Commons:Deletion requests/2024/09/25

24 September 2024

26 September 2024

Deletion requests on 25 September 2024

September 25

File:Shell Foundation Logo.jpg

TOO in the UK is very low. Similar files were previously uploaded to Commons and deleted (see DR 1 and DR 2 for further details) Fma12 (talk) 00:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shell Foundation Logo white.jpg

TOO in the UK is very low. Similar files were previously uploaded to Commons and deleted (see DR 1 and DR 2 for further details) Fma12 (talk) 00:55, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berezovychi Vol-Volynskyi-Volynska-Monument to the countrymen-general view.jpg

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created after WW2. So the image should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary. Adamant1 (talk) 01:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Erected in 1966 according to uk Wikipedia[1], but unfortunately no info on the author there.

What if we'd crop it to the obelisk only? Nakonana (talk) 17:45, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Mass grave of Soviet soldiers in Bilashiv

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created in 1956. So these images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 01:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say the second photo might fall under de minimis. The podest itself is probably below COM:TOO. The text on the plaque is very generic ("Eternal glory to the Soviet warriors who died to protect the homeland during the battles of ww2"). So all that's left are the photos. But neither of the photos is the focus of the image and thus are de minimis. And judging by the death date of those depicted, all photos were taken before 1944. Nakonana (talk) 17:56, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Monument to Soviet soldiers-countrymen in Bilashiv, Kovel Raion

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created after WW2. So these images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 01:38, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bilychi Ivanychivskyi Volynska-Monument to the countrymen-general view.jpg

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created after WW2. So the image should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary. Adamant1 (talk) 01:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Memorial sign to the heroes of SU, Blazhenyk

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created in 1985. So thes images should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary.

Adamant1 (talk) 02:05, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Боратин - меморіал.jpg

Unfortunately there's no FOP in Ukraine and it's pretty unlikely that the artist of this monument has been dead for more then 70 years since it was created in 1984. So this image should be deleted as COPYVIO unless someone can provide evidence to the contrary. Adamant1 (talk) 02:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20231201 Dubai Foto Oficial COP28-cortesia COP281461.jpg

Author is Mahmoud Khaled / COP28 per Metadata, not a work from the Flickr user, thus the PD license is invalid A1Cafel (talk) 05:06, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La fotografía fue publicada por la Presidencia de la República de Colombia además de tener CC0 y es totalmente legal su publicación de hecho su subida a Wikipedia fue por medio del link así que no hay ninguna razón para su borrado Danielmoreno4774 (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The metadata of the photo states the author is "COP 28 / Mahmoud Khaled", so it is a work for hire. So the photographer was Mahmoud Khaled, but the copyright holder is the U.N. (the organizer of the conference). The Colombian government likely received a copy from the organizers, but they are not the copyright holder to re-license it. The photo is also available in the U.N. official Flickr account at https://www.flickr.com/photos/unfccc/53367995361/in/album-72177720313065328 and it is licensed under CC-NC-SA, a license incompatible with our policy. Günther Frager (talk) 20:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dick Cheney in May 2019.jpg

Anonymous photo is still protected by copyright, not PD in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 05:14, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:LRP Logo Letras.svg

Logo likely to be above COM:TOO A1Cafel (talk) 05:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo de Som Castelldefels.jpg

Logo likely to be above COM:TOO A1Cafel (talk) 05:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo del Grup municipal de Primàries Granollers.png

Logo likely to be above COM:TOO A1Cafel (talk) 05:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hedley Thomas Crop.jpg

On commons since 2012 but the source is credited to Hedley Thomas, would need VRT. Tightly cropped formal photo, PCP Gbawden (talk) 06:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t know what VRT means. Hedley Thomas emailed me this photo himself and claimed copyright of it. You can contact him to confirm provenance. —Surturz (talk) 08:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:VRT - if you got it from someone else the onus is on you to provide us that permission. The permission would need to come from the photographer Gbawden (talk) 09:08, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have been a Wikipedian since 2006 and I have a clean block log. I am asserting that the subject of the photo provided the photo for the express purpose of adding it to his Wikipedia article. It's been a while since I have actively edited, but I think the onus is on you to quote the wikipedia/WM commons policy you are asserting the photo violates? You have provided no evidence at all that contradicts what I have asserted, so you should assume good faith that I am telling the truth. Perhaps your energies would be better spent securing a more up-to-date photo of Hedley Thomas? --Surturz (talk) 09:50, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The policy is laid out on the COM:Licensing page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure it is, but no-one has specified which part of that policy is being violated here. --Surturz (talk) 03:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the relevant point is on COM:VRT, instead:

If any of the following statements is one you could make, then you must send an email to the VRTS system:

I have received permission from the original author (not me) to upload the file to Commons.

Please ask the copyright holder to send a permission statement to the address listed above. We require that owners make a clear statement that they release the image under a free license; to help prevent confusion or misunderstandings we prefer one of the email templates be used. Permission grants must specifically contain a free license grant and may not merely give permissions for Commons or Wikipedia. If you have already uploaded the image to Commons, follow the instructions on Template:Permission pending.

If the image has been deleted, do not recreate the deleted content but include in the correspondence a link to the deleted image or a link to your talk page in order to help the work of the VRT members.

Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not about to hassle Hedley Thomas about a 12-year-old photo of him. Hard to see how you are making the world a better place by deleting this image. And next time wikilink the relevant policy in the nomination, so you aren't wasting people's time. --Surturz (talk) 08:21, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't delete anything on this site, and I volunteered to spend my own time to quote the relevant policy for you. You're welcome and goodbye. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jericho Trompete Ju87.jpg

Looks far more like a scan or something, but not own work. there is also a signature in the image. Avron (talk) 06:20, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Flag of Lunda Tchokwe.svg

copyvio - found elsewhere, 2011 https://web.archive.org/web/20110208141129/https://www.africafederation.net/Lunda_Tchockwe.htm TheLoyalOrder (talk) 06:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not sure this would be under TOO for angola TheLoyalOrder (talk) 06:58, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:01 Manhattan NYC MTA subway 8286697034 o.jpg

No FoP for 2D works in the United States A1Cafel (talk) 08:21, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

De minimis: long shot down a platform; ads are too small and unfocused to be usable. Should be kept as a 2014 photo of that subway platform, unless there's a copyright problem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Since COM:DM US requires "so trivial" that will not impose legal consequences. Based on the proportion of the advertisement in this photo, IMO this exceeded the definition. --A1Cafel (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  As a non-lawyer, you seem to be misinterpreting the legal weight of the word "trivial," as you are ignoring the quote from Ets-Hokin v. Skyy Spirits, Inc. and its context, which is that:
  
  'Skyy's position that photographs of everyday, functional, noncopyrightable objects are subject to analysis as derivative works would deprive both amateur and commercial photographers of their legitimate expectations of copyright protection. Because Ets-Hokin's product shots are shots of the bottle as a whole—a useful article not subject to copyright protection—and not shots merely, or even mainly, of its label, we hold that the bottle does not qualify as a "preexisting work " within the meaning of the Copyright Act. As such, the photos Ets-Hokin took of the bottle cannot be derivative works.'
  
  This is a photo of an entire subway platform. The ads are incidental to the shot. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mahmud Ghaznavi.jpg

Derived from a painting on an Afghan stamp, which may be subject to copyright. Hakaped (talk) 08:47, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Screenshots of Mastodon (social network)

Social media screenshots that include non-free news story thumbnails, user photos and usericons. File:Mastodon Single-column-layout.png is marked as COM:DEMINIMIS, but the large cat photo and the user icons seem like the main visual elements of the image, it would just be boxes and a few words otherwise.

Belbury (talk) 08:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe it's just me, but I look at the interface before anything else. So all that you mention is not the main visual focus to me. Mondo (talk) 10:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:المركبة الهجينة.jpg

توريج ودعاية Mohammed Qays 🗣 10:01, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:مروان احمد كاظم الشمري.pdf

ملف سيرة ذاتية Mohammed Qays 🗣 10:03, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alison Darwin en Sala Apolo.jpg

Copyvio Darwin! 186.172.152.158 10:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Veronica Raimo Funweek.it 2024.png

Reindizzamento superfluo Freddiev600 (talk) 10:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Bernard Boucheix

As evidenced by either the description or watermarks in the images themselves, these relatively recent (all within the last 30 years or so) portrait photos all showing the same person are apparently photos by professional photo studios, so presumably not the uploader's own work. We'd need COM:VRT permissions to keep them. And even if we had those permissions, there's still the questions if this person is in project scope and even if he is, if we need so many portraits of him.

Rosenzweig τ 11:04, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Two of these photos - File:Bernard Boucheix dit Baron de Reyvialles 22 avril 2023 Studio HARCOURT.jpg and File:Bernard BOUCHEIX dit Baron de REYVIALLES à Paris 22 avril 2023 Studio HARCOURT.jpg - do actually have VRT permission. Scope is still questionable, though. Omphalographer (talk) 18:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt that this is correct. That VRT ticket was added by User:Ruthven as part of the ongoing Studio Harcourt discussion. I don't think that this ticket from 2020 covers photos from 2023. --Rosenzweig τ 19:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosenzweig: @Omphalographer: Please note that in the File pages it's the template {{VRT info}}, linking the original permission, and not a Permission template. Ruthven (msg) 20:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't make out the name of the photographer at File:Le Baryton Bernard Boucheix fondateur du festival VOLCADIVA.jpg, they should be deleted but the category for the photographer should be added so that when the copyright expires they are already properly categorized. --RAN (talk) 04:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No photographer is named as a person, but there's a watermark N.PHOTO with some graphical elements, which is apparently the logo of a photo studio. The same applies to many of the files listed above. --Rosenzweig τ 10:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Europa Miniköche Logo.svg

Logo from https://www.minikoeche.eu. No permission from copyright holder. MrBenjo (talk) 11:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Usage rights have been discussed with management and granted. Anilcoskundeniz (talk) 11:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The permission of the copyright holder to use the logo under a free licence needs to be proven to the Volunteer Response Team to ensure that the image can be kept on Commons. Please contact the copyright holder and ask them to provide verification (e.g. by using email templates). –MrBenjo (talk) 14:32, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tun mahathir - Adakah melayu bersatu apabila tertekan.webm

I think the youtube channel this is from is not the original source and thus can't license it under CCBY or is it? Prototyperspective (talk) 11:31, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So where do you think the original source is? Baginda 480 (talk) 15:18, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It says something in the corner of the video, look that up. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:46, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Journal Express.jpg

COM:Derivative work: photograph of a newspaper article. Original article copyright belongs to the newspaper. MKFI (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:SheridanFamilyInstagram.jpg

Previously published in https://www.instagram.com/heidimaesheridan/p/C3CKum1uSLr/. VRT permission needed to verify copyright. MKFI (talk) 12:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Logo Official USU.png

duplicate Zulfahmi purba (talk) 12:43, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:COMPETITION DE CANOE - 2013 SUR LE FLEUVE PASSER (5).jpg

The photo has bad quality. We have file:KAYAK CANOE.jpg about the same. Taivo (talk) 12:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non ho davvero capito, comunque fatemi sapere se ho commesso qualche errore. Cercherò di migliorare. Grazie per la comprensione. Valérie Varsivolaffa (talk) 06:46, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:National Stadium, Lagos.jpg

This is actually an image of the National Theatre not the National Stadium. It's an error on my part. Ridzaina (talk) 13:29, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can request renaming for the file with Template:Rename. Nakonana (talk) 19:12, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Judeburnside (talk · contribs)

derivative of File:NetJets Sign.jpg, but there's a problem, having the horizontal white bar removed, this image is no longer a faithful representation of reality, hence no com:educational value and com:out of scope.

File:NetJets HQ Sign.jpg

RZuo (talk) 13:37, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lycée dominique Savio.jpg

C'est l'image de la façade en travaux. COM-ACTION237 (talk) 13:41, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Prof. Lindsay Falvey (talk · contribs)

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagrams.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Prof. Lindsay Falvey and EugeneZelenko: These PDFs look like clear-cut cases of {{BadPDF}}, but they could be quite useful if they were reuploaded as their own images. If you want I could convert them to images myself, but I'd prefer that "Prof. Lindsay Falvey" upload them instead. Duckmather (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:CharlotteHendrickxSeflie.jpg

no permission from photopgrapher - see nl:Charlotte Hendricks where is clearly stated "Credits Emily Sandifer" Hoyanova (talk) 15:11, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

zie hier pdf van de mail met approval www.jbi.be/approval.pdf

ik hoop dat dit voldoende is

grts Destavener (talk) 15:25, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's not enough. The document does not contain a release into a free license. All images at Wikipedia/Wikimedia must be available for use anywhere, for any purpose. A permission for usage at a Wikipedia page is not enough. Jcb (talk) 14:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ally got punked... (1863007176).jpg

Unused personal picture from Flickr Enyavar (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Noteworthy Hair fashion is most important point in this photograph. --Benzoyl (talk) 16:14, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is of interest in this 0815 hair fashion? That you are able to align your head and a background wall ornament?

We also delete pictures of posers who try to move the leaning tower of Pisa back into a straight position. --Enyavar (talk) 17:21, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you’re saying. This maybe kidding (not educational) photo.

But also, international established "culture". Category:People holding the Leaning Tower (Pisa) / Category:Forced perspectives (Pyramid, Merlion...). --Benzoyl (talk) 08:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Whowearedesa.jpg

No permission from the source and author A1Cafel (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Prédio da ONU em Nova York, estampado com os Objetivos de Desenvolvimento Sustentável.jpg

Author is UN Photo/Cia Pak per Metadata, not uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 17:07, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Roman16Prok (talk · contribs)

Historical photos, missing essential info: original author, source, date, and permission.

P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:40, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have corrected it according to the rules. Thank you for your message. Roman16Prok (talk) 05:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your so-called corrections are wrong or just assumptions. You added {{PD-anon-expired}} to all images including ones clearly published after January 1, 1929. So you clearly don't know anything about these images that you just grabbed from the Internet, and you surely don't know if they are really PD. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:06, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This might be a bit more complicated. For example, File:Храм в Бекетовке. 1974 год.jpg is sourced to https://dzen.ru/a/Y-Zl97uZICyTbOKf which then says that the image was taken from the "OKN passport" (in Russian: "Бекетовка. Храм Казанской иконы Божьей Матери. 1974 г. Фото из паспорта ОКН."). That "OKN passport" stands for "Паспорт объекта культурного наследия (ОКН)" (lit. Passport of Culture Heritage Site). The linked dzen.ru source provides the passport number of the depicted church: Паспорт ОКН № 1300000194. If you google that, the first result you'll find is a .pdf file on Ru Wikivoyage which is licensed as PD because it is a document published by the government. See: [2]. I didn't (yet) check whether the image is indeed in that pdf document, but if it is, then it would mean that at least File:Храм в Бекетовке. 1974 год.jpg is indeed in the public domain, if I'm not mistaken? Nakonana (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK I checked the pdf and the image is indeed there. The exact license text for the pdf file on Ru wikivoyage is: "Это официальный документ государственных органов или органов местного самоуправления, который не охраняется авторским правом согласно статье 1259 части четвёртой Гражданского кодекса Российской Федерации № 230-ФЗ от 18 декабря 2006 года.This official document is in public domain. Please, do not bother us with questions about its copyright status." Nakonana (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Никольская церковь в селе Левжа.jpg and File:Никольская церковь в с. Левжа.jpg were taken before 1915. I've added another source that has those photos and confirms the creation date of the photos and that the author is unknown.

I've updated the above three files regarding source information, date of creation, and license tag in accordance with my findings.

So, the only two photos in this nomination that are likely still copyrighted are those that show Nikolay Uchvatov. Nakonana (talk) 21:02, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And another note regarding the File:Никольская церковь в селе Левжа.jpg and File:Никольская церковь в с. Левжа.jpg: the website with the date and author information I found states: "Фотография из архива Романа Прокопьева." (lit. "Photograph from the archive of Roman Prokopyev.") Now, with this information in mind, please compare this name with the uploader's username. There's a chance that the uploader did not just grab the photos from the internet, but is actually the person who provided those photos from their archive to various websites. Nakonana (talk) 21:27, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:All India Institute of Medical Sciences Mangalagiri.jpg

probable copyright violation Saiphani02 (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Dan Osborn

Several of these (Dan Osborn AFL-CIO of Nebraska Endorsement and Osborn Headshot 1, namely) return reverse img search results crediting Osborn's senate campaign, and I'd consider the rest COM:PCP.

Queen of Hearts (talk) 19:15, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Five of the nine photos linked above are mine personally, which I grant the Osborn for Senate campaign full rights to. The four others are from another photography who has also granted the Osborn for Senate campaign full rights to the photos. 137.48.255.229 20:39, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The images have their Exif metadata and are of extremely high resolution. I'm unable to find with an image search the equivalent files with the high resolution or Exif metadata. For instance if File:Osborn Headshot 1.jpg is reverse image searched there are matches; however, the matches are of lower resolution and do not have the original Exif metadata. --Guest2625 (talk) 01:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The images were uploaded by a user named Ramseywill. Googling "Will Ramsey Nebraska" yields the linkedin page of someone who has volunteered as a photographer for several Nebraska campaigns. I am not convinced that COM:PCP applies here--Occam's razor suggests that Ramsey took them, retained the rights (as you'd expect for a volunteer, not someone working for hire), and licensed them to the campaign, and that he uploaded them here. Blameless (talk) 23:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Seattle Kraken

Above COM:TOO US. w:File:Seattle Kraken official logo.svg is non-free.

Jonteemil (talk) 20:42, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mechanism of old Gatling gun 1.webp

Datei wird nicht korrekt dargestellt HobbyAstronaut (talk) 20:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep No valid reason for deletion. It's an animated WEBP. Preview doesn't work. The file does work. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:22, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a fully functioning version in gif-format here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mechanism_of_old_Gatling_gun1.gif

The webp-version can be deleted. HobbyAstronaut (talk) 07:52, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still voting keep. Neither AGIF not AWEBP are good. MNG is the good animation format botched by the proprietary malware lobby. Keep both AWEBP and AGIF until a viable alternative exists. Taylor 49 (talk) 13:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mechanism of old Gatling gun 2.webp

Datei wird nicht korrekt dargestellt HobbyAstronaut (talk) 20:57, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep No valid reason for deletion. It's an animated WEBP. Preview doesn't work. The file does work. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:23, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a fully functioning version in gif-format here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Mechanism_of_old_Gatling_gun2.gif The webp-version can be deleted. HobbyAstronaut (talk) 07:56, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still voting keep. Neither AGIF not AWEBP are good. MNG is the good animation format botched by the proprietary malware lobby. Keep both AWEBP and AGIF until a viable alternative exists. Taylor 49 (talk) 13:41, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arabic explanation of the engravings on the pillar from Al-Ar fort.jpg

Copyrighted text (in Yemen so no FOP argument). Elli (talk) 21:19, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There might be an FOP argument. Per COM:FOP Yemen: "Taking photographs of any entity that has been previously photographed" is allowed. So if that's the case, anyplace that's previously been photographed should be OK. If that's not the case, I hope the closing admin explains why. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:1964 diary (IA 1964diary00vand).pdf

Handwritten diary by an author who died in 1976. First publication may have been by The Internet Archive, Undelete in 2047. Abzeronow (talk) 21:49, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I don't see a copyright notice. If we treat this as an American work (as the author does seem to have been an American), then, per Commons:Hirtle chart, if it was published without a copyright notice, it's PD. If, however we treat this as a work from Papua New Guinea (as it was indeed used while leading the 7th Archbold Expedition to New Guinea), then Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Papua New Guinea suggests that copyright expires 50 years after the author dies (i.e. in 2026), so it's still copyrighted until then. If it's PD, we could use it as an index on Wikisource. Duckmather (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The printed diary (which is a U.S. work, where the diary was published) is obviously PD-US-no notice, although there’s not much there to copyright. Also, the first publication would have been by the university through BHL; IA is just a mirror for that stuff. TE(æ)A,ea. (talk) 16:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]