Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

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 ^{[new section]}	User problems ^{[new section]}	Blocks and protections ^{[new section]}	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
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	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	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	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}

Note

Before reporting one or more users here, try to resolve the dispute by discussing with them first. (Exception: obvious vandal accounts, spambots, etc.)
Keep your report as short as possible, but include links as evidence.
Remember to sign and date all comments using four tildes (~~~~), which translates into a signature and a time stamp.
Notify the user(s) concerned via their user talk page(s). {{subst:Discussion-notice|noticeboard=COM:AN/U|thread=|reason=}} ~~~~ is available for this.
It is important to keep a cool head, especially when responding to comments against you or your edits. Personal attacks and disruptive comments only escalate a situation; Please try to remain civil with your comments.
Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

Hounding by Grand-Duc

Latest comment: 3 days ago38 comments11 people in discussion

This section is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, replace this template with your comment. Jmabel ! talk 17:21, 3 August 2025 (UTC)

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

Hello, since this report in the Administrators' noticeboard early in this month, Grand-Duc started to hound my edits in the COM:QIC, declining all my pictures candidates and flagging them as violating Commons guidelines. I think this is a despicable behaviour, because it is clearly some kind of revenge specifically against me, since dozens of pictures with the same "problem" he sees in my pictures are promoted every day (this one being just a random exemple from yesterday), and hundreds of them are for review right now (example) without him caring at all about them. This is preventing me to contribute serenely, so I call the admins for some actions that could stop him. Thank you. --Phyrexian ɸ 00:23, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Admin actions to stop me? Hilarious. You have all the power needed to stop any thing "preventing [you] to contribute serenely" that by yourself: see Commons:File naming#Descriptive for details on how to use this power. Furthermore, nothing stops you from contributing towards the growth of our repository - but QI seals are only accolades for which a bit more than run-of-the-mill contributions can reasonably be expected. Please refer to Commons:Quality images candidates#Image page requirements. There, it is written: "Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices", so that any candidate has to be compliant with guidelines, that's a bit of a stronger wording than the standard disclaimer with "It illustrates standards or behaviors which most editors agree with in principle and generally follow" on every guideline page. Even stronger yet is the second requirement: "Quality images shall have a meaningful file name,[...]" - a shall rule is only a bit short of an actual must, if not outright equal, see en:Shall and will#Legal and technical use and also en:Shall issue.

Objectively, your naming scheme is failing the naming guideline, as far as I can tell and as you were told in the report you linked. You cannot comply if another Wikimedian take objection to some QIC of you and decline a promotion on those grounds. Also, I think that you went on the side of an illegitimate personal attack by calling some soundly reasoned QIC declinings hounding.

About your examples: I moved the first, as you were right in that the name was not really guideline compliant. I reviewed your second example after you made me aware of it, and yes, it has also a naming issue (and is not of the quality I expect from QI). I'm not often anymore on the QIC pages, so you cannot blame me from not parsing all of the candidates. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 02:30, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm a bit unclear - can you provide an example of an image he has hounded you over? - Chris.sherlock2 (talk) 02:33, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Phyrexian: Please stop complaining and start fixing your filenames per COM:FN. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:02, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Comment On COM:QIC#Consensual review, there are several opposing reviews by Grand-Duc of images by Phyrexian, claiming an "unsuitable generic filename". This is clearly -- WRONG. I didn't look at the images in full-size view to assess their technical quality, but at least the filenames such as "Napoli_-_Gesù_delle_Monache_3288.jpg" are definitely okay, neither meaningless nor misleading. Grand-Duc, please stop that nonsense. --A.Savin 07:47, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Grand-Duc: you accuse me of personal attack after you indulge is sarcasm and dismiss my comment as "hilarious". Ok. I see you have not any will to collaborate in the scope of this Project and just want to make your point here. Which is not even about the filenames, as you completely ignore the other many pictures with similar or even more generic names, but a personal vengeance against me. What you call "objectively" is just your personal opinion, as multiple people already told you, you should deal with it and move on without harassing other users.

@Chris.sherlock2: All my current submissions to COM:QIC has a negative comment by Grand-Duc, not actually reviewing the pictures, but just pretending they have unsuitable file names. I repeat: the 100% of my submissions are being discarded by Grand-Duc, who have done no other contributions to the page, so 100% of his contributions there is just rejecting my pictures for this specific reason. That's hounding. --Phyrexian ɸ 12:11, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Phyrexian: Without going into any other aspect of this, I notice you often upload specific works of art and just name them by the museum they were in, and a number. That may be permissible, but it is certainly not optimal. - Jmabel ! talk 16:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Two things. First, I disagree with the opinions that filenames that say nothing about what is depicted and instead include only the large place in which it was photographed are acceptable. There's an argument that FNC 2.4 applies, and if not FNC 2.7 applies: Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. However, when you open a noticeboard thread and have multiple people telling you you're wrong, it's not acceptable to proceed with the same behavior. I'd like to see Grand-Duc leave Phyrexian's images alone, but for Phyrexian to add some language about what is depicted to filenames moving forward. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:35, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Off topic. I give some explanation to whom says that some of my files have a not optimal name. I do agree that a very specific name would be the best. We could seek the best of the best and just allow very long and specific filenames in the language most people would understand without taking too much space in the name line, and end up in having all files on Commons having Mandarin Chinese names. I'm joking of course, but is clear that we should find a balance between an optimal solution and a useless file name. I also think we can agree that different people have a different sensibility, and thus will find a different solution for this balance. I think this is perfectly fine in a collaborative project.

There is a reason why I upload my own images with a simple filename: they are a lot (right now roughly 15 thousands own produced photographs and counting). They come from huge private archives, so when I search pictures to upload that could be useful for Commons I surf tens of thousands of pictures, and before uploading I process one by one almost all of them. Is a lot of work and a work I'm the only one who could do, being those my personal photographs. I could much more easily do as most of the people do here: just upload hundreds of pictures in batches, with meaningless filenames, useless descriptions and wrong categorization. But no, I try to make my work here useful, and find an optimal solution, giving them a file name that IMHO is above Commons standards, the best categorization I can do (often creating entires category trees and sorting other files) and a multilingual description with links to Wikipedia, allowing bots to automatically improve the file structured datas.

Also, I think everybody here knows that the file name is not the main way to find a file on Commons, being it a volunteer project that allows the use of any language in the world. We find pictures in this project browsing categories, searching structured data, and so on. Therefore, alongside with decades experience of Commons customs, I think my file names are quite good, as I said above Commons standards, but for sure good enough according our guidelines and enough to allow people to find them and understand exactly what's the subject. So why I do not choose even better names? Because of two reasons. The first being time: I would spend more time figuring out longer names, and as a volunteer on this project I prefer to focus my work on what I think is more useful, so I prefer to upload more pictures, to ad better descriptions and better categorizations instead of searching 100 different name of 100 different objects in the same building, that maybe have no descriptions on them and I have no idea what they are. Second, and more important, I need pictures from same batches to have similar names, or I could not easily figure out which of my files I already uploaded. This is the most important thing. My personal categories, that are already a lot, grows too much populated, and I need a way to not waste my time searching for my own uploads, and everybody's time uploading the same picture multiple times with different very specific names.

I hope is clear now why I choose descriptive names for my pictures that are just slightly general (and for sure are not subject to COM:FNCFNC 2.4 and neither 2.7). If my contribution here is not acceptable I can stop it any moment, I'm here to help, not to create problems. What I'm not doing is to make even more difficult and time draining the process to search, edit and upload my shots on Commons. I think the project could survive without my pictures, even if thousands of them are in use in over one hundred of wiki projects, according to GLAMorous tool.

Coming back in topic, my file names, good or bad thy be, were not the object of discussion here. The behaviour of Grand-Duc is, so I'd like to know if I'll be free to keep my contribution here without being molested by him seeking my QIC pictures or my edits anywhere else just because we have a different opinion. Thank you. --Phyrexian ɸ 19:29, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

A filename is not just about finding a file on Commons. It is also about having it be clear what the file is in contexts where it is used. And, yes, files named in Chinese probably get under-used outside of the Chinese (and certain other East Asian) wikipedias, but that is entirely off topic.

There are files where filenames about just the building are fine. Pictures of known works of art are not those. We would not want a picture of La Gioconda / the Mona Lisa to be titled "Louvres 984735". - Jmabel ! talk 06:35, 30 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

It is stranger and stranger for me to see this discussion instead of discussion about Grand-Duc. If his actions worth just words 'hey, you should not do this', such filenames should not gain more emotions and discussions. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 07:56, 30 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

And he is still deaf to this 'don't do it' from many people. "single remaining way", aha. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 08:10, 30 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Phyrexian, you wrote "I do agree that a very specific name would be the best. We could seek the best of the best and just allow very long and specific filenames in the language most people would understand without taking too much space in the name line, and end up in having all files on Commons having Mandarin Chinese names. I'm joking of course, but is clear that we should find a balance between an optimal solution and a useless file name." Most of that is demonstrably false. Even though you were joking, assuming that Mandarin is the most spoken language is wrong. That is still English with over 1,5 billion speakers worldwide who can use English as maternal or learned tongue. And I think that the balance is NOT where you're placing your filenames, they are, as several other contributors concur, too broad.

Let's decline that with two examples; first one of those images where I opposed your QI nomination, File:Roma_-_San_Luigi_dei_Francesi_8250.jpg. The filename and the descriptions say that this is a photograph of the church San Luigi dei Francesi. I'll play a bit dumb now: if File:Roma_-_San_Luigi_dei_Francesi_8250.jpg is a picture of a church, where's the door(s) where worshippers can enter? Where are the windows, where is the bell tower? I can't see that on your image, so it's obviously not an image of a church and thus inadequately named! File:Église San Luigi Francesi - Rome (IT62) - 2021-08-28 - 2.jpg is indeed an image of a church and adequately named.

Your photo is a relief of a mythological, fire-spitting creature. Neither the file description nor the filename says whether that's indoors or outdoors or on which building side (which cardinal side) it's visible. The precision of it being a depiction of relief and maybe the subject (category says "salamander") would be IMHO the bare minimum for a guideline-compliant filename. The result could be something like "File:Roma - San Luigi dei Francesi Salamander relief outdoors 8250.jpg" (or indoors if applicable or west/east-northern/south side).

Second example: File:Berlin - Museum für Naturkunde 6942.jpg. You cannot claim that conjoined canine twin fetuses are a depiction of a museum, that's simply stupid. A good name could be "File:Berlin Museum für Naturkunde - Siamesische Hundeföten Alkoholpräparat 6942.jpg", because the fetuses are the main motif. On that case, you actively opposed a rename (Special:Diff/1052481749) despite your primary choice is clearly going against the guideline COM:FN.

You're IMHO also wrong in saying "Also, I think everybody here knows that the file name is not the main way to find a file on Commons, being it a volunteer project that allows the use of any language in the world. We find pictures in this project browsing categories, searching structured data, and so on." I could not possibly say it any better than JMabel above with "A filename is not just about finding a file on Commons. It is also about having it be clear what the file is in contexts where it is used.". Imagine some editor preparing longs article texts offline or compiling some bullet lists with images. These people should have their usages facilitated (with "speaking filenames") as much as you with "Second, and more important, I need pictures from same batches to have similar names, or I could not easily figure out which of my files I already uploaded." You cannot impose your working patterns on others; do that organising of yours separate from the main file space, maybe offline (with folders on your hard discs, metadata in EXIF / IPTC or subpages with galleries in your user space)! When you use galleries in your username space here, you won't even be bothered by file renames, as the links get updated by a bot. Furthermore, the Commons software is searching for duplicates based upon hash values, so "[wasting] everybody's time uploading the same picture multiple times with different very specific names." is moot point. It's technically hindered to do this.

Back to the last point: "[...]my file names, good or bad thy be, were not the object of discussion here. The behaviour of Grand-Duc is,[...]" Well, the file names are the reason why we met again here, so they are very well a subject to be discussed here. As told in previously, I made a compromise and left your uploads alone. But now, you're even pushing for a likely infringement of the Commons:Quality images candidates#Image page requirements?! Why should I get even more compliant and not point out your bad naming choices? As I said before, QIC is more or less an "addon" to Commons' work and nothing you're entitled to. If you're participating, you have to abide to some more stringent rules, as put forth in Commons:Quality images candidates#Image page requirements and its shall rule.

All that said, I won't dare to disparage your work in providing media, categories etc.! I know how time-consuming and ungrateful the curating work is. But I think that you should also be ready for compromises, like accepting renames towards more precise strings - if we could agree to that, and I happened to do some moves, I would leave your index numbers intact, as they are, according to your explanations, apparently of importance for you. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:37, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Phyrexian, Thank you for donating your photos to Commons. I can understand why you need the generic filenames in your archives, but you can change the name of the file when you upload them to Commons, and I recommend you do so before uploading files in the future. If you really need the original filename, put it in the EXIF. As to the policy compliance: Grand-Duc is technically correct in his interpretation of the QIC naming guidelines, and even if it wasn't required, I would strongly recommend you take the 20-30 seconds to accurately name files based on what they depict when you upload the file, as it makes the files very useful for people who don't know how to use the category system. The hounding allegations regarding Grand-Duc are valid, and this could have been resolved with rename requests and a note on Phyrexian's talk page regarding file naming. I don't see any sanctions needed against Grand-Duc other than a warning to stay civil in ANU reports and not mock users who spend less time filing ANU reports than you. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 03:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Grand-Duc: «the file names are the reason why we met again here». No, we met here because you chose to hound specifically my QI candidates, despite you being inactive on that page and ignoring others' many files with similar names, blatantly violating COM:POINT. That's unacceptable and that's why we are here. And I'm honestly tired of being accused of policies violations, but since this should be a collaborative project I do my best to give explanations if requested. I'm glad to see everybody deemed your actions abusive and I'm confident you'll stop following me on Commons. That for me would be enough and I'm not calling for any further action.

Apart from this (off topic again), I see my previous explanation was maybe not clear enough, so I'll try to add some clarifications. I've been contributing on Commons since quite some years, so I know the policies, and I'm not violating them. If my work was disruptive I would have been told some thousands own pictures uploads before you stumble on them, I guess. I also do not violate Quality Image policies, or I would not have several hundreds of pictures with the same filename template promoted without anybody ever complain about it (not to mention the many thousands more QI pictures form other users with similar names being promoted constantly). So once again it appears to me that the only problem is you not accepting different opinions. For example the opinion of other users, very active in QIC, stating the name of my files you chased are fine. It's exactly 100% of others comments, on 100% of those files, so maybe I'm not the one driving against traffic the wrong way. On the other hand sometimes people kindly asked to give some more specific description, and I always do if possible (broad descriptions are just a matter of time), and invite anyone to perfect the details of my photographs, as you would expect in a wiki.

Once again, I understand and agree that very descriptive names are better, it would just make my contribution too much difficult and I would give up. You can look for instance at this upload of mine, done while I was working as a wikimedian in residence in a museum, and see it has a much more specific name. That's because is not an own picture, and it will not interfere in my future uploads. But if I would have to seek specific names for every single picture in a batch of, say, 600 pics from a same place (and that would not take just a bounch of seconds per picture), in 1 year I would never remember every single name and would cost me too much time and effort to understand if I already uploaded some specific image. Moreover I do not always knows exactly the proper name of everything I'm shooting. I'm not a botanist, not a zoologist, not an historian about south east Asia or Viking artwork and so on, I don't know the author of every single piece of decoration in every single church in the world... So if I shot a detail of a church, and I put the filename with tha specific church name in the specific location, I'm giving quite a good name according to Commons guidelines. Could be a little better (most of the time on Commons would be worst), but this would disrupt my ability to find it again easily and keep contributing to the topic. Honestly, if a name like "This specific church" confuses you because you do not see a bell tower or a door in the picture, the problem yet again is not in the file name. If the subject is not clear after checking description, categories or metadata, on the other hand, is something me or others can work about.

And there is nothing moot in my point. The software recognize if you try to upload exactly the same picture, but as I said I proces almost every single shot, so if I process the same image twice it would be different and I'll get no warning, apart of wasting my time working on my pics multiple times just for nothing. That's why I need to know in advance if I already uploaded them. To find my pics I combine their camera number, their names and their categorization in my personal categories. Giving them very specific names would disrupt my ability to search them, as I should have to browse in the miniatures of categories with hundreds and sometimes thousands of elements. So I hope is clear now, I need the file names to be precise, according to the guidelines, but to be a little general to allow me finding my personal uploads through time. Of course the many hundred thousands pictures in my personal archives have not specific names, I name them for Commons, is not an "author" thing that I'm too proud to change or I'm jealous about, is a "Commons user" thing that I need to work here.

One very last thing, really really off topic, about the "context where a file is used". What? Really? Files on Commons are free. There is no context, everybody is free to use them in the context they want, we have no clue about any context, and who use them can change the name at his convenience. The name is just a technical requirement of our software. I hope I misunderstand this point, because I would not like to see users thinking that images with names like this one should be renamed, just because "the context" of "everybody speak English and nobody speak Georgian" requires it. Commons is a collaborative project, not a militarily regimented unpaid job. --Phyrexian ɸ 12:50, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

The standard for QI is higher than "non-disruptive."

If I run "გრემი - გრემის კომპლექსი" through Google Translate I get "Remi - Grammy Complex" (Google apparently tripped over "Gremi"), neither a great nor awful file name. I'll guess that most people dealing with material about a castle in Georgia read at least some Georgian. - Jmabel ! talk 16:38, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Bringing up other languages is irrelevant, because Commons is in theory a multilingual project. The idea that users can use their native tongue or whatever language they're most comfortable with supersedes the idea that filenames should be maximally clear.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:49, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

tldr i only skimmed thru part of this thread, but i totally agree with 1 point by User:Phyrexian: requiring a so called "meaningful filename" is unrealistic for users who upload a lot of files, because tools are not suited to fine tune filenames and other details during the upload process, and more importantly filename is merely an identifier string and often a poor quality duplication of file description (due to length and special character restrictions). RoyZuo (talk) 21:59, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@RoyZuo, I'm of the opinion that 1 properly titled, categorized image with full SDC is much more valuable than 10 files with bad names and minimal categorization. If a file is being correctly categorized when it is uploaded. I appreciate the thought in trying to get as many photos as possible on commons, but I'm in the quality over quantity boat. (if you aren't going to do it when you upload, adding some form of tracking catagory like "uploads by Prosfilaes needing renaming" would be useful if someone wants to rename the files after upload.

@Prosfilaes, @Jmabel's point isn't about the language, it's about the actual name itself. the language is only mentioned due to the risk of translation garbling the message. A well titled file in german is infinitely better than a bad English file name. All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 02:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@RoyZuo: the issue is not as much that Phyrexian uploads his media with too generic, broad filenames, but more that he actively opposes name changes. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 17:43, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Let's look at his latest upload; File:Roma - Sant'Agnese in Agone 8215.jpg. There's nothing in the title or description beyond the general location. In this case, it's not a "poor quality duplication of file description"; the filename is the exact same as the description. I do not think that anyone should have to look at the categories to figure out what a file depicts. This is a very busy picture, and even with the categories, could use some description to explain what's going on. Where's the pipe organ? Where's the tomb -- I sort of see it, but is that all, does it start two meters off the ground, or does it start on the ground outside the picture?--Prosfilaes (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

The issue here is not my files, is the chasing by Grand-duc to my edits. An issue that I hope is settled now. We can open a different discussion about file names on Commons, that would belong to some other page.

By the way, just as an example and out of curiosity, I pushed three times the Special:Random/File button, and I got those 3 average Commons files: File:Elche - panoramio (22).jpg, description in an unknown language: "elche", 1 category; File:布袋鎮天宮 Budai Zhantian Temple 20.jpg, description in Traditional Chinese: "地址：625 嘉義縣布袋鎮岑海里新南路6號", 2 categories; File:Yongning Tomb - P1200285.JPG, description in English: "The Yongning Tom (Tomb of Chen Qian)" and in Simplified Chinese: "永寧陵石刻", one category. If I watch back to my upload File:Roma - Sant'Agnese in Agone 8215.jpg I see: description in English: "Sant'Agnese in Agone church in Rome, Italy", so with 3 links to Wikipedia articles (unbreakable since are enforced through Wikidata), and se same is done also in Spanish, French, and Italian, 4 categories. I think is good upload, useful, easy to find, easy to understand, above average Commons standards, and everybody is very welcome to improve the description and categories. If instead this is doing some damage to the Project, I can just stop and spend my times in something else. I don't think this is how Commons should work though. --Phyrexian ɸ 23:20, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Your first example of "Elche" is now at File:Spain, City of Elche, Passeig de l'Estació - panoramio (22).jpg, the coordinates were the hint needed to find out the data (I got the street name from Google Maps).

Another point: if a renaming process keeps your index number intact, will you still object to renamings according to COM:FNC? If no, then the subject is truly settled. Please suggest a guideline-compliant name for the QIC, if their issues are solved, I'll gladly retract my opposing votes. If you will still insist on keeping your quite unsuitable names, then the issues are not solved - and this is totally independent from the plethora of other files that are not suitably named. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:32, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I will keep working on this project the same way I've been doing dor almost 20 years and keep using names that are fine with Commons guideline. If the community ask me to stop I will stop contributing with my pictures. I will keep candidate my pictures on QIC, as absolutely everybody but you stated that the file names are fine according to the QI guidelines. If the community would tell me otherwise I would stop. You shall not vote against my files in QIC to prove your point about how you would like to rename them, as this is clearly an abusive behaviour, as everybody told you. Thank you. --Phyrexian ɸ 10:40, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hmm, about "as absolutely everybody but you stated that the file names are fine according to the QI guidelines. If the community would tell me otherwise I would stop." - that seems to exhibit a deficit about reading ability or even worse, a delusion. There's ample evidence of the contrary:

"I fully agree. The filename and description should detail what the file shows, not merely what museum it was in. Pi.1415926535, 05:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)", you were told the first time separately from me that your naming schemata is borderline unsuitable.
"Phyrexian, please try to use slightly more descriptive names. They can still be simple, e.g. "Item in the collection of xyz museum". And please change the description to include as many details as possible.[...] --Kritzolina, 05:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)", second time you were told that your names need a betterment. Both quotes are from a preceding ANU report about the subject. Then, in this thread:
"Without going into any other aspect of this, I notice you often upload specific works of art and just name them by the museum they were in, and a number. That may be permissible, but it is certainly not optimal. - Jmabel, 16:25, 29 July 2025 (UTC)" -> You've been told the third time that your naming schemata is not the best.
"First, I disagree with the opinions that filenames that say nothing about what is depicted and instead include only the large place in which it was photographed are acceptable. There's an argument that FNC 2.4 applies, and if not FNC 2.7 applies: Contains a coherent description or message that do not describe the subject of the file. However, when you open a noticeboard thread and have multiple people telling you you're wrong, it's not acceptable to proceed with the same behavior. I'd like to see Grand-Duc leave Phyrexian's images alone, but for Phyrexian to add some language about what is depicted to filenames moving forward. — Rhododendrites, 16:35, 29 July 2025 (UTC)": Fourth time the lack of suitability of your filenames were pointed out to you.
"@Phyrexian, Thank you for donating your photos to Commons. I can understand why you need the generic filenames in your archives, but you can change the name of the file when you upload them to Commons, and I recommend you do so before uploading files in the future. If you really need the original filename, put it in the EXIF. As to the policy compliance: Grand-Duc is technically correct in his interpretation of the QIC naming guidelines, and even if it wasn't required, I would strongly recommend you take the 20-30 seconds to accurately name files based on what they depict when you upload the file, as it makes the files very useful for people who don't know how to use the category system. The hounding allegations regarding Grand-Duc are valid, and this could have been resolved with rename requests and a note on Phyrexian's talk page regarding file naming. I don't see any sanctions needed against Grand-Duc other than a warning to stay civil in ANU reports and not mock users who spend less time filing ANU reports than you. All the Best -- Chuck, 03:33, 31 July 2025 (UTC)" - fifth that another Wikimedian pointed you to the fact that your filenames aren't really suitable. Furthermore, you've been told a second time and in unmistakable words that your filenames violate the QIC rules. The first hint to that your practice for QIC is not conform to guidelines is at "The standard for QI is higher than 'non-disruptive.'[...]. - Jmabel, 16:38, 31 July 2025 (UTC)"

On the other hand, only A.Savin told me hat he doesn't concur with my opinion about the issues with your filenames ("Grand-Duc, please stop that nonsense. --A.Savin, 07:47, 29 July 2025 (UTC)").

So, the majority apparently has the wish for you to better name your files, which is also a mandatory course of action for QIC participation, and for me to not push the issue too much. The ball is in your camp, change your working patterns, please. And stop with empty threats of you leaving Commons, the experience tells that people with such an amount of contributions as hobby are addicted and won't leave anyway. You'll better the experience for everybody if you reduce your stubbornness and show a bit of adaptability: you can keep your catalogue number and the community can gain better named files. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 16:21, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

And stop with empty threats of you leaving Commons, the experience tells that people with such an amount of contributions as hobby are addicted and won't leave anyway. - This is needlessly antagonistic FWIW. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Grand-Duc, you've quoted me but you're ignoring half of what I wrote: last time you were here, there was not consensus that the filenames were bad, but you proceeded to try to enforce your view via QIC. That's not ok, and it is IMO reasonable for Phrexian to be upset about it. In the quotes above, there might be consensus that Phrexian's names are not very good, but I still don't know if there's consensus that they are so bad that they must be changed. I would like Phrexian to use better filenames, but all I think we can expect of them is that they tolerate it when other people rename them (as long as those renames retain information in the original, such as an index/number). At this point, however, it would be better if you are not the one doing the renaming. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:34, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Add me to the list of people who thinks that these are generally poor filenames. As an admin, I'm not going to sanction Party A for following Party B around if the reason they are doing so is that there is a problem with Party B's work that Party B seems to have no interest in fixing or even acknowledging, and especially if Party B tries to resist when others try to fix the problem. - Jmabel ! talk 17:59, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Just for the record, after being harassed by Grand-Duc who is disrupting Commons to prove his point, I am being tolt I am: hilarious; exhibiting a deficit about reading; delusional, mentally ill as pathologically addicted to this Project. I have nothing to add, they administrator may or may not take the decision they think are the best to make this collaborative project grow peacefully and defend its Terms of Use, including the Universal Code of Conduct. Bye. --Phyrexian ɸ 20:41, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

That is not an accurate reading of what I, for one, said. It's a rather classic case of a content issue vs. a behavioral issue. You have a content issue; Grand-Duc has a behavioral issue. We tend to have a higher degree of tolerance for behavioral issues when the person is correct on content issues, for better or worse. Regardless, both are relevant. For your part, the solution is very easy: let other people rename your files (or rename them yourself). If you do that, and Grand-Duc still follows you around, hounding you, I will support some sort of warning/sanction against them. But also, I know the value of taking a wikibreak, if that's what you decide. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:53, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

For your part, the solution is very easy - no, the solution not to chase people or stop people who are chasing is much easier. Phyrexian told that then it will be hard to find did he already upload something or not. As an admin, you probably should read what's written and look for a solution (if you decided to participate in the discussion at all), but you do something else.

So Phyrexian told that he works with the archive. The solution for archives is never 'shut up, we will rename it better', but taking the structure, saving and improving it. The structure is 'City - Place number' ('Roma - Sant'Agnese in Agone 8215.jpg'). If you or someone else wants to improve - welcome, use 'City - Place number - blablabla'. Not 'CityPlace', 'City-Place' or 'City place'.

But now if Grand-Duc will do it, it WILL be hounding because instead of respecting an archive you both pushed for too long. You ignored that the QI project absolutely supported Phyrexian and people repeatedly told Grand-Duc that he is not right. He continues and believes that he's right, and you're supporting this behavior as an admin. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 01:02, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

As an admin - To be clear, I am not an admin. I think Jmabel and A.Savin are the only admins who have commented so far.

but taking the structure, saving and improving it - Yes, this is what we are suggesting.

now if Grand-Duc will do it, it WILL be hounding because instead of respecting an archive you both pushed for too long - Yes, this is why I said If you do that, and Grand-Duc still follows you around, hounding you, I will support some sort of warning/sanction against them.. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:29, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

That's a danger in participating in the late night, sorry. we are suggesting - I don't see it (the initial renaming was with another structure), so probably it wasn't suggested in an appropriate way and understanding was stopped by the idea 'you're wrong, you break rules'. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 07:52, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

No problem. it wasn't suggested in an appropriate way. From me: I would like Phrexian to use better filenames, but all I think we can expect of them is that they tolerate it when other people rename them (as long as those renames retain information in the original, such as an index/number). Grand-Duc said I would leave your index numbers intact, as they are, according to your explanations, apparently of importance for you. The request is merely not to object to adding information. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:05, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Are you doing that on purpose, Phyrexian? Why didn't you pay attention to the fact that a description of an idea as "hilarious" doesn't mean that the person who published it is also hilarious? It feels like you're adamant on proving that you're indeed not reading as thoroughly as needed (meaning an exhibition of a lack of reading ability, read as lack of understanding of contents transmitted, wherever it comes from and under reserve of that I didn't make a mistake in using English, which is obviously not my mother tongue).

Furthermore, I didn't disrupt Commons to prove "my" point that your filenames are bad, as it is shared by the majority of responders in this thread. You're working against that majority. Then, I didn't say that a project addiction, which I certainly share, is pathological in nature. That was your interpretation - but, well, the proverb tells "If the shoe fits, wear it."

@Rhododendrites: My sentence with the "empty threat" from above is a response to Phyrexian's behaviour itself. First, I asked him quite kindly (I hope) to make file names in better compliance with COM:FN: Special:Diff/1039228595/1039879776. His response exhibited something that, in the curent light, was a premonition of some stubbornness: Special:Diff/1039220520/1040247953, especially in combination with Special:Diff/1052481749, where he went from a better name to his worse scheme. It feels like he, Phyrexian, absolutely wants to stay in some kind of cozy ivory tower.

Phyrexian, why didn't you react to the suggestion of keeping your catalogue number and accept a renaming that adds useful info? There's an example above: File:Berlin - Museum für Naturkunde 6942.jpg to e.g. "File:Berlin Museum für Naturkunde - Siamesische Hundeföten Alkoholpräparat 6942.jpg" (in German as I don't know the technical term in English for biologic specimens preserved under a liquid like ethanol yet). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

shared by the majority of responders in this thread - but not in another threads. If you ignore another threads, why shouldn't he ignore this? Анастасия Львова^ru/en 07:50, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

As I already said, I'm not answering anymore here after I've been insulted. I already exposed at lenght my point of view, I've nothing to add. AN/U is for discussing users' behaviour issues. If my volunteer work here is thought to damage the Project I'm gonna spend my time somewhere else. If a discussion about what Commons considers an unacceptable file name is open in a proper space, properly notifying the community, I'll be partecipating with my thoughts. Bye, again. --Phyrexian ɸ 09:38, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Not done @Grand-Duc: it would be good if you would not comment on Phyrexian's QIC content in the future, because if you continue it is likely to be considered harassment, but in terms of your past behavior I'm certainly not going to sanction someone for having objected to someone doing things wrong and being recalicitrant when others try fix it. @Phyrexian: if you won't participate further here, so it goes. Several people have made entirely reasonable suggestions as to what you could do differently that would fix this issue, including simply not to resist when other people improve your filenames, and you've rejected them out of hand. If you want to take umbrage and walk away, that's your right, but don't expect to be rewarded for it. - Jmabel ! talk 17:21, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

عراق بغداد

Latest comment: 2 days ago5 comments2 people in discussion

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

Continues to upload copyvios after final warning. Especially File:الشاعر التركماني الخالد فلك اوغلو.jpg is recreated time after time when deleted. All uploads should be gone through. Jonteemil (talk) 12:26, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done. I blocked the user for a month and deleted all his/her uploads as likely copyvios. Taivo (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Taivo Iraq-telafer has recreated all the files. Clear sockpuppet. Jonteemil (talk) 13:40, 31 July 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done by User:The Squirrel Conspiracy (indeffed) but shouldn't عراق بغداد's block be extended? Jonteemil (talk) 22:34, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I extended the block – now 3 months. Taivo (talk) 09:34, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Tsetsokunsang

Latest comment: 4 days ago4 comments4 people in discussion

Tsetsokunsang (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user This new user uploads photographs from unknown sources, or document from sources of unknown copyright status (like https://library.bdrc.io/?type%5B0%5D=Instance&sortBy=firstScanSyncDate_desc), and claims {{PD-old-70}} for some clearly recent images. I flagged his/here uploads as non conform. Could an administrator take a look? Pierre cb (talk) 16:54, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Comment The Tibetan texts should be old enough for {{PD-old-100-expired}}. I deleted the other files, and added a warning. But without some English information, these are of little value. So few people can read Tibetan. Yann (talk) 17:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Qualifying that last: not specifically "English" information; Chinese, German, etc. would be comparably useful. But, yes, Tibetan-only content is likely to languish. - Jmabel ! talk 18:02, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Agree. All languages are welcome on Commons, but if the license status isn't clearly obvious, also adding some basic info in some language some admins/regulars understand is helpful. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:24, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

AdHistory2020

Latest comment: 5 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

AdHistory2020 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

This user does not stop uploading photos from the net as copyright infringement. Stepro (talk) 10:00, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Stepro: I notified the user of this discussion on their user talk page, as you should have done per the above. I also added a final warning and the template above. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:27, 2 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

User:Simba16

Latest comment: 3 days ago7 comments4 people in discussion

There is an ongoing discussion in the Russian Wikipedia about the systematic copyright violations by this user regarding this deletion request. During the discussion, it turned out that he had admitted some time ago that he had been deceiving the community for many years by uploading other people's photos that were sent to him by mail. He's been settting a condition for the people who were sending them that these photos should not have been previously published. After that, he uploaded them as his own works. Please advice what to do with the rest of the user's uploads after these confessions. Quick1984 (talk) 16:35, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Quick1984: Tag them as {{subst:npd}}. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:51, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Quick1984: No, please, don't just tag them as npd! No one just looking at the tag will have any idea what is going on unless they have read this discussion. Start a mass deletion request where you can either reference this thread (with a permalink) or otherwise explain why the license is in doubt. - Jmabel ! talk 17:14, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel: Thanks, that's a better suggestion. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:10, 3 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel: I'm afraid, some users started speedy deletion nominations instead, see [1]. Quick1984 (talk) 07:47, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Shabe: Please stop. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:28, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Sure! Shabe (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

User:יאיר שוורץ 33

Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

יאיר שוורץ 33 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

This user is copying pictures from the net constantly, shows no respect for copyright at all. 0x0a (talk) 11:54, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done Blocked for a week. Yann (talk) 15:31, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Paddy Mc Aloon

Latest comment: 16 hours ago18 comments6 people in discussion

User: Paddy Mc Aloon (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Beyond my unactioned report archived to Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 41#User:Menakei, Paddy Mc Aloon made this edit 08:24, 4 August 2025 (UTC) to File:Façana Carretes 26-30.jpg: omitting transclusion and the subpage.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 12:43, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

What is "transclusion", If I may ask? Paddy Mc Aloon (talk) 12:54, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Paddy Mc Aloon: See Help:Transclusion. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:22, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Paddy Mc Aloon, see Transclusion, it's a technique to embed the content of one page into another one. Here, Jeff basically reports that you wrote an incomplete deletion request which is somewhat of a burden or hassle to clean up. You'd better use the tools available (Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets - use "AjaxQuickDelete") for that which help completing the formalities. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 13:22, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Right. I suggest that you use the automatic Nominate for deletion or Nominate category for discussion tool in the Tools menu on the sidebar provided by the AjaxQuickDelete gadget per subpolicy procedures COM:DR#Starting requests and COM:CFD#Starting requests. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:37, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Why isnt this just enabled by default Trade (talk) 16:39, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Trade: It is, but I can't make people use it. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 16:45, 4 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Not done As with every other time you have brought this issue to this notice board, no admin action is necessary. Failure to understand the weird idiosyncrasies of wikimedia templates is not a blockable offense. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 13:30, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: What about the precedents I cited at Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Blocks and protections/Archive 41#User:Menakei? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:39, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I'm not familiar with the specifics of those cases, but the fact that you have reported this issue, what, a few dozen times, and there are only two blocks tells me that blocks are the anomaly, not the expectation. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 13:56, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: So you are willing to let the subcats of Category:Incomplete deletion requests grow without bounds and without consequences? — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:25, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

I don't think that's quite the argument that you think it is. All of those subcategories are currently empty despite the fact that we have only blocked two users since 2020 (?) for this issue. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 14:30, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@The Squirrel Conspiracy: That is only because I and maybe others have been policing them. Let's see what happens if I stop for a while. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:37, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Policing the categories is appropriate. I think even bringing the issue here for people who do dozens of these is appropriate, but don't expect them to be blocked unless they are basically replying with an "FU". @Jeff G.: do you clearly explain the issue to the users in question on their talk page before escalating to an administrative issue? Can you link an example of how you do that? - Jmabel ! talk 16:49, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel: this is what I sent Paddy on 13 September 2023. Then there were four more edits before I escalated to ANB on 7 July, and then here above on 4 August. These days, I add MUST and mention the AjaxQuickDelete gadget as seen in Special:Permalink/1066192209. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 17:07, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

That 13 September 2023 message is awfully convoluted and confusing. I would not expect the average Commons user to understand readily what they should and shouldn't do by reading that. If this is the form of what you are routinely using as a warning, can you and I please work together on crafting something more to the point? - Jmabel ! talk 05:36, 6 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Jmabel: Sure. Is this the best venue for that? Perhaps we could make a template. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 08:01, 6 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Fine by me. I'm really busy right now, but I copy-pasted at User:Jmabel/Draft deletion problem template to set up a place where we can work in this, and I'll give it a few minutes work now. - Jmabel ! talk 00:13, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Aganachil

Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments3 people in discussion

User: Aganachil (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: I don't think that this user is here to contribute meaningfully. Worst, he's propagating hate speech and racism, at best, he's writing uncouth jokes. Best evidence: File:Aryannations.webp and its description "English: motoryclegang" (it's actually a duplicate of File:Himmler besichtigt die Gefangenenlager in Russland. Heinrich Himmler inspects a prisoner of war camp in Russia, circa... - NARA - 540164.jpg). Further evidence: his other contributions, all related to motorcycle gangs (and often copyvios as screenshots). As far as I'm aware, MC gangs are really often associated with right-wing extremist and organised criminal acts, so I think that such a fanboy may endorse this kind of "culture". Grand-Duc (talk) 17:05, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

This user's uploads are all wildly out of scope as GTA fantasy/roleplay content; this one is no exception. Omphalographer (talk) 20:03, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done Blocked as clearly NOTHERE. Uploads deleted. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Chaheray

Latest comment: 7 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion

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

Continues to upload copyvios after three blocks and threat of indef by Yann after last block. For example File:IRTXI2021-22.jpg is stolen from the club website, which says © 2022 Ittihad Riadhi Tanger. All rights reserved. File:Ittihad Tanger Logo 2025.png is licensed with {{Cc-by-sa-2.5}} but I see no proof of permission so unless it's deemed below COM:TOO Morocco or proof of permission is found, it too would be a copyvio. Jonteemil (talk) 21:57, 6 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done Fulfilled Yann's promise. --Lymantria (talk) 09:23, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

인케

Latest comment: 1 hour ago2 comments2 people in discussion

User: 인케 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:아이리제 단체 genie.png after two blocks for doing so.

— 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 14:59, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply

Done Blocked for 6 months, 2 more files deleted. Yann (talk) 15:35, 7 August 2025 (UTC)Reply