This is anarchive of past discussions.Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on thecurrent talk page.

• User:Hero Hasan(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}07:04, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. No vandalism, simply self-promotion-only user. No activity after you warned him, all the spam is deleted. Let's try at first without block.Taivo (talk)09:41, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

User:62.46.216.59(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism.

jdx^Re:03:24, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done: Blocked for 1 day, not static. --Achim55 (talk)07:02, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

User:VladimirBoys(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
User:180.195.208.145(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism-only account.jdx^Re:02:23, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Both are reverted and blocked.Taivo (talk)10:14, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Neocon1(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism-only account, already blocked on a few other projects.

jdx^Re:00:51, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked by AntiCompositeNumber a couple minutes before you posted, and since glocked. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs)17:17, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

User:172.58.224.0/19(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Range used by globally banned user Rgalo10 for trolling/disruptive editing. A long softblock suggested.

jdx^Re:01:13, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done for one year.Yann (talk)14:01, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Artnets(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: All his uploads were either copyvio or no permission. Let's indeff him so he doesn't upload more.

Contributers2020^{Talk to me here}15:26, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Warned.Yann (talk)14:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Shame_on_The_One_That_Got_Away_GMA(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism-only account and cross-wiki abuse. Uploaded images for cross wiki vandalism use. See alsoglobal contribs.

SCP-200018:36, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Already globally locked.Yann (talk)13:59, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:Naresh kumar sawariya khatik(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam, copyvio, NOTHERE.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}11:07, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Already warned.This image could have educational uses.Yann (talk)13:58, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

User:188.162.254.152(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism with lots of edits..

Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)12:30, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

This is urgent !!! -Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)12:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done by Krd.Yann (talk)13:55, 14 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:113.210.106.52(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}15:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done anon only block for one weekMorganKevinJ^(talk)03:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

@Morgankevinj: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}09:50, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:223.177.138.145(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}21:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done: 3 months, open proxy or compromised server, blacklisted on several DNSBLs. --Achim55 (talk)07:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Achim: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}13:50, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:Rifal Sharma(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}22:01, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked him for a week. Edits are reverted.Taivo (talk)11:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}13:51, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

User:131.242.30.121(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: racist text added to several files, some would even justify a revdel to hide them.

Denniss (talk)12:49, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the Nazi racist IP for a week. Thanks for reverting! Now I will hide some revisions.Taivo (talk)14:08, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:Awesomus(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism, and a complaint about not being able to upload it, only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}11:18, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. No activity after you warned Awesomus.Taivo (talk)16:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Marium Alberto(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting:Using image with copyrights as new version.19:35, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. The version is hidden.Taivo (talk)10:19, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

User:2A01:4C8:C24:65F1:DD74:94B5:DBAA:F3D4(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: vandalism at VPStang^★14:58, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Blocked for a week, all edits are hidden.Taivo (talk)09:57, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

User:65.246.72.92(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Globally banned user Rgalo10.jdx^Re:23:06, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Let's start with week-long block.Taivo (talk)09:56, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:Merajul Islam.Meraj(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}12:04, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Herbythyme blocked the user indefinitely.Taivo (talk)14:08, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

@Herbythyme andTaivo: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}19:30, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

User:63.143.0.0/16(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
User:65.246.0.0/16(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Ranges used for trolling by globally banned user Rgalo10. Please block at least access toUser talk:Achim55,User talk:Pandakekok9 andUser talk:Jdx.jdx^Re:18:49, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

@Jdx: see alsom:srg#Global block for ranges used for Foundation Global Ban evasion by Rgalo10.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}19:37, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I blocked both IP ranges for a week, but did not revert anything.Taivo (talk)20:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I semi-protected Pandakekok's talkpage for a year and reverted some vandalism. Jdx's talkpage is already semi-protected until December, do you want longer semi-protection?Taivo (talk)20:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

No, thanks. I forgot that I asked for semi-protection two weeks ago. --jdx^Re:21:31, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo: A note regarding the block – these ranges are from New York City so IMO there may be a lot of collateral damage if full hardblock is applied. That's why I asked for a partial block. A softblock also seems to be OK. --jdx^Re:21:44, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

I agree. That's why my blocks are not full hardblocks.Taivo (talk)08:14, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

User:151.43.45.52(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: structure data removalStang^★22:13, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. 3 days block. Thanks for reverting!Taivo (talk)08:08, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

User:174.197.144.251(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Insult atUser talk:Rgalo10Stang^★02:12, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

I recommend partially block174.197.128.0/18(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user editing User Talk namespace.SCP-200005:02, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the IP from User, User talk and Commons namespaces.Taivo (talk)08:09, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

User:102.182.199.113(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism. Cross-wiki abuse.SCP-200004:44, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. 3 days block.Taivo (talk)08:12, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Pitzzaboy(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Uploading numerous images without mentioning the real source, pretending that they are personal work. For instance, uploading weather radar and satellite images that only national weather services can be the author of. He has been notified numerous times. Could now use a warning from Administrators.

Pierre cb (talk)14:49, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a month (2nd block).Yann (talk)15:01, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

@Pierre cb andYann: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}15:16, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Vanth9(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: clearly a vandalism only account, see user contributionsNeko-chan (talk)03:23, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I would not block Vanth indefinitely, if not the comments on his/her talkpage ...Taivo (talk)11:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

User:HarrisDerkins22(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Also some IP addresses that are clearly the same person. I originally made a report atCommons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#User:HarrisDerkins22 because it wasn't initially obviously vandalism, but this is becoming more and more blatant. I'd still like to see at least one other admin overtly agree that this should be treated as vandalism (or disagree with me, in which case I'll back off) rather than be left to act on my own. I was certainly unhappy with these as edits to photos I've uploaded, and reverted those, but a lot of other people's photos are clearly also affected.Jmabel !talk04:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I warned Harris and blocked two IP-s.Taivo (talk)12:25, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

User:27.131.209.70(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: persistent vandalism, inserting inappropriate captions.

Hasley05:19, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the IP for a week. Thanks for reverting vandalism!Taivo (talk)11:29, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

User:97.117.68.4(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: persistent vandalism, personal attacks in captions.Bridget (talk)05:25, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the IP for a week and semi-protected the target file for a month.Taivo (talk)08:10, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Нікк лузер, шавка, шваль(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Harassment

Gyrostat (talk)01:03, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

• Could anyone please proceed this request? This is a vandal doing cross-wiki harassment against me. Thanks —NickK (talk)01:59, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
  •  DonePi.1415926535 (talk)02:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Cukrakalnis places the following files of the flags of theKiev Voivodeship

• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1529-1569).svg
• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1529-1569)-1.svg
• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1529-1569)-2.svg
• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1569-1793).svg
• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1569-1793)-1.svg
• File:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1569-1793)-2.svg

inCategory: Fictional flags of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. At the same time, the description of the files contains a Polish historical heraldic source:Kasper NiesieckiHerbarz Polski. Tom 1, 1839.

Additionally, there is a separate fileFile:Herbarz Polski Kaspra Niesieckiego Tom 1 - Województwo kijowskie.png, where the description is given.The same description in the form of text in Polish:

Województwo Kijowskie, że się pomieścić może z starostwem swojem jużem namienił wyżej. Za herb nosi anioła bialego w czerwonem polu.Paproc. o herb. f.718.Gvagnin w Kronice Ruskiej fol. 24, powiada że chorągiew jego zielona o dwu rogach, w polu czerwonem, z jednej stronypogonią Litewską, z drugiej strony Niedźwiedziem czarnym, w polu białym naznaczona, atoli co się tycze pogoni pomylił się Gvagnin. Bielski fol. 9. krom anioła z jednej strony chorągwi, który w jednej ręce miecz goły, nadoł końcem spuszczony, w drugiej pochwy trzyma: na drugiej stronie, przywlaszcza mu Niedźwiedzia w bialem polu, u którego noga lewa przednia trochę do góry podniesiona.

My literary translation:

Kiev Voivodeship.Previously, a white angel in a red field was depicted on the coat of arms.Paprocki gives a description ofGuagnini in the Chronicle... (A Description of Sarmatian Europe): the Voivodeship had a green banner with two horns. On one side of the banner, the Lithuanian coat of armsPahonia is depicted in a red field (shield), on the other side, a black bear is depicted in a white field (shield).But Bielski believes that Guagnini was mistaken and says that on one side of the banner there was a punishing winged angel, with a drawn sword lowered down in one hand and holding a scabbard in the other hand. On the other side of the banner there was a Bear walking in a white field (shield) with his left front leg slightly raised.

Similar information in the sourceGeografia historyczna - Województwo Kijowskie.

Smaller territories also had similar flags (Powiat). Example:flag of Grodno powiat.

Please stop vandalism. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)19:12, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The issue here is that Лобачев Владимир invented flags. The description he gives does not match the flag. In the description, there is no mention of a various forms, e.g. yellow circle, with "Kijowska" in the center and there is no mention of Ioannes Casimirus, which is still shown onFile:Flag of Kiev Voivodeship (1569-1793).svg. Лобачев Владимир created some flags with conjecture and added his own things, i.e.Wikipedia:WP:OR, and wants to label them as historical. The necessary disclaimers that they are fictional should be placed.--Cukrakalnis (talk)19:21, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

• 
  Banner ofTrakai Voivodeship during the reign of KingSigismund III Vasa
• 
  Banner ofSlonimPowiat,Novogrudok Voivodeship during the reign of KingSigismund III Vasa.

In the above examples, we see that the name of the king on the banner, as well as the name of the horogvi by the name of the voivodeship or powiat, were common practice. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)19:39, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Лобачев Владимир takes two flags from the late-16th century (one of them refixed in the mid-18th century) and establishes a supposed trend on them. In addition, it is incorrect to establish such a trend when there was no known standardisation of flags. Лобачев Владимир proceeded to imaginatively use two different flags (with different shapes, forms, details, etc.) as a sort of template for other flags, without any basis inWikipedia:WP:RS or elsewhere to ground them in reality. The flags Лобачев Владимир created are fictional by definition. If Лобачев Владимир had just made the flagsFile:Troki, Pahonia. Трокі, Пагоня (XVI).jpg andFile:Słonim, Pahonia. Слонім, Пагоня (1747).jpg into SVG versions, then it would have been OK, no problem, because it would have a clear basis in reality. The flags of the Kiev Voivodeship, however, are not a comparable situation.--Cukrakalnis (talk)19:46, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Here is the banner of the military unit of the army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth,and another banner of the 17th century of the military unit of the army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)20:32, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

The shape of the banner with two horns is described in the source. And earlier there were rectangular banners. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)20:34, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

Here is a rectangular banner of theMazovian Voivodeship from the 16th century.https://pl.pinterest.com/pin/63894888442841755/ Chorągiew województwa mazowieckiego XVIw.] --Лобачев Владимир (talk)10:04, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

• First of all, Wikimedia Commons has its own policies and guidelines, so the persistent referring the English Wikipedia ones by Cukrakalnis is irrelevant. The most relevant local policy isCommons:Project scope/Neutral point of view, that states:It is not the role of Commons to adjudicate on subject-matter disputes nor to force local projects to use one version of a file in preference to another. Provided that a file falls within Commons scope, and can be legally hosted, we make it available. Whether and under what conditions it is actually used is a matter for the local communities of the individual projects to decide. Moreover, user Cukrakalnis is known as a disruptive one, who obviously doesn't understandCommons:Project scope. This user usually STARTS and fights many edit wars mostly with removing the categories connected to Belarus and Belarusians (denying history of Belarusians), that is a clear manifestation of chauvinistic national discriminations of Belarusians. If this project still has any real administrators (not just "file removers"), they should stop persistent attempts by this user of disrupting the users, who really contributes to the project understanding the aim of Wikimedia Commons.

The "banner of the military unit of the army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth" is a false statement because the page has no such caption. Лобачев Владимир linked to a random petition that translates to "Dismissal of Właszczykowski as the head of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for treason of Poland". Using such a thing as this is baseless. As for andthe "banner of the 17th century of the military unit of the army of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth", that is also an incorrect statement, and the Facebook post itself says that it is aКаралеўская харугва, i.e. a Royal Banner, which is not a military unit flag like Лобачев Владимир says it is. Лобачев Владимир's flags are mostly based on conjecture and should be labelled as fictional and not historical.

My actions concerning Belarus is just removing categories that do not belong there. That is not a denial of history. To prove that this is not out of the ordinary, no one placesCategory:History of Poland intoCategory:German Empire orCategory:Russian Empire, regardless of the territorial overlap and other things. It's not "chauvinistic national discriminations of Belarusians" when improperly-placed categories are removed/deleted, likeCategory:Coats of arms of Belarus in the Imperial Russian Army. Belarus did not even exist at the time, so how can there be a coat of arms of a state that did not exist, even as an idea? A parallel would be to have a Category:Coats of arms of Singapore in the British army in e.g. 19th century, even if the Coat of arms of Singapore only appeared in the 20th century. Belarus as a country only appeared in 1918, as multiple sources will tell you, including Encyclopedia Britannica. It is nonsense to claim that such an esteemed source would be chauvinistic. So, the problem is not a denial of history on my part, but the misplacement of many categories on the part of others. In fact, removing categories that do not belong in certain places is precisely educational.

My actions do not contradictCommons:Project scope/Neutral point of view, because I am not deleting the files. I am moving them to the appropriate category, i.e. fictional, instead of historical, in this case. In other cases, I move other files to other categories. Commons depends on accurate categorization to be useful. Looking atCommons:Project scope, it is actually my actions that are educational because placing ahistorical flags as historical is precisely counter-educational. Moreover, Kazimier Lachnovič is making absurd claims of me being "disruptive", despite the fact the vast majority of my actions are beneficial and many are concerned with off-loading overburdened categories. Just in the past few days I have categorized several hundreds of files fromCategory:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany into various new categories I created:Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Anhalt,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Baden,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Nassau,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Nürnberg,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Westphalia,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Reuss,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Saxe-Meiningen,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach, in addition to putting many files into the already existing categories. In fact, Wikimedia Commons should stop the persistent attempts of Kazimier Lachnovič against effective and accurate categorization.--Cukrakalnis (talk)09:48, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

User:194.214.51.118(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: page vandalism despite warnings.

Hasley15:58, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a week byNatuur12. --jdx^Re:05:19, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Masumansa1(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism in progress (after warnings).jdx^Re:05:18, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked him/her for a week and deleted more self-promotion.Taivo (talk)08:21, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Mohin Talukdar(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Repeatedly adding their name or other nonsense as captions/descriptions/depicts in unrelated files.Clump (talk)22:20, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done Last warning sent. Should be blocked if behavior continues.@Clump: You should inform any user if you report them here. I did it for you this time. Thanks,Yann (talk)22:46, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

User:113.181.113.123(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: German: Der Benutzer macht den redirect von Dateien unbrauchbarFile:EuroRussia.svg undFile:Flag of China.svg. Als IP kann ich das nicht wieder herstellen. Die redirect sind vielfach in Verwendung. Bitte die redirect wieder herstellen. Danke2003:DE:708:435B:40D9:D684:4C6:6B9F09:39, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Danke für den Hinweis & podziękowania dlaMichała. --Achim55 (talk)16:30, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

User:千村斛免(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Openly admitted to beingw:zh:LTA:QCHM.

SHB2000 (talk)05:08, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Also vandalism-only account and cross-wiki abuse.SCP-200008:48, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

 DoneYann (talk)09:04, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Cundtischarge(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: This is a long-term vandal from English Wikipedia known as Architect 134 (sock puppetry archive). He specializes in porn-themed trolling.NinjaRobotPirate (talk)01:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user indefinitely.Taivo (talk)09:56, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

User:DominicReymysterio619(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Vandalism-only account.jdx^Re:02:55, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked him indefinitely.Taivo (talk)09:58, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

User:2405:4802:15e:ea40:f9f2:548c:c4b4:4596(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: "Musée Annam" is vandalising again, most of his edits are good so please don't undo them or delete any new categories without good reason to do so, just asking for a block as he keeps leaving insults on my user talk page (as is customary once I find his socks and tag him, despite the factI am usually the one defending his edits...).Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)19:43, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

@Donald Trung Please consider asking for semi-protection ofUser talk:Donald Trung atCOM:ANB.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}23:52, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user and reverted 1 edit. If you want to semi-protect your user talkpage, just ask.Taivo (talk)09:48, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any use for protecting "my" talk page as hes'#s not that frequent and if he can't vandalise here he'll go to another wiki where I don't have Rollback privileges so it would (ironically) cost me more to undo their edits, plus if an IP editor would want to message me I don't feel like they should be filtered out because of one (1) annoying bad actor. This section is resolved and generally they hop IP ranges so I don't suspect a block to be effective. Cookie-block also isn't that effective against them, apparently. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)10:36, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• User:Shriramwytfield121(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism only account. Please also hide their spammy edits.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}08:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked him/her indefinitely and hided 3 edits.Taivo (talk)09:45, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}10:57, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

User:Cukrakalnis(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user.
There is a 1920 flag depicting the coat of arms of theBelarusian People's Republic ofPahonia –File:Flag of Biełaruski Asoby Bataljon u skladzie vojska Letuvy.svg. There isCategory: Pahonia on flags. ButUser:Cukrakalnis removes this category. Strange argument:"because it is already included with Category: Historical military flags of Belarus)". --Лобачев Владимир (talk)11:04, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I addedCategory:Historical military flags of Belarus to the filein this edit. This category has the following categories:Category:Historical flags of Belarus,Category:Military flags of Belarus,Category:Pahonia on flags. It is normal Wikimedia Commons practice to seek to better categorize things. FollowingCommons rules is not vandalism. The real vandal is Лобачев Владимир, because he considers actions guided by rules as vandalism and constantly goes against those same rules, especially the ones regarding over-categorization.--Cukrakalnis (talk)12:05, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

No. It's just another prove that user Cukrakalnis is persistently denying the history of Belarusians based on the stereotypic and not specialized source this user likes and ignoring specialized sources this user doesn't like. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)15:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

This statement by Kazimier Lachnovič is a clear indication that this person does not understand Wikimedia policy.Kazimier Lachnovič thinks that following the official policy on Wikimedia Commons aboutOver-categorization is somehow "denial of Belarusian history". Will someone please explain it to him that official policy is supposed to be followed? He clearly does not understand it.--Cukrakalnis (talk)19:44, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

No. I just reasonably connect your previous edit warring to deny the history of Belarusians with this case as well as with the evidence that you are trying to distract the users from normal work in here. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:07, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

There was an issue withOver-categorization on the file that this section concerns. Kazimier Lachnovič's statement just goes to show that his goal is to "protect the history of Belarusians", even when no one is threatening it. Kazimier Lachnovič considers my actions, which were fully in line with the official policy of Wikimedia Commons, as "discrimination", "chauvinism" and something that is not "normal work". A clear indication to anyone with a thinking brain thatKazimier Lachnovič is ideologically motivated and is especially not to be trusted in matters concerning history.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

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

• Still blanking talk page. Obviously didn't take the so-called "death threat" seriously. Well, neither would I.Rodhullandemu (talk)23:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

  @Rodhullandemu:{{D}}, blocked for a week thanks toYann!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}04:59, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Yann: Please reblock without talkpage access, as that access is being abused.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}05:04, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

   DoneYann (talk)08:49, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

  @Yann: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}13:20, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

User:陳畇榛(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Upload Non-free file and can't give any permission.

CreeperDigital13:09, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done User warned, all files deleted.Yann (talk)14:32, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

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

User removesCategory:SVG historical flags of Belarus, which combines vector versions of flags:01;02;03;04;05;06. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)16:59, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Лобачев Владимир is misportraying the situation, because theCategory:SVG historical flags of Belarus is for flags of Belarus, which necessarily must be after 1918, when Belarus first appeared as a state (according to Encyclopedia Britannica, if anyone doubts what I am saying). Definitely not anything earlier than that, especially not from other countries. This is not vandalism. This is ensuring that Wikimedia Commons is educational instead of counter-educational. Actually, Лобачев Владимир is the real vandal here, by adding categories where they don't belong, e.g.1 (adding the category of "SVG historical flags of Belarus" to Samogitia, a region in Lithuania),2 (same as previous one) ,3 (adding the category of "SVG historical flags of Belarus" to Kyiv, a place in Ukraine, among other inaccurate uses of other categories.--Cukrakalnis (talk)19:39, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

• Another prove of denying the history of Belarusians by user Cukrakalnis, which is a clear manifestation of the nationalistic chauvinism and national decriminations of Belarusians in here. Is there any sane authority to stop it left?! --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:52, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
• Does Wikimedia foundation support the national discriminations of Belarusians? --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:57, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič deemsreliable information fromWikipedia:Encyclopædia Britannica to be "denying the history of Belarusians", "nationalistic chauvinism" and "national decriminations of Belarusians". Here is thelink to Encyclopædia Britannica and the relevant quote is "WhileBelarusians share a distinct ethnic identity and language, they never previously enjoyed unity andpolitical sovereignty, except during a brief period in1918." The previously refers to previously to the 1990s. Where is the discrimination in following historical facts? The issue here is thatKazimier Lachnovič considers historical facts as discrimination where there is none.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:59, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

Another example of ignoring by Cukrakalnis the reliable sources he doesn't like. I've already provided this informationhere, but the user pretends not to notice the quoted reliable sources. So I need to quote these sources in here as well.Andrew Wilson, a British historian specializing in Eastern Europe, writes in his bookBelarus: The Last European Dictatorship (Yale University Press, 2012):The entity referred to as medieval ‘Lithuania’ in fact had the full name of ‘Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Rus and Samogitia’. Its short name was ‘Litva’. This is not the same thing as ‘Lithuania’. In the modern Lithuanian language, the word for ‘Lithuania’ is Lietuva (p. 21—22). <...>Most of what is now Belarus was part of ‘Litva’ proper. (p. 33). Moreover, another historian specializing in the history of Central and Eastern Europe Dr. Prof.Timothy D. Snyder writes in his bookThe Reconstruction of Nations: Poland, Ukraine, Lithuania, Belarus, 1569-1999 (Yale University Press, 2003):During the period of dynastic union with Poland, Lithuania became an East Slavic realm in which the gentry enjoyed rights relative to the sovereign (p. 22).Before 1863, the most common self-appellation of the largest group in Russia’s Northwest Territory — Belarusian-speaking peasants — was apparently “Lithuanian” (p. 49).By removing the historical sense of the term “Lithuanian” in the popular mind, Russian power cleared the way for a modern, ethnic definition of Lithuania, and simplified the task of Lithuanian activists (p. 50). <...>The conflation of an old politonym with a new ethnonym (“Lithuania”) prevented non-Belarusians from seeing the connection between modern Belarus and the early modern Grand Duchy of Lithuania (p. 81) <...>As we have seen, the traditions of the Grand Duchy were altered beyond recognition by Lithuanian and Polish national movements, as well as Russian imperial and Soviet states. They have changed least perhaps in the lands we now call Belarus (p. 281). And I'm not talking about denying by the user the works of Belarusian historians (like "The History of the Belarusan Nation and State", published in English outside Belarus in 2005), which is a another clear prove of the nationalistic chauvinism expressed in denying the history of Belarusians, the people of Belarus. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:02, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič accuses others of what he himself is guilty. Heignores everything, including reliable sources, that go against his preconceived notion of history, but pretends that he is not doing it and that others actually are. His view of history is obviously distorted, because he just copy-pastes the same thing over and over again, without taking into account anything contrary to it, and continues calling historical truth as "nationalistic chauvinism".--Cukrakalnis (talk)12:43, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The evidence suggests that I'm not the one who denies the history of some nation by removing the categories connected to this nation by means of edit warring in order to push this obviously chauvinistic national discriminations. So it's really clear who is disruptive here in order to distract the normal users from their constructive work in this project. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)15:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I am not denying the history of any nations. On the contrary, the accuser, Kazimier Lachnovič, himself illegitimately claims and appropriates more history for some nations than they actually have. It can't be "obviously chauvinistic national discriminations" to ensure that accurate categorization is applied. To put this all in perspective, it is not "chauvinistic national discriminations" to remove e.g.Category:France fromCategory:History of Germany,Category:Russia fromCategory:History of Ukraine orCategory:Belarus fromCategory:History of Lithuania. My actions are according to the rules, scope and goals of Wikimedia Commons, soKazimier Lachnovič's statements are nonsense. His portraying me not as a "normal user" is absolute insanity: to shatter his LIES, all one needs to do is look atmy contributions, which are very clearly beneficial, especially in off-loading overwhelmed categories, likeCategory:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany. Just for that category, I created many categories. In fact, of the 25 categories underCategory:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, I created the following:Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany (1871-1909),Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Anhalt,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Baden,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Berg,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Brunswick,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Danzig,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Franconian Circle.Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Frankfurt,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Hanover,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Nassau,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Nürnberg,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Oldenburg,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Reuss,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Saxe-Meiningen,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Westphalia,Category:Vinkhuijzen: Military uniforms of Germany, Würzburg were ALL created by me in just the past week. I created a total of 17 categories for better categorization of what once included thousands of files just placed in a huge mix. To portray me as a not normal user like Kazimier Lachnovič is doing, is a straight-out lie.Kazimier Lachnovič's statements, which clearly go against the policy of Wikimedia Commons, should be punished.--Cukrakalnis (talk)19:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Totally irrelevant to the situation and clearly absurd example («to remove e.g.Category:France fromCategory:History of Germany,Category:Russia fromCategory:History of Ukraine orCategory:Belarus fromCategory:History of Lithuania») is another sound evidence that user Cukrakalnis is just trying to disrupt the normal project functionality. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:01, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič clearly did not understand that removing claims of a certain country to another country's history is not chauvinistic. It is precisely the reverse, it is anti-chauvinistic. That is precisely how the project normally should function and Kazimier Lachnovič's claim that this is somehow evidence of disruption just goes to show that Kazimier Lachnovič is himself a disruptive user. When given SOLID EVIDENCE that I am a BENEFICIAL CONTRIBUTOR to the project, Kazimier Lachnovič just dismisses it as irrelevant. He is clearly not acting in good faith.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:15, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Beside total misunderstanding of what chauvinism is, the user just revealed their motivation here: «removing claims of a certain country to another country's history is not chauvinistic. It is precisely the reverse, it is anti-chauvinistic». It actually is aggressive removing any connection of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania to Belarusians, despite many reliable sources (not only Belarusian, but also not anyhow connected to Belarus and Belarusians) confirming such a connection. To prove that the user is well informed about such recognized connection, I quoteen:Alfredas Bumblauskas, ″one of the best known Lithuanian historians″ (English Wikipedia):Norwegian linguist Christian Schweigaard Stang determined that at first Vytautas’ office was dominated by Ukrainian language (Volhynia), which later switched to Belarusian (Novogrudok, Polock, Grodno). In a way, we offended Belarus by forgetting that there is no single sentence in Lithuanian in the Lithuanian Metrica. We called the language Chancery Slavonic (of GDL Slavs) – a term panned by Professor Gudavičius, as the language was used not only in GDL, but in Poland, as well; and, as Poles are Slavic, the definition becomes incorrect. The language was not used only in office, but in poetry, as well. However, the attitude of Lithuanians is slowly changing. At first everyone was outraged that Belarusians are stealing our history. I say, however, that they have been part of our history for a long time. <...>The present-day events in Belarus seem to allow us a more peaceful look to our common history and show kindness in sharing it». --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:08, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič's "response" (not really a response, because he ignored most of what was said by me in the previous message then he went on some irrelevant tangent) demonstrates this user's incompetency and limited, cherry-picked understanding of history. He will not admit that he is wrong or that it is somehow against behaviour guidelines on Wikimedia Commons to denigrate another user and his contributions to the project. And the motivation Kazimier Lachnovič revealed is absolutely in-line with Wikimedia Commons' scope, which is to be educational, instead of engaging in pseudo-historical lies ofLitvinism or any other ideology, which are inherently counter-educational. The motivation ofremoving claims of a certain country to another country's history is absolutely justified, and even commendable. In fact, such actions are necessary to ensure that the project of Wikimedia Commons stays true to its educational goals.--Cukrakalnis (talk)21:49, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment Another prove, that the user just ignore the reliable sources they don't like (that time it is the opinion of modern Lithuanian historian Alfredas Bumblauskas). But I'm not sure that any admin really follows. If someone does, please let me know. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)16:24, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

This is not proof of anything except Kazimier Lachnovič's inability to accept and behave according to Wikimedia Commons policies and guidelines, especially considering categorization.--Cukrakalnis (talk)20:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Reverted. Both users warned.Yann (talk)22:08, 27 November 2021 (UTC)

File:Grunwald Pogoń czerwona.svg
Removing a counter-educational and ahistorical category. The user independently decided thatCategory:Historical military flags of Belarus is anti-historical, and he decides for himself what can be included in it and what not. Please return the category and remind the participant that personal preferences in the project are not desirable. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Ensuring that historical facts are taken into account is portrayed by Лобачев Владимир as "personal preferences". That Medieval flag,File:Grunwald Pogoń czerwona.svg, cannot be a flag of Belarus, because, asWikipedia:Encyclopædia Britannica and many other sources state: Belarus as a state appeared only in 1918. There can't be a flag of something that did not exist at the time. If anyone doubts this basic historical knowledge, here you go:link to Encyclopædia Britannica:While Belarusians share a distinct ethnic identity and language, they never previously enjoyed unity and political sovereignty, except during a brief period in 1918. (previously to 1991),link to Encyclopedia of Nationalism (2nd volume), with the relevant quote on page 45:The only real nationalstatehood that could pass for beingBelarusian in letter and in spirit was the Belarusian National Republic (BNR), declared in Minsk on March 25,1918. In contrast to how Лобачев Владимир is portraying the situation, the reality is that he is himself guided by personal preferences, as he creates fictional flags with elements deriving from his fantasy, and attempts to label them as "historical", e.g.File:Flag of Duchy of Samogitia (1419-1795).svg. With this flag, Лобачев Владимир takes an element of truth, which is indeed based on sources (e.g. that the flag's main colour was indeed recorded in sources as white), but then he adds "Ioannes Casimirus", "Zmudzka" and a bizarre, rectangular pattern surrounding the centre of the flag, none of which are based on anything, except on Лобачев Владимир's fantasy and conjecture. Labelling such creations as "historical" is against Commons' goal of being educational.--Cukrakalnis (talk)12:36, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• The Grand Duchy of Lithuania is the part of history of Belarus, as well as the history of the Republic of Lithuania (which own name is Lietuva). The Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Republic of Lithuania are not the same (according to the reliable sources I have providedhere, i.e. Prof. Snyder, Dr. Wilson, many Belarusian historians). So either both categories must be removed or both must be present. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)15:21, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič does not understand how categorization works on Wikimedia Commons. The Russian Empire is part of the history of Lithuania, as well as Belarus, Ukraine, and Finland, among others. EVEN THEN, inCategory:Russian Empire, there is ONLYCategory:History of Russia and notCategory:History of Lithuania,Category:History of Belarus,Category:History of Ukraine,Category:History of Finland. And that is how it is supposed to be. Another example isCategory:Kingdom of Hungary, which has onlyCategory:Political history of Hungary from among such history categories. This is in spite of the Kingdom of Hungary including parts or the entirety of modern Slovakia, Romania, Serbia, Croatia. None of them placedCategory:History of ... onCategory:Kingdom of Hungary. Ergo, it is only logical that a similar situation should apply toCategory:Grand Duchy of Lithuania, so that it has ONLYCategory:History of Lithuania. As for the other part, of course, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and the Republic of Lithuania are not the same, just like the Russian Empire is not the same as the Federation of Russia, and the Kingdom of France is not the French Republic or the Belarusian National Republic is not the Republic of Belarus. That is beside the point.--Cukrakalnis (talk)20:26, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• If you follow your logic, then the Middle Ages history of Polotsk, Vitebsk, Minsk, Novogrudok, all cities and territories of Belarus belongs to the Republic of Lithuania, but does not belong to the Belarusian Republic. This is very similar to the ideology of Lithuanian chauvinism. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)21:11, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The logic I explained is only applicable at the level of states. At the level of cities and towns, the categories that should be used are different. For example,Category:Bratislava was part of theCategory:Kingdom of Hungary from the 10th century to 1918. But even then, there is noCategory:History of Hungary. The same goes for Belarus, e.g.Category:Minsk was part of theCategory:Grand Duchy of Lithuania from 13th century to 1795, but that does not mean that the category will haveCategory:History of Lithuania. Both Лобачев Владимир and Kazimier Lachnovič are obsessed with calling on Lithuanian chauvinism, while all I am doing is just following Wikimedia Commons policy.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:51, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

• There are no reliable sources that Russian Empire was anyhow Belarusian state, but there are quite enough such sources that the Grand Duchy of Lithuanian was more Belarusian then Lithuanian (in modern sense with the own namelt:Lietuviai) state. So like I said based on provided sources either both categories (History of Belarus and History of Lithuania) must be removed or both must be present. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:13, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič's statements are indicative of the fringe pseudohistorical theory ofLitvinism. The Grand Duchy of Lithuania is regularly called the "medieval Lithuanian state":1,2,3 or even as Lithuanian empire -as is here. Clearly, if the Belarusian element had been so dominant, then the state would not be called Lithuanian so often. Kazimier Lachnovič's statement that there are sources proving that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was more Belarusian than Lithuanian is nonsense, for many reasons (this list is non-exhaustive): the country itself was founded onLithuania proper by ethnic Lithuanians, the Grand Duchy's official religion was Catholic (not Orthodox) after the pagan Lithuanians (the founders of the state according to Encyclopedia Britannica) were baptised into the Catholic faith, the rulers were Lithuanian-speaking (as is clearly madehere with many sources), the dominant nobility was the Catholic (Lithuanian) one, as it had privileges not given to the Slavic nobility and many other arguments refuting Kazimier Lachnovič's distortion of history.--Cukrakalnis (talk)23:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

This is all your personal opinion. But there are no sources that directly state that the rights to the historical heritage of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania are exclusively owned by the Republic of Lithuania. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)10:55, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

Without providing reliable sources (like I told you before, reference to any English Wikipedia article is just a poor attempt to disrupt the discussion because according to the rules of that projecten:Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source), that criticize the reliable sources provided by me, your references could be a prove just for the opinion that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was Lithuanian state AS WELL. It means that both categories must be present, removing one of them is clear push of nationalistic (actually chauvinistic) POV, which should be stopped. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:50, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Stating historical facts is not a personal opinion. As for 'reference to any ... Wikipedia article is just a poor attempt to disrupt the discussion', Kazimier Lachnovič referenced a Wikipedia article with "lt:Lietuviai" in a previous message.Kazimier Lachnovič is a hypocrite. Moreover, Kazimier Lachnovič's conclusion that "both categories must be present" is atotal obfuscation and misportrayal of the actual situation. As I explained in aprevious section, it is clear thatKazimier Lachnovič is ideologically motivated as he refuses to remove a category because that is "denial of Belarusian history" (according to him), even if that category should be removed to curb overcategorization.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:01, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment So the user just admitted that they don't have reliable sources, that are critical to the reliable sources provided by me. This is clear and direct recognition of nationalistic (more precise chauvinistic) POV pushing. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)16:27, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič is once more making conclusions based on nothing while repeatedly refusing to acknowledge that he is a hypocrite and ideologically motivated, if anyone even pays attention to all of this. To top this all of, Kazimier Lachnovič accuses others of what he is guilty of, namely a nationalistic POV.--Cukrakalnis (talk)20:32, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

• Category:Historical military flags of Belarus removed fromCategory:Flags of Vitebsk Voivodeship,Category:Flags of Minsk Voivodeship,Category:Flags of Mstsislaw Voivodeship,Category:Flags of Nowogródek Voivodeship (1507–1795),Category:Flags of Polotsk Voivodeship.The stated reason: Belarus does not exist. There is only the Republic of Lithuania. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)07:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

User:2600:1011:B00A:3258:B09A:4240:38A5:12A6(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: cross-wiki vandalism, already warned; blocked elsewhere (cf. edits on enwiki and mediawikiwiki.)

Hasley20:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the IP temporarily.Taivo (talk)21:50, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Md Rahat Islam 1997(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: vandalism multiple user's talkpageStang^★01:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

User also continues to upload copyrighted images, after being warned to cease.Bidgee (talk)

More copyvio files:Special:ListFiles/Md Rahat Islam 1997. Mostly screenshots and copyrighted video game settings or movie scenes being shown on a monitor. The interface of the monitor might be unfree too if it is not a free interface (e.g. Windows).JWilz12345(Talk|Contrib's.)04:44, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. User is indefinitely blocked and globally locked as sockpuppet. All uploads are deleted.Taivo (talk)21:48, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Diskdrive15(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}03:15, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. You warned the user and at moment that's enough.Taivo (talk)21:46, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Celniku(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: A sock ofMusée Annam, seems to make something up about the "No-U Movement" and adding random files to it, I don't like asking for this but please just do a massive rollback on the edits that add this, they are known for creating weird definitions of categories.

Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)08:21, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Addendum, slightly different modus operandi, do not delete their uploads and nominate the provincial emblem for deletion in a DR. Probably not delete any pages they made or their user sub-page for the supposed "No-U Movement", I will review their edits after their block, but anyone familiar with these edits can tell that it's Musée Annam. Notice the editing of Vietnamese flags with odd categorisation, completely re-inventing categories, uploading a Vietnamese provincial emblem, tagging public domain images as "Own work", and the general pages they edit. I usually don't request a block for them until they're being disruptive but they always seem to mess with categories in a way that only seems to make sense to them. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)18:27, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Culture_of_the_South_China_Sea I don't know what a "Culture of the South China Sea" / "Culture of the Asean Sea" is supposed to represent but I can't find it anywhere else, the No-U Movement is legitimate as it's a (very large) part of the Vietnamese Democracy Movement, but this Musée Annam sock's edits still require a review and as they keep reverting my reverts I will wait for a block before reviewing their edits, they did some good edits, so they will need to be carefully reviewed and not carelessly rolled back. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)20:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

 Hilarious addendum, he left a funny comment about how I'm a dog 🐶 who can't understand human language and how I should start carrying a knife (which I already do, though because of other people threatening me IRL) because he would do something to me, LOL. He then proceeds with a rant calling me stupid and noticebly referring to Vietnamese as "Duck 🦆 language" (a staple of Musée Annam rants),please don't censor his rant as I prefer to keep a public record of such events, just that this is a verytypical Musée Annam rant. Though the longer he's unblocked the more damage he does to categories. Again, please don't mass-delete their edits, I will take the time to review the good ones from the bad ones. This is hilarious because he's a member of the 8X generation yet threatens people online like you would expect from a 10 (ten) year old. Not meant as an insult, just an observation. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)07:39, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 Comment At first I blocked Celniku for a week. Now I will go to sleep and tomorrow I will continue with his/her edits. Maybe the block must be longer.Taivo (talk)22:00, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Kind of find it odd that a globally locked sockmaster known for threatening users gets a 1 (one) week block for death threats while users "Rodhullandemu" and "Jdx" get banned for life, well, c'est la vie, I guess. Anyhow, the main type of abuse this Musée Annam sock does is in categorisation (which I would argue are more damaging than some death threats that only arouse laughter from its target, LOL) as they seem to have invented a number of non-sensical forms of categorisations like the "Culture of the South China Sea" and adding the "No-U Movement" (whichis a legitimate movement) to encompassall opposition towards both the Vietnamese Communist Party (VCP) and Chinese expansionalism on perceived Vietnamese territories. Musée Annam often has these own "invented definitions" of terms which judging from my experience in volunteering with vulnerable individuals makes me think that he suffers from either a form of Autism or Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder especially in light of them maliciously socking for over a decade (but then again, I am not a psychologist and these are just observations of similarities in behaviour with these mental and developmental disorders, I do not mean to insult them only try to understandwhy they act so idiosyncratic and easily to identify), I don't want to call the users that usually hunt this sockmaster because they're all deletionists and would also undo his good edits, which I believe would be detrimental to undo, but my main reason for reporting him is because I believe that the negatives of his edits withthis account outweigh his positive edits, such as replacing free images with copyrighted ones (a staple Musée Annam behaviour) and mislicensing files. Anyhow, this user is a Human Rights Activist (like the Nipponese Dog Calvero family of socks) so I would say that there is a certain sense of nobility in his edits and if he lashes out against me I do not hold it against him as he is frustrated with a misanthropic system he wishes to overthrow, but still, this doesn't justify inventing bullshit things like a supposed "South China Sea culture" that somehow includes Hong Kong, Viet-Nam, and a vague definition of other places based on nothing other than his fantasy, that simply doesn't have a place on the Wikimedia Commons. --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)09:08, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment, I've undone most of the stuff I can immediately identify as bad edits, I am not opposed to Musée Annam being a regular contributor to this website as I think that they have a lot of valuable uploads to add to this website, I have checked most of their categories and 95% (ninety-five percent) of their page creations appear to be good page creations and useful, I have nominated the bad categories for discussion soplease do not nuke his edits. The people at CfD can probably handle the rest of his mess, not sure if I should tag this section as "Resolved" and only report him if he will continue to vandalise after unblock or not. Usually I watch Musée Annam socks for weeks and they tend to be largely good or largely harmless until you actually expose them as Musée Annam socks, anyhow, I think that they probably would vandalise again but I am open to watching this sock after the block expires and then only report them again after they would start making bad edits again (again, most of their edits are good). --Donald Trung 『徵國單』 (No Fake News 💬) (WikiProject Numismatics 💴) (Articles 📚)09:28, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Donald, I am really sorry. I extended the block indefinitely. Yesterday I had no time to Google translate his words, today I did it and indefinite block is a proper punishment. Sometimes I feel, that I am the only who works in AN. You complained on 4th of December, I came back on 6th of December and none of administrators did anything meanwhile.Taivo (talk)17:55, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

User:MUHAMMADSHAHZAD11(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: The user have just uploaded 1 images which can be speedy deleted underCSD Criterion G3. The CSD G3 suggestsUsers that commit such acts are subjected to their accounts being temporarily or permanently blocked. As the user have not made any useful edits since a year, I suggest permanently blocking him for no vandalism behalf of this user after time.Contributers2020^{Talk to me here}07:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. But I do not consider this neither vandalism, threat nor attack. What did he actually say? That Google robot is not a muslim. I would surprise, if Google would say, that his robot is a muslim. User has not edited for a year, so block is not practical. The only upload is nominated for deletion, that's enough.Taivo (talk)17:46, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

User:2.26.157.214(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: vandalism despite warnings; blocked on enwiki as well.

Hasley18:12, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Blocked and reverted.Taivo (talk)15:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Bayu Fuller(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Continuous disruptive edits onthis map. Already given a warninghere, but the user just uploaded another map version. If you take a look at his map updates you can see that the background gets messed up every time. After pointing that out, the user made no effort to stop the disruptive edits or fix the background disruption.

Ratherous (talk)10:56, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Please note that the reported user just tried to delete this report here -[1]. --Ratherous (talk)11:32, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

 blocked the user for 3 days and placed the full protection on the file uploadsrubin16 (talk)12:00, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Sandiey X(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mitte27&diff=612456578&oldid=608920331Mitte27 (talk)17:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked Sandiey indefinitely.Taivo (talk)17:59, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:1l5082783312(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism-only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}16:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user indefinitely, because all his/her edits consisted of adding copyrighted text (copyright message in the very end). I hided all edits. No vandalism, though.Taivo (talk)10:44, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Buddyemus(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Sock, cross-wiki abuse, images are hoaxes or copyvios. SeeWikipedia sock investigation for linked user.Citing (talk)16:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Buddyemus is not registered in en.wiki, so no evidence of sockpuppetry is given. All his uploads are nominated for deletion. At moment that's all.Taivo (talk)10:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:怡秀許凱翔沈淑蘭陳怡婷吳政勳劉政勳劉定瑋彥霖陳蘭貞葉品緯(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.

 DoneYann (talk)08:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:劉定瑋劉妍鈴葉品緯陳彥霖譚哲文(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.

 DoneYann (talk)08:49, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:陳妍安(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.

 DoneYann (talk)08:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:江月嬌許凱翔陳怡婷劉怡秀蕭名秀蕭如芬詹金麗陳彥霖劉定瑋(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.Midleading (talk)06:27, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

 DoneYann (talk)08:48, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:詹金麗阿麗師姐(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.

Midleading (talk)10:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:蕭如芬老師熊淑芬老師(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppeter active on Chinese Wikipedia uploading random non-educational files here.

Midleading (talk)10:19, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Manitarski(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: As seen on the talk page, this user has 37 talk file notices with having speedy notices, DR notices etc. and this is happening since 20th April. I suggest to indeff this user.

Contributers2020^{Talk to me here}05:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Manitarski was not formally warned, so I warned him.Taivo (talk)14:25, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Cukrakalnis(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: RemovingCategory:History of Belarus inCategory:Grand Duchy of Lithuania,the reliable sources provided on the talk page are ignored by the user

Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:14, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Yet again Kazimier Lachnovič demonstrates a lack of understanding of how categorization works on Wikimedia Commons. For clearly ideological reasons, Kazimier Lachnovič considers removing over-categorization as"denial of Belarusian history" and "distracting users from normal work". As I stated in an edit that explained my revert,Kingdom of Hungary is part of Slovakian history, but theCategory:Kingdom of Hungary does not haveCategory:History of Slovakia, but hasCategory:Political history of Hungary. Following the example of a non-contentious case, there should beCategory:History of Lithuania forCategory:Grand Duchy of Lithuania, like that would be the case already if not for ideologically-motivated Belarusian nationalists. Kazimier Lachnovič's actions are directly inspired by a Belarusian nationalistic view of history, as many sources which I provided on the talk page withthis edit will attest.--Cukrakalnis (talk)21:27, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment The user is simply trying to confuse the discussion in order to push their personal nationalistic (chauvinistic) POV. I've providedquite a lot reliable sources, written by American and European historians and anthropologists specialized in the subject that the Grand Dutchy of Lithuania doesn't associated with modern Lithuania (Lietuva) in any similar way the Kingdom of Hungary is associated with Hungary. The reliable sources clearly state: «For this reason many historians argue that the medieval Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the first Belarusian nation state» (Ethnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia,ABC-Clio, 2011, p. 43, by American anthropologist Dr. Prof.Jeffrey Cole, who is an expert on race and ethnicity in Europe, and Dr. Prof. Stephan E. Nikolov, a Senior Fellow researcher at theBulgarian Academy of Science, Institute of Sociology and Associated Professor at theNeofit Rilski Southwestern University Blagoevgrad). According to the reliable sources the GDL wasn't just a part of history of Belarus like the Kingdom of Hungary was a part of history of Slovakia, it was Belarusian state. Removing the opinion widely presented in specialized reliable sources is a clear act of vandalism. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

The Grand Duchy of Lithuania is regularly called the "medieval Lithuanian state":1,2,3 or even as Lithuanian empire -as is here. Kazimier Lachnovič's statement that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was a Belarusian state is a clearlyBelarusian nationalist andLitvinist statement, and he is simply misportraying a loud minority as a majority. The very fact that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania is called of Lithuania is by itself sufficient to compare it to the Kingdom of Hungary which is called of Hungary, or the Kingdom of France which is called of France. No amount of distortions or twisting of historical reality can change that.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:03, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Quoting "medieval Lithuanian state" means nothing. According to the several specialized reliable sources (Dr. Prof. Timothy D. Snyder, Dr. Andrew Wilson, Dr. Jan Zaprudnik, Dr. Prof. Norman Davies) the historical meaning of term Lithuania (Lithuanian) differs significantly from the modern one. According to these specialized reliable sources the own name of the GDL was Litva (Belarusian Літва = Litva), while the own name of modern Lithuania is Lietuva. User Cukrakalnis didn't provide any reliable source criticizing these sources. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:17, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Quoting "medieval Lithuanian state" does mean something, just like "medieval French state" or "medieval Spanish state" has a meaning. Litva itself is a derivative of the original Lietuva, as the many sources collected onthis website will clearly demonstrate, so your argument means nothing.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

The difference is that there are no specialized reliable sources that states that historical meaning of term French or Spanish differs significantly from the modern ones. So the comparison is clearly irrelevant. And the reference to self-published nationalistic website is another prove of disruptiveness. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:29, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Dismissing the linked page as nationalistic is a clear indication that Kazimier Lachnovič is completely entranced in his highly nationalist view - the linked page just provided clear primary sources that Lithuania's original name is Lietuva instead of Litva, unless Kazimier Lachnovič wants to call 13th-century German chroniclers likePeter of Dusburg, 17th-century official decrees from the state in question, i.e. Grand Duchy of Lithuania, and 19th-century Polish and German scholars as "Lithuanian nationalist". This by itself should indicate how disoriented Kazimier Lachnovič's thinking is.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:39, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment I would like to highlight the last comment to any reasonable administrator. I believe, there are enough evidence of disruptiveness now. So, I expect appropriate reaction. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)22:47, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

A reasonable administrator, upon closer inspection of the link I gave, would only agree with me. There is no nationalist narrative on the page, only a large variety of primary sources that absolutely demolishes Kazimier Lachnovič's fantasy that Lietuva as a name was not used to describe the Grand Duchy of Lithuania itself. The disruptiveness is on the part of Kazimier Lachnovič, who fails to acknowledge anything that he dislikes. He has not acknowledged that he was wrong with regards to over-categorization and in calling me a disruptive user, even if I contribute significantly to off-loading categories and helping better categorize the material. I will reiterate that Kazimier Lachnovič considers fixing over-categorization as"denial of Belarusian history". It is clear that he is ideologically driven and goes against Wikimedia policies.--Cukrakalnis (talk)23:07, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Comment So instead of following contemporary specialized reliable sources (like «For this reason many historians argue that the medieval Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the first Belarusian nation state» inEthnic Groups of Europe: An Encyclopedia,ABC-Clio 2011 by American anthropologist Dr. Prof.Jeffrey Cole, who is an expert on race and ethnicity in Europe, and Dr. Prof. Stephan E. Nikolov, a Senior Fellow researcher at theBulgarian Academy of Science, Institute of Sociology and Associated Professor at theNeofit Rilski Southwestern University Blagoevgrad) the user suggests to dooriginal research by reading «large variety of primary sources». Is the link to «primary sources» on some self-published website a justification for edit warring in order to deny the history of one nation by aggressive removing the category?! --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:38, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

  The way that Kazimier Lachnovič uses sources is indicative of his tendency to twist history. A precise example is the quote and source he emphasises. The article was not written by the American anthropologist Dr. Prof. Jeffrey Cole, but only by Stephan E. Nikolov. Such basic misattribution is indicative of the low level of Kazimier Lachnovič’s grasp of the topic at hand and sources about it. Then, he leaves out an important element from the source, which is that “The Ruthenian language, which later evolved into modern Belarusian, was the official language there.” Language itself is not a sufficient basis to claim a country, because some languages were used as lingua franca, and so to claim that the 18th-century Kingdom of Prussia was somehow a French state because it used French in its official proceedings is nonsense. It should be clear to all that the use of a certain language does not immediately mean the country belongs to those that write that language. Later on, the article itself states “In the 14th century, while being incorporated to Lithuania, Belarusians never lost their national identity.” This is a major statement that CONTRADICTS Kazimier Lachnovič’s whole argument. How can a country be incorporated to something which it supposedly already is? It can’t, and ergo the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was NOT Belarus. How can a national identity be lost in a state that is supposedly your own? This source clearly implies that the Grand Duchy of Lithuana was not a Belarusian state, and the centre of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania were always the ethnic Lithuanians, which still exist now, while the Belarusians were part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, but never were the Lithuanians.The sources that Kazimier Lachnovič uses contradict him.Cukrakalnis (talk)19:29, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

• The user just trying to mess the discussion. The article by Dr. Stephan E. Nikolov is published inthe Encyclopedia “Ethnic Groups of Europe”, which is edited by the American anthropologist Dr. Prof. Jeffrey Coleю. So there is no any misattribution. And the article clearly states that «For this reason many historians argue that the medieval Grand Duchy of Lithuania was the first Belarusian nation state», which considering the other sources is quite enough to stop the disruptive user of their aggressive nationalistic (chauvinistic) POV pushing. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)20:46, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

The misattribution was in not clearly stating that Dr. Prof. Jeffrey Cole was the editor overall of the Encyclopedia. The way Kazimier Lachnovič wrote made it seem that the American Professor was the actual writer of the article, as Kazimier Lachnovič did not clearly state any distinction between editors and authors. Moreover, Kazimier Lachnovič fails to understand the context in which that sentence is written and flat out denies the rest of the source he is supposedly referencing (more like twisting it in directions he prefers, taking out only one sentence and leaving all others). It is clear that he denies the rest of the source, just see my message on 19:29, 11 December. The Encyclopedia itself does not state that the Grand Duchy of Lithuania was actually a Belarusian state (which is patently false), it only points out that there is such a view. And that the view is based on “The Ruthenian language, which later evolved into modern Belarusian, was the official language there.” To claim an entire state as being a country of that written language is not strong, because the same logic is never applied elsewhere. The medieval Western European states used a lot of Latin in their documents, are they suddenly Latin states? Of course not. Moreover, Kazimier Lachnovič ignores everything presented to him and instead accuses others of "aggressive nationalistic (chauvinistic) POV pushing". Such behaviour clearly contradicts Wikimedia Commons policy and it is problematic that Kazimier Lachnovič is allowed to rampage with his toxic ideological behaviour.--Cukrakalnis (talk)21:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

The Grand Duchy of Lithuania was liquidated in 1792-1795 and became part of the Russian Empire. The Russian emperor was called the Grand Duke of Lithuania. After the revolution of 1917, the Republic of Lithuania was formed on a part of the empire (without the Vilnius region). Thus, the modern Republic of Lithuania is not a continuation of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. And the modern Republic of Lithuania appeared after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Historically, the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, with the official Old Belarusian language, was located on the territories of modern states: Poland, Lithuania, Belarus, Russia, Moldavi. Why the right to the historical heritage should belong exclusively to the Republic of Lithuania is not clear. Formally, the Russian Federation is the legal successor of the Soviet Union and the Russian Empire. It is she who can lay claim to the historical heritage. But the Republic of Lithuania does not have any internationally recognized documents on the rights of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania. --Лобачев Владимир (talk)10:19, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

The Tsar of Russia was titled the King of Poland. Does that mean that all of Polish history is suddenly Russian? Of course not, so the same applies to Lithuanian history. Does anyone internationally consider Russia as the successor state of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania? No. In mainstream reliable sources, the continuity between of Lithuania, first as the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (13th century-1795) and then as the Republic of Lithuania (1918-1940; 1990-) is affirmed by numerous statements like "When the independent Lithuanian state was reestablished in 1918"in The SAGE International Encyclopedia of Mass Media and Society (2019) (unknown page because of copyright), Editor: Professor, PhD Debra L. Merskin (not specialized in history, but still goes to show the prevalence of the statement), "the reinstating of Lithuania's independence in 1918"p360, sub-chapter 7.1 The Historical Development, Chapter 7 - General frameworks of Lithuanian Law, book called The Law of the Baltic States (many editors), "in 1918 the reestablished Lithuanian state"p210, Handbook of European Intelligence Cultures and many more.--Cukrakalnis (talk)20:30, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

• Administrators! Stop aggressive nationalistic (chauvinistic) POV pushing by the clearly disruprive user Cukrakalnis, who systematically ignores reliable sources. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)20:55, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

  Kazimier Lachnovič ignores everything presented to him and instead accuses others of "aggressive nationalistic (chauvinistic) POV pushing" and other things that are not grounded in reality. Such behaviour clearly contradicts Wikimedia Commons policy and it is problematic that Kazimier Lachnovič is allowed to rampage with his toxic ideological behaviour.Cukrakalnis (talk)21:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

• User Cukrakalnis was clearly warned[2]: “If you continue to edit war, you may be blocked from editing – even if you are right about the content issue”, but they just did three reverts in 24 hours in order to aggressively deny the history of Belarusians. The user ignores the reliable sources and arguments provided here as well ason the talk page of dispute category against such explicit discrimination of Belarusians and tries to mess the duscussion by all possible means including referring to primary and not-specialized sources and authors.I do really ask administrators to stop this disruptive behaviour! --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)21:32, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

The edit-war that the message concerned was about theCategory:Fictional flags of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and did not involve Kazimier Lachnovič but concerned Лобачев Владимир. I followed the Wikimedia Commons policy and did not do any more reverting concerning that category. Kazimier Lachnovič is confusing different things from different times. As I have constantly repeated and soundly reasoned, the fact thatKazimier Lachnovič views following the Wikimedia Commons policy on over-categorization as "denial of Belarusian history" clearly shows he is IDEOLOGICALLY MOTIVATED and does NOT care about Wikimedia Commons policy, scope and goals. There is no messing of discussion - the things he is referring to is just my rebuttals that collapse his entire argument and which he cannot refute, and as he will not admit that he was wrong, he will call other users like me names like "nationalistic", "chauvinistic" and etc. etc.Kazimier Lachnovič should be punished for flagrantly and repeatedly going against Wikimedia Commons policy on behaviour, by making false and slanderous statements about me and my actions.--Cukrakalnis (talk)22:11, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

User:162.218.183.189(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Change author of images with no reasonStang^★20:55, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the IP. Thanks for reverting!Taivo (talk)18:13, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

User:2.26.157.214(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: inserting meaningless textStang^★21:12, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Already blocked, nonsense is reverted.Taivo (talk)18:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Qatalpult(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: contiously upload out of scope map, warning appliedStang^★01:38, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. One week block. Quite funny uploads, though.Taivo (talk)10:05, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:ZAREI 2020(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism-only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}13:28, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked.Yann (talk)12:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Yann: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}12:40, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

User:علي محمد علي ابو سنيد(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: add nonsense text toFile:TZExample.jpg

Stang^★17:15, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Last warning.Yann (talk)12:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:2.6.0.0/16(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism-only this year. Requesting soft block.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}21:53, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
•  Support - Not sure if I need to support here but this IP has done nothing useful or constructive here other than to blank error-reporting pages. Sad really. –Davey2010^Talk22:23, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
•  Done Long term targeted vandalism; 6 mo block --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk)00:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Comment for the record: Might be IP socks ofColine Cantou (talk ·contribs) who was trolling since May 2021. --Achim55 (talk)08:57, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Infrogmation andAchim55: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}11:54, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:2401:4900:5B88:17AE:DCC4:BFB3:EADE:6B62(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism, attempts at it, and an unwarranted complaint only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}11:52, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. 3 days block for spamming.Taivo (talk)22:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}22:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:214.3.138.230(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Gross vandalism that needs to be hiddenhere.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}12:11, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 DoneYann (talk)12:17, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

@Yann: Thanks!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}12:39, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Pentto software(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}16:30, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done thanks toHerbythyme!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}16:54, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Vinod Gariya(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism, promotion, and copyvio only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}16:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. The user stopped after you warned him.Taivo (talk)22:08, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Agusan flags(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Sock puppet ofJurisdrew.91.221.17.22006:07, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Globally locked.Taivo (talk)17:03, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Becce Motorsports(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism-only account. Inappropriate username.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}12:33, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. No activity after you warned the user. In my opinion the username is acceptable, but if others will block him/her, I will not protest.Taivo (talk)17:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:71.47.84.22(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism only.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}10:59, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Globally locked. Thanks for reverting!Taivo (talk)17:05, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo: Thanks, and you're welcome!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}14:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Bayang Ilirt(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Sock puppet ofJurisdrew. Vandalism in progress, please revert. --91.221.17.22007:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user indefinitely.Taivo (talk)13:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Rio2003(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Spam vandalism-only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}14:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. No activity after you warned Rio. If (s)he continues spamming, let us know.Taivo (talk)15:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

User:حسین_فریدونی_نیا(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Contiously uploading images that are not his/her own work. S/He has got the last warning by Taivo but again uploaded such images(e.g.https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%D9%86%D9%82%D8%B4%D9%87_%D8%B4%D9%87%D8%B1%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86_%D8%AF%D8%B4%D8%AA%D8%B3%D8%AA%D8%A7%D9%86.png). Here is the link to the last warning:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%D8%AD%D8%B3%DB%8C%D9%86_%D9%81%D8%B1%DB%8C%D8%AF%D9%88%D9%86%DB%8C_%D9%86%DB%8C%D8%A7#You_may_be_blocked_soon

Rohalamin (talk)09:06, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

نقشه کار خودم بودحسین فریدونی نیا (talk)10:52, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked the user for a week and deleted a copyvio (not own work, © on image itself).Taivo (talk)17:20, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

@Taivo And alsothis one needs to be deleted because of © on image itself.Rohalamin (talk)11:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done.Taivo (talk)12:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

User:President Marriott William Kruger(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Another sock puppet ofMorris Kiyosaki Technique andMorris William Kruger(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user which should be blocked permanently and his ludicrous uploads of photos of himself and capture of documents categorizing him as a president or a king be deleted.Pierre cb (talk)06:46, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Blocked, tagged, all uploads deleted.Taivo (talk)12:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

User:ID Act(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Another sock puppet ofMorris Kiyosaki Technique andMorris William Kruger(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user which should be blocked permanently and his ludicrous uploads of photos of himself and capture of documents categorizing him as a president or a king be deleted.Pierre cb (talk)06:46, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Blocked, tagged, all deleted. Claims to be son of Paul Kruger and Marlene Dietrich.Taivo (talk)12:57, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

User:RDominguezHernandez(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Uploads multiple times the same out-of-scope picture under different names. The user should be blocked and the pictures deleted.Pierre cb (talk)14:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I warned the user.Taivo (talk)16:03, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Afro Europeans(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
User:Sarang Haido(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Sock puppets ofJurisdrew. Please revert the flags they overwrote to the previous states. This also applies toUser:Bayang Ilirt mentioned above. --91.221.17.22010:57, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blocked both sockpuppets and semi-protected one page. Their edits are in my opinion reverted, mostly thanks to Fry.Taivo (talk)16:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

User:DelawareMatt(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: User still have copyvii problems despite warning s and blocks.182.239.121.13018:48, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. At moment seems, that he has no bad uploads after May.Taivo (talk)19:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Kakaart12(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Edit test. User warned.

Stang^★10:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked as VOA.Yann (talk)10:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

User:92.40.190.157(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting:File:Pound cake.JPG, LTA

Stang^★22:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism of this section, too.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}22:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked byAntiCompositeNumber for 31 hours.Jianhui67^T★C06:00, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

User:2401:4900:38C6:2E01:C293:DB82:64E2:B253(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Add meaningless content to file description pages.Stang^★10:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Blocked by Achim, all reverted.Taivo (talk)11:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Pichpich22(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: remove{{Copyvio}} template from their uploads, warned.

Stang^★08:43, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

• Another sockpuppet ofUser:Sokreas87. --ManFromNord (talk)08:54, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

•  Done Blocked. All files deleted.Yann (talk)09:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Possibly a new sock-puppet:Khmermusic9 (talk ·contribs). --Túrelio (talk)15:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

កាដួយម៉ែ Sock ម៉្រាយហែអKhmermusic9 (talk)15:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

អាឈាមថោក អាឆ្កែ ទើសរហូត កាដួយម៉ែអាមុខងាប់Khmermusic9 (talk)15:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked.Yann (talk)18:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

+Manith44 (talk ·contribs) --ManFromNord (talk)20:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Has uploaded the same copyvios. Blocked. --Túrelio (talk)22:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Contributer1234(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Continuing disruption - was blocked on the English Wikipedia, so has come here todisruptfurtherbybeingannoying.

~TNT (she/they •talk)16:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done Blocked for a day with a strong warning. Older edits were already self-reverted on November 1st, 2021.Yann (talk)17:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

• User:Selena2019(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
• Reasons for reporting: Vandalism-only account.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}21:37, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done. Selena stopped after you warned her. I deleted one unneeded talkpage redirect.Taivo (talk)08:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Cukrakalnis(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Chauvinistic vandalism on theCategory:Grand Duchy of Lithuania against the sources provided on the talk page. Page protection is required.

Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)11:33, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Kazimier Lachnovič is misportraying the situation. He himself does not answer the objections of other users and only seeks to push through his own ideological POV.--Cukrakalnis (talk)18:15, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Vandalism is continuing. Page protection is still required. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk)10:10, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

User:C22H30N6O4S(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Abuse:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yawning_Infant,_August_2018.jpg&action=history

Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)14:28, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Urgent, they keep vandalizing, also with an uploaded vandalistic file and reverting my contribs. -Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)14:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Indef'd as vandalism-only account. --Túrelio (talk)15:10, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

User:31.182.189.19(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Abuse, same as above:https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Yawning_Infant,_August_2018.jpg&action=history

Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)14:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Urgent, they keep vandalizing, also with an uploaded vandalistic file and reverting my contribs. -Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)14:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. 1-day-block as vandalizing SP of blocked User:C22H30N6O4S (above). --Túrelio (talk)15:11, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

User:5.173.19.54(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Continue vandalism of blocked users.

Richardkiwi (talk) (talk)15:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. 1-day-block as vandalizing SP of blocked User:C22H30N6O4S (above). --Túrelio (talk)15:14, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

User:51.89.95.5(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user 1-day-blocked.
User:94.254.164.20(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user 1-day-blocked.
User:51.89.95.6(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user 1-day-blocked.
User:205.185.127.136(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user 1-day-blocked. --Túrelio (talk)15:18, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Next sockpuppet:ពេជ្រសោភា1 (talk ·contribs). Indef'd after uploading the same copyvios as the other accounts. --Túrelio (talk)17:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

User:詹金麗阿麗師姐(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppets ofUser:陳妍安 who uploads useless files.

User:詹金麗(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppets ofUser:陳妍安 who uploads useless files.

User:胡碧宛(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: sockpuppets ofUser:陳妍安 who uploads useless files.

Midleading (talk)08:33, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done. I blo0cked and tagged them all.Taivo (talk)10:37, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Sieghardt Schneider Koller(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Globally banned user: Wikinger

JavaHurricane16:57, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Update: account has been globally locked.JavaHurricane16:59, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Aww man, you spoiled my pizza!(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: VOA, likely block evasion (Pizza for britian)

Hasley00:03, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Spoiling this section, too.   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}00:18, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done thanks toAntiCompositeNumber!   —Jeff G. ツ _{pleaseping ortalk to me}00:48, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

User:KafferKing(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Another sock puppet ofMorris Kiyosaki Technique andMorris William Kruger(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user which should be blocked permanently and his ludicrous/pornogrpahic uploads of photos of himself categorizing him as a president or a king be deleted.

Pierre cb (talk)04:31, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done thanks!!!Ezarateesteban17:42, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

User:Bank of England King(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user
Reason for reporting: Another sock puppet ofMorris Kiyosaki Technique andMorris William Kruger(talk ·contributions ·Move log ·block log ·uploads ·Abuse filter log) block user which should be blocked permanently and his ludicrous uploads of photos categorizing them as a president or a king be deleted.

Pierre cb (talk)04:35, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

 Done thanks!!! --Ezarateesteban17:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)