Commons:Deletion requests/2024/10/10

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

October 10

[edit]

Is this logo own work or free? 181.203.28.41 00:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_talk:PD-USGov-DOE LNL works are not necessarily under PD terms. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 00:23, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No information on source of medallion or year it was made. User is claiming own work. Bastique ☎ appelez-moi! 01:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is this an own work? 181.203.28.41 02:14, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This image does look similar to an image from the Encyclopedia of Arkansas found here. Farragutful (talk) 19:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mdgil84 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: a bunch of logos of unclear significance, all with descriptions along the lines of "powerBi icon storage" (possibly referring to en:Microsoft Power BI?).

Omphalographer (talk) 04:17, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that they have anything to do with Microsoft — at least the first bunch listed, starting with "Lethal" appear to be variations of the coat of arms of a U.S. Army regiment: 12th Infantry Regiment (United States). But the fact that it carries the title Lethal Warriors in some variations might mean that it is some fandom stuff. Edit: Crossing out my fandom remark as those appear to be legit army insignia. Nakonana (talk) 17:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The batch starting with "Stalwart" is similarly from another regiment: 41st Infantry Regiment (United States). Nakonana (talk) 17:42, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The batch starting with "Blacksmith" is the 704th Support Battalion Unit Crest (Skilled and Steadfast) [1]. Nakonana (talk) 17:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "RedWarriors" batch appears to be related to some unit of the Vietnam War [2][3]. Nakonana (talk) 17:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The "BDE" batch is of another unit and we even have a version with a proper file name and categorization: File:2nd Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division Insignia.png. Nakonana (talk) 17:57, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking into this. If these are real insignia, could you please request appropriate renames for the following files?
I don't see any potential use for the modified images like File:LethalBlocks2.png, though. Omphalographer (talk) 19:58, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think renaming is not recommended as long as the deletion request is still open, so we'll have to wait with this. Nakonana (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Skazi as no permission (No permission since) Krd 04:41, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep: This file was uploaded as an Own Work by Овладевающая and marked without them being notified on their talk page, nor any reason given for their ownership of the image being under scrutiny. Google Lens reveals no instances of the image appearing on the internet before Овладевающая's September 7th upload to the Commons, only two news articles from this current October in Russian, as a ban on Quadrobers (no English article) has been in consideration in Russia. I believe this photo is the work of the original uploader. Kaasterly (talk) 01:07, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, no. I don't think so. No EXIF, no permission. I'm not going to explore all the social media communities to find where this image was taken from. Either the permission is added to the photo or its deleted, there are no other options. This is a user who logged in to Wikipedia for the first and last time and is trying to “improve” the article by adding photos to it from social media. And your Google Lens doesnt index such images. Skazi 10:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stand corrected in that the two news articles aren't the only instances of this image appearing on the internet. However, after clicking on "exact matches", and clicking on all that don't give a date on Google, the earliest date I can find on an instance not associated with Wikimedia or Wikimedia clones is a Livejournal post from September 16, 9 days after the Commons upload. I believe Google Lens does indeed index from social media; the image we're debating on appears in an X tweet from October 3rd, 26 days after the Commons upload. Here is an instance of Google Lens indexing images from Facebook, LinkedIn, X, Pinterest, and YouTube. Here is an instance of Google Lens indexing an image from VKontakte. Worth noting is that the article this image is used in has been among the top five six most visited on the Russian Wikipedia since at least Monday October 4th. Also, I think this being Овладевающая's only contribution makes it more unlikely that they would know they were contacted in time, even if they were contacted about the initial no permission since nomination. Kaasterly (talk) 20:45, 13 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is also the issue of the mask if the uploader/subject did not create it. Abzeronow (talk) 23:54, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but we will have to delete these photos because they depict artworks by Frida Kahlo, whose copyright has not yet expired.

Gnom (talk) 07:33, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see also:
--Gnom (talk) 11:12, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Freedom of panorama in Mexico applies to public places regardless of a payment to enter El Nuevo Doge (talk) 21:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep File:El Museo de Frida Khalo (6086563681).jpg as a US work this is unpublished and the author has been dead for at least 70 years so PD-US-unpublished applies El Nuevo Doge (talk) 23:35, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This file was initially tagged by Prototyperspective as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: doesn't seem to be CCBY (?) Prototyperspective (talk) 12:43, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Universitätsklinikum Bonn as Speedy (Löschen) and the most recent rationale was: Nicht mehr aktuell --Universitätsklinikum Bonn (talk) 09:34, 9 October 2024 (UTC) Yann (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 10:39, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Xu Beihong died in 1953, and thus this work would not have been public domain when the URAA came into effect in 1996. The painting will only be public domain in the United States in 1935 (per the 1939 date given by China Daily).  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:15, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine. The house was built in 1957 and maybe the photo violates architects copyright І. Михайленко, В. Новиков, Д. Чорновол.. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:31, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


And also

There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and the photos violate sculptors and architects copyright. Created 2001. Derivatives of work - photo nonfree sculpture. No Permission from the sculptor Садовник Василь Петрович, dead in 2005. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


And also

There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and the photos violate sculptors and architects copyright. Created after 1990. Derivatives of work - photo nonfree sculpture. No Permission from the sculptor. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:51, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Incorrect restoration and overall bad quality. We have, for example. file:Bathyopsis fissidens head.png. Taivo (talk) 16:27, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very improbable that the uploader (Nemoianu at Romanian Wikipedia) is the author of this photo. Judging by their short contributions list, Nemoianu is most probably Andrei Filotti himself, and the photo looks like has been taken by an official photographer – or at least not Mr. Filotti himself as he is in the picture. Gikü (talk) 17:44, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Andrei Filotti Bangladesh.jpg is in the same situation. Actually it may be a good idea to review all photos in ro:Andrei Filotti. Gikü (talk) 17:46, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, it's clearer now. The following images are also uploaded by Nemoianu and claimed as own work:
Thus Nemoianu is either Filotti's life-long photographer, that covered his life from 1938 to at least 2004, or it's Mr. Filotti himself, who uploaded photos from his personal collection. Trouble is, the photos have Mr. Filotti as the subject, not the photographer. We don;t know who the photographers are and what would be their copyright claim.
Tagging User:Afil because he really is Andrei Filotti. Gikü (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no freedom of panorama in Russia for sculptures and the sculptor en:Zurab Tsereteli is still living. The photo violates his copyright. Taivo (talk) 18:35, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've marked the image for transfer to wikivoyage where the image can be hosted without limits according to Russian law. Please wait with the deletion until the bot has transferred the image. (Unfortunately freedom of panorama-like rules for sculptures in Russia only apply if the image is used in travel guides.) Nakonana (talk) 19:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no freedom of panorama in Estonia. The sculptor en:Ekke Väli is still living and the photo violates his copyright. Taivo (talk) 18:47, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Isle of Man Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:00, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio see metadata which read Copyright holder KSENIA GAILLARD Hoyanova (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

License information in the source is unclear: it has an icon for CC BY-NC-SA, which is linked to CC BY 4.0, and the following text says it is licensed under ODbL 1.0. Green Mostaza (talk) 20:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. Per Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2023/10/18#File:María Eugenia Dengo Obregón.png, it looks like the link to CC BY 4.0 is enough. I'll wait for an administrator to confirm this and remove the tag from the image. Green Mostaza (talk) 21:01, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio see metadata which read Copyright holder KSENIA GAILLARD Hoyanova (talk) 20:02, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio see metadata which read Copyright holder KSENIA GAILLARD Hoyanova (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

copyvio see metadata which read Copyright holder KSENIA GAILLARD Hoyanova (talk) 20:04, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

no metadata no photographer given no permission no source Hoyanova (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La persona que aparece en la foto ya no trabaja en el Centro Takiwasi y utiliza la imagen indicando falsamente que ha sido capacitado por nosotros para dar ayahuasca. Austro180 (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

La persona que aparece en la foto ya no trabaja en el Centro Takiwasi y utiliza la imagen indicando falsamente que ha sido capacitado por nosotros para dar ayahuasca. Austro180 (talk) 20:18, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a reason for deletion. --Rosenzweig τ 10:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Green Mostaza as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: COM:FOP Costa Rica. Converting to DR per COM:CSD#F3. King of ♥ 21:28, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1936 American photograph from negative. CC license seems dubious since no photographer info is given at Flickr source. Flickr upload could have been first publication and we might have to wait until 2057. Abzeronow (talk) 22:34, 10 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete I agree, it came from scanning a negative so we have no evidence that a copy (print) was ever circulated. If it came from a family member, the Flickr account can file a VRT as the heir. --RAN (talk) 17:35, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]