Open main menu

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections

< Commons:Administrators' noticeboard(Redirected from Commons:ANB)

Shortcut: COM:AN/B · COM:AN/P

Community portal
introduction
Help deskVillage pump
copyrightproposalstechnical
Administrators' noticeboard
vandalismuser problemsblocks 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 at COM:HMS.


Archives
13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES (index)


Note

  • For page protection requests, please state protection type, file name, and proposed protection time span. See also: Protection Policy.
  • Before proposing a user be blocked, please familiarize yourself with the Commons' Blocking Policy.
  • Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
  • If appropriate, notify the user(s) concerned. {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/B|thread=|reason=}} is available for this.
  • Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.


TSMBlueshockerEdit

A new sock of blocked user Fieryflames. Please block this user indefinitely and delete any files with unclear copyright he has uploaded so far. Thanks. theinstantmatrix (talk) 22:02, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd already nominated one, but upon looking further all of their uploads appear to be screen grabs from youtube, so they need to go and they need a block. Even if they weren't socking they are willfully uploading copyrighted material. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:33, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Now they are. Adding JohnWickTheBoogeyman. theinstantmatrix (talk) 06:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
see also w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fieryflames (perm). theinstantmatrix (talk) 06:37, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm at a bit of a loss as to why TMSBlueshocker is just being ignored. All of their uploads are clear copyright violations and they are obviously a sock. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done. Érico (talk) 00:22, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Humanist920 - multi-Wiki disruptionEdit

I am an admin on en.wikipedia and recently blocked an IP for ban evasion. Behavioral evidence indicated that the user was a sockpuppet of en:User:Banana19208, who also used the account en:User:Humanist920.

Today, User:Humanist920 on Commons vandalized my user page [1] and user talk page [2]. The most likely explanation is that the same user is continuing their campaign of disruption and has moved to Commons to avoid the sanctions already placed on them at en.wiki. I request Humanist920 be blocked to prevent further disruption. C.Fred (talk) 02:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done One week block for a start. A longer block may be done by any other admin if appropriate. Regards, Yann (talk) 03:39, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
Today Humanist requested unblock and naturally I declined it. Taivo (talk) 10:25, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

RvsranEdit

Hi,

Already warned to end copyvios by Taivo, Rvsran uploads for the 3rd time Chandralekha serial.jpg. Please block.

Best regards, --Lacrymocéphale (talk) 10:11, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done Already blocked by Taivo. Yann (talk) 10:21, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

CaptainSwan1997Edit

More Angela Criss sockpuppetry at User talk:TenPoundHammer and elsewhere. Already blocked on enwiki. clpo13(talk) 15:59, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

@Clpo13: ✓ Done by @4nn1l2, indefblocked.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 16:13, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry by 79.71.253.248, 92.3.98.235, TH223Edit

The two IPs are the same user who has made twothree unsigned !votes in Commons:Deletion requests/File:The first sounds ever recorded complete set.ogg.

This is[The two IPs are] an LTA blocked user known as "Shingling334" on English Wikipedia: en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shingling334/Archive. 92.3.98.235 has repeated edits of 79.71.253.248, see: [3] and [4].

They have been edit-warring from multiple IPs on en:Phonautograph trying to add this file, which has copyright issues. That page has now been protected. 79.71.253.248 has edited it directly, while 92.3.98.235 is in the same range as 92.3.110.170 which has also.

I'm not sure if I should strike one or both of their comments in the deletion discussion?

It seems likely[possible (see below)] that the uploader of the file, TH223, is also the same user. On the Phonautograph talk page, an obvious sock of Shingling334 (editing via a proxy) asks for help creating the file: [5]. --IamNotU (talk) 11:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

  • He has now made a third unsigned "keep" comment, as well as casting aspersions on me as "a rule violator" which I strongly object to: [6] (ironic considering e.g.: [7], [8], etc.). I'm not that familiar with Wikimedia Commons, but on Wikipedia - where I do regularly delete his sock edits for evasion of the indef block/ban, and regularly receive harassment for it - this would be considered sock puppetry and personal attacks, and the comments would not be allowed to stand. Since I guess he's not blocked here,[turns out he is, see below] is there something else I can do about it? --IamNotU (talk) 22:37, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
    I Symbol support vote.svg Support doing something about this block evasion nest. Pinging @Elcobbola, who indeffed Shingling334 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter logblock user here.   — Jeff G. please ping or talk to me 23:05, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
    Oh, somehow I didn't realize that he was actually blocked here too. Well then yes, it seems like a whole mess of continued block evasion, copyright violation, harassment, and other typical nonsense from this person... --IamNotU (talk) 10:00, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I don't have anything special to offer here. The IPs' information is visible to everyone and clearly related. There is also currently no evidence whatsoever that TH223 is editing whilst logged out; indeed, that account is not in the en.wiki SPI, as the comment above wrongly implies. TH223 1) has not edited the DR; 2) did not add the file to en:Phonautograph (where the IPs are edit warring with IamNotU); and 3) has never even edited article space at any project (!!!) Accordingly, there is currently no reason to believe they would log out to act inappropriately in spaces where their comments would be perfectly valid (Commons DR) and where they've never before edited (en.wiki article space). Sockpuppetry is, by definition, the abusive use of multiple accounts; an accusation thereof is thus inherently one of bad faith. Be reminded that COM:AGF is expected and required "unless there is clear evidence to the contrary". Эlcobbola talk 15:04, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
I've stricken a double-vote. The level of IP involvement does not yet appear to be at a level requiring semi-protection. If IP socking continues, let me (or this noticeboard) know and protection can be added. Эlcobbola talk 15:15, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
  • elcobbola, thanks for responding, and for the time you spent looking into it. You are completely correct that user TH223 has not been discussed on English Wikipedia. I'm not sure what part of my comment above implies that, but it wasn't my intention, so I am sorry about that. Also, after your feedback I reviewed my assessment, and it seems I may have made one mistake. The subtitles on the file were clearly added by Shingling334 according to evidence on Wikipedia. When I looked at the file history, there is only one record, the initial upload, and no record of a subsequent modification. I had assumed then, that it was uploaded with the subtitles already included, and thus, clearly by Shingling334. I was not aware of the "timed text" feature that is in another tab, with a separate history, where I've now discovered Shingling334's edits adding the subtitles an hour or so later. So again I'm sorry about that.
Nevertheless, I wouldn't say that there is no evidence whatsoever about TH223. The username is similar to confirmed Shingling334 sock TS422, which is also editing the same "phonautograph" article and files on Turkish Wikipedia: [9]. There is some name similarity to Editor.TH. Shingling334 has a long history of using throw-away sock accounts, dynamic IPs, and proxies, all at the same time. He had tried unsuccessfully to add a similar file to the article, and had he wanted to upload this one, he would have been motivated to cover his tracks with sock accounts or proxy IPs. On 11 May, within a span of about ten minutes, the TH223 account was created and the file uploaded to Commons, and that was the only thing that account has ever done. Less than 30 minutes later it was added to the Wikipedia article by a proxy IP, and then just one hour later Shingling334 (as 79.71.244.147) added the subtitles. Evidence in SPI cases isn't always completely clear, and according to the "duck" principle, I still think there's enough here to warrant me at least mentioning it for consideration in an investigation, without it being bad faith on my part. If you don't feel that looking into it is justified, then that's not a problem. In the meantime, I've tried to clarify what I meant above, and "downgraded" my assessment of TH223.
That the two IPs listed above are Shingling334 though, and are evading a block on Commons, is beyond any question. And to that I will add Special:Contributions/79.71.244.147. However, that relies in part on evidence from Wikipedia. As I understand, evidence of wrongdoing on another Wiki can't be used in a complaint against someone, but it's permitted to consider evidence in terms of linking accounts and identities. Am I wrong about that? If not, then is it usual practice to allow an obvious sock of a blocked user to comment in a deletion discussion? I would think all their comments would be removed, and their IPs blocked. Am I to understand that no further action will be taken, and he is free to edit here?
I suppose it could seem that I'm trying to influence the deletion discussion by removing Shingling334's "keep" !votes, but I don't feel I have any need or motivation to, as there doesn't seem to be any valid argument behind them. I think the file will be deleted either way, because I think it's the right thing to do, but either way it isn't that important to me. I'm just reporting a case of block evasion/sockpuppetry, which I think people shouldn't be allowed to get away with.
I would very much appreciate it though, if Shingling334's personal comment about me could be removed, as I can assure you there is no basis for it, and I honestly feel that it is harassment, designed to make people question my integrity. I like to think that I have a reputation as a careful and conscientious editor, and that reputation is important to me.
If you'd like any further details, just ask, or e-mail me... --IamNotU (talk) 23:17, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Fersts ("Fangruida") sockpuppetsEdit

Please block the following accounts, , which are obvious sockpuppets of Fersts:

Holfman also needs to have their uploads nuked. See Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Fersts for background. LX (talk, contribs) 09:57, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

Holfman uploads already nuked by Gbawden. --Túrelio (talk) 09:49, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

block for legal threatsEdit

I have temporarily blocked the following accounts for making massive personal legal threats in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Omar Hanoune and here against our colleague JuTa, who just tried to enforce our COM:OVERWRITE policy.

By the way, both accounts have already been indef-blocked a while ago on :fr and :en Wikipedia for CU confirmed sockpuppeting. --Túrelio (talk) 09:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)