrister if he ignores this AN/U complain. He needs, at least, apologize for his behavior. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
✓ Blocked after this statement, and then he continues to edit (ignoring this AN/U case). --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
That's fair enough. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
My full support, Steinsplitter. Nick (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Pinging Masur and Alan, who are involved with this user. --George Ho (talk) 15:06, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I received an appeal of this block via email, which I declined, as it was based solely on the argument that the block was punitive and against policy. - Reventtalk 01:59, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Also, the user was blocked at English Wikipedia for "cross wiki harassment". --George Ho (talk) 02:56, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Just wow. What got into him I wonder. Natuur12 (talk) 13:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
Had to be done as to many Wikipedians were getting tired. FYI - User_talk:Alan#Illegitimate_Barrister_-_user_rights. Masur (talk) 13:02, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

inappropriate username[edit]

I propose an indef block of the new account AdolfHitschler88 (talk · contribs), as this is a totally inappropriate username (containing Adolf Hitler and 88, which is a neonazi code[3]). In addition, his so far only upload, File:Barock Obamena.jpg, doesn't provide any positive expectations. --Túrelio (talk) 07:44, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

+1. Might even be done globally. --Leyo 07:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hoggardhigh (talk · contribs)[edit]

Has vandalized one of my pictures twice, strange edits on other pics, too. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Laas_Tschengls_St._Ottilia.jpg --ManfredK (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Blocked. Strange behaviour. Had already been blocked for the same reason on :en. Account compromised? --Túrelio (talk) 08:51, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

user Hkronk/editing Kobi Arad article[edit]

Hi Wiki admins. I have been working on an article some time now about the artist Kobi Arad. I understand that sockpuppets had previously worked on his page and, after I submitted the article for review, I was also accused of being a sockpuppet. I asked what I could do to prove that I wasn't and heard nothing. In subsequent days, both the article, which I had put a lot of work into, and my user profile were deleted. Is there anything I can do about this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hkronk (talk • contribs) 22:39, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

@Hkronk: Hi,
You are probably on the wrong page. This is for issue about Wikimedia Commons, while articles are on Wikipedia. For help on the English Wikipedia, please see en:WP:TH. Regards, Yann (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
@Hkronk: No, there is nothing you can do about this directly. Why are you so interested in that artist? Exactly how does it meet en:WP:NMUSIC? How long have you been working on that article? Are there other artist or music articles you could work on until this blows over?   — Jeff G. ツ 00:51, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Dlldo777[edit]

This user violates a lot of policies: first, violates the username policy by having an inappropriate username; second, this account was created to vandalyze on Spanish Wikipedia (where has been blocked) and here, and all the photos uploaded to Commons by this account are out of scope; third: the user has uploaded only copyrighted photos/screenshots. For that reasons, I ask the permanent block of the user and the deletion of the photos uploaded. Thanks, --Warko (talk) 03:00, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done Nuked and blocked indef. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:47, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

ebook-advertisements[edit]

Zacharylupita (talk · contribs) has uploaded more than 200 1-page-pdf-files, each of which is merely an advertisement for a commercial ebook. He continued to upload even after receiving a warning not to upload promotional material. Due to the large number of files, I am going to nuke them. --Túrelio (talk) 10:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

  • The files contained advertising links to external website. This is spamming, and IMO, the user can also be indef. blocked right now. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:26, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Damn. Though the original account wasn't even blocked, he/she created the sock Harismatys (talk · contribs) and started uploading the same spam. Now, indef'd and uploads nuked. --Túrelio (talk) 12:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
I think me too, I blocked a similar one a few time ago... Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:35, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
The next one: Wighardlorenzo (talk · contribs). --Túrelio (talk) 12:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
The next one: Hansrudolf (talk · contribs). What the hell is going on today? --Túrelio (talk) 13:13, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
The next one: Siegbrecht (talk · contribs). Eventually, a CU should check whether a range-block might help to stop this nonsense. --Túrelio (talk) 13:31, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
The next one: Zebadiahwayne (talk · contribs). --Túrelio (talk) 13:35, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment -- Block all account used by this user and tag them accordingly. Wikicology (talk) 14:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
That was already performed when posting them here. However, as my time is limited and as the spammer is able to upload hundredths of these pdf files within a few minutes, I want to get the recent-upload patrolers on alert. --Túrelio (talk) 17:01, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh...That's fine. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 18:50, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Now in Category:Sockpuppets of Roycewolf. --Túrelio (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

User:Slowking4[edit]

This user made an uncivil comment here calling me "asshole". I kindly asked him on his talkpage to be civil but he responded in a similar manner as before. See this comment, too. Thanks. --Mhhossein talk 18:29, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Mhhossein: Slowking's comments are not nice, but you are part of the problem. You try to enforce your point of view by attacking others (here you are attacking me), and creating non-sense deletion requests (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Monument morts Servignat 2.jpg). No wonder why people get angry after you. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
i did not call the editor an asshole. i said: "you want to be an asshole, go for it; it is all on you", but i see subtlety is lost on this editor. i once was squeamish about this word, but now it is a technical term - many books are written about this "toxic leadership" phenomenon, i.e.:
The Asshole Survival Guide: How to Deal with People Who Treat You Like Dirt. Penguin Books Limited. ISBN 9780241980187.
Assholes: A Theory. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. ISBN 978-0-385-53568-7.
Assholes are killing your project
and a self diagnostic humor site from our late WMF board member.
that being said, you set the tone for speech on this website; i will follow the consensus norms.
but when an editor claims the right to suspend the AGF, i will call out that editor, and any admin who would dare to cross that bright line. you want to call that incivility go for it. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 01:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Although Slowking's comments are indeed not nice, he didn't called you an asshole. And even if you are called one, that's not a reason to call out an admin action against him. I actually called someone an asshole before and they nor anyone didn't reported me to the admin noticeboard. But that's on my enwiki talk page, and the reason why I called them an asshole is because they are pissing me off after their failed LR request here (which I opposed). If Slowking made a personal attack against Mhhossein, then that may warrant an admin action, but this isn't the case here. ★ Poké95 05:19, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Oh, and Slowking would think first before calling you an asshole. Why? Because he is a Slowking. ★ Poké95 05:21, 10 May 2017 (UTC)
Mhhossein, I am sorry to learn that you felt insulted by Slowking4 but they never called you an asshole. Slowking4 is aware that nobody deserves to be disrespected on this project and treating each other with respect is an integral part of building a repository of media files. I hope you can accept that Slowking bare you no malice. :Yann, I took part in that discussion. You attacked the user first here by accusing him of having a conflict of interest with the rest of the group. That was a damaging comment and coming here to claimed they attacked you is appalling . Admins are expected to resolve dispute among editors and not to fuel it. I'm not impressed. Regards. Wikicology (talk) 09:39, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I suggest trying the racist test. If you replace "asshole" by "racist", what was written would have been "you want to be a racist, go for it; it is all on you" injected into discussion that had nothing to do with racism. In this discussion Slowking injected "asshole" into a discussion that had nothing to do with assholes or calling people assholes. The excuses for the un-civil language are excuses, the excuses that pretend that using "asshole" to refer to other editors, even obliquely, is respectful are way off-beam. Someone wrote a book with "asshole" in the title, sure, that's not an excuse to drop the a-bomb into discussions. On the English Wikipedia it has become the norm, even lauded as if the project is a lad's locker-room, to be allowed to call people cunts and tell them to fuck off, see en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-10-21/Editorial. Let's not go down the same route of allowing "free speech" to be an excuse to create and sustain a hostile environment, where nobody who is offended by the misuse of obvious trigger words can feel comfortable taking part in open discussion.

Slowking, grow up please. You don't have to go out of your way to cause upset. --Fæ (talk) 11:45, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

ouch. here is the thing, User:Fæ. we argue; we vent, but we get work done. we collaborate with people to get work done. what has this editor done? less than 50 uploads and 300 edits, and i am supposed to entertain his attempt to veto a consensus about a multi-user account? i am tired of thin-skinned factotums who are always right. i suppose you would say he deserves to be an admin, he certainly has the attitude for it.
you want an adult code of conduct go for it. you should expect to be opposed by editors like this one, who want to reserve the right to trash AGF. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 22:31, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

I'm not going to dig up extensive links here, but Slowking4 has a well-established history of being hostile and accusing others of bad faith... just skimming the recent history of VPC, I see comments such as...

  • "oh yeah mr. "i'm right and you're wrong"? LOL"
  • "if you don't like the negative feedback, go cry on your pillow - snowflake"
  • responding to a simple question asked by an IP about 'no known restrictions' licenses (they said "I have to believe I'm just misunderstanding something", and were asking about knowing if they could safely reuse such images) with the statement "you are making up difficulties, where no one cares", then calling them a "faux naif" and a "proto-deletionist"
  • "i leave the animus to the commons admins"
  • "trying to reason with you is pointless"

At the same time, Slowking criticizes Commons as being "toxic" and claims that it is a battleground. This is, at best, misleading behavior from someone who resorts to insults when talking to people who disagree with him. Here, whether he actually said "you are an asshole" or not, he accused Mhhossein of 'wanting to be an asshole', and he continued the behavior after being asked to stop twice. Such behavior is completely unacceptable, and quite worthy of a block if or when it continues. - Reventtalk 00:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

hey that is great - here is the warning to use - just to be official Template:Be civil final. it has never been used, that i can tell. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 17:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I don't want to comment on other incidents where Slowking4 commented; but for this particular incident I feel his analysis on Mhhossein is fair. Mhhossein demands AGF from all but he has zero AGF on Mardetanha or the other fellow Wikimedians from the Iranian User Group. I/We tried our best to stay cool; but his repeated, redundant and inconsistent arguments are intolerable. There are 14 Wikimedians granted the permission and license but he still making the argument "Are you endorsing the uploaded photos with unknown authors?" Here no unknown authors or unknown works; the only limitation is authorship of individual works is not disclosed. A professional photographer working with a team can easily understand this is a common thing. I/We had spent too much time to educate Mhhossein; but he is either incapable or unwilling to learn. Anyway he must drop the stick and move on. Jee 01:58, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jkadavoor: Using the word 'asshole' when discussing someone is clearly not the way to accomplish that. Regardless of if Mhhossein was right or wrong, there is a vast difference between discussing someone's behavior and simply being grossly and repeatedly offensive. The claim that 'asshole' is some technical term, or that the consensus norm on Commons is to use profanity when referring to other editors, is complete and total nonsense. - Reventtalk 09:51, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Jee, we should be stopping any misbehaviour of this nature and really making a massive push to try and improve the behaviour of all contributors to Commons. Your assessment of Mhhossein is accurate but it should not be an excuse to avoid warning Slowking that his behaviour in not going to be tolerated. I will, for the avoidance of doubt clarify, that if his behaviour does not show a marked improvement over the next days and weeks, repeats of this behaviour will result in him being blocked until he provides a cast-iron guarantee that his behaviour will improve.
I would also add, this is a multi-national, multi-lingual project, the attempt to use the subtlety of the English language as an excuse is not appropriate, many users with a basic grasp of English as a second or further language simply cannot grasp the very fine line that stops something being an outright personal attack. If something you say or do on Commons offends people, in the spirit of collaboration and ideally friendship, consider modifying whatever it is you said or did. Nick (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
"Your assessment of Mhhossein is accurate." Thanks Nick; this is only I meant. I'm not a fan of vulgar slang; noway encouraging their use. But Mhhossein tirelessly making inconsistent arguments that testing our patience. I had asked him to stop making such indirect accusations but he continuous. "Are you endorsing the uploaded photos with unknown authors?" is the last one. I didn't get provoked by that; but Slowking4. Jee 12:05, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
I like to +1 Revent and Nick. --Steinsplitter (talk) 10:44, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
i look forward to your warnings. since you will not institute a code of conduct, we will start here. i will use Template:Be civil. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 11:52, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
The brief template relies almost entirely for meaning on the English Wikipedia, I have never personally seen it in use. I suggest using Commons:Staying mellow which is a well established essay and emphasises why Commons is different to other projects, in conjunction with Commons:Blocking policy which is clear about enforcing a non-hostile environment. --Fæ (talk) 12:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
thanks. the disuse says it all. let's modify the template to link to the essay.
just so everyone is on notice, if this is where you want to draw the civility line, that is great, and we will enforce this standard fairly going forward. commons expects every admin will do their duty to enforce it. and when the free speech argument gets made, i will link to this discussion. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 16:40, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
@Slowking4: Don't play the system, stop being hostile to other users. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
i am not gaming anything. i am not hostile. i note that civility enforcement is virtually non-existent. there is no code of conduct. there are no standards. it is important to realize that decisions you make have consequences. the civility standard you set in this case, will be the standard going forward. i expect you to be consistent in that standard in the future. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 17:37, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
This, this and this? I have to say it again, you are obviously playing the system. Your ambiguous comments are confirming that. --Steinsplitter (talk) 17:45, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

User:McClellandRA[edit]

User has begun uploading radio station logos as own work.

(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/McClellandRA) The editor has been blocked in the past. See https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:McClellandRA#Your_account_has_been_blocked Regards, Aloha27 (talk) 23:30, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I've deleted several obvious copyvio logos and blocked the user for a month. Daphne Lantier 05:48, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

disclosure of personal data of a minor on userpage[edit]

New user Lanuginous (talk · contribs) has uploaded an image of a 6-year-old, fully identifiable boy (File:Efrayim's 1st day of Pre1A.jpg) and has published personal data of this boy, such as birthdate, the name of his siblings and even the street-address, on his user page User:Lanuginous. Despite of the potentially somewhat suspicious characterisation of the child in his "summary" (User:Lanuginous#Summary), I assume that all this was done out of mere stupidity and/or ignorance. 24 hours ago I strongly recommended (User talk:Lanuginous) the user to remove all personal data from his userpage. As there was no reply/response, I'm inclined to remove the critical by myself. Opinions? --Túrelio (talk) 06:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I've deleted the userpage and the two images, and warned the user about scope, though this goes a bit beyond that. If he posts that sensitive material again I'll consider blocking him indefinitely. We can't know for sure that the post is really by the children's parent/s. I've also reported the en.wiki page to their OS team so as not to draw attention to it with a CSD. Daphne Lantier 07:24, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. They have already deleted the corresponding page on :en. --Túrelio (talk) 07:38, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Rick_Blood[edit]

Unless I'm very much mistaken, every single one of this user's contributions has been an image misattributed as "Own Work", mostly obvious copyvios. I'm not really sure what should be done about this to stem the tide, but I hope someone here knows. Pinkbeast (talk) 16:18, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done User warned, files deleted. Yann (talk) 16:55, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=243673815"