en This user is a native English speaker. This user is an administrator on Wikimedia Commons. (verify) This user is a checkuser on Wikimedia Commons. (verify) This user is an administrator on Wikidata. (verify) This user is a member of the Volunteer Response Team. (verify)

Archives —
SM: 2012 • 2013 • 2014 • 2015-19
SQ: 2020-23 • 2024 • 2025

Links —
Checkuser Wiki
{{Unfree}}, Category:Bad file message templates
Category:Images with borders
Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/Backlog
Category:Candidates for revision deletion
Abuse filter 298

Note

• "Architectural composition - DPLA" series, Varon, David Jacob (1872)
• File:Broadgate seen from the Cathedral Close, Exeter.jpg

Question about deletion

Hello. You are the administrator who deleted this gallery. Per undeletion request guidelines, I am asking you for the reasoning. Either I or another person had addressed every concern raised in the deletion request. As far as I can tell, the gallery is in scope per Commons:Project scope/Pages, galleries and categories:

Allowable content includes:

• Educationally useful, classified collections of images or other files, along with small amounts of explanatory text.

Given that the initial reasoning was too broad of scope and that I had proposed "political flags would be an appropriate descriptor" (notably without response), I don't see how the gallery could be considered out of scope. That is also ignoring that, upon questioning the reasoning, it was quickly changed to page loading speed (which is near instantaneous) and outright falsehoods about the number of images on the page.

I would appreciate elaboration on the decision to delete, as I sincerely do not see how that conclusion could have been made. Jhpratt (talk) 04:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

The galley was a colossal mess. That it displayed out of date flags and that the sections were incomplete, could, in theory be fixed (though in practice it was never going to happen). The bigger issue though was that it contained a large a number of flags that aren't actually supposed to be in 3:2 ratio. The argument that it served an educational purpose was severely undercut by the fact that people were making factually incorrect flags purely so they could fill out that gallery. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:17, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

If it's out of date, that's an issue with the file, not the gallery, no? While I don't disagree that a file shouldn't be created for the sole purpose of filling out the gallery, having a gallery of pre-existing files was useful for quick reference (and realistically for showing people what the flags look like). If anything, it sounds like individual files should have been marked as out of date or deleted themselves.

flags that aren't actually supposed to be in 3:2 ratio

I presume you're referring to the fact that many flags, such as the United States and Switzerland, are officially 19:10 and 1:1 respectively? In practice having a "standard" ratio for display is extraordinarily useful. Jhpratt (talk) 08:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

I guess I won't be getting a response to this? Jhpratt (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Vandalism/Archive_24#w:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TheCaseOfGoliath, Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/Vandalism/Archive_24#w:simple:Special:Diff/10342086

Hello, my recent reports were not answered by the sysops. Can you take a look at them? MathXplore (talk) 12:34, 24 June 2025 (UTC)

@MathXplore: Please open up cases at COM:SPI. When you do so, please make sure to explain why you feel all of the accounts in question are operated by the same user. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:49, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

Request for Upload Wizard campaign editors

Hello, 8 days ago, I requested the right to create an Upload Wizard campaign. In accordance with "If your request has remained unanswered for several days, consider personally asking an administrator." I am asking you as one of the very active admins on this page: Are there some questions? Some additional steps and/or explanation I should take? Thank you!

(I also added the same message to the talk page of Abzeronow.) Schoeneh (talk) 10:09, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm very much not an active editor on that page, and I don't handle upload wizard at all. Hopefully you have better luck with Abzeronow. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 13:54, 25 June 2025 (UTC)

request for feedback

Hello. I'd like to make contact regarding the proposal Commons:Village pump/Proposals#remove mandatory username verification from username policy. A private discussion with uninvolved bureaucrats concluded that the proposal has not enough participation to be closed currently, and it was suggested by crats to put a notice at the talk pages of the ten most active admins and ask for feedback, which I'm doing hereby. If possible please comment directly in the proposal with your opinion.

(I hope this is not interpreted as canvassing. I was told it's not as the criteria of contacted users is clearly defined, and the proposal was already mentioned at several noticeboards. Please don't feel biased because of being personally contacted.)

Thank you, yours --Krd 09:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

I've commented on the post. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 11:08, 4 July 2025 (UTC)

Yet another file kept at DR, then speedily deleted by you

001 Auf den eigenen Körper ejakuliert.jpg: Yet another file kept at a DR discussion, then speedily deleted by you.

Files that have been kept after discussion are not eligible for speedy deletion (certainly not for scope reasons). If you disagree, can you explain? Brianjd (talk) 09:56, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

As I've said before, I can't see previous DRs when I'm using batch task. I deleted a large number of their uploads at once, and it seems that this one was previously kept (though looking at the DRs, the overwhelming majority of their other uploads have been deleted). Feel free to request undeletion at COM:UNDEL. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 10:20, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

US Graffiti listings

Thank you for your large amount of earnest good work for the Wikimedia project. I wish to suggest you take more consideration with your recent mass deletion requests of US graffiti. From my perspective, some of your mass listings have lumped together images which may individually have very different considerations regarding copyright status - for example artistic depictions v/s simple text, main focus of photo v/s incidental inclusion, modern work v/s older work from back when copyright notice was required, etc. I suggest perhaps you should take time to list only images where considerations are similar in a single request, eg graffiti depicting figurative art separately from graffiti with only simple text words? IMO it rather puts a burden on others to go though the photos in your mass listings one by one to see what relevant considerations there are. Other thoughts? Thanks for your attention. Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Infrogmation of New Orleans I think we have just very different standards when it comes to threshold of originality. You're voting keep for a lot of bubble text and other stylized text, which I think is above the threshold of originality. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:22, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I do not dismiss your argument out of hand that stylized text might be copyrightable, I just think that there are at least arguments that the case is not nearly so clear as for artistic depictions, and listings should allow for such discussions without requiring judgement for everything in a large list as if circumstances were identical. I have not voted keep for text that seemed to me intricate nor artistic, but don't believe every single tag or written word is a copyright violation - if it were, we wouldn't have PD-text nor PD-signature. Again, I think better curation would have advantages - it would allow the obvious cases to be deleteted with more dispatch, and more ease of discussions to make determinations on possible borderline cases. (And including old PD-US-no notice images in listings IMO is not appropriate and distracts from what you are trying to do.) Cheers, -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:47, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

Sockblock query

Hi there, I'm looking into an unblock for Peachy1621 on en-wiki. Details at en:User talk:Peachy1621#Copyright issues, unblock, etc. You sock-blocked them over here, so I'd like to know if you have anything to add. -- Asilvering (talk) 16:20, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

@Asilvering: I responded there, but Peachy1621 is a sock of one one of this project's more persistent trolls, Crimea Republic. Looking at the logs, I blocked around 20 accounts at the same time that I blocked Peachy1621. Some of the Crimea Republic socks are globally locked, but I don't always go to SRG when I should. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Interesting. Was that connection made via Frenchman1953, by chance? -- asilvering (talk) 23:42, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

@Asilvering: I don't remember which account triggered the investigation, and I'm not able to publicly discuss the technical evidence, though any English Wikipedia CheckUser is able to see it at https://checkuser.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons/Crimea_Republic.

I am, however, able to tell you that all of the following accounts were blocked at the same time: Baraem, Iloveflag, Flags18, RedMeansStop, Super FileSaver, Algerian Flags, Maps for kids, Stack the games, Flagmapes, Funfridayschool, Schools1233, GaelMehDude, Flagmap2, FlagGuy24, Peachy1621, Auseronline, EATMEWHILEIMHOTT!, Boarduser91, Frenchman1953 and they're tagged as socks of Crimea Republic. That much is in public logs. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

The reason I ask about that specific account is because that one (according to Peachy, whom I have found no reason to disbelieve so far) was shared between two editors, the other one of whom socked more extensively, and whom I could easily believe is a persistent troll on Commons. Doesn't look like we have any of these other accounts associated with them, though, so that's interesting. Thanks. -- asilvering (talk) 00:16, 9 July 2025 (UTC)

Help/guidance with my talk page

Hello! First of all, thank you very much for my unblock here on Wikimedia Commons! I am very grateful to you. Secondly, I have a question regarding my talk page if you could help me with, namely: is it ok for me now to blank several sections of it (on the English Wikipedia, users can blank their talk pages for example if they want or need to)? I am asking you this question because I do not want to disrespect a certain rule here on Wikimedia Commons which would state otherwise and I do not know if I can erase a certain segment/discussion of my talk page here as I would be able to on the English Wikipedia. Therefore, I would only want to do it if it is allowed and if an admin agrees. Your guidance is helpful in this regard. All the best and many thanks once again for my unblock! Rosenborg BK Fan (talk) 04:14, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

@Rosenborg BK Fan: I would recommend dumping everything in an archive instead of deleting it, in case you need to find something later, but there's no issue with you clearing out your talk page. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:10, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

I see, thank you for your reply. The archival process is also an option worth considering, but I would opt for erasing several outdated and no longer relevant sections from my talk page now. Normally, I don't need to go back to those ones or if I would, I would simply check the history of my talk page. Many thanks for your confirmation and for my unblock. I am deeply grateful to you! I truly wish you all the best and plenty of success here on Wikimedia Commons! Rosenborg BK Fan (talk) 05:14, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

P.S. Also, regarding the archival process, I don't know how to create an archive on my user page. Can you please help in this regard as well? I would be very grateful to you. All the best once more! Rosenborg BK Fan (talk) 05:22, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

There are several options at Commons:Talk_page_guidelines#Archiving. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Re. Commons:Deletion requests/Galleries of Olympic and FIFA flags

Can you please undelete Flags of the Nations at the Olympics and the Paralympics? This gallery was deliberately not included in the nomination. Omphalographer (talk) 09:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

 Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)

FCK HMS

Hello. Could you please explain why do you state that I took some original file and run through the filter when it’s not the case? Do you believe there was some filter here as well? You have also stated that it’s unused which is not the case as well. Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It shouldn't have been included in that nomination. I've struck that one out. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 14:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

I appreciate it! Thank you. Regards, Oleg (talk) 15:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)

You reverting me on COM:BLOCK

If you've seen the talk page, I've proposed the addition you just reverted (Commons talk:Blocking policy#Section "Before blocking"), but after a few days of not getting a response, I thought I could make the change unilaterally. I encourage you to post your thoughts. When consensus is not given for a few days, the user thinks they can make the change themselves. Faster than Thunder (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Question

Hi. Would you mind closing Commons_talk:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#Explicitly expand F10 to include AI? since it's been open for 5 months now and has unanimous approval? I feel like it should be officially closed by an administrator instead of just being archived given the subject and that it involves modifying the policy. Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 07:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Re. Flags of country subdivisions

Can you please undelete Flags of country subdivisions? This gallery was deliberately not included in the nomination, and it wasn't meant to be deleted, but discussed how the gallery looks in a good state. It's notable enough to keep this gallery, as I cleaned them up already. Alexphangia Talk 08:55, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

It was specifically named as one of the problem galleries at the Village Pump thread. I can userfy it for you if you want to convert it to a collection of smaller, more focused galleries, but I urge you to read the discussion and the close rationale here first. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 09:37, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

I understand this thread, but this gallery was used to have clearly defined to include "only first-level subdivisions" and it contains around 600 images of flags I guessed, and it was the main gallery page for the corresponding category. This gallery page was literally related to "country subdivisions" and I don't want to lose my mind, because I have worked very hard over the last years under this section. I would spy to any new edits on that gallery page to prevent the another vandalism and disinformation and keeping it usable again. Alexphangia Talk 09:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)

Commons:Deletion requests/File:Truncated square tiling circle packing2.png

Hi, this is not a valid reason for keeping this file. Many images in Category:Vector version available have been deleted in favor of the new SVG version. ChemSim (talk) 05:51, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I disagree. Since it's a trace, if you delete the original, you break the attribution chain. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 06:38, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Yes, but the PNG file will still be linked in the new SVG version, even if as a red link. There is no need to keep inferior PNG version. In addition, it is PD material so no copyright reference or so is needed. ChemSim (talk) 07:01, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

I undid my close. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:08, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

Please have a look at this DR filed by you. It's the exact same thing. The replacement file File:Flag of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution.svg is attributed to the inferior version. Could you now please delete File:Truncated square tiling circle packing2.png as well? Best, ChemSim (talk) 08:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

FYI: I have restored the file in Commons:Deletion requests/File:RNLI FLAG.png. ChemSim (talk) 07:26, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

היי

העלתי לפני תקופה את הקבצים המצורפים מתוך מחשבה כי אני הוא בעל הזכויות עליהן . אך לאחרונה פנה אליי בעל הזכויות האמיתי על צילומים אלו (ר' אשר אריאלי במתיקות התורה) ודרש להסירן . אשמח באם תוכל להסירן בכדי להימנע מתביעה משפטית . תודה לך

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D7%A8%27_%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%A8_%D7%90%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%99_%D7%91%D7%9E%D7%AA%D7%99%D7%A7%D7%95%D7%AA_%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94.jpg אברהם אבא (talk) 10:07, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

 Done The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:38, 29 July 2025 (UTC)