Commons:Deletion requests/2024/10/18

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

October 18

[edit]

Uploaded by SPA to a Wikipedia page that is filled with SOCK editing. Uploader likely does not own the copyright to the image. CNMall41 (talk) 00:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Wuwenhao19960507 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright violation and not own work. Low resolution. Photos can be found in the Internet by Google search.

SCP-2000 02:26, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I found the picture on the Chinese app Xiaohongshu. I contacted the author of the picture, DK, and he agreed to let me use it on Wikipedia. The following is the chat record between me and the author. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 04:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wuwenhao19960507: Hello, thanks for your reply.
Could you please provide the exact link to these photos? Moreover, could you please ask the author to declare a suitable license, for example CC-BY-SA 4.0 (which is usually used on Wikimedia Commons), by either following this instruction or sending an email to the Volunteer Response Team? SCP-2000 04:59, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have re-uploaded the image using CC-BY-SA 4.0 license and marked the author's name on the image. Does this meet the requirements? This is the original author's publishing page Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 05:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your help. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 05:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wuwenhao19960507: Hello, you have to ask the author to declare a suitable license by themselves, by following above mentioned instruction. Thanks. SCP-2000 05:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have re-uploaded the image. Is this OK? I will ask the original author to write a CC-BY-SA 4.0 license and send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Is this correct? This is my first time uploading an image, so there are these errors. Thank you for your guidance. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 05:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wuwenhao19960507: Hello, you don't need to re-upload photos. I will ask the original author to write a CC-BY-SA 4.0 license and send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Yes, it is correct. Thanks for your help. SCP-2000 10:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear administrator, I have sent the email according to your instructions. The content link is here. Do you think this is correct? Thank you for your guidance. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wuwenhao19960507: Hello, you have to ask the author to send the email by themselves, rather than yourself. Thanks. SCP-2000 14:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If need a higher resolution picture, I can ask the author to provide it and re-upload it. But this is a copyrighted work. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 04:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wuwenhao19960507: Hello, thank you for your effort in contributing images. I have received and verified the permissions for these two photos File:Dafowan.DK.jpg File:Thousand-Hand Guanyin.DK.jpg. As File:Dafowan.jpg and File:Thousand-Hand Guanyin.jpg are duplicate, it is unnecessary to keep them anymore.
Moreover, I have not received permission for File:Beishan Rock Carvings.jpg. Do you want to keep this photo? If so, please ask the author to send an email to us. Thank you again. SCP-2000 16:22, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no need to keep this photo, thank you. Wuwenhao19960507 (talk) 05:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pergamon World Atlas

[edit]

All files in these categories:

These are over 300 maps scanned from Pergamon World Atlas, published in 1968 (the maps appear to be created in 1967). I see no reason for those files to be hosted here on the CC-BY-SA licence.

The source page mentions that those maps may be copirighted and its the user responsibility to seek permission. Once the permission is obtained they will allow the use of their material under a Creative Commons non-commercial license. --Botev (talk) 06:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I also raised that question with the uploader. These are fine maps, but the institution that created them seems defunct (Polish Army Topography Service). So, the initial uploader should provide a reasoning why Polish copyright would allow Commons to host the files, potentially some kind of exception for government-produced material.
Otherwise, my current assumption is that this atlas can enter public domain at earliest in 1968 + 70 + 1. So, review for Undelete 2039. --Enyavar (talk) 08:50, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid those maps would still be copyrighted in the USA for 95 years after publication due to URAA, so it's more like Undelete 2064. --Botev (talk) 08:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if it's useful, but some of these maps are being used for commercial purposes, like here and here. So, from this point of view, I don't have issues with these maps.--Babelia (talk) 15:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The point is we need explaination as to why these maps can be used freely for any purpose and by anyone. The mere fact that someone sells those maps is not enough. From this point of view, I regard these maps as copyrighted. --Botev (talk) 17:34, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Babelia, there is sadly a reason why Commons has a lack media from between the 1950s and 2000s.
David Rumsey and other sites are apparently seing no risks with getting sued - or there are 'secret' agreements with the copyright owners that they don't (and don't need need to) make transparent. Commons has different principles, so Botev is right here. Commons needs to verify that the maps are free to use, and we currently can't. Abandonment by the copyright owners does not waive copyright - we either need to point to the concrete rule that makes this material free from copyright; or we need a free licensing statement by the copyright owners that can be attached via VRT. --Enyavar (talk) 22:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

However, on the second thought, I wonder if those maps can qualify as official material and fall under {{PD-Polishsymbol}}, perhaps? --Botev (talk) 09:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anything needed to keep these images in Commons. Babelia (talk) 19:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author is Saurabh Rahurkar, not the same as the uploader, I doubt the claim of own work of this photo A1Cafel (talk) 10:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is me. Cave Johnson is not a real person, they are a character from a video game. Most people don't use their full names as their wikipedia username. For instance I am sure A1Cafel is not the real name of the person who is raising doubts
Happy to provide raw files if that will convince the doubters. Cave Johnson (talk) 18:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cave Johnson: You can submit a prove of identity to VRT--A1Cafel (talk) 10:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide instructions on how to do so. The page you linked talks about emailing and the raw file is much too large for emailing.
I also need to know that this interaction will be deleted after that verification since I don't want my irl life identity associated here.
I would also like to know who you are and what your role with Wikipedia/Wikimedia commons is before I engage in this laborious exercise. Your user page offers no information on your credibility to make these requests although they do state your preferences on keeping your real life unmolested. Clearly, you seem to think it's OK to maintain your "real life" separate from Wikipedia life yet seem to not afford the same consideration to other users. Again, while I can easily provide the RAW, I am indignant at this overstepping and casual accusation of stealing work when based on the licensing settings, this issue could be easily addressed by adding an attribution. Not to mention, editing EXiF information is a trivial task. If a person—myself included—wanted to pass off another person's work as their own, it is absurdly easy to either scrub the EXIF data or to edit it to change the author. This series of accusations could easily continue on and on, and a person could easily raise doubts on the provenance of the RAW files since anybody can change the author name in the meta data/exif. Cave Johnson (talk) 04:13, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. I think we can assume good faith here. All EXIF by uploader matches, including other uploads and file description details which would not likely be available if the image was stolen. IronGargoyle (talk) 12:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author is Saurabh Rahurkar, not the same as the uploader, I doubt the ownership of this photo A1Cafel (talk) 10:19, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is me. Cave Johnson is not a real person, they are a character from a video game. Most people don't use their full names as their wikipedia username. For instance I am sure A1Cafel is not the real name of the person who is raising doubts
Happy to provide raw files if that will convince the doubters.
Cave Johnson (talk) 18:12, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cave Johnson: You can submit a prove of identity to VRT--A1Cafel (talk) 10:45, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author is Robert Zusman, not the same as the uploader, I doubt the ownership of the photo A1Cafel (talk) 10:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s my photo.
Why do you think that a Wikipedia user name is necessarily the same as a given name? The Boy from Mars (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author is Robert Zusman, not the same as the uploader, I doubt the ownership of the photo A1Cafel (talk) 10:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by CoffeeEngineer as no permission (No permission since) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:29, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toutes les photos téléchargées par l'uploader ont les mêmes métadonnées. Il ne me paraitrait pas absurde que ces photos ne soient pas juste trouvées sur la toile. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Author is Rado Moskov per watermark, not the same as the uploader, I doubt the ownership of the photo A1Cafel (talk) 10:30, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What's your problem with my picture try to make anything better than come back to me right. I am Rado Moskov — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.144.37.54 (talk) 10:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by CoffeeEngineer as no permission (No permission since) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toutes les photos téléchargées par l'uploader ont les mêmes métadonnées. Il ne me paraitrait pas absurde que ces photos ne soient pas juste trouvées sur la toile. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by CoffeeEngineer as no permission (No permission since) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toutes les photos téléchargées par l'uploader ont les mêmes métadonnées. Il ne me paraitrait pas absurde que ces photos ne soient pas juste trouvées sur la toile. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:34, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by CoffeeEngineer as no permission (No permission since) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toutes les photos téléchargées par l'uploader ont les mêmes métadonnées. Il ne me paraitrait pas absurde que ces photos ne soient pas juste trouvées sur la toile. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:35, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Omphalographer as no source (No source since) CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Toutes les photos téléchargées par l'uploader ont les mêmes métadonnées. Il ne me paraitrait pas absurde que ces photos ne soient pas juste trouvées sur la toile. CoffeeEngineer (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uploaded as own work, but appears eg. at https://viveen.info/info/biography/ DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low resolution image missing full EXIF data, dubious claim of own work, VRT requested https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikimedia_VRT_release_generator CoffeeEngineer (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Riad Salih as Dw no source since (dw no source since) Krd 12:08, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by 94.140.246.27 as no permission (No permission since) Krd 12:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Title indicated that this photo is taken by José María Luna, not the same as the user page (Ángel), which means this is not uploader's work A1Cafel (talk) 13:42, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, A1Cafel. The title of the photo simply indicates who took it and that person gave me full ownership of it, for it’s a free license photo. I wrote his name in the title on purpose as a simple gesture of deference. If there’s anything I can do to prevent the file from deletion, let me know.
Thanks. AngPz91 (talk) 16:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@AngPz91: You may ask him to submit a written permission to VRT to prove the free license. --A1Cafel (talk) 02:53, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and the photos violate sculptors and architects copyright. Created 1975. Derivatives of work - photo nonfree sculpture. No Permission from the sculptor. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:37, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


And also

There is no freedom of panorama in Ukraine and the photos violate sculptors and architects copyright. Created 1970. Derivatives of work - photo nonfree sculpture. No Permission from the sculptor. Микола Василечко (talk) 15:40, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]


A photo of SS member Wilhelm Boger in uniform, taken from findagrave.com without any further details like the time and place it was taken. Presumably photographed between 1930 (when he joined the SS) and 1945.

It is claimed to be a {{PD-Poland}} photograph, presumably because Boger was present at Auschwitz for about two years, but no source and time of first publication (as demanded by that template) is given, nor is there any evidence at all that the photo was first published or even taken in Poland, so it is more likely a photo from Germany.

Without any further details about time, place, author, first publication etc. we cannot determine the copyright status of this photo, and there's a good chance that it is still copyrighted in either Germany or the US or both. The file should therefore be deleted per the precautionary principle. Rosenzweig τ 17:55, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

en.Wikipedia should upload this photo locally for w:Wilhelm Boger. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:54, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Nafisa06 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely not own works: many low-res/web-size images with missing or FB/transmission code in EXIF data, larger images with inconsistent EXIF data or credit to someone else (e.g. File:BRACU01.jpg credited to Mahmud Zaman Ovi). All photos and videos of same person, unlikely that uploader was present at all these diverse places and times.

P 1 9 9   18:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Gmkarve2024 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

This contains, or appears to contain, a picture of the uploader, but there is no evidence that the image is under an acceptable free licence. Ownership or possession of a photo, proprietorship of the equipment used to take the photo, or being the subject of the photo does not equate holding the copyright. The copyright holder is the photographer (i.e. the person who took the photo), rather than the subject (the person who appears in the photo) or the person possessing the photo, unless transferred by operation of law (e.g. inheritance, etc.) or by contract (written and signed by the copyright holder, and explicitly transfers the copyright). Evidence of any transfer of licencing must be sent via COM:VRT

🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 18:01, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment This editor is a long term Sockpuppet. Please see w:en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gmkarve. 🇺🇦 Timtrent 🇺🇦 talk to me 🇺🇦 18:25, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of File:VT-ANU B788 Air India Star Alliance livery DME (2) (33259690292) (2).jpg, except incorrectly credited and in an inferior format Adeletron 3030 (talk) 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata credits Yeko Photo Studio, not the uploader Adeletron 3030 (talk) 18:56, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even though the file is in a free license, the pictures on the board is most likely copyrighted. de minimis can't be applied here. Kakan spelar (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Inferior quality version of File:"Lydia"-LCCN2002708353.jpg Sam Walton (talk) 20:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1934 photograph created in Morocco, which was a French protectorate at the time. Publication and photographer information would be needed to determine if French or Moroccan copyright law applies. Possibly public domain but that needs to be proven. Abzeronow (talk) 21:24, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Might be above COM:TOO UK. Grandmaster Huon (talk) 22:48, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]