Commons:Deletion requests/2024/09/18

17 September 2024

19 September 2024

Deletion requests on 18 September 2024

September 18

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:National Anthem of Donetsk People's Republic (Instrumental Version).ogg

duplicate files. Recorded files with the same sound quality. 211.197.54.36 02:09, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Abzeronow (talk) 17:23, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is in public domain since like forever Abo Yemen ✉ 06:54, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:National Anthem of South Yemen (1979-1990).ogg

copyright violation Vichycombo (talk) 05:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per PD-Yemen. 95.55.235.27 19:31, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Гимн БНР.ogg

copyright violation Vichycombo (talk) 05:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per PD-BY-exempt. 95.55.235.27 20:56, 3 October 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 in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

All images contain an artwork that are protected by copyright. This is modern sculptures, reliefs, mosaics and other art objects. Authors are still alive or after death in less than 70 years. Not COM:FOP, see COM:FOP#Russia. Wrong licensing - all images is derivative works, see COM:DW.

Andrey Korzun (talk) 22:26, 20 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

They are not protected by copyright.

2. Допускается свободное использование путем воспроизведения и распространения изготовленных экземпляров, сообщения в эфир или по кабелю, доведения до всеобщего сведения в форме изображений произведений архитектуры, градостроительства и произведений садово-паркового искусства, расположенных в месте, открытом для свободного посещения, или видных из этого места.

(Russian Federation Civil codex). AndyVolykhov (talk) 19:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're wrong, I think. The mosaics, ceramics, stained glass, reliefs and frescos are not works of architecture. A work of architecture - entirely Metro station, details may relate to other forms of art, which the law prohibits - sculpture, painting, mosaics and so on. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 21:42, 21 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All of them are key parts of architectural objects. Architecture always includes decorative elements. We cannot eliminate them and keep only architecture. Moreover, this photo definitely shows station architecture. AndyVolykhov (talk) 13:37, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
They are not the key architectural elements - they are the key artistic elements. We can eliminate them. Your example - the fresco on left is easily cropped, and then illustration is under the rules. In its current version violates the rules, Commons:De minimis principle can not be applied, unfortunately. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 14:25, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You are definitely wrong. Moscow metro stations, according to typology of objects of cultural heritage in Russia, are works of architecture, with all its sculptures and mosaics, not of monumential art ([1]). We can eliminate decorative elements from images, of course, but we can not show achitecural heritage object without these elements. AndyVolykhov (talk) 14:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I do not think you understand what the synthesis of the arts. Details of architectural works may be relate to other kinds of art. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 15:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, sure they may be, but they do not become not to be the part of architectural works. Detail is a part, by definition :) AndyVolykhov (talk) 15:48, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If I understand correctly, user AndyVolykhov has received full answers during discussions Commons:Форум#Декор памятников архитектуры (on the Russian Forum). --Andrey Korzun (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, of course. AndyVolykhov (talk) 05:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro (part 2)

All images contain an artwork that are protected by copyright. This is modern sculptures, reliefs, mosaics and other art objects. Authors are still alive or after death in less than 70 years. Not COM:FOP, see COM:FOP#Russia. Wrong licensing - all images is derivative works, see COM:DW.

Andrey Korzun (talk) 15:57, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: Keep File:1905 год на стене метро Ул. 1905 года.JPG — it's just sign for 1905 year, nothing art in this file. Like this file. По-русски: на фотографии изображён лишь металлический знак для 1905 года, ничего художественного в нём нет. Точно также как здесь — --Brateevsky {talk} 14:13, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
See Commons:Threshold of originality. Obviously, the bas-relief of the figures is not appropriate, it is above the threshold of originality. This is no ordinary font. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 15:43, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Keep some files. A photo have no FoP in Russia and should be deleted only if the copyrighted artwork is the basic object of that reproduction, however, some images contains copyrighted artwork just as small part of image, which isn't a basic object of it, and these files should be kept or partially cut, not fully deleted from Commons. For example:
- File:Rimskaya_03.jpg — there is a photo of station hall, copyrighted sculpture on this photo occupies VERY small part of it. I think this photo must be fully kept.
- File:Babushkinskaya_Station_Moscow_2.jpg — relief on this photo occupies smaller part of it and isn't basic object; there is photo of station, which also includes platform, tunnel portals, escalators and ceiling of station.
- File:Посадочная_платформа_2.JPG — the basic object is entire station hall, which includes platform, walls and ceiling; the copyrighted plane artwork occupies small part of photo and photographed under big angle, so it isn't main object of photo.
- File:Kievsk APL 27.jpg — plane artworks are located just in left corner and behind lamps and aren't main objects of image.
  Unfortunately, I can not agree with you. Firstly, you do not exactly cite the law. Can not be used without the consent of copyright holders, "where portrayal of the work is used in commercial purposes". That is, there is a ban on commercial use, and this is not dependent on the size, it is the basic object or not. Secondly, some images do not have to know where the basic object. Anyway, it is impossible to apply the principle Commons:De minimis, I think. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 21:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

And also, copyrighted plane artwork on these files with trains

occupies half of photos, so photos should be cut to keep trains. — Xenotron (talk) 19:06, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- I agree that there is still possible to correct the errors. But who will do it? --Andrey Korzun (talk) 21:18, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

- - I crop one file: File:Yauza train at Maryina Roshcha station (Метропоезд Яуза на станции Марьина Роща) (4802643158) (cropped, train).jpg. I can do it with the other files, but the other are less quality...--Brateevsky {talk} 20:12, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer to ru-wiki pending. Leave open!! --Hedwig in Washington ^(mail?) 10:27, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Interiors of buldings and constructions in Russia are architectural objects, by Russian federal law. AndyVolykhov (talk) 17:09, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It does not change anything. In the photo we see the sculptures, mosaics, reliefs and other works of art. Of course, they are located in the interiors of the Moscow metro stations. But any painting placed in the interior of the museum, for example. I do not know that he wanted to prove his remark user AndyVolykhov. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 17:41, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There is the major difference between "placed in the interior" and "is the interior". All elements pictured above are interiors. AndyVolykhov (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. It's certainly details of the interiors. Interiors have a architectural objects, it is trivial, common knowledge and does not require links to Russian laws. But you forget about the synthesis of the arts [2]. I draw your attention to a few times. We'll have to repeat again.
The interiors of the stations of the Moscow metro is a synthesis of the arts - architecture, fine arts, decorative and applied arts. The mosaics and stained glass windows are works of decorative art, this is a trivial fact. Sculpture, bas-reliefs, murals are works of fine art, this is a trivial fact. The interior can be decorated with artwork or without it (for example, the style of Constructivism, Bauhaus). In the first case is a synthesis of the arts, in the second case is the architecture interiors in its pure form (it was a feature of the style Constructivism and the Bauhaus - nothing extra).
Artworks in the photographs made by sculptors, painters, mosaicists, chasers. These things did not make the architects. Architects solve common problems, such as proportions, ratio, materials and finishes, colors. Details solve other specialists. The photographs not only architectural works, although it is details of the interiors. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:37, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I continue. However, the synthesis of the arts does not cancel separate copyright in the separate parts of the work. For Example. There is kind of art music, there is kind of art poetry. The synthesis of the arts, for example, a song. Copyright controlled separately on the lyrics and the music of the song. For example, music can be traditional and not protected by copyright. Lyrics will still be protected by copyright. So also in our case. Works of architecture, interior design in general are free from copyright. Interior details - mosaics, sculptures, murals, stained-glass windows, bas-reliefs, are still protected by copyright. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 08:58, 7 July 2015 (UTC) All these arguments I have set out in Russian forum and they are not disproved. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 09:18, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

First, is is a piece of nearly incomprehensible English. Second, the outcome of the lengthy discussion on the Russian forum is that opinions about art objects in general and architectural objects in particular may vary. So far there is no evidence that the artwork in Moscow subway is copyrighted.

Everyone will likely agree that these photos can be stored on Russian Wikipedia instead of Wikimedia Commons, but I am sure that none of the volunteer editors should be forced to do the hard work of image transfer because of your personal opinion about the interpretation of the Russian law. --Alexander (talk) 09:54, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

>>So far there is no evidence that the artwork in Moscow subway is copyrighted. — The question is the opposite. Under the rules of the Commons, you have to prove be free from copyright. Refer to the burden of proof. It is your task.
But it is not difficult to prove the protection of copyright works on photos. See Russian Civil Code, Article 1259, paragraph 1: Objects of copyright are works of painting, sculpture, graphics, design, ... other works of fine art, .... works of decorative art. Article 1259, paragraph 4: For occurrence, implement and copyright protection does not require registration of the work or observance of any other formalities. Article 1259, paragraph 7: Copyrights extend to the part of the work ... if by nature it could be recognized as an independent result of the creative work of the author.
>>because of your personal opinion about the interpretation of the Russian law.— you are wrong. See Civil Code, Article 1276, paragraph 1: “Reproduction, broadcasting to the air or via cable shall be allowed, without the author's or other copyrightholder's consent or payment of royalties, of visual art, or photographic work, that permanently stand in places open for free attendance, except where portrayal of the work by such method is the basic object of that reproduction, or where portrayal of the work is used in commercial purposes.” Unequivocal ban if the basic object, or if commercial use of the work. It is obvious. --Andrey Korzun (talk) 16:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I am free from copyright, thank you.

The question at stake here is whether an artwork is a separate copyrighted object or an integral part of the subway station, and which copyright regulations should be applied. No existing legislation stipulates this. It remains a matter of opinion, and we have seen that opinions on this matter vary. There is ample evidence that your interpretation of the law is not shared by many other editors. It is a normal situation when no state regulation exists. But it is not normal that a personal and controversial opinion becomes a regulation. --Alexander (talk) 18:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, most, but kept some. There have been whole month for transferring files into ru.wiki. Taivo (talk) 14:06, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

Derivatives of 2D and 3D artworks without authors' permissions, no evidence of PD as well.Some demonstrate licence laundering by mos.ru website, which is not proper copyright holder to license the artworks depicted. No FOP in Russia for these.

Quick1984 (talk) 07:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The author of Teatralnaya porcelain sculptures is Natalya Danko. She died in 1942. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Teatralnaya (Moscow Metro). Andreykor (talk) 07:40, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andreykor, excellent. Please feel free to replace your 'own work' claims and CC licenses by proper data and I'll immediately withdraw nominations for these files. --Quick1984 (talk) 07:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced. Andreykor (talk) 08:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for co-operation. --Quick1984 (talk) 08:04, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only my file in this list is File:Medallion Kurskaya-Koltsevaya in Moscow.jpg, shot in 2008. I am outraged by the accusations of license laundering but I just ask to undelete this file in proper time. It's sad to have some of deleted works already overwritten by other users. --Rave (talk) 13:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Thomas Sewell Australian.jpg

This has not been released for use under a free license. The only claim made by the person uploading it is that they were sent the image by the author with permission to use it for Wikipedia. TarnishedPath^talk 08:13, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image has been released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 License and has no prior instantiation on the internet. Any claims of copyright violation should be substantiated. 114.77.179.191 07:32, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The person uploading the image specifically left the comment that "Uploaded a work by Thomas Sewell from It was sent to me privately by the author with permission to use it for wikipedia". That is not evidence that it has been released under CC BY-SA 4.0. The uploader can't release the image to CC BY-SA 4.0 on behalf of the copyright holder. TarnishedPath^talk 09:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Rahlin seasons

Commons:Derivative works, COM:FOP Russia

『Shiro Neko』^Обг. 08:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Some of these images could be cropped to remove the copyrighted part. Kcx36 (talk) 09:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:FiskAshtray.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Pigsonthewing as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Image from eBay; exact source and author not credited. PD claim applies to logo centre, not to the photograph Yann (talk) 10:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only source online is Alamy, which says that it is in the public domain. Yann (talk) 10:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alamy (who are notoriously poor in checking such matters, and in disclosing sources) will have taken if from us. EXIF shows it came from eBay, who expire old images, which is why it is no longer found there. As I noted in my speedy nomination "exact source and author not credited". It is clearly not a photograph taken by a man who died in 1932. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alamy says its copy is 1410 x 1419 px, while ours is only 1,094 × 1,101 px. Yann (talk) 12:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Upscaled? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:23, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pedra do Sal - Rio de Janeiro - 20240914100817.jpeg

sem valor enciclopédico SSoster (WMB) (talk) 11:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting bag. If kept, the file should be renamed and given a different description. My question is whether the bag art is OK even under Brazil's very lenient COM:TOO. I have no idea, and I hope the closing admin does. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:54, 18 September 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:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg

Complex shapes, it would pass the threshold for originality. Ionutzmovie (talk) 01:04, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per discussion on File:Adler klein.png and Category:Coats of arms of Frankfurt am Main. - Alexis Jazz 05:17, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Alexis Jazz. S.A. Julio (talk) 12:17, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --Herr chagall (talk) 05:31, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: derivative of an old coat of arms. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 14:04, 15 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg

This file was initially tagged by ~~Ahonc~~ Fma12 as Copyvio (Logo) and the most recent rationale was: SH. I don't think a file that's been kept in two DRs should be speedied. Jonteemil (talk) 12:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By Ahonc? Really?--Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) 14:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I wanted to nominate the file for deletion, but I was on the talk page when I made the request. This logo is not from 1911 but rather 1970 or 1998. See https://1000logos.net/eintracht-frankfurt-logo and discussion at https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Village_pump/Copyright&oldid=925537718#File%3AEintracht_Frankfurt_Logo.svg .|subpage=File talk:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg|year=2024|month=September|day=17}}. Redrawing an ancienc coat of arms creates a new copyright. Glrx (talk) 15:15, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The auotomatic gadget incorrectly mentioned Ahonc as copyvio tagger but it was really Fma12.Jonteemil (talk) 16:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I nominate the file for speedy deletion because the license tag "PD-textlogo" was obviously wrong. The eagle design looks pretty contemporany to be considered PD-old (at least a reliable source proves the contrary), so the statement "derivative file from the coat of arms of Frankfurt" should be reconsidered. Fma12 (talk) 18:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep That it is below TOO has been asserted already in the previous DR, because the Reichsadler is not protected (too old) and the logo doesn't show much more than that. --PaterMcFly (talk) 09:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From the discussion on File:Adler klein.png : "Ist Gemeinfrei, aber eine Marke. Der Eintrachtadler wurde der einfachheithalber um 1900 vom Stadtwappen abgekupfert. Die Version hier stammt von 1911 -- Stahlkocher 08:41, 23. Feb 2005 (CET) Auszug aus der Löschdiskussion". (The Eintracht eagle was copied from the city's coat of arms around 1900 for the sake of simplicity. The version here is from 1911)
I can't find specifically the 1911 version of the Category:Coats of arms of Frankfurt am Main that is being referred to. This particular rendition seems to be from 1970 (https://1000logos.net/eintracht-frankfurt-logo/) The difference in outline with the 1998 version is not sufficient for a new copyright.
As a derivative, it seems sufficiently different from versions in Category:Coats of arms of Frankfurt am Main to have its own copyright. So unless the 1911 version that Stahlkocher was referring to can be shown to be highly similar to the Eintracht version, it should probably be moved to Wikipedia as fair use. - Alexis Jazz ^{ping plz} 17:23, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://media.eintracht.de/image/upload/foto_3_ffv_klein-4c30.jpg, this version is one of the Logos the "Frankfurter Fußballverein" used in 1911, there is an article on the History of the Logo: https://museum.eintracht.de/news/eintracht125-die-geschichte-der-eintracht-adler-teil-1-157673 --Nick-4711 (talk) 21:38, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Inge Lehmann Memorial 1603.jpg

made by Elisabeth Toubro (1956-), thus still alive artist and there's no FOP in Denmark for works of art. 80.62.117.213 14:59, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Eqdh (talk · contribs)

Unlikely to be own work. Small images, missing metadata, incorrect dates.

Didym (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r

Contains copyrighted Disney images, blurring is possible for some entries.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 17:33, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Striking one entry, mistakenly included as it is not Disney produced artwork. (Oinkers42) (talk) 17:36, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Most other files in the category could probably be deleted also. They are newspaper clippings from various sources. It is not believable that all the works were released under a CC0 dedication by their respective copyright owners. Some can be readily identified as probable copyvios, for example the works by Raymond Jeannin (1917-2007), as in File:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r (17 of 94).jpg (text and bottom left drawing), File:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r (18 of 94).jpg (text) and File:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r (19 of 94).jpg (top drawing). It should be the burden of the uploader to provide evidence if any works are in the public domain, by researching the original sources and authors and by using believable status tags. Many texts being from circa 1944, identified authors must have died between then and 1953 for the works to be in the public domain in Europe. Works by identified authors whose life dates are unknown do not meet the condition of the template PD-old-assumed. Insufficiently documented works could be deleted per PRP. Some PD files may be those with only titles and the blank pages, which are not really useful to keep. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Augie by Martha Homsy.jpg

This file was initially tagged by Netherzone as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The artist, Martha Mood, who created this artwork died in 1972. The uploader is not the copyright holder of the work, yet summary states "own work". Might be in the public domain due to lack of notice or renewal. Yann (talk) 17:35, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1ère Légion d'Honneur de la guerre janviet 1939.jpg

1939 photograph, possibly French. URAA would have restored US copyright on this. Would need publication info if we don't want to wait until 2060. Abzeronow (talk) 19:48, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:200 lempira bill.png

COM:Honduras says nothing about currency, presumably still under copyright. Abzeronow (talk) 19:50, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose all other bill images on the Honduran Lempira page should be deleted aswell. The image also quite low quality. Commons lionsleeps23 (talk) 17:43, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Birte Fritsch McLeod Ganj (97).jpg

This is a mural in India which does not have freedom of panorama for 2D works. Whpq (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it is possible to crop the picture and keep the right side of the "so-called mural" that is only text.

In any case, this is not really a work of art but a message posted by a non-governmental association. There is no commercial stake here, and I am sure that this association will be quite happy to see its message broadcast and there is absolutely no risk that it will assert artistic or commercial rights. This request for deletion seems to me to be completely exaggerated and ill-advised. Djampa (talk) 09:24, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle explains why that would not be a reason for keeping this file. -- Whpq (talk) 17:38, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Firma di Giulio I Cybo-Malaspina.jpg

Si tratta con tutta probabilità di un falso. Il file fu caricato sulla Wikipedia italiana dall'utente poi infinitato Darja82, come "fotografia scannerizzata da "Giulio I Cybo-Malaspina", di L. Staffetti, R. Deputazione di Storia per le Provincie Modenesi, Modena, 1893". Il testo dello Staffetti si trova oggi digitalizzato su Google Books (più precisamente alle pagine 123-268 del volume I e 5-184 del volume II - Serie IV, pubblicati di seguito al link indicato), ma io non sono stato capace di rinvenire traccia dell'immagine asseritamente scannerizzata. Nel testo, anzi, non si trovano affatto fotografie riprodotte. Jeanambr (talk) 21:32, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snapcode barcode.svg

File:Snapchat logo.svg is noted as a non-free logo, deleted several times on Commons for this reason. 80.62.117.213 21:44, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the best thing to do is to reupload the image without the Snap logo? Or possibly simplifying the logo. havarhen (talk) 21:53, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/2024/09/18

Contents

September 18

File:National Anthem of Donetsk People's Republic (Instrumental Version).ogg

File:National Anthem of Donetsk People's Republic (Instrumental Version).ogg

File:カンプチア人民共和国国歌（合唱）.ogg

File:Viva Viva A FRELIMO (instrumental).ogg

File:Rwanda Rwacu - Hymne National du Rwanda 1962 (music only).ogg

File:Instrumental national anthem of Burundi.ogg

File:National Anthem of North Yemen (1962–1978).ogg

File:North yemen anthem (1978-unification).ogg

File:Anthem of South Yemen(1967-1979).ogg

File:National Anthem of South Yemen (1979-1990).ogg

File:Гимн БНР.ogg

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

File:Thomas Sewell Australian.jpg

Files in Category:Rahlin seasons

File:FiskAshtray.jpg

File:Pedra do Sal - Rio de Janeiro - 20240914100817.jpeg

File:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg

File:Eintracht Frankfurt Logo.svg

File:Inge Lehmann Memorial 1603.jpg

Files uploaded by Eqdh (talk · contribs)

Files in Category:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r

File:Augie by Martha Homsy.jpg

File:1ère Légion d'Honneur de la guerre janviet 1939.jpg

File:200 lempira bill.png

File:Birte Fritsch McLeod Ganj (97).jpg

File:Firma di Giulio I Cybo-Malaspina.jpg

File:Snapcode barcode.svg

Navigation menu

Commons:Deletion requests/2024/09/18

September 18

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

Files in Category:Art in Moscow Metro

Files in Category:Rahlin seasons

Files uploaded by Eqdh (talk · contribs)

Files in Category:Recueil. Le dessin animé. 1937-1946 - btv1b10525535r

Navigation menu

Search