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-reports | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | |||
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 |
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
| ||
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.
copyright violation by KianXBe
[edit]KianXBe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log)
none of these file user own world all are Iranian sports club official logo. Please delete all and block account because user 've already received warning. Thanks, [[User:Modern Sciences|MSes]] (talk) 07:58, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
Done. I warned the user and mass deleted all his/her uploads as copyvios. Taivo (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
Repeated talk page edits and reverts by DB SBRP 15
[edit]Over the past few days, @DB SBRP 15:
- edited another user’s talk page message (courtesy ping @Filker123), which I reverted with a warning in the edit summary;
- reverted my revert, i.e. restoring his edit to another user’s message;
- edited one of my talk page messages (by removing it and then restoring it in edited form, for some reason), whereupon I left a warning on his talk page; and finally,
- reverted that, i.e. removed my talk page message (and then restored it and then removed it again for some reason), before leaving a message on my talk page.
While this is all mildly amusing, I don’t think it’s an appropriate way to behave on Commons. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 22:24, 26 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Lucas Werkmeister: When you report a user on this page, you are supposed to notify them on their talk page. I will do that for you this time. - Jmabel ! talk 05:10, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you! I guess it felt kinda pointless given what he’d done to my last talk page message just a few hours earlier ^^ but I pinged him, so I hope you’ll believe me I wasn’t maliciously trying to hide the report. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:41, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- (To clarify what I maybe phrased a bit confusingly above: The main reason I didn’t leave a talk page message was just that I missed the bullet point near the top of the page saying that I was supposed to do it; otherwise I still would’ve done it regardless of how pointless it felt. And I guess I also assumed that there was no “multi-step process” on the basis that there didn’t seem to be a gadget for facilitating it, unlike e.g. deletion request where I trust the gadget to update all the needed pages for me. But still, I should’ve followed the process, my bad.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:09, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done After a strange interference of a temporary account on their talk page, I did a CU check and found that this account is
Confirmed evading lock of Left page. Indeffed. --Lymantria (talk) 20:50, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Great, thank you :) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 23:41, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- (To clarify what I maybe phrased a bit confusingly above: The main reason I didn’t leave a talk page message was just that I missed the bullet point near the top of the page saying that I was supposed to do it; otherwise I still would’ve done it regardless of how pointless it felt. And I guess I also assumed that there was no “multi-step process” on the basis that there didn’t seem to be a gadget for facilitating it, unlike e.g. deletion request where I trust the gadget to update all the needed pages for me. But still, I should’ve followed the process, my bad.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 13:09, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you! I guess it felt kinda pointless given what he’d done to my last talk page message just a few hours earlier ^^ but I pinged him, so I hope you’ll believe me I wasn’t maliciously trying to hide the report. Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 12:41, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
User:"aritucal007"
[edit]- "aritucal007" (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
Hi ,please blocked indefinitely,this user is a sockpuppet in English Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:%22Articalwr%22) CambourAPPUSA3989 (talk) 14:15, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done as a precaution - only here to promote themselves. @CambourAPPUSA3989: You linked to a WP account - do you have any evidence of another Commons account?
- Gbawden (talk) 15:17, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
- This one: "ucb12" (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information). Yann (talk) 15:29, 27 November 2025 (UTC)
User:~2025-36580-27
[edit]- ~2025-36580-27 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
Please block. User not making constructive edits, just nomination things for deletion randomly. RAN (talk) 04:50, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- Done Blocked the account, protected the files they've been nominating. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 05:12, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
User:~2025-36927-86
[edit]Block evasion. We should consider restrictions on what new accounts can do. I am sure there are more than below. Most already blocked. --RAN (talk) 21:17, 28 November 2025 (UTC)
- User:~2025-36927-86 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- User:~2025-36580-27 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- User:~2025-34613-24 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- User:~2025-32925-15 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- User:~2025-34392-70 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
- User:~2025-34477-45 (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gisella Marengo - 66th Venice International Film Festival, 2009.jpg you wrote that the nominator ~2025-36927-86 is blocked, but I see they are not. You say this is block evasion, but don't say here what is the account in question, and the action itself doesn't seem enough for a block. Who are you saying this is? (I realize I could probably do some sleuthing and work it out but I only have so much time for each thing that comes up.) - Jmabel ! talk 06:21, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
- I blocked-86 as a precaution Gbawden (talk) 14:50, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
~2025-34613-24 does indeed look like a vandal, I will block.
Someone else can look into the others. - Jmabel ! talk 06:21, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
- I added a missing digit for RAN. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 20:05, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
- I blocked ~2025-37392-02 and ~2025-37643-99 today. Whack a mole!
- Gbawden (talk) 14:37, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
.svg/20px-Pictogram_voting_comment_(orange).svg.png){kind=small}
Comment I created Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/~2025-36927-86 and I'll look into a range block when I get off work. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 15:35, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
He passes off other people's photos as his own. When asked, he claims to have permission to do so. Someone should take a look at all his uploads; they all look like copyright infringements to me. The origin of the photos is completely unclear; most of them are obviously selfies of the people depicted and contain no metadata whatsoever. I find this very suspicious. In addition, he has now repeatedly removed the copyvio template from his own photo: Special:Diff/1122781015.
I addressed this with him on his discussion page, but I am far from convinced by his response. Stepro (talk) 14:38, 29 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Stepro: I just dropped a note on their page (under your exchange with them) suggesting strongly that they read COM:THIRD. As I'm sure you know, there are several tricky issues involved in uploading third-party materials, and I find it is usually best to aim people at that page for an overview. We'll see if they absorb it or not. Not sure if any further action is needed at this time. - Jmabel ! talk 05:12, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- I really don't think this needs to be posted here. I'm only human, I can make mistakes. And I've already fixed the authorship, but I don't know how to do VTR properly. Schestos (talk) 10:08, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- I wouldn't have a problem with mistakes, which is why I wrote to you on your discussion page first. Repeatedly removing the copyvio templates by yourself is already very borderline.
- But what I do have a big problem with, however, is lying to us here:
- Both of these statements cannot be true.
- And that is precisely why I opened this section here. Not because of possible mistakes, but because of the lack of credibility of your statements. Stepro (talk) 13:00, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Again, my bad. I was hastily trying to correct information that I obviously fucked up. Schestos (talk) 13:13, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- @User:Schestos, please do read COM:THIRD. You are headed the right direction, but you still haven't done what would be needed to retain these pictures. Read that, work out which ones you think are salvageable, start the process to salvage them, and on any that cannot be salvaged please if there is already a deletion request, indicate overtly that those particular files can be deleted, and if there are files that cannot be salvaged and aren't nominated for deletion, start that process yourself. Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 23:31, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- All can be saved. I don't see how they couldn't be. Schestos (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- @User:Schestos: so you believe you can get explicit licenses properly issued by all photographers involved? That is a much higher standard than I would have held you to, and I will be impressed if you achieve it. - Jmabel ! talk 03:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- I said CAN. That doesn't mean will be able to. Technically one could contact them via DMs, but chances are they may not see the message or might discard it as spam. Someone could try emailing Football Australia and maybe they know? Schestos (talk) 03:14, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- @User:Schestos: so you believe you can get explicit licenses properly issued by all photographers involved? That is a much higher standard than I would have held you to, and I will be impressed if you achieve it. - Jmabel ! talk 03:07, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- All can be saved. I don't see how they couldn't be. Schestos (talk) 23:47, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- @User:Schestos, please do read COM:THIRD. You are headed the right direction, but you still haven't done what would be needed to retain these pictures. Read that, work out which ones you think are salvageable, start the process to salvage them, and on any that cannot be salvaged please if there is already a deletion request, indicate overtly that those particular files can be deleted, and if there are files that cannot be salvaged and aren't nominated for deletion, start that process yourself. Thanks. - Jmabel ! talk 23:31, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
- Again, my bad. I was hastily trying to correct information that I obviously fucked up. Schestos (talk) 13:13, 30 November 2025 (UTC)
Moonsun147258
[edit]Moonsun147258 (talk · contributions · Statistics · Recent activity · block log · User rights log · uploads · Global account information)
The above-mentioned user keeps reverting changes to File:Europe-blocs-49-89x4.svg. Even though I have posted on the file's talk page and on their talk page in hopes of engaging in a discussion, but have not received a response. Assadzadeh (talk) 06:40, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have given them a 24hr block and warned them to address the issue Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I don't think that's enough. If you refer to the user's talk page, you'll note that they never responded to any previous warnings that they received. Assadzadeh (talk) 13:04, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment One formal warning. Yann (talk) 17:48, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
User:6D bulk uploading Flickr accounts
[edit]- 6D (talk · contributions · Move log · block log · uploads · Abuse filter log)
This user seems to be bulk-uploading entire Flickr accounts to Commons, picking one account at a time and uploading every photo from it.
Many of these uploads have generic "DSCN1234.jpg" filenames and no description, and are given no category, so are a long way from ever being found or used for anything. 6D has had at least four talk page requests asking them to give the uploads meaningful names and/or categories, but hasn't acted on or responded to this. They may not be checking their talk page.
Randomly sampling 6D's upload history, their intention may be to find Flickr users who have useful photos of cars and airplanes, and then to indiscriminately import everything from those accounts to Commons - including blurry selfies (File:Charaka & Me (5811241710).jpg) and close-up photos of copyrighted packaging (File:SPAM 2009 (3221827762).jpg).
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
To take one such Flickr account, https://www.flickr.com/photos/contri/ has 4045 photos on Flickr. A search for their Flickr username returns 4,011 photos on Commons. A lot of these were uploaded selectively in the past by other Commons users, but 6D uploaded at least a couple of thousand of them last month, including (as with SPAM 2009 above) photos that have been deleted from Commons before. Many of these have generic filenames and no description.
Is this kind of mass importing a net positive for Commons, for archiving Flickr photos that may otherwise end up lost? Or does the required cleanup by other Commons users, and the risk of copyvios, outweigh the benefit? Belbury (talk) 17:01, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- No, it's not a net positive. If they're uncategorised, they're basically useless. Especially if the filenames are bad. I'm interested to hear 6D's comments on this, before saying any more. Andy Dingley (talk) 17:19, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Sigh. Yet another flickr mass uploader who refuses to curate files. I see dozens of copyvio and scope warnings, and multiple requests from users to improve filenames and categorizations, yet no change in behavior. Unless they can come up with a truly stunning response here, I will partial-block from uploading. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Agree with above, I think uncurated mass uploading is a net negative to Commons, since it will take more time and resources for other users to categorize, rename and check for copyvio/scope after the files are uploaded. And as long as they are not cleaned up, they are more useless than them not being uploaded, as it prevents other users who would curate them to upload these images.
- For the amount of uploads this user has done recently (tens of thousands!), it is unreasonable to expect other users to clean up after them. So, I support restricting their ability to upload until they are willing to cleanup all their previous uploads. Thanks.
- Tvpuppy (talk) 20:45, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Through 6D's activities on COM:UNDEL and in DR, I formed the opinion that they have a penchant for a somewhat relaxed interpretation of copyrights and COM:PRP. This may be a (perhaps minor) point to be taken into account when dealing with this report, but I would support the ideas of Belbury, Andy and Tvpuppy (not a net positive for the project due to a lack of curating and it makes sense to restrict the uploading ability). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Some of their more recent uploads (their last few hundred are cars) at least have meaningful file names. I suggest we strongly warn them that they are required to provide some meaningful information about their uploads—description, categories, or file names—but if this is ignored, a partial block seems to be the way to go. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:54, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- The meaningful file names are taken automatically from the Flickr sources. I don't know if it's by chance or choice that the last few Flickr accounts User:6D has transferred have been users that named their own files. Belbury (talk) 09:12, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Some of their more recent uploads (their last few hundred are cars) at least have meaningful file names. I suggest we strongly warn them that they are required to provide some meaningful information about their uploads—description, categories, or file names—but if this is ignored, a partial block seems to be the way to go. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:54, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Through 6D's activities on COM:UNDEL and in DR, I formed the opinion that they have a penchant for a somewhat relaxed interpretation of copyrights and COM:PRP. This may be a (perhaps minor) point to be taken into account when dealing with this report, but I would support the ideas of Belbury, Andy and Tvpuppy (not a net positive for the project due to a lack of curating and it makes sense to restrict the uploading ability). Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 22:11, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- 6D here, I am sorry about that, I will categories many images that I uploaded as possible. 6D (talk) 00:37, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- @6D: That is a good start,, but please provide more detail about how you are going to clean up your uploads and how you will avoid similar issues in the future. You have uploaded over 140,000 files, almost all of which need cleanup - not just categorization, but also filenames, descriptions, and copyvio/scope deletions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- In the meantime, 6D added an author category (Category:Photographs by km30192002) to several hundred uploads from April 2022. Yet 6D also uploaded another ~1400 new files without categories (during three periods of activity around 01:50 UTC, around 05:30 UTC and around 10:00 UTC). -- Gauss (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- 6D has uploaded 1063 more files in the last five hours. They've also batch-categorised several thousand more of their earlier uploads into Category:Photographs by km30192002 and 246 to Category:Photographs by Samson Ng. These categories aren't especially useful for navigation, though.
- Unless I'm overlooking some other edits, 6D has only manually added actual descriptive categories to four files, among those thousands of others, putting File:Airbus A330-223.jpg, File:Boeing 737-84P - 49603785707.jpg and File:Boeing 767-332(ER).jpg into relevant aircraft categories and File:Boeing 737-39K(SF).jpg into a redlinked category that hasn't been created yet.
- @6D: Could you put the bulk uploading on hold for a while, and engage with the discussion here about your understanding of the situation and your intentions going forward? Belbury (talk) 15:18, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- 2000+ more uploads overnight, again only two or three files given descriptive categories and the rest trivially batched into low value "Photographs by..." categories. It's helpful that the files currently being batch uploaded have meaningful filenames on Flickr, but I don't know if that's just by chance. Belbury (talk) 08:57, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
- For the upload files, Yes 6D (talk) 13:16, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
- @6D unfortunately most of the ways that people find images online, especially on Commons, are text-based so without descriptions, categories, and meaningful file names, uploading images to Commons is almost completely useless because nobody can find it. For example, File:Idk (54451446496).jpg could be a useful illustration of that river or that bridge or the area where the photo was taken or of concrete bridges over water in that area or any number of uses that somebody else could think of. But with a name like "Idk (54451446496)", no categories, and no description, I don't know where that bridge is or which river it crosses; I can't even guess which country it's in, so if I'm looking for a photo of that river, I have no hope of finding it. And without any context, even people who enjoy making files easier to find have nothing to work with, which means the file will likely never be discovered or used. Does that help explain why people are concerned here? There are other concerns, like copyright and scope, but those would be easy to address if it weren't for the scale of your uploads. Harry Mitchell (talk) 15:54, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, Because if the file without meaningful filenames and no category, it is very hard to find. 6D (talk) 13:15, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
- In the meantime, 6D added an author category (Category:Photographs by km30192002) to several hundred uploads from April 2022. Yet 6D also uploaded another ~1400 new files without categories (during three periods of activity around 01:50 UTC, around 05:30 UTC and around 10:00 UTC). -- Gauss (talk) 10:43, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- @6D: That is a good start,, but please provide more detail about how you are going to clean up your uploads and how you will avoid similar issues in the future. You have uploaded over 140,000 files, almost all of which need cleanup - not just categorization, but also filenames, descriptions, and copyvio/scope deletions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 01:28, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- I, 6D, promises that I must need to do this things when uploading files and moving Flickr images to Commons:
- Having meaningful file names as possible. If not, a category must be added as fast as possible, if I don't have the knowledge for a specific file, do some research about it. If that's not sufficient, place it in a specific cleanup category (such as Category:Unidentified buses) or create a category named “Photographs by (Name)” (place it in if the photographer names category already exist) and place it in User:6D/Categories. However, even a file having meaningful file names, having categories and descriptions are recommended.
- I would not upload files that out of scope, blatant copyright violations, and random personal photos. If I mistakenly uploaded these images, send deletion requests or speedy deletion requests as fast as possible.
- I will clean up my past uploads as possible and I will avoid similar issues in the future.
- Failure to do this will result user warning on my talk page, if I have 2 user warnings on my talk page, I will have listing consequences:
- 2 User warnings = 1 Admin warning
- 1 Admin warning = Pinging me and Report to COM:ANU
- 2 Admin warnings = Restrict the uploading ability for 7 days
- 3 Admin warnings = Restrict the uploading ability for 1 month
- 4 Admin warnings = Restrict the uploading ability unless I cleanup all of my uploads (fix filenames, descriptions, and categories) 6D (talk) 10:13, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- Block They're still bulk uploading, even during this AN/U thread. That's a serious failure of basic competence and against the Law of Holes. If they can't even stop making it worse while we're talking about it, we're better off without them. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:51, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
- I am categorising files that I uploaded and newly uploaded files have meaningful file names. And also why you vote block me? 6D (talk) 12:28, 3 December 2025 (UTC)
Copyvios
[edit]Someone, presumably the same user, regularly uploads copyright-infringing photos of centenarians, creating accounts with the names of supposed relatives of these people. I came across three such impostor accounts at the moment: Михайловна1, Мария Гадючкина, Lisa Caterham and there may be more. If the admins know how to combat such activity, I hope they will stop the violator. @Yann: , who kindly deleted those photos. Romano1981 (talk) 17:25, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
- Comment I warned the first user, and deleted one more file. I think there is enough ground for a request for check user. Then they could be blocked indef. for socking. Yann (talk) 17:44, 1 December 2025 (UTC)
All uploads since 2025 appear to be copyvios. Please perform a mass delete operation. 0x0a (talk) 12:02, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- @0x0a: If you are bringing a case to COM:AN/U you are supposed to notify the user on their talk page. I will do it this time. - Jmabel ! talk 19:48, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
Might be a bit too late of a report, but just in case
[edit]There are three TAs at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Martinsritt 2022 Sindelfingen 19.jpg, which was started on 27 November. The TAs made each one post to the thread between 27 and 30 November. Two of them made (semi) legal threats. The third one didn't do anything bad in itself, but just by the timing and the content, it seems like the posts might come from the same person or from people who know each other. Right now, things seem to have calmed down, though. Nakonana (talk) 17:52, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Have you considered filing a report at requests for checkuser? We might be able to DUCK block them, but CU can show us any sleeper accounts. All the Best -- Chuck Talk 17:59, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- I don't have any experience in filing such requests. I'm also not sure whether they are socks or meat puppets. Nakonana (talk) 20:05, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Also, while I am not a German speaker, it appears to me that ~2025-36900-85 is at least very close to making a legal threat here. - Jmabel ! talk 19:55, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Yeah they are saying: "Let me tell you one thing: if this goes to court, you, Giftzwerg88, will be in trouble, and Wikimedia will also have problems."
- The other IP says: "I hope the children's parents will take legal action." Nakonana (talk) 20:03, 2 December 2025 (UTC)
- Exactly as I understood it; really only borders on being a threat.
- Legal threat issue aside: it's not inherently a problem for the same person to have more than one temporary account. This is not really under their control, and would be inevitable if they used different devices at different times. - Jmabel ! talk 20:07, 2 December 2025 (UTC)