Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems/Archive 39

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


This user uploaded File:European Union Flag 28 countries 2013.jpg. As the stars in the European flag are deliberately not meant to be representative of the number of member states, I really saw no scope and nominated the image for deletion. The user has sent me a personal email accusing me of "not appreciating his proposals", wanting to "take credit for his design", being "against freedom of speech" and "trying to steal his design". I have not responded to these accusations, however this is an inappropriate use of the Commons emailing system as far as I'm concerned. Fry1989 eh? 22:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Well unfortunately there is no way to just block his emailing privileges without blocking editing. From what you've described, it sounds like the user is upset and trolling as a result. I'm not going to respond to this one (and good thing you didn't either) for fear of feeding, but if the user continues to harass, I or another admin will warn. If it continues, a block is not out of the question. --O (висчвын) 03:14, 12 August 2013 (GMT)

Fry1989

He gives me an Accusation , every time he says i nominate files or vote Politically motivated , he tries to stop me from nominating and voting , he wants to start a war , he talks in a rude way ,i don't know all that because we had a dispute so they are a revenge ? , BTW , i need somebody to get him away of my side before my words start to be out of control , for now i'm holding myself , and it's all my right to talk worst than he talk to me .GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Like I said. Fight that out behind bars or on your/his discussion page. The problem starts with your wording policatal motivated... in the DR. I told you so on my talk page already. Please! I am not taking sides, btw. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 19:19, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
The last time when we had a problem , the result said he don't get in my way , and i don't get in his way , i did that , but he don't do so .GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
I have every right to vote in any DR I come across. I also have every right to oppose such DRs where I see a lack of substance or political motivation. Everything this user does is politically motivated. It's always an insult to Islam, an insult to Syria, an insult to Arabs. Commons is not censored, we hold thousands of images with differing political, historical, or religious viewpoints and we do not delete them because someone feels insulted. This user doesn't understand that concept at all. All anybody needs to do is look through his edit history, and you will find it littered with political comments of a perceived insult which he sees as grounds to get rid of whatever image it may be for the day. Fry1989 eh? 19:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Then why , when i uploaded filess like these they were deleted ?? , can you tell me why ?.GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
You've already been told why, you just refuse to accept it. You uploaded images in retaliation, after you had nominated images you found insulting and they were kept. You uploaded images with a "reverse insult" in opposition to the ones you wanted to have deleted. That is why. Fry1989 eh? 19:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
so is that a rule here ? , if a pictures i nominate them for deletion and i , in the same time uploaded another file that is oppose to these pictures , my pictures must be deleted ? , ok forget about thise picture , how about the greater syria picture ? , or the levant picture that had a syrian flag ? , or the ficional ispifoney flag ? .GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:46, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
The rule you broke here was that you nominated images for deletion because you didn't "like them", and after they were kept you uploaded images in retaliation. If you had uploaded those images in their own right, they very likely could have stayed. It was because of why you uploaded them that they had to go. Fry1989 eh? 19:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
all of those images that i said are my work and holds my copyright , the first image you are saying i uploaded it as a revenge , you are wrong , when i saw "free speech" and no censor are accepted here , then i uploaded this image , you are keeping to say this is a revenge , you don't read my mind , you don't know my faith , so stop accusations .GhiathArodaki (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
You keep trying to censor Commons, but whine that people have tried to censor you. Does anybody else sense the irony? Fry1989 eh? 20:39, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Censor me for what ? , what i have uploaded that should be censored ? , talk about yourself .GhiathArodaki (talk) 21:59, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

GhiathArodaki -- as someone who has seen your whole Commons career unfold from the beginning, it seems reasonably clear that that the majority of your actions here have been motivated by your desire to uphold the Assad regime, and eliminate what you consider to be "insults" to the Assad regime or to your conception of Syrian nationalism. What other reason is there for your recent round of deletion nominations on "Greater Iraq" related images, except that you consider any idea of "Greater Iraq" to be an insult to your own preferred cause of Greater Syria? If you have any other motivation, then please explain it to us. And I uploaded File:La Syrie rayonnante.svg specifically to be a more acceptable replacement for some of your previous semi-dubious efforts, but you won't use it on your Arabic Wikipedia user page, presumably because it includes a map of the borders of Syria over the last 70 years, while you consider these borders to be an "insult" to your expansive (i.e. irredentist) notions of Syrian nationhood. Etc. etc.
I'm sure you have basically good intentions, but Wikimedia Commons is for supporting the Wikipedias with relevant images, and building up an archive of useful images, not for importing political controversies... AnonMoos (talk) 11:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't care if there is an insult to stupid assad regime , because i don't support assad , and stop saying i support assad , yes i liked the image you did but i'll not use it because golan hights and iskandrun are not included , no i don't see this "insulting" , i see this "stealing" .GhiathArodaki (talk) 13:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
GhiathArodaki -- You sometimes say that you're not an Assad regime supporter, but you have unbounded love for the flag of a red-white-black horizontal tricolor with two green stars, while loathing with passionate intensity the flag of a green-white-black horizontal tricolor with three red stars, which leads people to draw their own conclusions. And the map in File:La Syrie rayonnante.svg doesn't include Alexandretta because Syria hasn't had any control over Alexandretta since about 1939 (however much you may think it was stolen by the French and the Turks). But it actually should include the Golan Heights, as discussed on your user talk page. If I replace the map of Syria with the letters سوريا in a circle, will you use the image then? AnonMoos (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
yes i love our flag , like any man who love the flag of his country ,i don't think it's a shame if i love my country flag, this flag is the syrian flag assad does not have any hand on it , and the other is the revolution flag and the fourth mandate flag , also the syrian flag that was during the syrian indepention from france , the syrian flag shows the unity the union , while the other shows the cut of countries , also the syrian flag was put by arabs not foregins , and syria is written سورية not سوريا, and no golan hights and iskandrunn must be included in the map , thank god that i didn't say include the true syrian map .GhiathArodaki (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
The spelling سورية could be considered more technically correct, but سوريا seems to be more commonly encountered, certainly officially. And I created the graphic to get away from irredentism, not endorse it. AnonMoos (talk) 12:22, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
سورية is the official spelling of syria , while سوريا is the western and paois spelling , سورية is the arabic spelling , we say سورية عربية , i told you i don't include any syrian map that doesn't include golan hights and Iskandrun , what i say isn't irredentism .GhiathArodaki (talk) 13:58, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I think your quarrel is with a whole lot of people other than me (many of them Arabs)... AnonMoos (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't care if GhiathArodaki supports the Assad regime or not (though the evidence is complelling), all I care about is the clear bias this user has espoused. Anything with a message he does not like, he will nominate for deletion. It's either insulting to him as a Muslim, insulting to him as an Arab, or insulting to him as a Syrian. At the same time however, he uploads images with the exact reverse message in retaliation while trying to censor the ones he doesn't like. He attacks other users so much so that some of his comments on user pages had to be striked out by admins. His political motivations are absolutely unacceptable here. Fry1989 eh? 16:23, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
what evidence ? , what did i do to show that i'm an assad regime supporter ? , and you think all what i upload is a respond ? , don't be silly please ? , you don't read minds , you don't read faith , you are nothing , All the files i nominate for deletion are out of scope , like the Eygpt flag on Middle east and africa , or the greater iraq files , or the dump islamic iran file , those files are out of scope , and i tried to protect the wiki from the wars that it was going to happen , you don't care for the wars , that is your problem , i told every body that any thing that insult any relegion must be deleted , you don't want to understand , don't understand , and i'll not care , but just leave me alone , you said to me to leave you alone , i did that , but you don't , you try give me accusations , why should i don't respond you ? , all of your accusations are wrong , you only want to give a bad image and let people here hate me because we had a little dispute and you thought i gave you an accusation that you are an israeli supporter , while i did not , after the dispute , every report that was at me you go there and write what happened in the dispute in you foloklore and with your lies , because i have uploaded a file that is oppose a files i nominate them for deletion , you say every time i upload a file it's a revenge or retaliation , you are the one here who is revenging , you are hunting me , because every move i do i see you there , that means that you use to see my latest controbutions or whatever , not only you , other users do so , also first time we had the dispute , i was completly new to this wiki , so i didn't know anything , and i'm not that old here , i'll say i have made a nomination by a mistake understand , the first three files that includes the syrian revolution flag , i thought they are saying as this is the new flag of syria or whatever , and then it was meant for other use , it was meant for a historical thing , mistake understand happens , and it is not a shame , so this is the solution , you don't get in my side and i don't get in your side. you want to vote , vote , but don't give a accusations to me that are wrong .GhiathArodaki (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I think that part of the problem is that GhiathArodaki treats whatever he was taught in school as the unassailable eternal truth, and his notion of Syrian nationalism, Arab nationalism, and Muslim identity etc., is that no non-Syrian should have anything to say about Syrian matters, no non-Arab has any right to speak about Arabs, no non-Muslim will ever have anything useful to say about Islam, etc. etc... AnonMoos (talk) 16:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
in school they didn't teach us anything about that , i hate the arab nationalist , but that doesn't mean i hate arabs , and yes you don't have the right to say anything bad or try to solve a problem in syria or muslims or arab world , as i don't have the right to say anything about your countries or give a solve for a problem ,We do not want any foreign interference in our countries.GhiathArodaki (talk) 18:00, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
We have no grounds to block you at this point, despite your obvious incompatibility with Commons principles, but I honestly think you should just leave for good. You're freaking out about things nobody here has even talked about. Everyone is against you, everything is wrong and an attack, everything is the West trying to control and interfere in Middle Eastern affairs. Every image with a message you disagree with must be deleted, while you expect to be allowed to upload whatever you like with the opposite message. You don't respect freedom of speech here when it comes to opposing views, or quite often even accepted fact. This isn't the place for you. Fry1989 eh? 19:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
i told you that the freedom of speech is a non sense thing , yes the west are trying to control every thing in the Arab world and muslim world , not the middle east , the middle east is a western word just to add israel to the arabian area , talk about yourself westerns "freedom of speech" , what a pathetic thing , you don't give us the freedom of speech , you are the dictator people , people like you don't even belong to the whole world , there are hundred of images here that i dissagree with , why i didn't make a campagin againist it ? , again i'll say , this freedom if speech your talking about with the meaning that if i insult you , you must accept , we will crush it and put it under our legs , we have got bored of your lies western , that is enough .GhiathArodaki (talk) 21:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Nobody here is trying to control anything in the Arab world. Commons doesn't even have such big geopolitical power. ;) What we're doing is to provide images to the world, including images that can be used to express points of view that you don't agree with or feel insulted by. I'm sure we also provide images that can be used to express points of view that you do agree with. Neither is a valid reason for deleting anything. darkweasel94 21:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Some of his previously-uploaded images were deleted for being low-quality reply or retaliation images, which had no real usefulness otherwise. AnonMoos (talk) 12:28, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Like what ?, I didn't upload any retaliation image , when you talk give examples.GhiathArodaki (talk) 14:00, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
If the (now -deleted) image of a green-white-black horizontal tricolor, with three red stars of David on the central white stripe wasn't a retaliation image, then I don't know what is. AnonMoos (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


Freedom of speech means that if you insult me, I must accept it? That's exactly what it means. Words can only hurt you as much as you let them. I do believe you've done more then your fair share of insulting people during your time here, and they have all shown incredible restraint in how they've responded. Freedom of speech is a two-way road. If you try and censor things you don't like but want to upload things you do like at the same time, you don't deserve the right to freedom of speech. You must give to others what you expect in return. Freedom of speech also means that we present facts here even if they are unpopular. The facts regarding Syria's territorial integrity obviously are unpopular to you, but we still have the obligation to tell people the truth. We will not allow you to censor this place. That seems to be your over-riding goal, from the first day you arrived you have tried to get deleted images with messages you don't like. Fry1989 eh? 01:55, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
i don't even care about the freedom of speech , because i don't accept to be insult by anybody ,i signed up to wikipedia for a non political goal , i hated the politicals , but then when i have read more about the history and what is happening in syria , i loved it and i will not accept any insults , Down with the freedom of speech , so this is the true mean of the freedom of speech , if someone say a dirty swear to another , the another must accept it ? , is that ? , freedom of speech Do not give people their dignity ? , i'm not censoring anything here or censoring the site , i'm trying to protect the site from wars , i don't think syrians or muslims or arabs when they see an insult to their symbol they will stand and laugh , no they will do as i did , this is my duty for my homeland and religion , i'm ready to leave this stupid site , that don't give a respect to others , and don't care about there dignity , yes i'm ready to leave it , but if i'm going to leave , all of my uploads must be deleted , they are my works and i don't want to publish them , i'm free to do what i want with them.GhiathArodaki (talk) 12:29, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
If you don't care about freedom of speech, then I'll say it agian: LEAVE!' This is one of the most basic principles of Commons. We are an image repository for all images, we do not take a political stance and remove images that might insult one group or another. If you are incapable of understanding that principle, or your so blinded by pride that you believe anything you don't like must be silenced, then you have no place here. If you continue down this course of action, the community will eventually be forced to give you a "permanent vacation". Fry1989 eh? 18:38, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
I'll Leave from this dirty place , but i'll leave with my images .GhiathArodaki (talk) 18:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
What you call dirty, others call freedom. The freedom to see many different views and make their own choice on what they think is right. The freedom to see facts even if they're unpopular. You want to take that away from people, you want to silence what you don't like and some times even silence the truth. It's people like you which is why half this world is a shithole to live in, where people are always afraid of what to say and think. Such behaviour will not be missed. Fry1989 eh?
I'll Leave from this dirty place , but i'll leave with my images, I Will not waste my time in a nasty place with a person that i don't care about and have no value , no body controls me , i don't care about the community , they are not my masters , i'll go by myself and my ruling , They do not equate the value of ant, as you so, annon , keep your pathetic file for yourself , Fry , Because you are rude with the word you said , don't get angry from my rude words , this world isn't in need for a non value people like you , i don't silence the truth , i silence the lies you make .GhiathArodaki (talk) 19:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Obvious username violation

User:Samuraiantiqueworld's username is in clear violation of Commons:Username policy#Company/group names. He/she already got blocked on English Wikipedia for the same violation.[12] Note: I do not hold a grudge against him/her (even if the feeling is not mutual), and I think a formal request to change the username should be enough. I do not want this user to get blocked over this. Hijiri88 (talk) 12:26, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Oh wait: on Commons is it okay to use a company name if it can be proven that the user actually is an authorized rep of the company? If so, sorry my bad. (>_<) Hijiri88 (talk) 12:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
No. Our editors are individuals, not companies. Problems arise when two people use the same company name -- one is a good editor and the other is a problem -- how do we deal with him or her? Also, what happens when the person leaves the company? Finally, there is the simple fact that most people who use a company name are here solely to promote the company, which is a violation of COM:Advert. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
(Edit conflict) See Commons:Username policy#Company/group names. I suggest resolution by discussion. A voluntary change of name would be far less confusing and we should try to be nice unless the account is just being used for blatant promotion and failing to respond to questions. Accounts (as on any Wikimedia project) are intended to be individual accounts, rather than group accounts. In this case it would be okay to change to a name like User:Simon (Samuraiantiqueworld) which neatly converts their edits from a group back to a responsible individual.
By the way, their uploads look within scope and interesting, not promotional at all as far as I can see. So let's be extra nice for someone who appears to be interested in sharing for the benefit of open knowledge. :-) -- (talk) 13:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
I would be concerned, though, that if he was blocked for this, he might just give up then and there and, rather than come up with a new user name, continue editing under a sock account. This appears to be what happened on English Wikipedia (although I don't really remember the details, as I was not directly involved until later). And it's also somewhat problematic. Hijiri88 (talk) 14:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
While he is certainly a valuable contributor, I would not be any happier with User:Simon (Samuraiantiqueworld), which still has his business name in it. While certainly businesses that deal in interesting objects can be great contributors, we do not allow them to promote themselves here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes, they are a valuable contributor. If you have strong views on what would be acceptable under the username policy (there is some flexibility in its wording) I suggest you try engaging them in dialogue and try hard to ensure they are not vulnerable to getting blocked through a misunderstanding. I note that organizations such as chapters allow their staff to use account names on projects which might be thought to promote the organization, and were I to take the policy literally as stated, then I would expect users such as Conti to be forced to change their account names. Let's not go there. -- (talk) 16:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm with Fæ on this one. Let's not judge the users intentions based on his or her username, but let's look at the contributions. IMO there is nothing wrong about giving credit where credit is due. If the company allows useful contributions to be made on company time it is just fair to attribute them with the company name. The Advert policy exists to prevent commons to be flooded by useless and biassed ad spam. This policy should not get in the way of having commons benefit from a benevolent company upload. --Dschwen (talk) 17:15, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I want to add one point to this debate that is not connected to this particular case. At de-wp, we have an OTRS-driven process to verify user accounts that are named after organizations or prominent people (see this page at de-wp). According to this process, we have meanwhile 1,642 verified users. (Verified means that they are able to send emails from the organization or personal contact they claim to represent.) This has some advantages and there also some legitimate concerns (like those raised above in regard to advertising). One advantage that is seen at de-wp is that contributions coming from users with an conflict of interest (i.e. companies editing their own Wikipedia article) are more easily recognized if coming from a verified user. The policy as it current stands supports this exception. Regards, AFBorchert (talk) 17:22, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

That is a great point. If you have company representatives editing it is certainly a plus to have them visibly do so. We should think about having such a verification process on Commons. --Dschwen (talk) 18:16, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Immediate unblock request for Samuraiantiqueworld so they do a CHU request for themselves

Maybe could we unblock the user ? He seems open to a name change... Pleclown (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

  •  Support I am amazed that Jim took this block action when simple discussion would have resolved the problem. Jim, actions like this drive away good faith contributors and are very, very un-mellow, are you having a bad day or something? Please unblock immediately as a gesture of goodwill and on the understanding that this user is happy to request a new account name. -- (talk) 17:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I unblocked the user. There is no immediate danger to the project. A block does not seem necessary to me at this point. --Dschwen (talk) 17:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

    • Thanks for the support, I really appreciate it!!!!, I think blocking an experience user who has taken a lot of time to create and organize hundreds of categories and populate them with vast ammounts of properly licensed images that are free to be used by anyone for any reason was a little overboard. I am extremely offended by suggestions that my participation in Wikipedia Commons has anything to do with commercial interests, my participation is all about contributing knowledge and sharing information, as anyone who looks at my work can plainly see. Although User:Hijiri88 denies it, this was definitely an attempt to use Wikipedia Commons as a means to continue a dispute that was started on Wikipedia, whether there is a basis for the accusations made here or not is a different matter, I just want to clarify why this has even come to any ones attention in the first place since my name was well know and it was never a problem here until now as its obvious that there has never been any intention of selling or advertising etc on my part.
    • I came here originally because I had access to knowledge and images that no one else had, all that was here in the areas I work on mainly (Japanese / Samurai weapons, armor and associated items and Indo-Persian weapons and armor) was a bunch of images grouped in a few categories with no organization and no way for interested people to find these images, I also found that many types of armor and weapons related items which I had images of did not have categories on Wikipedia Commons, which for the most part means that Wikipedia articles on these subjects did not have any corresponding images for readers to look at while reading the articles. It took a massive effort on my part to systematically review the huge amounts of images that were just dumped into a few categories and sort them all into properly named categories and sub categories. In addition since I had access to many images that were not currently available on Wikipedia commons I started uploading these images and creating categories for them, many of these images are extremely rare, with some of them being the only know images on the internet. There are only a few people in the world with the knowledge and properly licensed images to do what I have done here and most of them do not want to take the time to contribute to Wikipedia commons, and I have asked other people with similar knowledge to contribute here but unfortunately that have not happened. In addition I have spent large amounts of time going through properly licensed Flicker images and adding them to the appropriate Wikipedia Commons categories.
    • For anyone interested in what I actually do here I have provided some links, if you take the time to expand these categories you will see what I have been working on, which is creating categories and sub categories and populating them with appropriate images so that people can actually find these images when searching for them, I will ask everyone who has commented here to take a minute and just expand each and every category / sub category in Category:Samurai_armour alone and you will see why I think that it is absolutely absurd that anyone would even be worrying about what name I am using, I have spent years researching this and all of the other subjects I edit, what type of financial gain does anyone think I am getting from my contributions here???

Category:Samurai_armour Category:Samurai_weapons Category:Samurai_horse_equipment Samurai_accoutrements Category:Chainmail Category:Indo-Persian_armour Category:Indo-Persian_armour Category:Depictions_of_samurai samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 19:39, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

My apologies for creating this tempest. It's too bad that time does not allow full checking when we see an obvious violation of our way of doing things -- if I had known that he had 15,000 edits, I would have handled it differently, but we're all too busy.

As many of you know, I feel very strongly that users should be individuals, not groups, or organizations. There are simply too many potential problems that can arise from multiple people using one username. That leads directly to our consensus that organizational usernames are not acceptable. There is also the fact that Samuraiantiqueworld.com is a the domain name for this user's commercial web site. Although no direct promotional activities are present on Commons, just using the name probably violates COM:Advert.

My preference would be for a change to a name that is not the web site -- "Samurai" appears to be free, for one possibility. With that understood, I note that we have grandfathered a few users who have been around for a some time and who have names that are problematic. Although I cannot recommend doing that in this case, I will not object if others feel it is the appropriate action. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I can heartily recommend using the Popups feature available in Preferences/Gadgets if you do not already use it. This means I can hover over anyone's signature and check their user contributions and flags (handy for seeing who is a sysop or new user). Not everyone likes it, but worth taking for a test run. -- (talk) 20:40, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
As I stated above, I find it a bit far fetched that having Samuraiantiqueworld in the username is a violation of COM:Advert just because someone could get the idea to type it in a webbrowser and append a .com. Look at the users' actions, not at the username. And AFBorchert said it above, having the affiliation clearly stated in the username can also be seen as a disclosure. Lastly nothing point to your assertion that this user is a group account. He seems to be a solitary editor. Again, do not just look at the username, please. Unfortunately the SUL account check tool is currently not working, so I cannot look into renaming Samuraiantiqueworld. This might be a good case for the upcoming global user rename. After three years of activities I don't think we have to rush this anyways. --Dschwen (talk) 21:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
And even if he had Samuraiantiqueworld.com in the username I still don't think merely that fact would be problematic. The policy just states content which constitutes advertising or self-promotion may be deleted from Commons. It is about the contributed content. Applying this to a username seems very much like overreaching to me. --Dschwen (talk) 21:08, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Dschwen, you're kind of missing the point. I don't think SAW has been engaging in problematic behaviour, or that he should (have been) blocked. But his username is a violation of the rule that users are not allowed use the name of a company or group. Hijiri88 (talk) 11:05, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't think I'm missing the point at all. Have you read what Jim wrote above? He is the one who made the point about COM:Advert. The minor issue with COM:UPOLICY could be solved with a short mail to info-commons@wikimedia.org (or a rename to Username (Samuraiantiqueworld). --Dschwen (talk) 11:17, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I know you weren't the first one to miss the point. And I'm not putting blame on anyone here. Just that "advertising" is not a complaint I made, and it's not a policy SAW is actually guilty of violating. I specifically said at the start that he could get a rename and let that be that. So pointing out after he has already been unblocked that this is the case is somewhat redundant. Anyway, no harm, no foul. :-) Hijiri88 (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Sorry to write here. Only a little bit of Mustard.I don't understand even the problem. The photographs User:Samurantiquesworld has given here to use in Commons are very unique. You will never find a contributor who will give such photos, explanings, writers help with informations (like me) and historical knowlege. Trust me. I wrote to all important Museums around the world to beg for assistance with photos for commons, because my drawings are not perfect, and I even don't get any answers from the Museums. Not positive, not negative only none. So many people in Wikipedia.de and Wikimedia are crying that no real Specialists will work in here. One is coming to work and contribute and for this nonsense with the Users name he will be blocked ????????? I write near all the Asian weapons articles in WP.de and without his help, informations and pictures it will near be impossible. The picture quality is very good and some of the photographed items you will not find in the best and most famous Museums.

So I'll beg everybody here who has something to say and Ideas what to do, to help to let stay the User:Samuraiantiquesworld here in commons. There must be a way. Greetings and sorry for my bad english --MittlererWeg (talk) 20:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

I reject Samuraiantiqueworld's assumption of bad faith on my part. I pointed out that he was originally blocked on Wikipedia for a username violation, and was guilty of the exact same violation here. I never said that he should be blocked, or that he was trying to engage in self-promotion. My only interaction with him in the past was when his block-evasion sockpuppet on Wikipedia reverted a bunch of my edits in an area I clearly know more about than he does (not being able to speak Japanese led him to [en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jitte#Requested move consistently misspell Japanese words], and so on). Responding to MittlerWeg's defense of SAW: Photos of Japanese weapons and armour can be easily produced by anyone who lives in Japan and regularly visits museums, and those of us with proper academic credentials can provide better explanations too. I am someone with an actual background in this area and SAW's sockpuppet tried to force me out of the area on English Wikipedia.
Anyway, despite SAW's continued holding of a grudge against me, the feeling is NOT mutual. He should just get a new username and remain unblocked. And if he ever wants to come back to Wikipedia and contribute constructively under one account, he will have my full support.
Hijiri88 (talk) 11:01, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Also, to anyone who still thinks SAW wasn't engaged in sockpuppetry/ownership on en.wp, please consider what his motivations for uploading this file could possibly have been. Hijiri88 (talk) 11:18, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Nobody here is a mind reader, that's what AGF is for. --Dschwen (talk) 11:32, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Well, actually we don't need to do any mind reading here, because we can actually see his en.wp sock showing up here asking himself to upload the file[13] his main account responding saying he wasn't sure if he had one[14] his main account saying that he had already uploaded a different file and citing an extremely obscure and expensive book that not many people likely have access to[15] his main account uploading the file[16] and his en.wp sock linking to it and citing the same book[17] all in the space of around 30 hours. Hijiri88 (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

"Jitte" or "Jutte"

SAW veered radically off-topic by making a AGF-violation and claiming I was here talking about usernames because of something to do with Japanese weaponry. I'd like to see this resolved here, so I'm giving it its own sub-section. Please remember that en.wiki already has a consensus on the issue. Hijiri88 (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
    • User:Hijiri88 has revealed the true reason for attacking me here in the first place, User:Hijiri88 is obsessed with changing long standing image descriptions and or category names and User:Hijiri88 would like me out of the way in order to do this. User:Hijiri88 is trying to manipulate the editors here. I have asked for a discussion of this users edits here [18] and I think that this subject should be discussed there not here. This discussion is supposed to be about my name, not about User:Hijiri88's personal problems with me and my editing etc, thank you samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 14:19, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
Nope. My reason for bringing you up here was your username. I realized during the course of your discussion that by including inaccurate descriptions on images here, you had been effectively altering cross-wiki content on English Wikipedia. en:Talk:Jitte#Requested move already clearly established that "jutte" is just an obscure spelling of "jitte", and your books that appear to say otherwise are just plain wrong according to actual definitions of these Japanese words as written by actual Japanese speakers. Therefore, I changed the descriptions to reflect consensus and historical fact. You reverted me, but I don't see why you should be allowed do so, when consensus was already clearly established against you(r sockpuppet) on the issue. Hijiri88 (talk) 14:34, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

User does not contribute anything meaningful to the project, but only seems interested in uploading PNG/JPEG versions of flags we already have in SVG format. User also has sever warnings for vandalism. I suggest an indefinite block. Fry1989 eh? 01:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done Let's try 3 months for now. I don't think she/he will be back anyway. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Ottava Rima


Hello could I get an admin review of this user's recent actions please!!! I would ask that User:Hijiri88 be asked not to make any further edits of the type now being currently made until a discussion can take place in the proper venue. User:Hijiri88 is making changes to image descriptions on categories which I have worked on for a long time without any discussion, User:Hijiri88 feels that due to a superior understanding of JAPANESE that long standing names of items should be changed. User:Hijiri88 has no history here and as I understand it no knowledge of the subject now being edited by User:Hijiri88 (Japanese armor and weapons). I have spent many years studying and researching this subject with more than 15,000 edits, I have added the majority of the categories and images that User:Hijiri88 is now editing without any discussion. I would like someone to look at his recent edits so this situation can be discussed properly, thank you samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like this requires topical knowledge rather than just an admin. Any chance you could find somebody familiar with the topic on en.wp to help? --Dschwen (talk) 01:55, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
We already resolved this on en.wiki. Please see en:Talk:Jitte#Requested move. The discussion involved one user making a weak argument about "common name", because apparently SAW's misunderstanding is shared by a martial arts magazine or two, and SAW's sockpuppet Darkness walks, but pretty much everyone else accepting that jitte is the proper name and jutte is an obscure variant. I made the changes to the image descriptions here on Commons because consensus was already established back in April/May. The only user who is likely to disapprove is SAW, out of some misplaced sense of "ownership" or personal grudge against me. Cheers! Hijiri88 (talk) 14:39, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
The pages need to be fixed because [20] now contradicts en.wiki's actual article on the topic. Plus, SAW's above claim to "more than 15,000 edits" is irrelevant. Not all of them are good, and he could claim the same thing on en.wiki but he's still been indeffed there twice, and now is attempting to continue to exert influence through "ownership" of its images.
    • Dschwen I should have explained the problem better, this has to do with Commons, not Wikipedia. Let me try to make this more understandable, in Commons there are two Japanese weapons, one is called a "jutte" Category:Jutte, the jutte is a small truncheon like weapon, the other weapon is called a "jitte" Category:Jitte, which is a small hand held spear like weapon. User:Hijiri88 knows that there are two categories on Commons and yet User:Hijiri88 changed the image description of a "jutte" calling it a "jitte" instead and added this comment (Fixing spelling). Difference between revisions of "File:Jutte 1.JPG", in fact User:Hijiri88 did the same thing on 13 different images knowing that I would revert these edits. When an editor purposely makes edits knowing that the edits will be controversial and reverted it is a form of edit warring and I want to avoid this type of editing, it has no place here, User:Hijiri88 knows that there are appropriate methods for disputing an image description and or a category name. Any other editors on Commons would revert the same type of edits made to image descriptions in categories that they have been working on, to call that revert "ownership" is antagonistic and disrespectful, these were not "good faith" edits, there were done specifically to get a reaction. I am simply requesting that User:Hijiri88 stop making derogatory remarks about me and stop making edits that will knowingly be contested and instead if there is a serious belief that an image description and or category name is wrong that User:Hijiri88 use the appropriate venue on Commons to discuss the issue. I hope this is a clearer description on the problem.samuraiantiqueworld (talk) 03:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

I guess that such an anti gay statement shouldn't remain without consequences. Since I blocked this user recently, I would prefer another admin to decide. --Leyo 06:00, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done Indef, communication blocked. We can do without those kind of people. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 06:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
Thank you. —Psychonaut (talk) 10:17, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Stunteltje refusal to gain a consensus


Beleiutz

Serial copyright violator Beleiutz (talk · contribs) is back, continuing to upload images with falsified licencing information using his sockpuppet Mateescu (talk · contribs). The two accounts were already checkusered on English Wikipedia, and both are blocked there for copyright violations, though Mateescu is the only one of several socks which remains unblocked here on Commons. Further details are available at en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beleiutz, en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Beleiutz/Archive, and the user talk pages of the various sockpuppets here and on English Wikipedia. —Psychonaut (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

✓ Done Thanks for this notification! Regards, High Contrast (talk) 13:34, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Since the other two accounts are indefinitely blocked here, consider extending the block for the other confirmed sockpuppet Consiliul (talk · contribs) to indefinite as well. It seems this user likes to reappear every few months and try the same old shenanigans, so there's a good possibility they'll misuse that account again once the block expires. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Was there a checkuser-request on en.wiki for Consiliul (talk · contribs), too? --High Contrast (talk) 14:19, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Yes. Results were posted at en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive805#User Consiliul use of internal links. The match was ruled possible on technical grounds, and considering the behavioural evidence as well, the account was confirmed and blocked as a sockpuppet [24]. —Psychonaut (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done --High Contrast (talk) 14:27, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Looks like they're back as Maria Streza (talk · contribs). That account has uploaded a copyvio image, and an IP account on the English Wikipedia (in the same IP range as a previous one) immediately added it to one of Beleiutz's favourite articles. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:51, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Blocked as a precaution, but I think this is nothing but a throwaway account. --O (висчвын) 21:44, 23 August 2013 (GMT)

They've returned yet again as Roberta Place (talk · contribs). —Psychonaut (talk) 15:21, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Blocked and filename protected from re-creation for one month. --O ( • висчвын) 16:00, 24 August 2013 (GMT)

Request the unblocking of the an animated GIF

Hello, to illustrate the article https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constante_de_Planck we have made an animated gif, Archivo:HornoCuerpoNegroGif.gif , on the basis of an already existing fixed photo, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HORNO_CUERPO_NEGRO_TT.jpg of five years ago and that is not our. One way to incorporate the animated gif into the Wikimedia Commons data base would be modifying the old drawing and put the animated gif in its place. We have already tried to do so but is not possible to convert a jpg format to another animated gif type. The old drawing is a stationary photo of the radiation inside the Black Body cavity at the end of the process. Now with our animation, is observed the entire process on the inside of the black body to the influence of light on it. From the entrance of the light, through successive absorptions in the cavity, until completely absorbed. We believe that a cartoon in a physical process of difficult understanding, helps a lot. This is what we wanted to do with the animated gif. In this moment the upload of the animated gif to internet is blocked by the administrator Ju Ta http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:JuTa. Although we have asked you the unblocking of the animated gif on August 9 but he did not answer. Please, I request another administrator to review this case and also I request the unblocking of the upload of the animated gif to the Wikimedia Commons database. Many thanks in advance, --LFISUPM2013 (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

links fixed by darkweasel94 17:45, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I don't understand the problem. Could you write it in spanish ? Pleclown (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
I believe LFISUPM2013 wants Commons:Deletion requests/File:HornoCuerpoNegroGif.gif undeleted. darkweasel94 18:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
Perdon por el retraso en la contestación ya que he estado unos días sin internet. En efecto como dice el usuario darkweasel94, lo que solicito es que el gif animado Commons:Deletion requests/File:HornoCuerpoNegroGif.gif no sea borrada. Además intento subirla de nuevo y no puedo porque está bloqueada la subida de esta imagen. Así pues, por favor solicito poder subir a Commons el gif animado Commons:Deletion requests/File:HornoCuerpoNegroGif.gif. Muchas gracias y un saludo. --LFISUPM2013 (talk) 16:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Complaint about administrator's attitude


Revert warring of User:Fry1989

Ottava Rima (let's try and not let this one get derailed)