Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems

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

• Community portal
  • introduction
• Help desk
• Village pump
  • copyright
  • proposals
  • technical
• Administrators' noticeboard
  • vandalism
  • user problems
  • blocks and protections

This is a place where users can communicate with administrators, or administrators with one another. You can report vandalism, problematic users, or anything else that needs an administrator's intervention. Do not report child pornography or other potentially illegal content here; e-mail legal-reportswikimedia.org instead. If reporting threatened harm to self or others also email emergencywikimedia.org.
Vandalism []	User problems []	Blocks and protections []	Other []
Report users for clear cases of vandalism. Block requests for any other reason should be reported to the blocks and protections noticeboard.	Report disputes with users that require administrator assistance. Further steps are listed at resolve disputes.	Reports that do not suit the vandalism noticeboard may be reported here. Requests for page protection/unprotection could also be requested here.	Other reports that require administrator assistance which do not fit in any of the previous three noticeboards may be reported here. Requests for history merging or splitting should be filed at COM:HMS.
Archives
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	126, 125, 124, 123, 122, 121, 120, 119, 118, 117, 116, 115, 114, 113, 112, 111, 110, 109, 108, 107, 106, 105, 104, 103, 102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1	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	102, 101, 100, 99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90, 89, 88, 87, 86, 85, 84, 83, 82, 81, 80, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73, 72, 71, 70, 69, 68, 67, 66, 65, 64, 63, 62, 61, 60, 59, 58, 57, 56, 55, 54, 53, 52, 51, 50, 49, 48, 47, 46, 45, 44, 43, 42, 41, 40, 39, 38, 37, 36, 35, 34, 33, 32, 31, 30, 29, 28, 27, 26, 25, 24, 23, 22, 21, 20, 19, 18, 17, 16, 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

^{Translate this page}

Administrators: Please make a note if a report is dealt with, to avoid unnecessary responses by other admins.

purge Admin backlog

---

Copyright:

• Copyright violations: ~157
• Unfree Flickr files: ~2
• Recent unfree Flickr images: ~2
• No license since 29 October 2025: ~202
• No permission since 29 October 2025: ~13
• No source since 29 October 2025: ~5
• Media uploaded without a license as of 2025-11: ~143

Other:

• Duplicates: ~53
• Advertisements/spam: ~2
• Personal photos/selfies: ~5
• Other speedy deletions: ~211
• Categories for discussion: 84 months
• Media requiring a split up: ~0
• Requests for unblock: ~4
• Undeletion requests: ~17

Protected edit requests:

• Full protection: ~41
• Interface admin: ~10
• Technical: ~1
• Template protection: ~6
• Protection level: ~0

See also: DR, HMS, …

COMMONS DISCUSSION PAGES

• Commons Help desk
• Village pump (general discussion)
  • Copyright
  • Proposals
  • Technical
• Graphics and photography discussion
  • Photography critiques
  • Image improvement
    • Illustration workshop
    • Map workshop
    • Photography workshop
    • Video and sound workshop
• Categories for discussion
• Undeletion requests
• Deletion requests
• Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard
• Translators' noticeboard
• Work requests for bots

---

• Contact administrators
  • Vandalism
  • User problems (Dispute resolution)
  • Blocks and protections
• Bureaucrats' noticeboard
• CheckUser requests
• Oversight requests

---

• Telegram
• IRC ^webchat
• Commons mailing list (archive)
• Commons' bugs on Phabricator

Note

• 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 Klgchanu

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

User uploads images under false licenses and then becomes rude when addressed. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 15:24, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

 Comment Account created 8 days ago, Special:Log/Klgchanu of 8 images 5 have already been deleted. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:32, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

We are currently discussing the wrong photo license. Please delay the process.

1. Commons:Deletion requests/File: 현무 4-4 발사.jpg

• ^^^^ this appears to be a bad link. Most likely Commons:Deletion requests/File:현무 4-4 발사.jpg. - Jmabel ! talk 01:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

2. Commons:Deletion requests/File: 하이코어 극초음속 발사체.jpg

Klgchanu (talk) 23:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

Users continue to upload non-free material under incorrect licenses, which is problematic. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 17:14, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Ziv It’s surprising. You reported it as belonging to the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) without even checking the source.

File:Hypersonic Missiles,The Front Line of the Arms Race (Defense Prime Episode 82) (Defense Media Agency).webm

and File:Launching Ceremony of the Jang Bogo-III Batch-II 1st Ship, Jang Yeong-sil.webm is SOUTH KOREA.

You said 'The video footage uses images not taken by the Korean Central News Agency.'

It's KFN(Defense Media Agency) and Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN).

This confirms that @Ziv filed a report without properly verifying the source.

Klgchanu (talk) 17:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Klgchanu: What you are doing on Commons:Undeletion requests/Current requests is spam. This page is only intended for restoring already deleted images, not for preventing a deletion. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 17:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Copyright is interpreted by the user as they see fit, like "The image was used by a government agency and must also be free of copyright." זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 18:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Ziv I am raising an issue with the fact that you filed a deletion request without verifying the source.

If you had clicked on the source even once, you would not have reported it for deletion.

Klgchanu (talk) 18:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@Ziv oh, I mistake. Last time requested deletion, it was processed immediately, so I thought it would be the same this time. Klgchanu (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

All your uploads have either been deleted or their deletion is currently being discussed. Just a side note, and a reference to the user disk of User_talk:Revi_C.#Other uploads by Klgchanu. I don't believe a constructive cooperation with Klgchanu can be expected here; rather, it would only be exhausting if every upload had to be discussed in detail. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 19:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

It started by you making all quick deletion requests. (including mistakes)

As you have requested a quick deletion, I think you should also be responsible for the act.

As I said, please check the source by pressing the link at least once before requesting deletion. It seems to me that it was just copied and pasted.

Klgchanu (talk) 19:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Another false claim! Do you really think I wouldn't check your sources? זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 19:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

You did it. You said 'The video footage uses images not taken by the Korean Central News Agency' in File:Hypersonic Missiles,The Front Line of the Arms Race (Defense Prime Episode 82) (Defense Media Agency).webm and file:Launching Ceremony of the Jang Bogo-III Batch-II 1st Ship, Jang Yeong-sil.webm.

It was by South Korea government, and South Korea navy.

I kindly entered all the copyright holders.

If you click the source and check copyright holders once, you didn't claim deletion. I was watching you request deletion in real time. The time of each deletion request was precisely short, and all the reasons for deletion requests were the same.("not taken by the Korean Central News Agency")

That's what I said you didn't check the sources. Klgchanu (talk) 20:28, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I really wonder why you're doing that to me. All my requests for deletion of images are only requested by you or you to ask another manager. Why do you request deletion without even checking the source? I think you are a meticulous person who doesn't usually do this, but I think you are swayed by emotions. I feel like I'm being cyberbullyed. Klgchanu (talk) 04:33, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

@Klgchanu, I'm sorry you feel that way, but this isn't directed at you personally. Checking files to see if they meet community standards and whether copyrights are respected, suggesting files for deletion if necessary, that all is a normal user activity on Commons. זיו「Ziv」 • For love letters and other notes 13:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

OK. I understand your intention.

Klgchanu (talk) Klgchanu (talk) 13:24, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

ICTYVTYC1261212012

• User: ICTYVTYC1261212012 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Continued copyvio uploading like File:Univox Coily.jpg after final warning for doing so. Inappropriate username per COM:IU. Creating incorrect DRs.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user for a week, all uploads are deleted. Taivo (talk) 13:14, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks!   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 13:28, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Kontributor 2K

• User: Kontributor_2K (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

Hello, please can I request an admin to look at User:Kontributor 2K's persistent failure to understand how to nominate a category for discussion. He simply removes all the images from a cat he does not like and then nominates it for speedy deletion. I have explained to him that the correct way to do it is to nominate it for discussion, and that in doing that he should not remove all the images before the discussion is held and resolved. The cat in question is Category:Crowns in heraldry by country, from which he removed about ten images back to Category:Crowns in heraldry. I have tried to have a collegiate discussion with him but to no avail.Lobsterthermidor (talk) 21:39, 1 November 2025 (UTC)

 Comment, convenience links:

• User talk:Kontributor 2K#Category:Crowns in heraldry by country
• Commons:Categories for discussion/2025/11/Category:Crowns in heraldry by country

Tvpuppy (talk) 00:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

User:207.241.245.140 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user/204.210.149.11 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

• User: 207.241.245.140 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user/204.210.149.11 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log) block user

User is changing their IP for the sake of placing multiple votes. --Trade (talk) 17:52, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked both for a week. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Lvova

What does that mean "Your name is becoming more and more a household word." [1] ? I don't understand this user's relentless pursuit, although we disagree on closing the photo nomination process in QIC. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 17:58, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

If their native language is Russian (as the username implies) and they used Google translate, it suggests that the original Russian expression would have been "имя нарицательное" which kind of means "famous but not necessarily in a good way"[2], sort of? Nakonana (talk) 21:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)

Strange place for Sebring to ask. So after one request he told me that it is boring to behave politely and then went here because decided to be offended by relentless pursuit (what?.. no, I understand the translation), and didn't notify me. The problem on QI was very similar, it's boring to notify.

Nakonana gives the good answer on the question, I am not sure what to add. Probably I can mention that for me after that talk Sebring is a reason to take a rest from QI, because recently a lot of newcomers did some mess and I tried to manage it, so if I have someone who is bothering this process, it may be chaotic further, why not. I believed before that restless pursuit is not 3 messages and such decision, but now I have new horizons. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 08:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

@Lvova: The original issue was just that you closed consensual review of an image on Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list prematurely (less han 48 h after the last entry) and Sebring12Hrs reopened it - correctly IMO, but without an edit summary. In addition, I suppose that the explanations on Sebring12Hrs' talk page may be rather hard to understand. This may be due to language problems or may be it's just that I personally do not understand this. In the meantime someone moved the image back from CR to the general section where it got declined. This is rather odd and I wouldn't do anything like this ever, but the outcome looks o.k. to me. I would prefer reverting an image to "/Nomination" as long as it is not in CR yet (with an appropriate comment), i.e. if someone set it to "/Discuss" without a vote. Or I would just wait for 48 h after the last entry if the image can be promoted or declined or until 8 days of consensual review are over in all the other cases. Anyway, I don't see any reason for hot disputes and please do not feel offended and please also try to avoid wording that could be considered offensive. I see no convincing reason for administrative action or for staying away from Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list, but that is not really any of my business, of course. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 10:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Robert, if Sebring didn't understand the phrase, it doesn't mean that the language problem is on my side. I can understand that 'if smth is on CR let's wait more', but I explained my action in my edit, and he

- could make an edit summary,

- could move it from CR by himself

- could answer me normally on the request.

He didn't do anything of it because it is BORING (probably it's interesting to say that 3 phrases on his talk page is a relentless pursuit). This is the problem, it is too BORING for him to be polite. I didn't cancel his edit, did nothing to fight that it should be closed exactly in my chosen way. And even after his rudeness, I'm not an author of the request here; probably should, but I don't try to behave like this.

Also the original issue started when a person sent their image to CR when they should not (after they did this mistake for several times). I corrected it again and again, with pings and explanations, and this time didn't, just closed. I tried to work with the short descriptions of the rules on the page, I helped to find on QI talk page that the rules are broken in every language but English; Sebring did nothing to solve the problem, just behave in the comfortable way. So I'm strongly against your idea about 'you just misunderstood his action', but if my actions have no result but unpolite unreflecting cancelling, it is a good reason to quit. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 11:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

The initial problem is that you marked a procedure as "decline" when it should have remained in "discuss" or "nomination" mode, since the last entry was less than 48 hours old. And regarding "could move it from CR by himself," well, I moved it back to "discuss" myself; I don't understand your complaints about me on my discussion page. Sebring12Hrs (talk) 12:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Moved back - do whatever you want, I am not surprised by this decision from you. Everything is explained. Анастасия Львова^ru/en 13:03, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

@Lvova: Once again, reopening the prematurely closed discussion was correct IMO, even though I agree that the action itself was suboptimal, because the edit summary was missing and because Sebring12Hrs failed to add at least a comment about reopening. However, moving an image back to the general section is very unusual, to say the least. There was even an opposing vote at the time, which means that the nominator could have rightfully requested moving it back to CR once again. So why not just wait until it is at least 48 hours after the last entry? If someone has images moved to CR without a prior vote, I recommend notifying the user who did it on their talk page that they should not do that anymore. Anyway, this is something that happens quite frequently. That said, staying calm and friendly is much better than strong wording (on both sides, by the way, at least in my opinion). This is just not worth it. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

And, by the way, if you reset something to "/Nomination" in the CR section it will be removed by the bot as well. This should be done only for inconclusive results after 8 days of consensual review. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 13:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Robert, I will not do it, I am not crazy, but understand the situation, please: if I will go now and will set /Discuss status randomly for several days in a row, what should you do? Probably you'll try to manage it, for example, mark it is as /Nomination again (or as /Decline, if it was a voice oppose). That's what happened.

I recommend notifying the user who did it on their talk page that they should not do that anymore - it is easy to check that I wrote to this user on QI page, I pinged, I wrote to his page, and did it recently probably for 5-10 people, also put the difference between /comment and /discuss on the visible place, and again, mentioned the problem with the rules even here now. I did everything (and during the whole last month I didn't get any messages against such decisions, it is absolutely not the first case), in a random moment got rudeness from the person who didn't, and after that I am not friendly?

For you it's also easier to give me an advice or decide that my English is so bad, but not to check that you're talking about what has already done. I did something for a month and noone said a word against. If you support his idea, why didn't you come and tell me - let's do it in another way? I am not against another way, but if something has already done, it is not normal just to cancel without any comment; okay, he could not see my edit summary, so I showed it, and what I got? Why I am punished with advices when I tried to communicate? Because I am not friendly enough to the user who told me that communication is boring? Hey, even now he tries to make a conflict bigger, as far as we're talking with you, and he just doesn't understand and continues to revert, even when he knows that it is not a neutral action during a conflict (and again, I am not surprised); I do nothing with it, but do you believe that I am the one who needs an advice here?

Anyway, if you try to stop something - I do nothing bad that can be stopped, I literally wrote that I don't want to do anything after such attitude. We can discuss what to do with the initial problem with random newcomers actions, but why here (and I am not sure if I want to discuss exactly now). Анастасия Львова^ru/en 14:38, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Comment: I've notified Lvova of this discussion. Geoffroi 01:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

@Sebring12Hrs: That should have been done by you per the above.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 04:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Yes sorry, thanks. Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:56, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

Blatant violation of COM:NPLT

Here -- Zimbonte (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

IMO yet it's not a legal threat. However, if it's true what they claim, it might indeed be a mess if "our version" is used for official papers, as it's quite different than the (assumed) real version see [3]. --Túrelio (talk) 13:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

If a file from a Wikimedia project is used outside Wikimedia projects, the "mess" lies with the person using it. For sure not with Wikimedia projects, as per Commons:General disclaimer.

Also, in heraldry, there's no “real version” of a coat of arms purely in terms of stylistic rendering. A coat of arms is defined by its blazon (the textual description found in the decree granting the arms). As a textual description, it allows almost every stylistic interpretation. For example, if a blazon reads "azure, a lion rampant or", then any golden/yellow lion rampant is acceptable, and any shade of blue is acceptable.

A coat of arms itself is not a logo; therefore, from a stylistic standpoint, there is no such thing as an “exact” coat of arms. Nor does the version adopted by a public body have any sort of precedence: any drawing that correctly follows the blazon constitutes a “valid” version of the arms.

That said, it's pretty clear that a municipal administration may adopt (for its own activities and sponsorships) its own proprietary design of the coat of arms, protected by copyright, which in certain respects functions as a logo. The administration may impose and regulate its use, for instance by publishing an informational page on its website, an official visual identity manual, or other regulations. However, this applies solely to the activities of the municipal administration; Wikimedia projects don't fall within this scope.

Moreover, under Italian law, the official drawings of coats of arms (those used by institutions) are considered "intangible assets" of the institution itself and therefore cannot be released under a fully free license, as their use for commercial purposes is prohibited (#11). This makes them incompatible with Wikimedia Commons - and btw, there's still plenty of such images here, uncorrectly licensed, that should be deleted at once.

In short, if a coat of arms complies with its official blazon (that is, with the textual description), there is no urgency for replacement, the claim should therefore be rejected and of course there's no room to evoke any legal threat. -Zimbonte (talk) 18:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Ingvarooo

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

Continued to upload copyright infringing photo despite being warned by multiple users. 0x0a (talk) 06:39, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done. One week block. Taivo (talk) 11:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

Thecameraman arras

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

I deleted all of their uploads CSD F10 (they're all made-up flags accompanied by personal essays in the file pages). IMO, it's clear that they're NOTHERE, and they've already been blocked as such on EnWiki, but since each time I deleted their files, they left a wall of text on my user talk page, I figure I'm too involved to block them. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 10:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done Indeffed as clearly NOTHERE. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:22, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

I've requested a global lock as well so he doesn't move to another wiki. Geoffroi 21:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

User:BOKOBA veroly

This user has uploaded photos that are clearly not his own as own pictures. Examples: File:Présentation en.jpg, File:Excellent.jpg

I was one of the organizers of the event and do not know him. He does not respond to inquiries on his discussion page, even though he edited a Wikipedia project yesterday [4]. Given his discussion page in this project, I think administrators should take a look at this user. Stepro (talk) 20:42, 4 November 2025 (UTC)

@BOKOBA veroly please reply here and explain this. Otherwise we might have to delete all your uploads per our precautionary principle. GPSLeo (talk) 12:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Ice743

User:Ice743 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information) (assign permissions)
User constantly modifying the licenses on flag or emblem files: latest example.
--Kontributor 2K (talk) 11:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

In this example both the original and the new license are incorrect. The file needs a correct license or has to be deleted. GPSLeo (talk) 12:38, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

I wasn't sure if PD-shape was relevant in the example, since it's "own work based", and the linked website claims "Copyright © 2019". Also, I'm still not certain about the relevance of the user's other interventions. --Kontributor 2K (talk) 12:45, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

It has to be some kind of PD-old or PD-gov. Creating a vector version of a raster file does not create a new copyright. GPSLeo (talk) 18:01, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

User:Alachuckthebuck

He goes on after me and threatens to block me cause he thinks I'm a sock Ungulatte (talk) 12:17, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Is this retaliation? [5] You hit some abuse filter[6]. Nakonana (talk) 17:19, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Yes, this is likely a sockpuppet of a known LTA. (I reported them last night, nothing to do until then) All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:37, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

 Done Boomerang block by Elcobbola. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 17:53, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, can you add the socktag? All the Best -- Chuck ^Talk 17:57, 5 November 2025 (UTC)

Uploads by User:AntoineIDE

Hello dear colleagues,

A Wikipedia contributor mentioned me this user, active on Commons since June 2022. I was asked to delete a clear copyvio uploaded by AntoineIDE (File:CF1976.jpg). I had a look on the other files uploaded by this user and most of them are really suspicious. AntoineIDE claims that his uploads are personal work but the quality and the fact there are no Exif make me feel that these pictures are all copyvios. It would be nice if another admin could have a look on his remaining uploads.

On his talk page, we can read that he received many messages pointing his problematic uploads, but he went on uploading files found elsewhere as his personal works. Could we regard blocking this account for a while ?

Best regards, Pymouss Let’s talk - 20:51, 5 November 2025 (UTC)