Jump to content

Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository

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-reports@wikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergency@wikimedia.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
24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1
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
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
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
COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

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.

User Gjhk1

[edit]

זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 21:46, 3 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Thank you for warning the user against copyvios! I warned him/her again against uploading penises. All uploads are either deleted or nominated for deletion. In my opinion that's currently enough. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
They have continued All the Best -- Chuck Talk 06:07, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked as NOTHERE. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:13, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yukitanooki & theinstandmatrix

[edit]

This user doesn't appear to be abiding by Commons:Licensing nor doesn't seem to be acknowledging warnings.

They have recently uploaded three obvious copyvios (File:Mobile Legends Bang Bang 2025 logo.png, File:抖音上中国对巴拉望岛的主权主张（郑和岛）.jpg, File:Baidu Map (Nine Dash Line by China).jpg), and when confronted with open deletion requests of their remaining uploads, also about copyright, removes the DR tags of it ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7]) in hopes of stopping its deletion out of process.

Even when reverted and warned about it ([8]), they removed the tags again ([9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15]) and blanked their talk page ([16]), indicating acknowledgement.

At the moment I recommend giving this user a final warning not to remove DR tags again nor upload more copyvios. If they still refuse to abide by warnings and continue their disruptive editing, they should be blocked. theinstantmatrix (talk) 17:07, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is stated that it is under the Apache License 2.0 and based on Android Open Source Project on Legal Notice. Yukitanooki (talk) 00:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

they just attempted to delete the complaint. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 23:56, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and removed that comment. please stop removing comments. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 06:06, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You kept deleting the file and vandalizing the page, but it is under the Apache License or AOSP. This is stated in the ColorOS screenshot, File:OPPO ColorOS 15 Screenshot.png.

Here is the license that Oppo provides on their website: https://www.oppo.com/my/store/contents/legal/open-source-software-notice/ The other Android screenshot is under the Apache License. You can refer to the website for more details.
Yukitanooki (talk) 00:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You should be blocked for disruptive editing, as you kept denying that the screenshots are under the Apache License, which is clearly stated on their website. Yukitanooki (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I warned both users to stop edit warring.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 02:22, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G., Yukitanooki is removing comments from this page. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 06:11, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And also at least once removed this section. They are (barely) allowed to remove comments from their user talk page, but not to remove complaints against them here. I would support a short block to remind them (Yukitanooki) that was a pretty serious violation. - Jmabel ! talk 15:08, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Info - Yukitanooki has been blocked for 3 months by The Squirrel Conspiracy for socking in DR discussion. Tvpuppy (talk) 19:05, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Socking in DRs is only a 3 month block? All the Best -- Chuck Talk 19:36, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Farrehan Saboori

[edit]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 22:23, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

من ضد آذری نیستم چرا الکی میگی من دارم واقعیت رو میگم حتی مردمان ترکیه ترک تبار نیستند Farrehan Saboori (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand correctly from Google translate, the last post here indicates that the user believes that the people of Turkey are not of Turkish descent. But I leave it to someone who reads the relevant language(s) to sort out what exactly we are dealing with here. - Jmabel ! talk 23:22, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Ebrahim, Mhhossein. - Jmabel ! talk 15:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is worth of one week block. Taivo (talk) 18:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mhomadrsa mabubi 7

[edit]

The user is keep adding a lot of personal photos despit warning. 0x0a (talk) 05:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It appears to be alternative account of User Mhyarjan 7, who is adding these photos to w:fa:بحث_کاربر:Mhyarjan_7. 0x0a (talk) 05:47, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done. Now blocked for a month. Taivo (talk) 18:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Asquyas

[edit]

User has reverted the edits of multiple attempts to nominate their file for speedy deletion under F10. The original file is linked with a Wikipedia article that seems to also be used for self-promotion purposes. Full disclosure, I have not done anything in regards to this user prior to this incident, but this seems like the only way anything could be done. TansoShoshen (talk) 08:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done. The file was nominated for speedy deletion as unused personal file. Now, when the file is used in en.wiki, this is not a valid reason. After the en.wiki article is deleted, you can try again. Also if you have proof, that the file is a copyvio, you can nominate it for deletion as well. Taivo (talk) 18:41, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Riad Salih

[edit]

Riad Salih (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) 

The user keeps flagging Maghreb-related files concerning maps, flags and banners, either nominating them for deletion or tagging them as "unreliable", in what seems like a targetted campaign. Some files may or may not warant deletion, but reasoning with him and suggesting alternatives, such as renaming (which in some cases may be the reasonable approach), seem fruitless. An attempt to restore a file which is clearly a reconstruction of an existing flag was reverted by the user. I prefer to leave this to the Commons administrators to handle. Ideophagous (talk) 08:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this report is silly. I’ve already said what I had to say in here and here, and I’m no longer willing to continue the discussion with him unless needed. Sorry, I'm exhausted. Just look at the user who uploaded the file, and you'll immediately see that he consistently creates original works. (the banner is not used anywhere, fictional, out of scoope)
The user is currently doing this as a form of revenge; he lacks a basic understanding of reliable sourcing. He mixes everything— a banner with a flag, the Marinid dynasty with the Saadian dynasty, and the Moroccan flags found in 1912, none of which mention that they are Marinid (here is the PDF from the museum that keeps the flags; keywords to search (in case someone wanted to check) in the PDF: Marinids, Mérinides, Merinide).
To be honest, he isn’t qualified on these topics. His sources are mostly Wikimedia files or amateur blogs, which don’t hold much value when it comes to accuracy. He shows no attention to fact-checking or making any real effort. I told him to take his time and search thoroughly, but he is always in a rush. The first time he argumed about it my nominations, he said they were real, then he said they might be fictional, and now he’s suggesting we should rename them. It’s clear he’s rushing through everything.
If any admin wants expanded details, feel free to notify me, not only about this fictional banner but also about all my nominations, one by one. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 09:33, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

C.Suthorn

[edit]

C.Suthorn (talk · contribs) -- straight after the 2 weeks block (imposed by Pi.1415926535 -- see archived report) expired, continues exactly with the same stuff -- see Category:Bundesglasfaser. Absolutely discussion-resistant--A.Savin 18:58, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This looks unacceptable IMO. I also wonder whether the other recent activities by this user are much better. The user took photographs of a political protest of a very small number of persons. These can be found in Category:Nicht meine Regierung! Handmaidstaleriot. Wir fordern eine klare Abgrenzung und die Ablehnung jeder Zusammenarbeit mit der AfD. Intersektional feminisistischer Protest zwischen Kanzleramt und Reichstag 2025-04-04. At least the descriptions of these files look problematic. Each of the description fields consists of seven more or less different parts. These contain lots of keywords, even including some brand names, most of which have very little apparent connection to what can be seen on the photos. This looks like an attempt of search engine spamming misusing brand names and product names. In addition, these photos are categorized in Category:Videos of 2025 from Berlin, not just the single video fle File:Nicht meine Regierung! Handmaidstaleriot. Wir fordern eine klare Abgrenzung und die Ablehnung jeder Zusammenarbeit mit der AfD. Intersektional feminisistischer Protest zwischen Kanzleramt und Reichstag 2025-04-04 18.webm. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 22:16, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perfectly appropriate to document a small but creative demonstration, but it's an awful lot of very similar photos, each with a wall of highly repetitive text. - Jmabel ! talk 22:27, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@C.Suthorn: how do you believe this plethora of photos of a few fibre optic installations is in scope? What precisely is the supposed educational value of having more than a handful of such photos? I've seen you do some good work in the past, but this just seems to me to be totally counterproductive, to the point of being a detriment to the project. (Sie kann mir antworten auf Deutsch ob dass einfacher ist.) - Jmabel ! talk 22:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm curious, what are those cables actually? are they part of some project, or just stray cables neglected by their owners/maintainers? RoyZuo (talk) 22:34, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These photos are about a dilapidated distributor box that provided the internet connection for an official German constitution anniversary - just once. The cables are light-wave cables. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 23:21, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To whom it may concern: I went and renamed the bunch of images about the political demonstration under the rationale COM:FR#FR3 (there was a typo "feminisistischer <-> feministisch"), but also as the filenames were against the guideline against long names. Normally, I would expect the same rationale to hold true with the category name, but I do not know whether I'm right about this. Should the category be moved, too? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:45, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ✓ Done User indefinitely blocked for continuing to upload OOS files right after getting unblocked, failure to get the point. They may get unblocked only with a compromise to stop the behavior that led to the block. Several files from the non-existent OOS category were deleted, too. --Bedivere (talk) 23:46, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infolearner23

[edit]

Infolearner23 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Repeatedly uploading copyrighted images --Chtrede (talk) 08:33, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Last warning sent, all files deleted. Yann (talk) 10:07, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: File:Witbooi in 2025.jpg This is another one, just uploaded some minutes ago --Chtrede (talk) 12:03, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And another one the user just uploaded again File:Official portrait, 2025.jpg --Chtrede (talk) 12:24, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And one more File:Witbooi Offical Photo.jpg --Chtrede (talk) 12:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked for a week, files already deleted. Yann (talk) 14:14, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Madhavgn007

[edit]

Madhavgn007 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

Keeps uploading out of scope images. Uploads have already been wiped twice and user has been notified about COM:SCOPE. They still keep uploading the same type of content. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 19:43, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked as NOTHERE. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 19:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apply for a limited expiration date on my block on Commons

[edit]

Good evening, dear Pi.1415926535 administrator,

I would like to apologize for the poor quality contributions I have made, as well as for my failure to comply with your warnings, which unfortunately led to the blocking of my account.

Despite this situation, I respectfully request clemency. I would like, if possible, for you to consider temporarily unblocking my account, or for the block to be limited in time, with a clearly defined expiration date.

I sincerely thank you for your attention to my request, and please accept, dear Pi.1415926535 administrator, the assurances of my highest consideration.

Here is the link that summarizes my blockage : Special:BlockList/Blessingedi76 Blessingedi76 (talk) 19:58, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose Your partial block will be lifted when you show that you understand the reasons for it and have taken steps to rectify the problem. Blocks are preventative, they are not intended to be punitive. Abzeronow (talk) 20:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good evening dear administrator, noted. Blessingedi76 (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And also I would like to ask for your clemency so that you can show me another way that exists to make a demonstration on Commons. Blessingedi76 (talk) 21:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
?? Trade (talk) 21:05, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To me, they are just repeating their request for an unblock or the shortening of the their partial block. Since this partial block is not a punishment, there is no need for "clemency", the partial block will be lifted when the user has demonstrated that they have the ability to make productive edits. Abzeronow (talk) 21:52, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that my partial blocking is the result of poor-quality contributions that did not comply with Commons rules and standards, despite the warnings I received. I fully acknowledge my mistakes and realize the importance of contributing constructively, rigorously, and in compliance with the project's rules.
To address this, I took the time to reread the help pages and the essential guidelines for contributing to Commons, particularly those related to the quality of uploaded files, copyright, and file descriptions. I also committed to improving my education and asking questions before contributing if I have any doubts.
Thank you for your understanding and I remain at your disposal for any further information. Blessingedi76 (talk) 20:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please disclose your plans and ideas on how, if at all, you plan to participate in future Commons:ISA Tool/Challenges. As already disclosed, your usage with these programs on a likely mislead financial motivation (you forgot to mention foundation:PAID among the rule pages you read - you were likely expecting a financial gain stemming from Commons edits) is the root cause of your block. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 21:40, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I participated in this campaign with the aim, first, of contributing to Commons, and second, of winning an award. However, I did not go about it well. That is why I received numerous warnings and finally a block. In any case, I apologize profusely for my bad behavior and for not respecting the rules established for the campaign. Blessingedi76 (talk) 22:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Grand-Duc: I don't think foundation:PAID applies to entering contest sponsored by organizations associated with the Foundation itself. It would never have occurred to me to do such a thing. Uploading with the tags related to the competition seems to implicitly indicate that you are competing for a possible financial reward. Did any of the participants make any further disclosure?
@Blessingedi76: I suggest you hang back for a month or two. You created quite a mess, which other people had to try to clean up. Let people cool down a little before you resume activity. Also, when you come back (but please, as I said, wait a month or two before dealing with that), please be clear what exactly you intend to work on that is unlikely to create similar problems. - Jmabel ! talk 23:49, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I know that PAID is most likely not intended for in-Wikiuniverse activities. I used it only as argument to illustrate that Blessingedi76 seemed to get sidetracked: in his unblocking request, he wrote about licensing and copyright, scope and file descriptions, saying that he understood the zoo of policies. But he never wrote about the issues at hand: spamming bad structured data. That's why I pointed out that, while he seemed to try to make a sweeping grasp at any imaginable policy, he missed something related to his suspected motivation. So, if he truly wants to show kind of a kowtow to get unblocked, then he should have taken stuff like PAID, as he did with other mainstays of our project, into consideration. On the other hand, the wording "You must disclose each and any employer, client, intended beneficiary and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation." does presently not directly exclude in-universe activities, so, expecting a monetary reward offered in such a competition could warrant a disclosure... That should be the Foundation's job to clarify, though.
@Bedivere, about AI: instead of AI, I'd rather say the pattern of remarks is more likely stemming from the educational / professional background of the applicant (cf. his user page). I got the distinct feel of a try at mollifying (the people with blocking power), using psychological techniques. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 01:12, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, it's pretty easy to generate remarks like that using ChatGPT. I think it's pretty obvious these are not their work. Bedivere (talk) 01:28, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've got a feeling these remarks are all AI-generated... Bedivere (talk) 00:57, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. I would expect to see actual productive edits in other namespaces / projects before I would consider unblocking from file namespace. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:17, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think their responses are wholly generated by AI. For one sample response, Duplichecker's AI detector scored "Human Written Content - 99.8%, AI Written Content - 0.2%."
This doesn't mean that I agree to their disruptive structured data contributions, though. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 05:33, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any clue why they keep talking like this? I can barely understand what's he's trying to convey because he's being so general and unspecific Trade (talk) 21:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Shubhamchitte1

[edit]
✓ Done Blocked for a week, all copyvios deleted. Yann (talk) 08:06, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New sockpuppets of globally locked User:Wave of Pandas

[edit]
Same useless images of Hong Kong at night. Krok6kola (talk) 15:27, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Krok6kola: The older, currently recognised master account is actually User:Zestsees, on these, Wave of Pandas was a later sock of theirs. Belbury (talk) 15:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Belbury: That is fine. I got the Wave of Pandas account from Meta. All I want is that account (by whatever name) stopped. Krok6kola (talk) 15:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked. All files deleted. Yann (talk) 16:02, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Gatto bianco

[edit]

Gatto bianco (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)

User is requesting the deletion of multiple dozens of files that are obviously PD-simple / PD-textlogo with the copypasted rationale "copyright violation". Skyshifter (talk) 15:47, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for 3 days pending further investigation. Yann (talk) 16:01, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked indef. as per [17]. Closing all DRs. Yann (talk) 16:18, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yann: They are back as 2.194.241.191 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RBL • abusefilter • tools • guc • stalktoy • block user • block log).   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:03, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done Blocked by Bedivere. Yann (talk) 09:18, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conkerpox627

[edit]

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 01:10, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Bedivere (talk) 01:17, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lock on the way All the Best -- Chuck Talk 04:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cymatilus

[edit]

Tpe.g5.stan (talk) 07:41, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Last warning sent, all files tagged or deleted. Yann (talk) 09:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Giuse07licata

[edit]
✓ Done Blocked for a week, and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Giuse07licata. Yann (talk) 09:29, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vaca louca dedo

[edit]

Eduardo Gottert (talk) 16:23, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Blocked for socking, all porn deleted. Yann (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Colin

[edit]

Colin's only contribution this calendar year is this pair of insult-laden remarks: [18], [19]. I'm one of the targets: he characterized one of my edits as "stupid".

I requested that he take back that insult, and have waited well over 24 hours without response; given the infrequency of his recent contributions, I have no way to know whether he saw my request, but since he remarks in one of his edits that he is responding to a ping, I would have to guess he saw my ping as well.

Given that it would be nearly meaningless to briefly block someone who is barely participating, I have no what (if anything) is an appropriate sanction here, but it does not seem to me that being an infrequent participant here should constitute a license to insult people when you do show up. - Jmabel ! talk 05:55, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also: I realize that Colin has in the past been a very good contributor, and I am not disputing that. Again, that is not (or should not be) license to insult other users. - Jmabel ! talk 05:58, 11 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators%27_noticeboard/User_problems&oldid=1019841432"