ꠇꠝꠘ:ꠄꠒꠝꠤꠘꠣꠁꠘ

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Administrators and the translation is 3% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Administrators and have to be approved by a translation administrator.

Shortcuts: COM:A • COM:ADMIN • COM:SYSOP

This page is considered an official guideline on Wikimedia Commons. It illustrates standards or behaviors which most editors agree with in principle and generally follow. Feel free to update the page as needed, but please use the discussion page to propose major changes.
Other languages:
This page in a nutshell: Administrators on Wikimedia Commons are users with additional technical abilities to manage the site. They can delete and restore files and pages, protect pages, block users, rename files, and perform other administrative tasks. There are currently 186 administrators on Commons. To become an administrator, users can apply and go through a voting process.

This page explains the role of administrators (sometimes called admins or sysops) on Wikimedia Commons. Note that details of the role, and the way in which administrators are appointed, may differ from other sites.

If you want to request administrator help, please post at Administrators' noticeboard.

There are currently 186 administrators on Commons.

What is an administrator?

Administrators as of ꠘꠜꠦꠝ꠆ꠛꠞ 2023
Listing by: Language • Date • Activity [+/−]

Number of Admins: 186

  1. -revi, ko, en-3
  2. 1234qwer1234qwer4, ru, de-4, en-3
  3. 1Veertje, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1
  4. 32X, de, en-2, hsb-1, ru-1
  5. 99of9, en (bureaucrat)
  6. A.Savin, ru, de-4, en-2
  7. Abzeronow, en, fr-1
  8. Achim55, de, en-3, nds-3, la-2
  9. AFBorchert, de, en-3
  10. Ahonc, uk, ru-4, en-2, de-1
  11. Aka, de, en-3
  12. Alno, fr, en-3, es-2, pt-1
  13. Андрей Романенко, ru, en-3, uk-3, be-2, fr-2, lv-2
  14. Ankry, pl, en-2, ru-1
  15. AnRo0002, de, en-2, fr-2, es-1
  16. Anthere, fr, en-3
  17. AntiCompositeNumber, en, fr-2 (steward)
  18. Aude, en, ar-2, de-2, es-3
  19. Benoît Prieur, fr, en-3, pt-2, es-1, it-1, hy-1
  20. Billinghurst, en
  21. Blackcat, it, en-3, fr
  22. BrightRaven, fr, en-3, nl-2, es-2, zh-1
  23. Butko, ru, uk-2, en-1
  24. Captain-tucker, en
  25. Christian Ferrer, fr, en-2, es-2
  26. Ciell, nl, en-2, de-1
  27. Common Good, en
  28. CptViraj, gu, hi-4, en-3
  29. Cromium, en, de-1, fr-1
  30. Cybularny, pl, en-2, es-1, de-1
  31. Czar, en
  32. DaB., de, en-1
  33. DarwIn, pt, en-3, es-2, fr-2, gl-2, ca-1, it-1, oc-1
  34. Davepape, en
  35. De728631, de, en-5
  36. DerHexer, de, en-3, grc-3, la-3, es-1 (steward)
  37. Dharmadhyaksha, mr, en-3, hi-3
  38. DMacks, en
  39. Didym, de, en-2, fr-2
  40. Dyolf77, ar, fr-5, en-2, it-1, es-1
  41. D-Kuru, de, en-2, it-1
  42. Ebrahim, fa, en-3
  43. Elcobbola en, de (checkuser)
  44. Ellin Beltz, en (bureaucrat)
  45. Ellywa, nl, en-2, de-1, fr-1
  46. Emha, de, bar, en-3, fr-1
  47. Érico, pt, en-2, es-1
  48. EugeneZelenko, ru, be, en-2, bg-1, pl-1 (bureaucrat)
  49. Explicit, en, es, ko-2
  50. Ezarate, es-3, en-1
  51. Fitindia, en-3, hi-2, mr-2
  52. FunkMonk, da, en-4, no-3, fo-2, sv-2, de-1, es-1
  53. Gbawden, en-3, af-1
  54. Geagea, he, ka-3, en-3, ru-1
  55. Geni, en
  56. George Chernilevsky, ru, uk-3, de-2, en-2, bg-1, la-1, be-1, fr-1
  57. Gestumblindi, als, de, en-3
  58. Gnangarra, en, nys-1
  59. GPSLeo, de, en-2
  60. GreenMeansGo, en
  61. Grin, hu, en-3, de-1
  62. Hekerui, de, en-4
  63. Herbythyme, en, fr-2, es-1, it-1
  64. Hesperian, en
  65. Holly Cheng, en, ja-2
  66. Huntster, en
  67. Indeedous, de, en-3, fr-2
  68. Infrogmation, en, es-1
  69. IronGargoyle, en, de-1
  70. Jameslwoodward, en, fr-1 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  71. Jaqen, it, en-2
  72. Jarekt, pl, en
  73. JarrahTree, en, id-1
  74. Jcornelius, de, lt-2, la-2, en-2, pt-2, fr-1
  75. Jdforrester, en
  76. Jean-Frédéric, fr, en-4, es-1
  77. Jianhui67, en, zh-4, ja-2, ms-1
  78. Jmabel, en, es-3, ro-2, de-1, ca-1, it-1, pt-1, fr-1
  79. Joergens.mi, de, en-3
  80. JoKalliauer, de, en-3
  81. Jon Kolbert, en, fr-4, de-2 (steward)
  82. Josve05a, sv, en-3
  83. Julo, pl, en-2, de-1, ru-1
  84. Jusjih, zh, en-3, fr-2, ko-1
  85. Kadı, tr, en-5, fr-2, az-2
  86. Kaldari, en
  87. Kallerna, fi, en-3, sv-2, de-1
  88. King of Hearts, en, zh-3, es-2, ja-1
  89. Klemen Kocjancic, sl, en-3, de-2, hr-1, bs-1
  90. Krd, de, en-3 (bureaucrat, checkuser)
  91. Krinkle, nl, en-3, de-2
  92. Kritzolina, de, en-3, fr-2, it-1
  93. Leit, de, en-3, fr-1
  94. Léna, fr, en-3, es-1
  95. Leyo, gsw, de, en-3, fr-3, es-1, la-1
  96. Lofty abyss, en, mt, it-2
  97. Lymantria, nl, en-3, de-2, fy-2, fr-1, zea-1
  98. Magog the Ogre, en, es-2
  99. Mahagaja, en, de-4, fr-2, ga-2, la-2, cy-1
  100. Maire, pl, en-4, es-2, fr-2, de-2, ru-1
  101. Marcus Cyron, de, en-2
  102. Masur, pl, en-3, de-1
  103. Materialscientist, en-4, ru-4, nl-3, fr-1, es-1
  104. MB-one, de, en-3, fr-1, pt-1
  105. MBisanz, en
  106. Mdaniels5757, en, es-1
  107. MGA73, da, en-3, de-2, no-1, sv-1
  108. Mhhossein, fa, en-3, ar-1
  109. Micheletb, fr, en-3, it-1, es-1
  110. Mike Peel, en, pt-2, fr-1
  111. Minorax, en, zh (oversighter)
  112. Missvain, en
  113. Mitchazenia, en, es-2
  114. Miya, ja, en-2
  115. Moheen, bn, as-1, bpy-1, en-3, hi-1, hif-1
  116. Morgankevinj, en
  117. MPF, en, da-2, de-1, fr-1
  118. Multichill, nl, en-3, de-1, fr-1
  119. Mys 721tx, zh, en-3
  120. Nagy, de, en-3, fr-2, es-1, sv-1
  121. NahidSultan, bn, en-3, bpy-1
  122. Natuur12, nl, en-3, de-1
  123. Nick, en, sco-2, fr-1
  124. notafish, fr, en-4, de-3, es-2, it-2
  125. odder, pl, en-4, de-2 (bureaucrat, oversighter)
  126. Otourly, fr, en-2, it-1
  127. P199, en, nl, fr-2, tl-2, de-1
  128. Pi.1415926535, en, es-2
  129. Platonides, es, en-2, fr-1
  130. Poco a poco, es, de-4, en-3, fr-2, it-2, pl-2, pt-1
  131. Podzemnik, cs, en-2
  132. Polarlys, de, en-2, fr-1, no-1
  133. Pyb, fr, en-2
  134. Pymouss, fr, en-3, de-2, it-2, he-1
  135. Racconish, fr, en-4
  136. Ragesoss, en, de-1, fr-1
  137. Ra'ike, de, en-2
  138. Rama, fr, en-3, de-2, la-2, es-1, it-1, ja-1 (oversighter)
  139. Rastrojo, es, en-3, fr-2, eo-1
  140. Raymond, de, en-3, nl-1 (oversighter)
  141. Red-tailed hawk, en, es-4, pt-2, ug-1
  142. Regasterios, hu, en-1
  143. Rehman, en, si-1
  144. Reinhard Kraasch, de, en-3
  145. Rimshot, de, en-4, fr-2, it-1
  146. Romaine, nl, en-3, de-2, af-1, fr-1
  147. Rosenzweig, de, en-3, fr-1, la-1
  148. Royalbroil, en, es-1
  149. RP88, en, de-1
  150. Rubin16, ru, tt, en-4
  151. Rudolphous, nl, en-3, de-2
  152. Ruthven, it, fr, en-4, es-4, nap-4, ca-2, de-1
  153. Sanandros, als, de, en-3, fr-1
  154. Satdeep Gill, pa, en-5, hi-5, es-3, fr-2, fa-1
  155. Shizhao, zh, en-1, ru-1
  156. Spiritia, bg, en-3, ru-2, mk-2, de-1
  157. Sreejithk2000, ml, en-3, hi-3, ta-1, kn-1
  158. Steinsplitter, bar, de-4, it-3, en-1
  159. Stifle, en, ga, fr-2, de-1
  160. Storkk, en, fr-3, de-2, eo-2
  161. Strakhov, es, en-2
  162. TadejM, sl, en-3, de-2, fr-2
  163. Taivo, et, en-3, ru-3, de-1
  164. Tarawneh, en, ar, de-1
  165. Teles, pt, en-3, es-2
  166. Themightyquill, en, fr-2, de-1, hu-1
  167. The Squirrel Conspiracy, en
  168. Thibaut120094, fr, en-2, ja-1
  169. Thuresson, sv, en-3, no-2
  170. Trijnstel, nl, en-4, de-1, fr-1 (checkuser)
  171. Tulsi, ne, mai, en-3, hi-2, hif-2, bh-1
  172. Túrelio, de, en-3, es-1
  173. VIGNERON, fr, de-2, en-2, zh-1
  174. Wdwd, de, en-2
  175. Well-Informed Optimist, ru, uk-4, en-3
  176. Wikitanvir, bn, en-3, de-2, as-2, bpy-1
  177. Wutsje, fy, nl, en-3, de-2, fr-1
  178. Yann, fr, en-4, hi-2, gu-1
  179. Yasu, ja, en-2, de-1
  180. Ymblanter, ru, en-3, de-2, fr-2, nl-2, it-1, es-1
  181. Yuval CT, he, en-3
  182. Zzyzx11, en, es-1, fr-1
  183. علاء, ar, en-4, he-1, es-1 (steward)
  184. Abuse filter, (automated account)
  185. CommonsDelinker, (bot) see request
  186. KrinkleBot, (bot) see request

If 186 is not the last number on this list, there may be an error or there are some users assigned temporarily.

Technical

Administrators are users with the technical ability on Wikimedia Commons to:

  • delete and undelete images and other uploaded files, and to view and restore deleted versions
  • delete and undelete pages, and to view and restore deleted revisions
  • protect and unprotect pages, and to edit admin-protected pages
  • block and unblock users, individual IP addresses and IP address ranges
  • edit less-restricted interface messages (see also Commons:Interface administrators)
  • rename files
  • add and remove user groups
  • configure Upload Wizard campaigns
  • delete and undelete specific log entries and revisions of pages
  • import pages from other wikis
  • merge the history of pages
  • modify abuse filters
  • not create redirects from source pages when moving pages
  • override the spoofing checks and title or username blacklist
  • send a message to multiple users at once (massmessage)
  • use higher limits in API queries

These are collectively known as the admin tools.

Community role

Administrators are experienced and trusted members of the Commons community who have taken on additional maintenance work and have been entrusted with the admin tools by public consensus/vote. Different admins have different areas of interest and expertise, but typical admin tasks include determining and closing deletion requests, deleting copyright violations, undeleting files where necessary, protecting Commons against vandalism, and working on templates and other protected pages. Of course, some of these tasks can be done by non-admins as well.

Administrators are expected to understand the goals of this project, and be prepared to work constructively with others towards those ends. Administrators should also understand and follow Commons' policies, and where appropriate, respect community consensus.

Apart from roles which require use of the admin tools, administrators have no special editorial authority by virtue of their position, and in discussions and public votes their contributions are treated in the same way as any ordinary editor. Some admins may become more influential, not due to their position as such, but from the personal trust they may have gained from the community.

Suggestions for administrators

Please read Commons:Guide to adminship.

Removal of administrator rights

Under the de-admin policy, administrator rights may be revoked due to inactivity or misuse of sysop tools.

In a de-admin request, normal standards for determining consensus in an RfA do not apply. Instead, "majority consensus" should be used, whereby any consensus to demote of higher than 50% is sufficient to remove the admin.

Apply to become an administrator

All intending administrators must go through this process and submit themselves to RFA, including all ex-administrators who are seeking to return to their previous role.

First, go to Commons:Administrators/Howto and read the information there. Then come back here and make your request in the section below.

  • If someone else nominated you, please accept the nomination by stating "I accept" or something similar, and signing below the nomination itself. The subpage will still need to be transcluded by you or your nominator.


Use the box below, replacing Username with your username:

Voting

Any registered user may vote here although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted. It is preferable you give reasons for both Support and Oppose votes as this will help the closing bureaucrat in their decision. Greater weight is given to an argument, with supporting evidence if needed, than to a simple vote.

Promotion normally requires at least 75% in favour, with a minimum of 8 support votes. Votes from unregistered users are not counted. However, the closing bureaucrat has discretion in judging community consensus, and the decision will not necessarily be based on the raw numbers. Bureaucrats may, at their discretion, extend the period of an RfA if they feel that it will be helpful in better determining community consensus.

 Neutral comments are not counted in the vote totals for the purposes of calculating pass/fail percentages. However, such comments are part of the discussion, may persuade others, and contribute to the closing bureaucrat's understanding of community consensus.

Purge the cache Use the edit link below to edit the transcluded page.

Requests for adminship

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Administrators/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Administrators before voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.


Gnom

Related requests:

Vote

Gnom (talk · contributions · deleted user contributions · recent activity · logs · block log · global contribs · CentralAuth) (Activity: Talk Commons DR)

Scheduled to end: 17:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
talking about legal questions relating to GLAM activities in 2018...
...about personality rights at Wikimania 2016...
...and about EU copyright reform at Italian WikiCon in 2018

Hello, and thank you for allowing me to put myself forward as an administrator.

As a media and IT lawyer from Hamburg, Germany, I have been a Wikipedian since 2005 and have been contributing to Commons since 2006/2007. Between 2014 and 2022, I was also a member of the board of Wikimedia Deutschland. Adding to my professional background, I was a legal fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation during the summer of 2013, and one of the privacy ombudspeople from 2014 until 2017. Over the years, I have been active on several Wikimedia projects in the field of copyright and personality rights – some of you may have seen me talk about these topics at Wikimanias and WikiCons, or in the copyright forum over at German-language Wikipedia. You may also have seen me file or contribute to occasional deletion requests on Commons, most of them relating to copyright-related issues.

My most relevant contribution as an administrator would probably be my experience around copyright law and personality rights, both from my 'day job' as well from my regular contributions in these areas a Wikimedian. Actually, my doctoral thesis on German and European copyright protection for works of applied art was inspired by a discussion on Wikipedia and Commons. Accordingly, you would certainly see most (if not all) of my activities as an administrator around legal questions relating to photos and other media on Commons.

In summary, I am hoping that while I may currently not be one of the most active users on Commons, my legal experience will prove useful to the Commons community. Thank you for considering my candidacy, and please let me know if you have any questions. I can respond in English, German, French, Italian, and Spanish. --Gnom (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Votes

  •  Support, no issues--Ymblanter (talk) 17:55, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose No recent activity in admin releated areas, not shown what admin rights are intended to be used for, and the mentioned intended activities don't require admin rights at all. --Krd 17:56, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I think it would be good if they had the mop. Abzeronow (talk) 18:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Copyright expertise will be valuable. Jeffrey Beall (talk) 20:46, 19 November 2023 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per Krd --Stepro (talk) 20:51, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose similar as Krd. Reading your CV, I also believe you might be a good admin for commons, but maybe you should also be editing a bit more. I'd likely support if you were to run after you've made some impact in the discussions around copyright.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 23:30, 19 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral The candidate makes a clear case for useful past experience but doesn't present any need for the tools. An expert on German copyright law would be quite useful on the copyright noticeboard or in related deletion discussions, but neither role requires admin rights. From Hill To Shore (talk) 01:21, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Changing to  Support per answers below. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:53, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral I agree with above commenters. Copyright expertise is valuable, undoubtedly, but you could first show your skills by participating in RFDs, requesting speedy deletions, reporting copyright violations, etc.. Had you started that way, I would have supported wholeheartedly. Bedivere (talk) 03:46, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Obviously a decent candidate but without real involvement in community/admin issues it is not possible for me to support sadly (looks like 4 DRs have been created in about 6 months). Herby talk thyme 08:06, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral his recent activity looks ok.--RZuo (talk) 09:11, 20 November 2023 (UTC)--RZuo (talk) 21:42, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per above. Concerns with limited recent experience in admin-related areas -FASTILY 10:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Trusted user --Ameisenigel (talk) 10:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support per nom and the answers below.   — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 11:54, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Edit count way too low after 17 years; you should have had at least 30K edits by now. 20 upper 13:43, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Not trying to influence your opinion, but how do you come up with this number? Ymblanter (talk) 13:52, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    There are requirements that must be fulfilled if an editor genuinely wants to become an administrator on Wikimedia Commons. Every admin should have at least 10,000 edits. If an editor has edited on Wikimedia Commons for five years or fewer, 10,000 edits is a reasonable criterion. I would anticipate roughly 11–20K edits after 6–10 years, above 20K modifications after 11–15 years, and 30+K edits after 16–20 years. If you are serious about Wikimedia Commons, you should be able to meet those standards with ease. Even though I've only been on the site for a year, I've participated in more DRs than they have. They must establish a reputation in that field if they want to use their admin tools there. 20 upper 14:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you but IMO this is completely insane. Ymblanter (talk) 19:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I would like to have you as an admin here. We need everyone who is trustworthy and knows our policies and especially copyright laws. To address the concerns: If we make the requirements for new admins to high we will never get enough people so manage the huge workload. GPSLeo (talk) 19:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support per above, furthermore we have plenty of administrators who are less active than the candidate and maybe some of us are even less competent than the candidate. At best they will help, at worst I am sure that no irreparable harm will be done with the tools. Thank you for volunteering. Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support looks competent to me, it's all that matters. – Ammarpad (talk) 22:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support no issues --Heitersberg (talk) 08:04, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per Krd and others --DCB (talk) 10:32, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support LGTM —MdsShakil (talk) 10:46, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Weak support, mostly per Christian Ferrer, very low activity in administrative areas but has good knowledge, I think they can be very helpful to the project, but I hope they will actually use the rights (as said in answer to my question) and don't just hold onto it. -- CptViraj (talk) 17:47, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support He can definitely use more experience in the areas he wants to work in. I appreciate the willingness to discuss things in a reasonable, well versed way though and the experience will come with time. --Adamant1 (talk) 18:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Hinnerk11 (talk) 19:17, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support MZaplotnik(talk) 04:29, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Jaqen (talk) 08:36, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Юрий Д.К 09:34, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Lymantria (talk) 09:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 10:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support - No concerns - Schlurcher (talk) 17:31, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose - I learned the hard way that Gnom doesn't care about right and wrong when it fits the agenda. -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 17:41, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose I am sorry, but I don't think that this candidacy is a good idea because of the rather low edit count. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 19:00, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I am amazed by the remarks about edit count above, I thought we had evolved past such crude statistics at least 10 years ago. There are many ways to be embedded in the movement and gain the expertise needed for some admin tasks that one million category edits would not give. Ainali (talk) 19:56, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support, per Ainali, GPSLeo, Christian Ferrer, we have too many admins and users not knowing nor caring about copyright and licenses and many useless and reverted edits of some voting here, so the quantity as such is a false criterion Oursana (talk) 20:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Trustworthy user with valuable expertise in copyright issues //Martin K. (talk) 22:33, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral — Sadko (words are wind) 00:38, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose. With fewer than 50 edits on Commons in the month leading up to this nomination - and most of those being trivial changes, like edits to file categories and claims - I'm not convinced you have enough experience on Commons to act as an admin. Your contributions to copyright discussions are certainly appreciated, but have been fairly infrequent; if you can make that more of a habit, I'll happily change this vote on a renomination. Omphalographer (talk) 03:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I think we really need more admins, specially people could help with the massive backlog of open DRs we have. He seems to be a good fit for taking some burden out of that massive amount of work. I don't care he can't dedicate 8 hours every day to commons, any small help from experts and trusted people like him is valuable. Amir (talk) 15:52, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Mö1997 (Questions ?!?!) 17:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support This project definitely needs more admins. Trustable user, lots of legal knowledge and the will to help. It‘s absurd not to accept such offer. NNW 18:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I believe his expertise will definitely benefit the project. --XanonymusX (talk) 20:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support. Seems to be active on the content side of Commons, and their planned area of administrative work (dealing with copyrights and personality rights) seems to be well within their expertise. Their explanations below on German FOP indicate to me that they will take their role seriously on Commons and that they will use the tools in accordance with community norms. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:55, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Surely a valuable asset, beneficial to Commons as a whole. Arjoopy (talk) 10:31, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Understands copyright, will not misuse the tools, trusted user. Good enough for me. Julle (talk) 21:53, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose per Paradise Chronicle. I'm willing to support if the candidate become more active and gain more experience on administrative stuffs. --A1Cafel (talk) 04:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments

  •  Question: In which administrative areas do you plan to work? -- CptViraj (talk) 04:42, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hello @CptViraj, thank you for your question. I am planning to help with deletion requests relating to copyright and personality rights – I also wrote about this above. Does this already answer your question, or is there anything else you would like to know? Gnom (talk) 08:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
a flugelhorn
a clarinet

 Question You are sysop in test wiki, but you have made there only 1 edit. Why? Taivo (talk) 10:10, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hey @Taivo, good question :-) – I just checked the log: I was made a sysop on the test wiki in 2014 by Nemo bis to learn about abuse filters in my capacity as privacy ombudsman. I then made my only edit on test wiki in 2017 when XanonymusX asked me to help with a music-related project. Is there anything else you would like to know? Gnom (talk) 10:40, 20 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Question Earlier this year you added a comment to a closed deletion discussion and were reverted.[1] As you intend to do admin work in the deletion space, do you understand why you were reverted and how would you handle a similar situation in future? From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:41, 21 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @From Hill To Shore, I should obviously have followed up with the closing admin on their talk page. (I should probably still do that, because there might actually still be an issue with the painting in that picture. @Reinhard Kraasch had initially fixed it, but now it is back.) Gnom (talk) 07:25, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
In this specific case (as an OTRS/VRT ticket is involved) I would advise going to Commons:Volunteer Response Team/Noticeboard as the best option. However, contacting the closing admin directly is also valid as they should redirect you if they can't give an answer themselves. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:48, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@From Hill To Shore: My thinking is that as far as I understand, in this case, it has already been clarified that the VRT ticket does not refer to the painting, so we do not have a release for the painting but only for the photograph itself. Gnom (talk) 09:23, 22 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@From Hill To Shore: See here. Gnom (talk) 11:20, 24 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 Question What is your take on some current borderline German fop cases like Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Liegender (Richard Steffen, Hamburg-Lurup) or Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Vegetatives Wachsen (Klaus-Jürgen Luckey)? --Rosenzweig τ 07:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello @Rosenzweig, I actually discussed this issue at this year's German-language WikiCon at the end of September. You can see both the slides as well as a video of my talk on this page (in German): de:Wikipedia:WikiCon 2023/Programm/Aktuelles Urheberrecht. This allows me to give a rather nuanced answer to your question (with some jokes thrown in as well, I hope you do not mind). Gnom (talk) 07:49, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm actually interested in what your take on them is to since I'm involved in the DRs and it seems like an area you'd be knowledgeable about. Sadly I'm not proficient in German though. Nor probably are a lot of other people reading this. So would you mind summarizing your take on it in English for the people in the room who can't speak German, me included? Thanks. --Adamant1 (talk) 11:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Sure, here's the gist:
  • First, the German law on freedom of panorama (sec. 59 of the German copyright act) talks about works located on public paths, roads or squares. However, in the light of the applicable EU Directive, there is consensus among legal scholars that it must be read to simmply apply to works located in the public.
  • Accordingly, the question is how to define the word public under German (or EU) copyright law. Unfortunately, there is not a sufficient level of clarity about how this term should be interpreted.
  • Looking at some specific cases:
    • Starting from a 1907 (!) judgment of the German Imperial (!) Court of Justice, there is broad consensus among German legal scholars that graveyards do fall under freedom of panorama, even if they are closed at night. User:Pajz gathered the available literature on German-language Wikipedia in an epic footnote.
    • For train stations (including subway stations), the available scholarship is more or less evenly divided, with no court having decided on the issue so far. There is an even more epic footnote for this question on Wikipedia.
    • For courtyards belonging to public schools, there is unfortunately no available literature or case law that we know of.
    • The institutions owning these artworks, i.e. the schools or the public transport companies, do not have the necessary rights, we would instead need to ask the (heirs of the) artists for a license.
  • In a major departure from the existing jurisprudence, a recent first-instance court judgment even allowed a picture of a building taken from a drone (Frankfurt am Main regional court, judgment of 25 November 2020, case no. 2-06 O 136/20). However, experts are unsure whether this is now really the new norm, or whether it should be regarded as an outlier.
  • In my talk, I ended by saying that this issue currently boils down to how we shoul apply the Precautionary Principle. Looking at the specific wording of our policy – which states that a file should be deleted whenever there is significant doubt whether a file is free to be used lawfully – I would say that looking at the available legal literature and case law, and considering my practical experience as an attorney working in this very field, it is fair to say that there is some doubt about these pictures, but just not enough to warrant deletion. However, I can understand any admin who would interpret the existing legal situation as well as our current policy differently.
I hope that you find this helpful. Happy to answer any additional questions you have.
--Gnom (talk) 12:15, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Interesting. I do wonder why your on the side of keeping the images of the "laying man" statue in the school yard since as you say there's no available literature or case law to draw from in that case. So it seems like a place to apply the Precautionary Principle if there ever was one. Epecially considering the existence of a fence and whatnot. Same goes for the other DRs where fences are involved really, or do you just not think those types of things matter or effect how "sufficiently dedictated to the public" a place is? --Adamant1 (talk) 12:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is also always a big fence or wall around a graveyard (with a gate locked at night) – and there is broad consensus in the available literature that those fall under freedom of panorama. Maybe we also need to consider the fact that in Germany, schoolgrounds are usually open to the public in the afternoon, with kids playing in the yard, clubs and sports teams using facilities, etc. Gnom (talk) 12:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm aware of the legal opinions on graveyards, but they seem to be an exception and one that as far as I'm aware has nothing to do with fences. Otherwise you might as well say anywhere with trees is a public place because graveyards have them. Regardless, the guidelines clearly say "Private property that cannot be freely accessed, for instance because there is some type of access control in place (or even an entrance fee is charged), does not fall under § 59(1)." It seems reasonable to assume gated fences are a "type of access control." As to schoolyards being open to the public during certain times, it's not like museums aren't open to the public in the afternoon either. But we'll have to agree to disagree. I at least appreciate the answers even if our opinions about it differ though. Your clearly knowledgeable in the area. --Adamant1 (talk) 13:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is tricky. The available literature does discuss walls and fences around graveyards in detail, which is why I brought them up. Gnom (talk) 13:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC))Reply[reply]

Requests for bureaucratship

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Bureaucrats/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Bureaucrats before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for CheckUser rights

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Checkusers/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Checkusers before posting or voting here. Any logged in user may vote although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

Requests for Oversight rights

watch

When complete, pages listed here should be archived to Commons:Oversighters/Archive.

  • Please read Commons:Oversighters before voting here. Any logged in user may vote, although those who have few or no previous edits may not be fully counted.

No current requests.

See also

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Administrators/syl&oldid=815179798"