Commons:Administrators' noticeboard

Shortcut: COM:AN

• 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
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	128, 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	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	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

^{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: ~10
• Unfree Flickr files: ~0
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~0
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2026-03: ~133

Other:

• Duplicates: ~2
• Advertisements/spam: ~0
• Personal photos/selfies: ~195
• Other speedy deletions: ~6
• Categories for discussion: 134 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~1
• Requests for unblock: ~6
• Undeletion requests: ~18

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~7
• Interface admin: ~12
• Technical: ~1
• Template protection: ~4
• 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

• Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
• Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
• Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

deletion requests backlog above 180 days

Dear colleagues, the deletion requests backlog crossed the 180 days line recently. Is there perhaps anybody who could close (or comment on) a few/dozen/hundred of the oldest ones? --Krd 06:10, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

• Two related DRs at Commons:Deletion requests/2025/09/26 will probably require someone who can read Chinese to resolve them. - Jmabel ! talk 23:17, 13 March 2026 (UTC)

  replied. RoyZuo (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

User:YiFeiBot Maintenance

Hi all,

It seems that User:YiFeiBot has stopped working? It hasn't made an update (Special:Contributions/YiFeiBot) since March 12 when normally it would scour changes one a day. At a minimum it was adding and removing entries from Category:Pages using Information template with parsing errors and Category:Media missing infobox template.

As far as I could tell the bot wasn't blocked for misbehaving or anything of the sort.

I wasn't sure where to place this since User:Zhuyifei1999, who I assume was its owner has retired and not made any edits for almost a year. And this page was linked from its "Emergency Shutoff" button.

Any assistance in this matter would be greatly appreciated. --Stux (talk) 14:38, 14 March 2026 (UTC)

Hello, I wanted to bring this issue up again before it gets archived. It's clear from the lack of responses that this isn't the place for this topic. However, it would be good to know what is the right place to bring up this discussion? I'm hoping someone can at least point me in the right direction. It's a bit disheartening that to not receive any response at all.  :( --Stux (talk) 01:23, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Possibly COM:VP/T. - Jmabel ! talk 05:34, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Or possibly Commons:Bots/Work requests if you give up on having that particular bot revived. It doesn't look like it was doing anything particularly tricky. - Jmabel ! talk 05:36, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Block request

Dear Admins, I have what might be a somewhat unusual request: I would like to be blocked. I am currently a student and have realized that I am putting too much work into this project. Therefore, I would like to request a temporary block until July 2028. I am going to use the rest of today to upload a final batch of images. I would appreciate it if the block could take effect starting tomorrow morning. If possible, I would like to retain access to my talk page and user page. I really hope for your support. Thank you. Lukas Beck (talk) 06:41, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Could someone please give me feedback, say whether it would be feasible, and carry out the blocking as quickly as possible? Thanks again. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:19, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

We don't do this. You are just going to have to be disciplined about it.

If you want to decrease the chance of being sucked back in, you can indicate on your user page & user talk page that you are on a years-long Wikibreak, and you can turn off all email notifications for your account. I don't recommend detaching your account from your email address, because if you were to forget your password you would have no way to get it back. - Jmabel ! talk 01:03, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

That is a lie. I have already seen requests for blocks from users who no longer want to be active. I therefore ask again, I simply want to be blocked, and it would be easy for me to do it this way. I have no desire to actively engage in vandalism to force a block. That should be easier, after all. Lukas Beck (talk) 06:28, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Maybe a tool like en:Wikipedia:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/WikiBreak Enforcer could be useful? DMacks (talk) 01:11, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

self requested/imposed block and digital detox, are common practice. i saw this post yesterday and would do it but i'm not sysop. i dont get why even simple requests like this are made difficult by bureaucracy. 🤷‍♀️ RoyZuo (talk) 08:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

I've consistently seen other admins deny these in the past, but if some other admin wants to block, I have no objection. Calling me a liar certainly doesn't make me want to do you any favors. - Jmabel ! talk 19:37, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a year. Yann (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Yann: as I said, not objecting, but is there precedent for this, and should we allow it in general? I don't really see how it's useful, since at any time he could come back and appeal the block, and that would presumably be immediately granted. Or shouldn't it be? - Jmabel ! talk 20:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, he could appeal the block, but will he? I can understand the situation, as I had faced it myself. Wiki-editing could be such an addiction!... Yann (talk) 22:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jmabel: This may have a "cultural background". On DE-WP, it's a common and widespread practice that Wikimedians can ask straightforward for a voluntary block (for whatever reasons), get their request fulfilled, and Lukas is German. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:20, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Grand-Duc: Ah, interesting. But I still don't see: if you can't do it through willpower, and you can reasonably expect that if you appeal the block you'll be let back in, why does this require any less willpower than just staying away in the first place? - Jmabel ! talk 00:01, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't know, I never asked for such a block for myself. But I could imagine that the (actually small) hurdle of having to write a request to lift the block (on the admin noticeboard, the talk page of an acquainted admin or on your own TP while pinging an admin) can be sufficient to overcome an acute need to write something else on Wikipedia. I understand these blocks also as gestures meaning "I am serious with my wish for getting some distance" or "Don't talk to me, I'm not here"; and they are certainly part of DE-WP's traditions. That option is actually the 6th bullet point on the admin noticeboard (de:Wikipedia:Administratoren/Anfragen), where "Avoiding distractions during exam time" is an example for when one can ask for it. We Germans certainly have included blocks much more in "our" Wikicommunity than e. g. EN with en:WP:SELFBLOCK. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 02:34, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Just noting that the enwiki policy explicitly condones it, but possibly not automatically. DMacks (talk) 13:24, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

@Grand-Duc, I appreciate your explaination about the cultural difference. Thank you for taking the time to share that point of view. I learned something new about this international project. Best regards, -- Ooligan (talk) 03:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Deletion request Category:Mate (drink)

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

The user made this move that is problematic, and I need to revert, mate can mean several drinks that is why we have Category:Mate (beverage) and chimarrão is a specific Brazilian beverage. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:24, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Context: User talk:Heylenny#parabéns pela péssima edição "Congratulations on the terrible edition", in English. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:33, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton: I notified the user of this discussion on their user talk page, as you should have done per the above.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@Jeff G.: I did already, I did before start here -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

No, you didn't. I saw this discussion because I saw it in your contributions. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:39, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

"agora vou ter de pedir a deleção de categoria" so now you decided to lie, in the noticeboard. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:44, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Please, stop en:WP:ASPERSIONS. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:46, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

FYI "pedir a deleção de categoria" (request category deletion) is literally COM:CFD. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:47, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

 Comment It should be named en:Mate (drink), anyway. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

 Comment Also, the right place to request a deletion in this case is COM:CFD. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:37, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

No its not, for both -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:38, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

See: Commons:Categories for discussion#Listing a single category on this "Categories_for_discussion" page. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:43, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton and @Heylenny: Would you agree to making Category:Mate (drink) a redirect to Category:Mate (beverage) and making Category:Chimarrões a subcategory of Category:Mate (beverage)?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:47, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

IMO, it makes more sense to be "Mate (drink)", as per the English article. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:48, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

@Heylenny: So that would be making Category:Mate (beverage) a redirect to Category:Mate (drink) and making Category:Chimarrões a subcategory of Category:Mate (drink)?   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:51, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

I mean, "Chimarrões" a redirect to Mate (drink). heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

'Mate (beverage) in Brazil' could be "Chimarrão", as we all say that. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:49, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Yes, that is the logical move -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:49, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

"Mate (drink)" rather than "Chimarrões" heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:51, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

read the article that you linked:

Con palo – a mix of stems and ground leaf

Sin palo – despalada: without stems or very little stem content

Compuesta – Mixed with other herbs and plants, like mint

Saborizada – in which the leaf has been flavored with flavorings and food additives

Para tereré – made specifically for tereré, usually with other herbs like mint etc

Barbacuá – toasted mate

Cocido/Saquitos – bagged, similar to tea bags

All these are mate drinks, categories are not Wikipedia articles, this is not en Wikipedia. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:54, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Tereré is also a mate drink 🤷 heylenny (^talk/_edits) 11:57, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

that is why we have Category:Tererés so makes no sense the mate (drink) that you created. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 11:59, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

So you want to make Chimarrão a category like Tereré? So Mate (drink) should be a redirect to Mate (beverage)? Seems OK to me. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 12:01, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

That is what I did, before you move it! -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 12:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

"Would you agree to making Category:Mate (drink) a redirect to Category:Mate (beverage) and making Category:Chimarrões a subcategory of Category:Mate (beverage) [in Brazil]"

@Jeff G.: , can you please do that. Thank you. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 13:25, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Duplicate

Moved from Category talk:Mate (drink) § Duplicate

@Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton and @Heylenny that worked on this: most files here are already in the c:Category:mate (beverage) category tree. This is a duplicate category of it. I made a redirect but it could simply be deleted. Arcstur (talk) 03:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Cara, @Arcstur: vc não deveria ter mexido nisso (assim como o Heylenny não deveria ter mexido de primeira), pois está em discussão, mas também deveria ter discutido antes.

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#Deletion_request_Category:Mate_(drink)

Chimarrão não é a única bebida feita da folha do mate; tem uma infinidade de variações regionais: tereré já não é chimarrão; "para tereré" é uma variação regional do tereré que leva outras ervas, como menta, também não é chimarrão. Na argentina eles torram as folhas para colocar na cuia deles, só comprar o pacotinho argentino e ver, a cuia também não é a mesma. Nenhum deles é chimarrão. Sério, vcs estão pensando como se fosse a Wikipédia. Isso aqui são categorias na Wikimedia Commons. Tem de ser específico.

Ex.:

• Category:Women wearing long black skirts (Categoria:mulheres usando saias preta),
  • isso não é para fotos de saias pretas,
  • não é para mulheres usando saias brancas,
  • não é para homens vestindo saia preta...

Não é para ter um artigo em wikipedias sobre mulheres usando saias pretas; logo, usar o artigo skirt para justificar deletar essa categoria não faz sentido.

A categoria Chimarrões não é para mates feitos na Argentina, não é para chá-mate, não é para tereré, não é para mate feito no Paraguai, não é para refrigerante feito de mate. É para chimarrão e só.

Eu só vi agora, pq vc marcou a conta da Wikidata, não a conta daqui. E também fez uma afirmação incorreta lá. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 14:09, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I made a mistake when creating Mate (drink), since Mate (beverage) already exists. I just think it’s unnecessary to create "Chimarrões." Especially because many people say "mate" instead of "chimarrão." Tereré is a different story because it is consumed cold. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 14:15, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

This category is for all beverages containing mate leaves. I feel that my time is being wasted unnecessarily, as I have already clarified this for you. Your continued insistence is quite frustrating. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 14:31, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

No, I'm just saying I created it by mistake. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 14:32, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Rodrigo.Argenton Why are you talking like this is a burden? This is not helpful to our discussion neither to our community. Arcstur (talk) 14:32, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Category:mate (beverage) is already about the traditional infusion, mate, chimarrão. If you want to create a c:Category:mate-based beverages or something like it, then go for it. Then, c:Category:tereré could be moved into it, but it is not wrong where it is right now. Argentinian mate and Brazilian chimarrão are the same drink and should be in the same parent category, if you want to create specific ones for them. Arcstur (talk) 14:25, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

pinging people involved here: @Heylenny @Rodrigo.Argenton and @Jeff G. Arcstur (talk) 14:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

No, it's not, look these sub categories:

Mate extract soft drinks

Mate tea

Tererés --

And the Argentinian mate and chimarrão are not the same; as I said, they toast their leaves Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 14:29, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Yeah they are in the wrong parent category because we don't have a "mate-based beverages". That would be nice to be created. The c:Category:mate (beverage) is about the traditional infusion, mate, chimarrão, etc. Arcstur (talk) 14:33, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

 Agree with @Arcstur about the parent category. heylenny (^talk/_edits) 14:36, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. The parented category was created, and many images were properly categorised, as it was a mess. I created the chimarrões back in case an Argentinian or a Uruguayan takes a photo of mate in Brazil, also, it would be easier to search on Google and to find only the beverages, not meetings or museums in Brazil about the subject. I left it inside the Mate (beverage) in Brazil. Wikidata was already properly linked. No sysop action is necessary. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 15:39, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Deliberate attempt at disruption/flooding of search results

EMERSON EDUARDO RODRIGUES (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Earlier today I noticed a batch of out-of-scope selfies uploaded by this user and started a deletion request. The files appear (at first sight) to be personal selfies without educational value and therefore fall outside Commons scope.

Subsequently, the same user opened a deletion request for File:Foragido Procurado Polícia Civil do Paraná.jpg, which is a police wanted notice relating to the Brazilian criminal case "Operação Intolerância". The uploader claims to be the same individual referenced in that case in the deletion request. Emerson Eduardo Rodrigues has an article on the Catalan Wikipedia, where a crop (of a crop) of this image is in use. The uploaded files are selfies whose filenames, descriptions, and metadata prominently repeat that name, which has the practical effect of flooding search results when you search for it. In combination with the deletion request targeting the police wanted notice, this appears to be a deliberate attempt to drown out or obscure that file. This is vandalism, albeit of a kind I haven't seen before.

If this were just about out-of-scope selfies, I would not be posting this here. But considering the connection to the criminal case and the attempt to obscure sensitive information, the situation goes well beyond a regular spam/vandalism/scope issue, which is something that should be brought to the administrators' attention. ReneeWrites (talk) 20:17, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

I've closed both DRs. I'm inclined to indef unless anyone has a really good reason otherwise. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:31, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

No objection. One more warning, more files deleted. Yann (talk) 20:59, 15 March 2026 (UTC)

Do we know File:Foragido Procurado Polícia Civil do Paraná.jpg is real, and appropriately licensed? Uploaded by Advogada Pollyane Cunha Ferreira Parreiras, an account that has no activity unrelated to the one file page. Author changed more than once, finally claiming "GAECO, ABIN, Ministério Público e Polícia Federal" as author and Interpol (with no relevant link) as source. I haven't sorted through all the details, but this all looks a bit suspicious to me. - Jmabel ! talk 01:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

The problem is that the original file (the one used to create the wanted poster) is a screenshot of a TV news broadcast (another image saying that is a tv frame). Since it is a TV frame, it is not free content, so deleting it is necessary. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 13:16, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

The screenshot seems to have originated from a Brazilian broadcast (either TV Globo, or RPC, a TV Globo affiliate), wouldn't Brazilian copyright laws apply? As this photograph doesn't seem to meet the threshold of originality as described in COM:TOO Brazil, putting it in the public domain. ReneeWrites (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

That is my point. -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton ^m 15:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Reporting vandalism sockpuppetry

• Manhduy8388 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Persistent vandalism sockpuppet continuously tagging for speedy deletion without basis, see [[1]] Lubinh123 (talk) 06:18, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Do we have evidence of sockpuppetry?

Gbawden (talk) 14:06, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Lubinh123, Who is the sockmaster? Kadı Message 14:37, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

@Gbawden You can check User:Manhduy8388's edit history for evidence. This user added speedy deletion tags to my uploaded files without reason, and I already reverted them. For example, images like File:Binz Da Poet.png, File:Tiến Luật.png, and File:Hứa Minh Đạt.png were wrongly tagged and then restored by @Túrelio; you can also check the edit history of these files. Lubinh123 (talk) 16:25, 16 March 2026 (UTC)

Adding SD tags may be disruptive but not evidence of sockpuppetry. Please answer Kadi's question

Gbawden (talk) 06:42, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Reporting a spammer

Multiple users' talk pages (including mine) are being spammed by a vandal with an angry tone:

• User_talk:ManuelB701#c-I_got_reported_to_the_police-20260317061000-H̳E̳L̳L̳O̳,̳_̳I̳_̳A̳M̳_̳G̳O̳I̳N̳G̳_̳T̳O̳_̳K̳I̳L̳L̳_̳B
• User_talk:I_got_reported_to_the_police

ManuelB701 (talk) 06:16, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Blocked, as I am only on my phone, someone else needs to delete the uploads. GPSLeo (talk) 06:21, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Looks like they're now globally locked and all uploads have been deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 07:03, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Already done See above. Yann (talk) 17:13, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Problematic creation of a huge mess of un(der)populated categories

Since every discussion about categorization on COM:VP consists of the same editors essentially talking to themselves and has zero bearing on actual categorization activity on the site, I feel like I'm wasting my time bringing this up there. On Wikipedia, a group of editors started a number of by-century category trees a little while back. It's mostly frivolous activity by editors engaged in the WP:MAW "competition", i.e. people making a huge number of edits solely to jack up their edit count. Despite such dubious motivation, at least the trees are being reasonably populated by these editors in the process. Here on Commons, I've noticed a similar group of categories have been created during the past three weeks or so. The difference is that these editors are creating multiple levels of un(der)populated categories, leaving a small amount of actual content several levels down, and walking away without populating the broader categories at the top. We already have countless such trees that were created years ago, with no one stepping up to populate them. Whenever the editors who create such categories are asked about the propriety of such activity and leaving behind work for others to do, they tend to act as if that isn't their problem. It would take too long to go over every such instance, so let's focus on the recent problem. The editors I've seen creating these categories include AnRo0002 and Eco84. RadioKAOS / Talk to me, Billy / Transmissions 18:29, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

A problem we've seen over and over, my only surprise was that it wasn't the editors I'd expected.

Categorization here on Commons is not defining, it is navigational. Hiding something beneath a dozen levels, each containing only that one subcategory, is just not useful. There is no value to the supposed policy (there isn't any such policy, but a few editors like to claim there is) that categorization must only introduce one additional new distinction at each level.

That said, I'm not against any 'by decade' categories for major topics, even if with only a few members. The two axes there are both substantial and the concepts they represent do at least exist.

'Photographs of' is also nearly always a useless distinction to include. Photographs are just what we do here. Even in the many cases when they aren't (diagrams, artworks) then either the context is clear enough already, or the default is stilll photographs and the 'in art' group are the exception. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:25, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Funny, I had just made a similar remark to Andy's in a similar discussion at User talk:AnRo0002#By-century categories. (BTW, RadioKAOS, when you start a similar discussion in two places it's good form at least to link them.) - Jmabel ! talk 23:03, 17 March 2026 (UTC)

Investigate whether a user is a sock puppet

I would like you to investigate whether this user is a sock puppet. He asked to vectorize the logo of Memiti, a TV station from Thailand. However this is a logo which has already been vectorized since 2011. Candidyeoman55 (talk) 11:40, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

If he is, ban him. Candidyeoman55 (talk) 11:55, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

@Candidyeoman55: Please bring your evidence to COM:RFCU.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)

Block reasons

Hi, The rationale "uploading unfree files after warnings" is no longer a possible reason for indefinite blocks. Most available reasons for not indefinite blocks are not available anymore. Any idea? Yann (talk) 12:21, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Change the color on map

Can anyone help change the color of india on this map to red?

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Reactions_to_the_2026_Iran_conflict.png

India has condemned Iranian strikes, [2]. India's position has been misrepresented on the map for a long time now, please change it, for I'm unable to do it as I'm not the original uploader and do not have permission to overwrite with a more updated image. Zalaraz (talk) 13:46, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Zalaraz: No admin action is needed here. Please ask on Commons:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. Yann (talk) 17:35, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

@Zalaraz: File:Reactions to the 2026 Iran conflict.png was uploaded by Josstiyn, who wrote "I'll make sure to fix that soon" in Special:Diff/1176388656. Please use internal links.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:35, 19 March 2026 (UTC)

Discussion closure request

The recent discussion regarding AI-generated content at Commons talk:Featured picture candidates/Archive 28#AI-generated content was automatically archived by a bot without an outcome or formal close.

Could an administrator please review the thread and assess whether there is sufficient consensus or not to modify the FPC nomination guidelines? Thanks! It's moon (talk) 16:56, 19 March 2026 (UTC)