Commons:Deletion requests/2024/11/13

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
12 November 2024
14 November 2024
Deletion requests on 13 November 2024

November 13

[edit]

File:Ghirardelli Chocolate Company Logo.svg

[edit]

Is this really a PD-US file? --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 02:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file is really too small to be usable, IMO, but if you go to the source page and zoom in, you'll see that "FOUNDED in 1852" is part of the logo, whereupon the statement "This media file is in the public domain in the United States. This applies to U.S. works where the copyright has expired, often because its first publication occurred prior to January 1, 1929..." But what confuses me is the "© 2008" on the file page. When was this logo created? There's a clearly very old but not evidently dated can of Ghirardelli chocolate shown in File:Ghirardelli Chocolate can photographed March 23 2013-8588.jpg, and it already includes the one obviously copyrightable element in the logo: the eagle, which is in the same orientation as shown in the image you nominated for deletion, though the colorations of the birds' feathers are not identical. I think it's close enough for this logo to be PD, but Ghirardelli doesn't appear to agree, so we need to be pretty sure it is to keep it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's an SVG, although I'm not sure why Commons renders it at 76 × 29 by default. But I would lean towards delete as I can't seem to find evidence that this version of the logo existed before 1929. Atomicdragon136 (talk) 01:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I would argue that the entire logo doesn't have to have existed then, as long as what's been changed is not sufficiently different from a public domain logo to be copyrightable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you compare the bird in the current logo to the one in the photo of the vintage ground chocolate can, it's quite clear that it was recreated at some point, not just vectorized or simplified. Atomicdragon136 (talk) 17:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How is that "quite clear" when it has exactly the same shape as the earlier bird? Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:39, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you look closely, there are less individual feathers on the current logo. The white head/neck section has a different geometry, although the geometry of the whole bird is the same. The wing on the current logo also does not have a flat leading edge. I'm leaning towards the current logo's bird having been recreated at some point. Even if the current bird logo is actually considered a minor revision of the logo in the vintage can mentioned, we don't have sufficient evidence that the logo has existed before 1929 to be considered PD. Atomicdragon136 (talk) 03:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, you have a good eye. I count 11 feathers on the right (viewer's left) side of the bird on the can and 12 on Ghirardelli's website (linked from the file), and conversely, there are more details on the bird's head and neck on the can than on the site. So it's not actually exactly the same. As for the history of the logo, you and I don't know, but I'm quite certain there would be a way to find out, even if it required someone to visit a library in person. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Updated Composite Sketch of Delphi Double-homicide Suspect.jpg

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Fourthords as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Not a product of the FBI per https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/INPOLICE/bulletins/23faa80 ("Early this afternoon Indiana State Police Superintendent Doug Carter spoke with members of the Delphi community and interested media to share the change in direction of the Delphi double murder investigation of Abigail (Abby) Williams and Liberty (Libby) German. […] Today, a new sketch of the suspect, appearing to be in his mid-twenties to mid-thirties and believed responsible for the murders of the girls, was shared with the Delphi community and media.") The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 07:21, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make a difference if it came from the Indiana State Police (with or without the FBI) instead? https://www.in.gov/isp/crime-reporting/delphi-homicide-investigation/ and https://www.wrtv.com/delphi-murders-isp-say-new-audio-video-and-sketch-shows-libby-abbys-killer Nakonana (talk) 02:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:ND-TV Logo Original.png

[edit]

Possibly too complex for PD-textlogo. Certainly not own work. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 08:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The only results I can find for NDTV are about w:NDTV 24x7 in India, but a different logo is shown there and on the station's website. I will say that if Indian TOO is anything like U.S. TOO, as stated at COM:TOO India, this would be PD-textlogo, but I'm uncertain whose logo we're really looking at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pingu 1.webp

[edit]

Copyrigt Paxxen (talk) 11:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Les Manchots au départ.jpg

[edit]

Infraction du droit d'auteur, il s'agit d'une installation artistique et lumineuse. DMontagne en résidence (talk) 14:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

non 2A02:8440:5117:948E:A55E:C967:7250:126C 21:04, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:We were promised Xanadu.pdf

[edit]

Derivative work without proper attribution (e.g., the photos and logos on page 3). The dw-nsd tag has been removed by the uploader on the grounds that it is not a derivative work. I believe that it is a derivative work (i.e. it includes other works such as photographs) and that they are not properly credited. - 2002:5396:177F:E472:9CAB:A163:AA64:31FF 15:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to supply one... The image of Tim Berners-Lee on page 2 is licensed under CC-BY-SA-2.5 by Uldis Bojārs, so it's missing attribution. There are more images contained on page 2, 3, 4 and 12 of this document which need attribution of the source images and correct and compatible licensing. Wikimedia Commons licensing policy states: "The information given on the description page should be sufficient to allow others to verify the license status." This is currently not the case and needs to be added. Cheers 2002:5396:177F:E472:9CAB:A163:AA64:31FF 19:08, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, but an existing image of Tim Bernere-Lee on Wikimedia Commons under specific license is not a prove, that the athor havent got a public domain version as for example. Such accusations, should be fixed at the time, when the document is uploaded, not 20 years later. So I would keep the file on Commons. Juandev (talk) 15:35, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You are maybe right, but this is not the right proceduree. I added attributions and licenses for what I could find. For other files the original author may have permission from Ted Nelson, so the proper way would be to request to provide this permisson to OTRS. Not that Ted Nelson's images are free, but his license terms cannot be fullfiled in formats like PDF or PPTX. In the case of other media I havent attached attributions because I havent find metainformation or original files. But all of projects based on free licences like GPL. Juandev (talk) 16:05, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Studio di Frida Kahlo.jpg

[edit]

see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Diego Rivera & Frida Kahlo Studio Gnom (talk) 16:47, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marteen July 2024.jpg

[edit]

This file was initially tagged by Skazi as no permission (No permission since) Yann (talk) 18:11, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A regular DR is better, as per [1]. Yann (talk) 18:12, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete The user clearly uploaded photos from the web and in the UDR he claimed to be the father of the musician depicted in the images. We need a valid COM:VRT ticket to keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 21:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, he also claims that he took the picture, and there is no copy in higher resolution on the Internet. Yann (talk) 08:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And there's no EXIF, and the studio photo was taken on a phone at the backstage. Skazi 12:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files in Category:Bimbo (animation)

[edit]

All three of these films were renewed and are still under copyright. Hot Dog was renewed in 1957, Bimbo's Initiation in 1958, and Minnie the Moocher in 1959. The files should be undeleted in 2026-2028 as needed.

(Oinkers42) (talk) 19:16, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grave stone images from the Englyn Bedd Facebook group

[edit]
  1. File:Aberffraw Huw Williams Englyn Bedd.jpg
  2. File:Bodfordd Englyn Bedd Grave Emrys Roberts.jpg
  3. File:Brynsiencyn Englyn Bedd Grave Englyn at Brynsiencyn.jpg
  4. File:Eglwys Morhaiarn Sant, Gwalchmai Englyn Bedd. Grave Englyn Gwalchmai Anglesey.jpg
  5. File:Englyn Bedd Bodffordd - Griffith Hughes.jpg
  6. File:Englyn Bedd Eglwys Sant Mwrog, Llanfwrog, Ynys Môn. Grave Englyn Anglesey.jpg
  7. File:Englyn Bedd Englyn Grave Coedana Ynys Mon Anglesey.jpg
  8. File:Englyn Bedd Englyn Grave St Sadwrn Ynys Mon.jpg
  9. File:Englyn Bedd Englyn Grave St Sadwrn.jpg
  10. File:Englyn Bedd Grave Englyn Penysarn Ynys Mon Anglesey.jpg
  11. File:Englyn Bedd Llanbedr, Niwrbwrch, Ynys Môn. Grave Englyn Anglesey.jpg
  12. File:Englyn Bedd Llanfwrog - Grave Llanfwrog.jpg
  13. File:Englyn bedd Mynwent Llangaffo Ynys Mon Grave Englyn Anglesey.jpg
  14. File:Englyn Bedd Mynwent Llangefni Ynys Mon. Grave Englyn Langefni graveyard Anglesey.jpg
  15. File:Englyn Bedd St Gwyddelan's Church, Dolwyddelan Grave Englyn.jpg
  16. File:Englyn Bedd yn Penysarn - Grave in Penysarn.jpg
  17. File:Englyn Bedd, Cemaes.jpg
  18. File:Englyn Bedd.jpg
  19. File:Englyn grave Mynwent Eglwys Llangadwalader Ynys Mon Anglesey.jpg
  20. File:Heneglwys, Llanllwydian, Bodffordd (Môn) Englyn Bedd Grave Englyn.jpg
  21. File:Rosgoch Englyn Bedd Rosgoch Grave Poem.jpg
  22. File:St Beuno.jpg
sorry we don't have this image in Welsh...

Images have been flagged by User:Dogfennydd earlier this year, but not listed and uploaders not notified. Reason given is:
"Images taken from the same Facebook group uploaded to Commons with CC0 licence, but no CC0 dedication is given in the original source. Uploaders are apparently not the photographers."
Can someone who has Facebook please verify?

All images are grouped in Category:Englyn Bedd Facebook group, none of the images is in use on a Wikimedia project. --Ciell (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ia dwi'n trio digiteiddio'r casgliad wedi siarad a Guto Rhys ayb. Sut Mae rhoi CC0 dedication iddyn nhw? Taffronaut1111 (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Taffronaut1111 only the original photographers of these pictures can release the works under CC-0. Are you in touch with them? Ciell (talk) 14:52, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I am in touch with the group. They will be used in a wikimedia project in the future. Please advise what licence to use. Taffronaut1111 (talk) 21:41, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Licenses are up to the creator of the work to choose, and are okay as long as they allow for other to (re)use the file and create derivatives from it, and they must permit commercial use.
That said, it is really bad to upload images from other photographers before asking for their permission and desired licensing conditions. Because this step should have been followed first, and the files are already lingering on Commons since July without action, my DR still stands. I would propose for you to first make sure the copyrights are agreed with all the photographers from the images in this set, before we host/restore them. Ciell (talk) 07:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I have made an announcement to the group saying I was doing this so permission was granted. I have updated them recently. Please advise what else I can do DR would jepardise a project. Taffronaut1111 (talk) 15:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/2024/11/13&oldid=976740623"