Commons:Deletion requests/2024/07/14

13 July 2024

15 July 2024

Deletion requests on 14 July 2024

July 14

File:Rain @ Parade @ Penis festival @ Kanamara Festival @ Kanayama Shrine @ Kawasaki (13695523384).jpg

No FoP for 3D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the shape of a penis has existed long enough to no longer be under copyright. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 03:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The penis here is having artistic appearance that is worth artistic appreciation, so I think it exceed COM:TOO Japan--A1Cafel (talk) 14:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is a very silly debate admittedly, but I don’t think a realistic 3D model of a human penis is sufficiently original to pass TOO standards, which I believe are fairly high in Japan Dronebogus (talk) 09:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obviously creative choices went into this statue. It is not a slavish reproduction of an identifiable ancient penis statue. IronGargoyle (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's a sculpture; although the concept is not original it's the sculptor's own artistic creation. Consigned (talk) 19:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree -- don't think that a standard reproduction of a penis reaches the level of originality, Sadads (talk) 14:15, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parade @ Penis festival @ Kanamara Festival @ Kanayama Shrine @ Kawasaki (13695105343).jpg

No FoP for 3D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep basic simple traditional depiction of aspect of human anatomy. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I don’t think a realistic 3D model of a human penis is sufficiently original to pass TOO standards, which I believe are fairly high in Japan Dronebogus (talk) 09:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obviously creative choices went into this statue. It is not a slavish reproduction of an identifiable ancient penis statue. IronGargoyle (talk) 11:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this is sculpture, although not an original concept, still the sculptor's artistic creation. Consigned (talk) 19:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Göring Augsburg 1945.jpg

The source for this image is Air Force Magazine, which is a publication of the Air & Space Forces Association, not the US Armed Forces. The photo is tagged as "Photo via Stan Piet", who could have been a jouranlist or other civilian. We really don't know. So we have no way of knowing if the copyright tag is correct.

The same applies to the cropped version, Göring Augsburg 1945-beschnitten.jpg. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:37, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting keep on this - an important image, and it's going to be 70 years old.Deathlibrarian (talk) 07:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the issue with it being on Commons is license status, not importance. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Caption on the 2015 magazine PDF linked above states "National Archives and Records Administration photo via Stan Piet". Stan Piet [1] is "an aviation photographer and historian" not quite old enough to have taken the original photo; apparently he got the photography from the US National Archives (en:w:National Archives and Records Administration) for use in the magazine. Göring was prisoner of the US military at the time of the photo. That it is a USGov work seems correct, and the mention of Stan Piet in the magazine is not an argument against that. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:43, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That caption is actually on a different photo in the same publication, but it could apply to both photos. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Alamy, rather notorious for copyfraud when they can get away with it, states it is PD on their copy [2] "This image is a public domain image, which means either that copyright has expired in the image or the copyright holder has waived their copyright. Alamy charges you a fee for access to the high resolution copy of the image." -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 15:03, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This may be the NARA record for the image: [3] — Goszei (talk) 04:53, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Sahaib (talk · contribs)

Fails COM:FOP Japan as 2D works.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 14:41, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 05:39, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fix --Min☠︎rax^«¦talk¦» 09:51, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Costumed character files uploaded by Sahaib (talk · contribs)

Violations of COM:COSTUME. Copyrighted characters and character designs.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 14:46, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@(Oinkers42): I agree with the 2D works but the costumes surely fall under Template:Costume:

This file depicts a work of costuming/cosplay of a copyrighted fictional character or real-life individual. While this file is under a free license, re-use of this file may be subject to legal constraints, depending on jurisdiction and independent from its copyright status.

Before using this content, please ensure that you have the freedom to do so under the laws which apply in the circumstances of your intended use. You are solely responsible for ensuring that you do not infringe someone else's legal rights. See our general disclaimer.

There is quite a lot of files from various disney parks at Category:Characters at Disney Experiences and so I believe those files should also be nominated unless the copyright concerns are specific to Japan. Sahaib (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning towards

Delete for the costumes. Most, if not all, of the characters in these photos are wearing full-body costumes which are more akin to wearable sculptures than articles of clothing. I don't see any compelling reason why these costumes wouldn't be copyrightable - they're certainly not utilitarian works, which is the usual argument put forth for why a costume is ineligible for copyright. Omphalographer (talk) 21:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@(Oinkers42): I believe that this discussion should not be closed until there is more discussion as this effects a lot of images, as I mentioned in the category Category:Characters at Disney Experiences. Sahaib (talk) 08:40, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ewald Frank Tombe.jpg

Aucune certitude qu'il s'agisse de la tombe de la personne indiquée, pas de traçabilitté. Par ailleurs, intérêt encyclopédique pas avéré. Pierrette13 (talk) 05:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Je pense que l'image peut être conservée si elle n'est pas associée à un nom. Cymbella (talk) 08:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

L'image a un intérêt encyclopédique pour illustrer la façon dont un cercueil est descendu dans une tombe. Skimel (talk) 12:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Droit d'auteur requis NalKy (talk) 16:37, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Sickahick (talk · contribs)

Out of scope: nonsense AI-generated illustrations.

Omphalographer (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader added the following comment on their talk page and on the talk page of the deletion request. I'm copying it here for clarity:

Dear Wikimedia administrator ‏Greetings,

‏My name is [‏sickahick], and I am requesting that the image in the article "Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics" on Wikipedia be retained. This image does not contain copyrighted content and includes the Wikipedia watermark. It has been published in compliance with all relevant copyright laws and regulations.

‏Details of the image are as follows:

‏- **Article Title**: Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics (one of the Persian articles on Wikipedia) ‏- **Article Link**: [Philosophy of Quantum Mechanics](https://fa.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/فلسفه_مکانیک_کوانتوم#:~:text=پیدایش_مکانیک_کوانتومی_در_آغاز,مفهومی_مناقشه%E2%80%8Cبرانگیزی_را_به%E2%80%8Cوجود_آورد.) ‏- **Image Description**: The image located at the bottom of the article, before the references section.

‏This article and its accompanying image provide highly valuable information for atomic resources and other related fields. It effectively explains and illustrates the theories and philosophical concepts of quantum mechanics. The included image significantly enhances the article's appeal and aids in better comprehension.

‏As this image adheres to all Wikipedia copyright policies and has been appropriately sourced, I kindly request that it not be removed.

‏Thank you in advance for your attention and cooperation. Sickahick (talk) 14:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issue at hand here is not whether these images comply with Commons copyright policy; it is that the images are meaningless. The backgrounds of both images are a jumble of mixed-up words and formulas like "Smany-roingers", "wave-particle intuality", and "Wave-Worldes inteprestion". These images do not convey any meaningful information about quantum mechanics or philosophy. Omphalographer (talk) 18:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image holds significant meaning and should not be deleted. The cat depicted in the image represents Schrödinger's cat, a famous thought experiment in quantum mechanics that illustrates the concept of superposition and quantum indeterminacy. This philosophical idea is central to understanding quantum theory and has profound implications for how we perceive reality.

The presence of scientific equations and the Wikipedia logo further emphasize the connection between advanced scientific concepts and the dissemination of knowledge to the general public. By merging these elements, the image underscores the importance of making complex scientific ideas accessible and understandable. Deleting this image would mean losing a valuable representation of the intersection between quantum philosophy and public education.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%2527s_cat Sickahick (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schrödinger%27s_cat Sickahick (talk) 12:50, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Schrödinger's cat

please check this Sickahick (talk) 12:51, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you looked at these images, or are you just repeating the prompts you gave to the AI? A picture of a cat sitting on top of a swirly blue box with the word "Wikipedia" on it does not even remotely invoke the concept of Schrödinger's cat (or Smany-roinger's cat, if we go by the text in the image), nor do the gibberish words and equations in the background make anything "accessible and understandable" - if anything, they do the opposite.

Creating good illustrations, especially of complex and/or abstract topics like these, requires thought and effort. In my experience, currently available AI image generators are not capable of doing this reliably. Omphalographer (talk) 18:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bekten Beishembiev.png

This man is born in 1941, photo migh be dated 1940-1960. can not be own work of 2024. Original date? Author? Copyright status? Drakosh (talk) 05:25, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ktm 1290 superduke GT 2016.jpg

Likely copyright violation. The photo is almost certainly a media photo and it is found in a lot of external websites. The copyright tag that states that it is a picture published befor 1929 it clearly wrong. Earthshaker13 (talk) 06:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However, since photos of other KTM motorcycles seems to have been uploaded with an authorization ticket (e.g. File:KTM 250 Freeride R.jpg), it may be worth to verify it there is a chance that authorization may cover also this picture. -Earthshaker13 (talk) 06:33, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Petri Nurmi Kirjailija.webp

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 06:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Petri Laukka.jpg

Single uploading by the user. No EXIF-data (or no satisfactory EXIF-data). Unlike that own work. Deletion per COM:PCP Estopedist1 (talk) 07:06, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Siil2 (talk · contribs)

different sources. Not own works. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed.

Estopedist1 (talk) 07:10, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pilt11.jpg

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for copyright infringement.--Mazbel (Talk) 23:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Eskokoskinen (talk · contribs)

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected.

Estopedist1 (talk) 07:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by MV89 (talk · contribs)

Not own work. VRT-permission from the creator/photographer is needed.

Estopedist1 (talk) 07:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kollaasi bussit 30x40cm.jpg

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. Estopedist1 (talk) 07:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iain Glen in The Last Front.png

copyright violation DirkVE (talk) 08:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

File:Flag of Innopolis.jpg

Dates, Sources and Authors cannot be "n/a" to avoid proper licensing. Very small derivative work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:15, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion; COA. --GPSLeo (talk) 16:34, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Innopolis.jpg

Fictional flag of the real city Innopolis. Real flag is different. Also

should be deleted for the same reason. The last is actually is File:Coat of Arms of Verhneuslonsky rayon (Tatarstan).gif (CoA of Tatarstan district) MBH 08:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:INUSE. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:40, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. You also could do it yourself. MBH 10:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't nominate it for deletion, so why should I have done your job? Absurd. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مراد علی پیروی چشناسر.jpg

خود این عکس را منتشر کرده بودم و می خواهم حذف گردد. Firooz Peyravi (talk) 08:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Google translation: "I had published this photo myself and I want it to be deleted." Why, Firooz Peyravi? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:42, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unused, though uploaded a few years ago, seems to have no educational purpose. Also, though uploaded as own work, it seems to be a scan of another photo, so the copyright status is dubious. Consigned (talk) 19:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Dekadenca (talk · contribs)

Uploader claims to be in the photo, no exif, PCP

Gbawden (talk) 09:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings,

What seems to be the problem with the pictures?

Someone made a page about my drag persona and I added these two pictures, as I am in them, I own them and have the rights to upload them. And being a visual artist, whose appearance is integral to the artform, I believe that having pictures like these is relevant to the article.

I hope that we can resolve this beneficially.

Warm regards, Dekadenca (talk) 10:42, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Contact COM:VRT to prove you, and not the photographer, own the copyrights to the photos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Dekadenca: Who was the photographer of these photos? Consigned (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:CharlotteUhlig.jpg

Dubious claim of own work, uploader claims to be in the photo, no exif, PCP Gbawden (talk) 09:40, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unable to verify that the uploader is a) the person in question and b) the photographer. If the uploader is the photographer or copyright holder, please provide permission to COM:VRT. Consigned (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kazys Ulvydas.jpg

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. Estopedist1 (talk) 12:08, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Minion.png

Google Drawings-esque illustration that is non-educational, low-quality, and unused (com:NOTUSED) QuietCicada (talk) 12:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep used in some sandboxes, no real reason to delete. —Matrix(!) {user - talk? - _uselesscontributions} 18:56, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, only used in two sandboxes, Sadads (talk) 12:41, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaļķu ielas gals pie Brīvības pieminekļa 1939.g..jpg

Old photo(s). Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status and license tags corrected. Estopedist1 (talk) 12:23, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:2024 Trump Assassination Attempt Map.jpg

Appealing Speedy Delete on behalf of the uploader. A source has been linked. Lordseriouspig (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The source does not tell us the source of the base map. It does not look like Google Maps or Open Street Map. My best guess is that it is a tracing from Google Satellite. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Landsat imagery is the base map. This is public domain imagery of the US Government. No attribution is required for imagery. MediaGuy768 (talk) 22:39, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Is it NC licensed or not? Hard to tell. The indicated source is not the original source of the image, but a personal image cloud. Deeply questionable origin. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The image is NOT a NC license. MediaGuy768 (talk) 22:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mario & Luigi - Superstar Saga logo.png

Above Commons:TOO? Mika1h (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it was okay as File:Sonic-Generations-transparent-bg.png has similar features and survived a DR. I welcome any second opinions though. SergioFLS (talk) 04:44, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, probably below COM:TOO Japan, but I'll be interested to see the closing admin's ruling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:23, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Chinese boundaries

Per reasoning on Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Indian boundaries funplussmart (talk) 16:45, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The reference in the template to "According to Chinese Law" is vague; do we know what this specifically refers to? Omphalographer (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Map Management Regulations (s:zh:地图管理条例): Article 50 Where a map that is not required to be submitted for review does not comply with the relevant national standards and regulations, and thus violates the provisions of this Regulations, corrections shall be ordered, warnings shall be given, illegal maps or products with map graphics attached shall be confiscated, and a fine of up to 100,000 CNY (note: ~14,100 USD) may be imposed; where there are unlawful gains, the unlawful gains shall be confiscated; where the circumstances are serious, the case may be notified to the public; where a crime is constituted, criminal responsibilities shall be pursued in accordance with law.

Note: Maps in published material should be submitted for review according to the Regulations. Despite this article, if you post "bad" maps on the Chinese net, normally you would face a deletion of your post instead of a fine, if anyone actually noticed. -- 魔琴 (talk) 01:25, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:STEULER-KCH Standort Mogendorf.jpg

Copyvio: Copyright holder: photographer Rainer Vogel. No indication of a Creative Commons Licensing. 87.150.14.218 19:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mussolini - Hitler Flag.svg

Derivative work of a medal design, no evidence that the original image is in the public domain. Di (they-them) (talk) 20:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files from the Kremlin's website by Tobby72

All the files listed bellow, uploaded by User:Tobby72 from the Kremlin's website, have been taken by photographers from RIA Novosti or TASS agency.

As stated in the "Using Website Content" of the Kremlin's website, contrary to other files, those aren't free: "The present rules for using materials from this website do not apply to RIA Novosti photographs that MIA Russia Today is the copyright holder of, or to photographs the TASS News Agency is the copyright holder of, when such photographs are posted on the www.kremlin.ru website with an indication of the agency and author." --Titlutin (talk) 21:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of files:

File:East Corridor, First Floor. Mosaic in domed lobby at head of stairway leading to ground floor, with quotation "Knowledge is power." Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building, Washington, D.C. (7562151600).jpg

bad copy of File:East Corridor, First Floor. Mosaic in domed lobby at head of stairway leading to ground floor, with quotation "Knowledge is power." Library of Congress Thomas Jefferson Building, Washington, D.C. LCCN2007687120.tif MBH 21:03, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is this a "bad copy"? It is completely normal that for NARA/LOC content we keep both a TIFF and a JPEG. - Jmabel ! talk 03:52, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@MBH,

Keep as @Jmabel is correct. This category has over 244,000+ files related to TIFF files and their related JPG files, Category:LC TIF images with categorized JPGs - Ooligan (talk) 04:27, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel files' resolution differs 10x times, it's not enough? Why we have many copies of files with 10x times worse resolution? MBH 08:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So by "bad" you mean "low-res". Thank you for answering my question. This should be overwritten with a higher-res version, but not deleted. - Jmabel ! talk 18:06, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, especially since the image is MUCH clearer in the JPG file (the quotation "Knowledge is power" is sharper, for instance)! Shāntián Tàiláng (talk) 15:58, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have now uploaded a version of the JPEG that is the same resolution as the TIFF. - Jmabel ! talk 21:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But why it's needed if we can use TIFF file for any purposes? Why we need to have 2 copies of exactly the same image? MBH 12:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Because for most purposes it is much more efficient to use a JPEG, but if someone wants to do derivative works it is best to start with the TIFF. We have at least hundreds of thousands, probably millions, of cases of this. If you object to this de facto policy, I suggest bringing it either to COM:Village pump or COM:Village pump/Proposals where it can be discussed in general. It is very unlikely that even most people with a strong opinion on this will see one particular DR. - Jmabel ! talk 16:49, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I understand that this file will not be deleted, you can close this nomination. But I still don't understand: "it is much more efficient to use a JPEG" - why? If I use a file in 300px thumbnail in Wikipedia article, there will be a little preview image in article and it isn't needed to download full scale TIFF, so why not to use TIFF? MBH 21:07, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it has something to do with how the mediawiki software processes these in terms of downsampling and sharpening, but I can't say I'm sure. Most of this was discussed 15+ years ago, and I don't remember the details, just the upshot. Someone else may be able to fill in more. - Jmabel ! talk 01:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kathleen Hewitt.jpeg

Unlikely own work. The works of British artists Jacob Epstein (1880-1959) are still copyrighted. Günther Frager (talk) 21:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep notable individual in public domain image, that doesn't have high quality of sculpture (likely covered by FOP). Minimally, this should crop out the sculpture because of the value of the image in depecting the subject, Sadads (talk) 14:37, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Antonio Cruz Collado

Works by Spanish sculptor Antonio Cruz Collad (1905-1962). His works are still copyrighted in its country of origin. Notice that I didn't included sculptures that were taken in public domain as FoP probably applies. His works would enter in the Spanish public domain in 2043 (notice that Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Spain says protection until 1987 was 80 years pma). The US copyright is more complex as it depends on the publication date, and many of these files doesn't give this information.

Günther Frager (talk) 21:38, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Palazzo di Marsciano - Brivio.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Ubimaior as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: privacy; not eligible for speedy — billinghurst sDrewth 21:47, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, unless the photo was taken from a private location. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:26, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Diario de Navarra, septiembre 1955.png

News article published in Spain in 1955. Still copyrighted in Spain (at least 70 pma). We can undelete it in 2051 when it enters in the US public domain. Günther Frager (talk) 21:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ruben Alves présentation de son film MISS.jpg

The movie poster is clearly copyrighted and definitively not de minimis. Günther Frager (talk) 22:05, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

l'affiche n'est pas entière #YanRB (talk) 22:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Can probably be replaced with already existing crop: File:Ruben Alves présentation de son film MISS (cropped).jpg IronGargoyle (talk) 11:45, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mafalda en el pabellón argentino del Salón del Libro de París 2014 (13352786213).jpg

Statue of Mafalda temporarily placed in an exhibition in Paris. It is still copyrighted as Quino, the creator of Mafalda, died in 2020. Günther Frager (talk) 22:11, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]