Commons:Deletion requests/2024/12/30

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

December 30

[edit]

Bogus PD-textlogo. The tree is way too complex. Stefan2 (talk) 00:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality image not in use, better alternative available. 1989 (talk) 00:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for sending this notice. I am fine with using the alternative. It is better than the low-quality image. Historyday01 (talk) 22:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This photo from an Iranian actress must have been taken from the web. The uploader needs to prove if this photo was taken by their own. NameGame (talk) 00:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by MHiggin336 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: unused cartoons of fictional people.

Omphalographer (talk) 00:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As well as:
Omphalographer (talk) 20:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope / potential copyvio: unused, unsourced collage. Omphalographer (talk) 00:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: unused AI-generated image of a beach scene. Omphalographer (talk) 00:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Potential copyvio: unsourced collage. Omphalographer (talk) 00:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: unused, likely hoax AI-generated "national emblem". Omphalographer (talk) 00:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete AS (Artificial Stupidity) plus out of scope. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 01:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 01:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

useless portrait NameGame (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likely copyvio. The uploader, Davidsabolcik, claims to be its author but the metadata indicates its author is named Woody Myers and its copyright holder is "Woody Myers/UNC." Denniscabrams (talk) 01:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

used for spam --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 01:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unused personal photo. Solomon203 (talk) 02:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting clothing, and not really a portrait, as we don't see their face. I'd suggest  Keeping it and improving categorization. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While the video is listed with a Creative Commons Attribution license it's not VOGUE Taiwan's video. The origin of the video is a copy of an interview with British Vogue (which the original video does not have the CC license) so VOGUE Taiwan does not have the right to put a different license on it. The original source video is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLJMEs_9ZZE&ab_channel=BritishVogue. This has been an ongoing issue where the YT channel Vogue Taiwan has been reposting videos belonging to other channels with a CC license and subtitles added. I would refer to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Emma Watson 2023 head and shoulders 1.jpg and the decision to delete. It's the similar where VOGUE Taiwan reposted a video that belonged to American Vogue; overall deciding to delete Diddykong1130 (talk) 02:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:PACKAGING Various illustrations below the "Fusion Chutney Flavour" is beyond threshold of originality. Graywalls (talk) 02:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No speedy deletion - In my perspective no copyright because it only consists of simple geometry and letters + The knight is also very simplified — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bildersindtoll (talk • contribs) 22:25, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reasons for deletion request -Bildersindtoll (talk) 22:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 03:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 3D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 03:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused fictitious flag; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is the file I uploaded. I understood the "Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Product_packaging". I'm sorry.--逃亡者 (talk) 04:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per COM:PACKAGE A1Cafel (talk) 03:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: plain text. (And a spammy description, too.) Omphalographer (talk) 03:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in Italy A1Cafel (talk) 03:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The artist is Chicco Mannazzu, still living. Friniate (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not from Italy, and took this image on vacation.
I did this to add it to the artwork mapped on OpenStreetMap (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11241167340) like I usually do when mapping artworks at home.
If the 'no freedom of panorama' in Italy means that there's no possibility to upload an image of an artwork on a publicly accessible square to Wikimedia Commons as it is now, then the file obviously has to be deleted. David.haberthuer (talk) 21:37, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Basically a duplicate of this image, but in webp file: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Telemundo_23_2018.png OWaunTon (talk) 03:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Law&OrderSUV (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: plain text. Partial slide decks for presentations, not appropriate on Commons in this form.

Omphalographer (talk) 03:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in Rwanda A1Cafel (talk) 03:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates A1Cafel (talk) 03:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Out of scope: unused word cloud image; unlikely to be useful. Omphalographer (talk) 03:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file contains a picture of me without my consent. I can provide evidence that i am the one in the picture. 194.90.91.195 03:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What are the privacy rules regarding performers at festivals in Palestine? I'd be more concerned with whether the uploader really took the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Commons:Undeletion_requests#File:Minha_Criança_Trans.png_and_File:Thamirys_Nunes_com_bandeira_Minha_Criança_Trans.jpg, there is debate whether the heart logo is within Commons:TOO Brazil. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I've created File:Minha Criança Trans (text only).png in case this file is deleted. If this file is kept, that file can be deleted. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Pinging original participants @Skyshifter, RodRabelo7, Abzeronow, DarwIn, and Mdaniels5757: The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with the hearth and the lettering, but the human stylization seems very original (it's also in prominent display at the association flag), which, from what I know about the way COM:TOO Brazil works, would not be allowed there on court. I recall the new logo of... - I think it's the Supreme Court of Brazil itself - on the documentation says, for instance, that the originality of the combined set of colours used there is protected by copyright itself, and apparently was produced that way, with such specific colours, just for that, along with the original drawing. On this case it's just the human stylization, but for me that's enough to vote  Delete unless it is demonstrated that the drawing was copied from some free source or at least very closely based on it. Darwin Ahoy! 03:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@DarwIn I think something was cut off in your second sentence. Also, where did the Supreme Court of Brazil say these things? I didn't see anything like that on the COM:TOO Brazil page... —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Mdaniels5757 The "..." were because I was unsure about the specific logo, but it's the new one of the STJ indeed. You can read the manual here. The interesting bit is in page 5, where an entire case is made for to establish the creativity of what could otherwise be seen as simple geometrical shapes and simple colours, certainly for the purpose of using it on court, if needed. I've not added it to COM:TOO Brazil because it's not directly related to it, it's just an example of what is considered creative works by a Brazilian institution, the Supreme Court of Justice in this case. On the other hand, if you read the cases that were added there, you'll notice that even if in Brazil there is significant liberty when you are simply reproducing something else that already exists and is free to use, if a case can be made for the work being the product of a process of creativity the chances get high that you could be successfully sued. In this specific case I do see significant creativity on the human figure, so my opinion is that it should be deleted from Commons, unless a valid license is provided for it. Darwin Ahoy! 04:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. On the US side, I think this is below COM:TOO US. The choice of colors is derivative, not original: they are the Transgender pride colors. The closest thing on COM:TOO US is the Nikken logo, and I think that is quite similar to this in terms of creativity. This symbol is the figure of 1 person, overlayed on a heart. In Nikken: "the combination of relatively few elements -- a square and a minor variation of a common symbol for man -- does not rise to the level of copyrightable authorship required" by US law. In another decision, the copyright office remarked that the "heart shape... [is a] common and familiar shape[], in the public domain".
With the STJ logo, I think that would likely be copyrightable under US law: the closest comparison on COM:TOO US is probably the American Airlines logo, which is copyrightable. The familiarity of the shapes being arranged is a factor, and the shapes of a human and a heart seem likely to be viewed as much more familiar than the an angled, curved aircraft tail with an element "evoking the head of an eagle" in the American Airlines case, or the abstract rounded shapes (including multiple translucent shapes) in the STJ logo. So I don't think the STJ's remarks about its logo are a basis for thinking that Brazil's threshold of originality has dropped from "considerably higher than the United States" (COM:TOO Brazil), to below it.
To me, since the logo is below COM:TOO US, and since there is no reason to think that COM:TOO Brazil has dropped from "considerably higher than the United States" to below the US's, this strongly points against the logo being above the Brazilian threshold. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 05:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The building was completed in 2012 by Zaha Hadid (1950–2016). There is no freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2087 A1Cafel (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The building was completed in 2012 by Zaha Hadid (1950–2016). There is no freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2087 A1Cafel (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The building was completed in 2012 by Zaha Hadid (1950–2016). There is no freedom of panorama in Azerbaijan. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2087 A1Cafel (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 03:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Uploader claims own work, but their description of the image includes "Photo by Tiffany Anderson." I believe this falls under COM:PCP unless we have proof Anderson licensed this image in a way compatible with Commons. RA0808 (talk) 03:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Corrected issue. Removed incorrect data. Image and Canon 5D camera are both owned by Inside The Trojan Horse. Tiffany is the lead singers girlfriend. She was directed by band to take the shot guerilla style. Jpierce007 (talk) 21:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The monument was completed in 1971 by Valdis Albergs (1922–1984). There is no freedom of panorama in Latvia. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2055 A1Cafel (talk) 03:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The monument was completed in 1957 by Ojārs Siliņš (1927–2003). There is no freedom of panorama in Latvia. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2074

A1Cafel (talk) 03:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused flag with no credible listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:50, 30 December 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.

Out of scope, not in use Dronebogus (talk) 20:42, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It was used once and then was removed by a well known "not-being-used-then-delete" person. MikutoH (talk) 01:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion. --Krd 09:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sculpture was completed in 2000 by Lorenzo Pace (1943–). There is no freedom of panorama in the United States for non-architectural works, permission from the sculptors are required A1Cafel (talk) 03:52, 30 December 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.

Out of scope, not in use Dronebogus (talk) 20:42, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It was used once and then was removed by a well known "not-being-used-then-delete" person. MikutoH (talk) 01:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion. --Krd 09:17, 17 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sculpture was completed in 2000 by Tim Hawkinson (1960–). There is no freedom of panorama in the United States for non-architectural works, permission from the sculptors are required

A1Cafel (talk) 03:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Flag is mentioned in the "LGBTQ+-woordenboek" and I have seen it on sale in the Netherlands. MarcoSwart (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I accidentally created a alt account. Privatecommons (talk) 04:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete user request, page brewed by mistake. Account cannot be deleted (it can be locked), the user page can. m:Special:CentralAuth/Privatecommons What is your main account? Taylor 49 (talk) 22:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flag with no reliable source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation (closeup of a drawing on commercial packaging: COM:PACKAGING) + low-quality (extremely blurry, except for the face that seems to have been ghoulishly enhanced by some face-detection algorithm) Fish bowl (talk) 04:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Used in real life [1] [2], and com:INUSE/historical file converted into svg. Just like the trans flag, this is probably a result of citogenesis. Skemous (talk) 04:20, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it's used in real life, then keepOwenBlacker (talk) 23:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: AI-generated image of a dolphin, unused outside a userspace draft; inaccurate and not useful for educational purposes. Omphalographer (talk) 04:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 04:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cerebrality (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of COM:SCOPE AI clip-art images.

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to establish a relevant lead image for the lucid dream wikipedia page. Those images are potential lead images. Cerebrality (talk) 16:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:Lucid girl flying.jpg while it's being discussed on enwiki.
 Delete File:Lucid dreaming girl flying.jpg and File:Cartoon of lucid dreaming.jpg for being redundant earlier drafts of the same cartoon but with misgenerated text. These are not potential enwiki images. Belbury (talk) 19:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is supposedly a group of teachers, but there is some seriously weird distortion that makes me wonder if it's a real image at all. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. Even the "OPPO F5 Youth" text in the corner is distorted - something very odd happened to this image. I'm guessing it was run through some kind of AI image "enhancement" tool. Unused and unlikely to be used, anyway. Omphalographer (talk) 06:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low quality AI image supposedly depicting a real person. Should not be used, so out of COM:SCOPE The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 05:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of File:Duke's Tom Davis drives (Rose Bowl), Chanticleer 1942 page 333.jpg IagoQnsi (talk) 05:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Sepia (versus black and white, which the other image is) is a significant enough of a difference/variation to justify keeping both. SecretName101 (talk) 07:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

license expiry Adityamendiratta (talk) 05:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

False claim of own work. Correct source and license are needed. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 06:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page créée par User:Lagence0, dont c'est l'unique contribution. Le message laissé dans la section « Metadata » montre qu'il s'agit d'une photographie prise par « LA RESERVE », reprise par « Lagence0 », et donc par deux professionnels, dans un cadre professionnel, commercial et de marketing. Par ailleurs, le titre affirme que la photo a été prise en 2022 alors que la page montre qu'elle a été prise le 20 juillet 2020 : pourquoi ce mensonge ? Éric Messel-4 (talk) 06:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Asdavdh as no source (No source since) Krd 07:00, 30 December 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.

The file is not realistically useful for an educational purpose (msali raso 22:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)) msali raso 22:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


Deleted: Personal/Private photo(s) of non-contributors. --Alaa :)..! 20:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Shadow4dark as no permission (No permission since) Krd 07:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Tiven2240 as no permission (No permission since) Krd 07:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence of permission Trade (talk) 07:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Potentially misleading/wrong on multiple levels, see disputed box, talk Mykhal (talk) 08:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted food menu in Taiwan. Solomon203 (talk) 08:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I don't know the threshold of originality in Taiwan. Is this above it? - Jmabel ! talk 17:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

この画像はAIで私が作成したものであり、画像の質が非常に低いため、Wikimediaに掲載する価値がないと考え削除を依頼する。English ver(machine translation):This image was created by me using AI and I request that it be removed because the quality of the image is so low that it is not worthy of being posted on Wikimedia. Willard0003 (talk) 09:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 3D works in USA. Worse, the sculpture is a temporary display, so it cannot benefit from FoP even the USA amend the law, including non-architectural works in the future. The only way to retain it on Commons is to obtain the permission from the sculptor Jaume Plensa A1Cafel (talk) 09:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Artwork is entirely de minimis, focus and subject of the photo is the group of people in the foreground. Nominator has a history of attempting to get photos deleted on flimsy grounds. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete Sorry, I disagree. The artwork doesn't draw your attention? If it were a lot smaller, things would be different. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also the uploader named the image "public art", which shows that the sculpture is one of the purpose to take this photo. --A1Cafel (talk) 08:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The statue was completed in 1956 by Alfred Janniot (1889–1969). There is no freedom of panorama in France. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2040 A1Cafel (talk) 09:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The monument was completed in 1996 by John Smith. There is no freedom of panorama in the United States for non-architectural works, permission from the sculptor is required

A1Cafel (talk) 09:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello There, A little Backstory before proceeding, Few days ago, i was randomly searching the Ableton Live page for reading about when did every major update versions were released. While reading the page, I stumbled upon the screenshot posted over there and I recalled this was the project that I made back in 2018. Being confused where did it came from, i checked the author who uploaded it and realized it was me who did in Wikimedia commons. Hence I tried to search back my account and here i am writing this message. This picture here is mine and I swear it never was and would never be used on the Wikipedia for any sort of reason. I was small, naive back then, when I uploaded these stuffs without even understanding what on earth am I even doing. Am 21 today and realize how stupid I was back then to upload unnecessary stuffs to Wikimedia which would never be of any relevance ever. I had two days of sleepless nights with this stress of what I did, how to recover the account and how do i remove those. I hope whoever reading this would understand the situation and would please delete this picture, i beg of you. It wouldn't be of any use ever on Wikipedia. And I promise from next time I would keep in mind before uploading anything to Wikimedia Commons. Also with that I want to add I have other unnecessary contributions too. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ableton_Project.png this was that Ableton screenshot I was talking about. I understand the situation that its being used over multiple Ableton pages right now, but it would be really helpful if these picture was removed too alongside with this one https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Upcoming_Project.png (I don’t even know why I created a separate account to upload that), but yeah if you say to remove that manually from that account, I would try to search back my account and apply deletion from there. And again hope whoever reading this would understand it. Hope you have a great day ahead. Thank You Rajdeepdutta516 (talk) 10:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Alexsandroclaudino92 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All photos of churches without Exif data and with low resolution, likely copyright infringement

Threecharlie (talk) 10:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Equador 62.117.235.101 10:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep after blurring of art by the uploader. Ooligan (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP in Equador 62.117.235.101 10:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep after blurring of art by the uploader. -- Ooligan (talk) 17:37, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass upload by LTA, extremely poor quality, out of scope file 62.117.235.101 10:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass upload by LTA, extremely poor quality, out of scope file 62.117.235.101 10:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Per nom. 茅野ふたば (talk) 10:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Weak keep The aurora is barely visible, and since observing aurora in lower latitudes is not a common event, this photo may have its own significance. --A1Cafel (talk) 08:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mass upload by LTA, extremely poor quality, out of scope file 62.117.235.101 10:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Per nom. 茅野ふたば (talk) 10:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

per Com:PACKAGING Hehua (talk) 10:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Oliver Schaper - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-commercial only.

Previous deletion requests:

copyright property rights belong to the Polish Agency of Photographers FORUM. More at: https://www.forum.com.pl/0950844772 Majusek1980 (talk) 11:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence of Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. Sqncjs (talk) 11:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Rainclaw7 as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Self-deleting due to copyright violation. While the photo was published by the Coast Guard, it is courtesy of Edison Chouest Offshore and is not a USCG photo. |source=https://www.news.uscg.mil/Doing-Business/Photos/igphoto/2003618606/ more complicated case, would benefit from discussion —Matrix(!) ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 12:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I marked the file for deletion because it is credited to Edison Chouest as opposed to a USCG employee or uniformed member. However, the photo is hosted on the USCG website and was assigned a VIRIN (241223-G-M0101-2001), which generally means that the image was acquired or taken by a USDOD component or affiliate as part of their regular duties.
I would still err on the side of deletion because the image is not credited to the USCG and as a result is not clearly in the public domain regardless of where it is hosted. This is similar to the rule applied for NASA's images page, which hosts copyrighted images taken by SpaceX and other private companies. Rainclaw7 (talk) 16:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 12:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 12:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This file was initially tagged by Skazi as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: the logo is copyrighted below COM:TOO but might be out of scope. —Matrix(!) ping onewhen replying {user - talk? - uselesscontributions} 12:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Non-photographs should not be in JPG. Redundant to File:603 (City of Edinburgh) Squadron Royal Auxiliary Air Force badge.png. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 12:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 13:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 13:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


My family members want me to delete it for privacy Hyderabadihistory (talk) 13:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: In use, but probably taken from https://masqati.com/Home/board_directors. --Achim55 (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
pls Hyderabadihistory (talk) 04:07, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Väiskis (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyrighted cover art of books, unlikely to be "own work" of the uploader.

kyykaarme (talk) 13:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious copyright claim. The user is unlikely Jo Yu Chen, and since it is not a selfie, the photographer is the most probable copyright holder. Note that it is a press photo, see for example https://www.musicajazz.it/intervista-joyu-chen/. Without a valid VRT photo we cannot keep it. Günther Frager (talk) 13:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 13:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Neutral user:Ort43v has 1,000 edits on ja.wiki. This image is unused, however. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mohamad bgl (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 13:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Sandhya.kabra13 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 13:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 13:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


out of project scope Didym (talk) 13:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Gono_Odhikar_Parishad.svg#mw-jump-to-license 103.213.237.113 13:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The two flags have different stars; that might be significant. --bjh21 (talk) 14:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to the party's official website https://www.gop.org.bd/? on the top left corner you can see that the stars are clearly rotated, not vertical. the party's official website is the official version of the flag.
However if the proposed version is accurate than is should be uploaded as a new version to the original file Tausheef Hassan (talk) 11:09, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate and inaccurate. According to the party's official website https://www.gop.org.bd/? on the top left corner you can see that the stars are clearly rotated, not vertical. the party's official website is the official version of the flag . this file is also a duplicate of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Gono_Odhikar_Parishad.svg Tausheef Hassan (talk) 09:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused AI-generated images approved by User:Shizhao using the User:Red panda bot, taken from Flickr's automated "explore" feed. No obvious COM:SCOPE beyond illustrating the capabilities of the AI generation software.

Belbury (talk) 14:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep 'A Little Bit Steampunk' (note: kept previously) and 'Artificial Street Photography 1'; maybe also 'Alps' neutral on the rest. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 14:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal image of someone without a huge number of Wikimedia contributions, but a pretty good headshot. Could be kept as such but probably won't be. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by MinnieCrace (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work. Some of the descriptions mention other sources.

Didym (talk) 14:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 14:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 14:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file unknowingly uploaded without not knowing about Wikimedia. Yoge9941112364 (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unlikely to be own work, also out of project scope.

Didym (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Bot r48 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 14:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Manfred Pollert - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Zilacayotitlan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Nacarinsilva (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 14:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by DumpsterFireTV (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 14:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Geometry is above COM:TOO UK --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 14:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Samanzand84 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 15:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not as long as a w:Travelport article exists. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is that the same company? The wiki article uses a different logo from the nominated one. Nakonana (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That I don't know. Maybe someone else does. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Way too recent as a bulding/structure in order to fall out of copyrights, since there's no FOP in Greece. 🏺ⲈⲨⲐⲨⲘⲈⲚⲎⲊ🏛️ ⲱⲑⲏⲥⲁⲧⲉ 15:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Non-photographs should not be in JPG. Redundant to File:No. 3 Squadron RAF badge.png. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 15:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of scope: personal advertisement — Preceding unsigned comment added by Periegetes (talk • contribs) 12:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

coyvio, Picasso died 1973 77.1.175.45 15:34, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The file uploaded by a blocked user on Bengali Wikipedia, proven to be a sockpuppet. The file is not the user's own work. (Source) Vengeance Talk 15:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The file uploaded by a blocked user on Bengali Wikipedia, proven to be a sockpuppet. The file is not the user's own work. (Source) Vengeance Talk 15:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine has no freedom of panorama. Ukrainian copyright extends until 70 years PMA, and this memorial was erected in 1975, so even if the sculptor died the next day (which is unlikely) it would still be in copyright until 2056 at the earliest. DS (talk) 15:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 15:43, 30 December 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.

I am the person who this photo represents. I was a minor--17 years old at the time of this photo. I have contacted the photographer and told him that I am very uncomfortable of him posting photos of me when I was a minor, without my consent, and have expressed my desire to have this photo taken down. I do not consent to this photo, of me as an underaged person, being posted on the internet without my consent. 71.71.108.213 23:35, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep First, no proof that this random is the person depicted (Olga Tsitlik). Even if that this is the case this photo was taken in 2007 (15 years ago) in a public eventin a public space (a demonstration in Washington DC) and fact that this can be an underage in this particular case is irrelevant and this photo is not demaning or abusive to the person depicted or attacks in any anyway the good name or character of said person.
In the words of the very photographer this march were a "small march, with only ten people (...) In the regular DC crowd, we had Jeff, Luke, Olga, Dylan (Olga’s guy), Isis, and myself, as well as four others", i.e. the photographer and the person depicted knew\knows each other at least on some personal level, not as some random photographer photographs some random person as this IP seems to try to imply.
Also, there is no need of consent for the taking and publication of this photo as, per the same words of the photographer, this was an "small protest march on Saturday in DC – a march reminding all of the FBI’s roundup of alleged environmental and animal rights activists" and they "marched from Farragut Square to the FBI building via the White House in our “Resist the Greenscare”, i.e. this march, an public event, happened in public space.
Per Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people/en#Examples, "The following examples do not require consent in many countries: (...) An anonymous person, in a public place, especially as part of a larger crowd" and per Commons:Country specific consent requirements there is no expectation of privacy in a public space and\or public event in the United States. Tm (talk) 00:16, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tm I agree that we need proof that the nominator is Olga Tsitlik; we also need proof that Olga was underage at the time. And I generally agree with the rest of your reasoning – assuming that all that stuff that the photographer said is true.
While you are eager to demand various sorts of proof from the nominator, you seem equally eager to take the photographer at their word. It may turn out that things are not what they seem. The nominator says they have contacted the photographer; if they succeed in having the photo removed at Flickr and the blog, then we should at least consider a courtesy deletion here. If what the photographer says is true, then we have plenty of other images of the same event; there doesn’t seem to be any pressing reason to keep this one. Not in use; not linked; uploaded in 2020; apparently uploaded to Flickr in 2020. Brianjd (talk) 12:14, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
In cases of deletions like this, i tend prefer to believe in the word of someone that is identified, than someone that claims to be someone but is unidentified and essentially anonymous and with unkown motives to open this deletion request. Tm (talk) 12:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You quote this example: The following examples do not require consent in many countries: (...) An anonymous person, in a public place, especially as part of a larger crowd
But you can hardly claim that the person is anonymous when you identify the person in the same comment. What are you trying to say here? Also, this image focuses on that identified person; it does not show them as part of a larger crowd. So that part does not apply either. Brianjd (talk) 12:17, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As is clearly quoted this is for "many countries". i.e. this is the generic example to the most part of the world, i.e. in a public space there is a generalized .The term "large crowd" comment is preceded by the word "especially" , not "in a", i.e. in several countries there is no or small expectation of privacy in public setting.
An naming someone with two names is not identified someone, i.e. not doxxing. I could point several people online that have nothing in common except this same name and are unrelated with the depicted person.
As this image was taken in the case of the USA, as clearly stated in Commons:Country specific consent requirements there is no expectation of privacy in a public place and, more strongly, this was a public event, not some stalker taking pcitures of someone on its backyard. Tm (talk) 12:40, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do minors demonstrating in public in the U.S. have the right to require takedowns of photos of them? If they don't and we choose to delete this photo, we need to specify that we are doing so as a courtesy only. I say this not to be unfriendly or disrespectful of Olga but because if we unnecessarily accept her premise, we might find ourselves unable to host images showing anyone or at least anyone who might have been a minor in public, lest someone complain. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:37, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And why do we are discussing this image taking as a fact, with zero proof, that the IP is the depicted person? Tm (talk) 12:41, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's another question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:01, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Tm We could have simply noted the nominator was anonymous, directed them to COM:VRT, and waited for an admin to close this DR (if no proof was provided). But you basically wrote an essay dismissing even the possibility of courtesy deletion. I felt the need to balance that with some comments of my own. And now it’s blown up into a huge discussion. Brianjd (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek Yes, we should always be careful about what precedent we set. I used the word courtesy in my comment above, and that word should also be prominently included in the deletion rationale if the file ends up being deleted that way. I also said that we need proof that the nominator is who they say they are and that they were underage at the time. That’s a high standard to meet; if it is met, it favours courtesy deletion. Brianjd (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And to answer your question directly, absolutely not. They have no right to require takedowns.
And to clarify, I would probably object to courtesy deletion even if suitable proof was provided. I am just saying that if we ever do courtesy deletions, then this would be a good candidate if such proof was provided. Brianjd (talk) 13:28, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 14:03, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]


This photograph was taken without my consent, when I was 17 years old and therefore underage. The photographer did not have my or my parent's consent to take this photograph. 71.71.107.110 15:43, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: The photo is still available on https://www.flickr.com/photos/schuminweb/50282658437/ licensed CC BY-SA. --Achim55 (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Again, per last deletion request, by another random IP. First, no proof that this random is the person depicted (Olga Tsitlik). Even if that this is the case this photo was taken in 2007 (15 years ago) in a public event in a public space (a demonstration in Washington DC), in the US where there is no general expectation of privacy in public space, and fact that this can be an underage in this particular case is irrelevant and this photo is not demaning or abusive to the person depicted or attacks in any anyway the good name or character of said person.
In the words of the very photographer this march were a "small march, with only ten people (...) In the regular DC crowd, we had Jeff, Luke, Olga, Dylan (Olga’s guy), Isis, and myself, as well as four others" (a link that also has another photos of the same person), i.e. the photographer and the person depicted knew\knows each other at least on some personal level, not as some random photographer photographs some random person as this IP seems to try to imply.
Also, there is no need of consent for the taking and publication of this photo as, per the same words of the photographer, this was an "small protest march on Saturday in DC – a march reminding all of the FBI’s roundup of alleged environmental and animal rights activists" and they "marched from Farragut Square to the FBI building via the White House in our “Resist the Greenscare”, i.e. this march, an public event, happened in public space.
Per Commons:Photographs_of_identifiable_people/en#Examples, "The following examples do not require consent in many countries: (...) An anonymous person, in a public place, especially as part of a larger crowd" and per Commons:Country specific consent requirements there is no expectation of privacy in a public space and\or public event in the United States. Tm (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. And looks like it was scanned from a print source without attribution. Omphalographer (talk) 17:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mjdavis2 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 15:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation, it taken from the copyrighted newspapers Mickey Đại Phát (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Sinayedanesh (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 15:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:PRP Obvious COM:DW and unknown copyright status of the drawing in the middle. File was uploaded for promotional usage as well. A09 (talk) 15:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:01, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 16:02, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunally there is no freedom of panorama for interior views in Germany. Lukas Beck (talk) 16:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy delete I found the picture here [3] --Lukas Beck (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Per Tineye, likely previous published and not the uploader's work Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:04, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is an Alexandre Alexandrov Work or art used in his article. Uzer123456789 (talk) 16:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:06, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:08, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by GBrizuela (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 16:09, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making so many excellent deletion requests! My question on this one is whether we have any other image of this menu on Telegram. If we don't, it might make sense to keep this one if it's not above the relevant COM:TOO. Per w:Telegram (software), its legal domicile is Tortola, British Virgin Islands, and its operational center is in Dubai, UAE. So then the problem would be that the UAE appears to have no TOO per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United Arab Emirates, and of course British TOO is extremely strict. Therefore, even if we want to keep this, we probably can't; ergo,  Delete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Offical company photo/press photo, used on web pages like https://www.vogelsang.info/de/news/highlights/artikel/article/aktuelle-informationen-zum-thema-corona/. Missing permission via COM:VRTS Wdwd (talk) 16:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Saeedehm67 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work, also out of project scope.

Didym (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Published to the subject's Instagram account prior to upload to Flickr: https://www.instagram.com/nithinlukose_/reel/DB0iKKxyT2W/ Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Low-res, incorrect colors. Redundant to File:KIA logo3.svg. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 16:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flickr uploader is likely not the owner of the film poster. The {{PD-US}} license indicates that the image was published in the United States before 1929; both claims are false. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Jerry roses1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 16:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Joyaljose (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 16:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 16:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine has no freedom of panorama for 3D artworks in public places, and Matvey Manizer only died in 1966, so this statue by him will be under copyright until 1 January 2037. DS (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ukraine has no freedom of panorama, and regardless of if we want to define this memorial plaque as a two-dimensional or three-dimensional artwork, it can't be from any earlier than 1963, so even if we knew who the artist was and the plaque was put up the day after Symonenko's death and the artist died the very next day, the earliest this could be free of copyright would be 2034. DS (talk) 16:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pierre Nouailhetas

[edit]

The uploader linked directly to the image, so there is no way to verify the information on the file information page. The claims that the photographer is anonymous and that the photographer died more than 70 years ago are unverifiable, and there is no evidence that the photo was taken in the year specified. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here is the legal language on the site, which certainly does not sound like unfettered permission to use images commercially, but rather, more nearly the opposite. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:05, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Elsewhere, the uploader pointed out that there is a third image, File:Platon et Nouailhetas, Djibouti 1941.jpg, which is a scan from a French magazine published in 1941. I don't see any named author on the scan, but most of the text is too small/blurry to be read and there could be a person credited above the image of which you only see the bottom part. Also, the text at the bottom row of the last line of the last column continues until the end of the row, so the article most likely continues on the next page of the magazine and there could be a person credited there.
If no one is credited, then the image should be in the public domain in France per {{Anonymous-EU}}. If someone is credited, the copyright status in France depends on that person's death year.
There is no information about the copyright status in the United States. If this is still copyrighted in France, or if the French copyright expired too recently, then it is presumably copyrighted in the United States per {{Not-PD-US-URAA}}. --Stefan2 (talk) 13:51, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
COM:FRANCE says that if it's not anonymous, then the copyright was effectively life+58 in 1996, and thus certainly not out of copyright in 1996. Anonymous rules in 1996 in France are unclear from the page; if they got the WWII extensions like most copyrights, they were most likely publication+58 years, and thus not out of copyright.--Prosfilaes (talk) 05:24, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Stefan2 (talk) 16:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Ukraine has no freedom of panorama, and Mykola Boholiubov died in 1992, so this memorial to him cannot be from any earlier than that. Even if the memorial was put up the day after he died, and even if the sculptor died the very next day, the earliest this could be free of copyright would be 2063. DS (talk) 16:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Also applies to file:Пам’ятний знак вченому Богомолову.jpg and file:Пам'ятний знак вченому М. Богомолову, Велика Круча.jpg) DS (talk) 16:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

King Gizzard & The Lizard Wizard files

[edit]

These come from the bootleggizzard.bandcamp.com website where there is an ambiguous licence: If anyone wants to release these albums, you’re free to do so. Here you’ll find links to audio files and cover art. Feel free to get creative with it if you like - it’s yours.

Problem 1: The licence only seems to cover these albums, but many of the images are photos of events and a logo for the band which don't seem to be parts of an album and therefore appear to be unlicensed.

Problem 2: The licence is vague, so it is unclear if it is a free licence or not. It says Feel free to get creative with it if you like which seems to imply that modifying the albums is permitted. It is permitted to release these albums, but it is unclear what this includes. I assume that release these albums includes publishing a CD with the music, but can you broadcast the music on radio? I would guess that the licence doesn't cover usage by a radio station and in that case the licence is unfree.

Files which are not parts of albums
Album covers

Stefan2 (talk) 17:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the files in question are part of the album, if you bothered to click on the link on bandcamp. Scu ba (talk) 17:33, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't even see most of the pictures on the linked pages. There is also a © All rights reserved at the bottom which seems to contradict the licence. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
click the download link, it will download a zip of the files in question. Scu ba (talk) 17:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the copyright, if you bothered to look, is for the lyrics, not the files. Scu ba (talk) 17:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The licence is for these albums, which implies that at least the lyrics and the music are licensed, maybe covers, definitely not any other images. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So when you click on the download album button, and it downloads an album, for some reason only some of those files in the album are subjected to the disclaimer about the album being free and in the public domain? Scu ba (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It does not say that anything is in the public domain, at least not on the linked pages. It only says that you can release these albums, which to me means that you can publish a CD with the music, but that you can't, for example, publish postcards of the album covers or broadcast the music on radio. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:07, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
released means released in what world would releasing files mean you have to be monetizing it for it to be able to be used? they're released, out in the open, anyone can do anything with them. Scu ba (talk) 18:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See wikt:wikt:release#Noun, meaning 3: Anything recently released or made available (as for sale). Making something available for sale is not the same thing as relinquishing all intellectual property rights. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment You could argue that the statement in question is a license for commercial and derivative use (though without using an actual license, there may still be problems, like those terms being revocable). But it is certainly not a release into the public domain. That's very different and needs to be explicit. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The licence also seems to be limited in that you may only release these albums although there are a lot of other commercial things which people might wish to do. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COM:COPYRIGHT Unknown author and taken from Telegram. Photo too new to be public domain by itself. Reverse Image search returned nothing 2620:6E:6000:3100:24F4:7FAB:E769:9BB 17:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by UT Nanaiah (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 17:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 17:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Manfi.B. (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Missing permission. Also not own work unless the uploader was born before 1900.

Didym (talk) 18:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused poor quality image without evident compensating value Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:17, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

wrong attribution James Oldroyd (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@James Oldroyd: Please could you elaborate? What exactly is wrong about the attribution?
This image is one of a collection of screenshots from this film trailer – all of which are sourced from the same video. As all of the images have the same attribution, is there a reason why you've nominated only this image, and none of the others? SuperMarioMan (talk) 21:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is a wrong attribution a deletion reason? Can you fix the attribution? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

unlikely to be own work Didym (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ugly self-made processed image by an unknown person from an unknown origin, no solid evidence it faithfully displays E.Goffman . Disservice to Wikipedia pages where it is displayed va wikidatas infobox I do not know how to edcit. Altenmann (talk) 18:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. Abysmally low-quality drawing. I've replaced the Wikidata image with File:E. Goffman c. 1940.jpg; other wikis should pick this up shortly. There are a handful of other drawings by the same author which can be found via Special:WhatLinksHere/User:キヨンネ. Omphalographer (talk) 00:24, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mayflormarie (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 18:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Dr.Abhi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

dubious license claim; might or might not be PD but needs better info. (How is this license known if the author is unknown?) Unused Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:26, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Screenshot? photo with overlaid descriptive text and some type of watermark at top right. I doubt this is original photo by uploader - if it is could they please upload the full sized unmodified original? Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:28, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sceptical that this is a 2024 photo by the uploader as claimed. Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Collage of unsourced photos, at least 2 of which are modern Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 18:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Ajmehta21 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 18:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Jerooney1992 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 18:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:44, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Weak delete Could be useful if the uploader had elaborated on some usefulness. Taylor 49 (talk) 22:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Vilma Elizabeth Morales (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Didym (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:47, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio; not own work. BilletsMauves (talk) 18:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am learning about sound recording rules still. Although this was recorded in 1922 it was published in 1934. I am requesting it be deleted until 2035. SDudley (talk) 19:29, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:36, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged as "Own work" but the photographer, Ron Vogel, died in 2019. Qcne (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly too complex for PD-simple The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly too complex for PD-simple The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Stefan2 as Logo - Contested by uploader. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 20:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Freedom of Panorama in the Philippines. The building didn't exist in the March 2014 Google Street View imagery of the area, and began to appear in the April 2017 imagery. This implies it was constructed sometime between 2014 and 2017, so very likely still under architect's copyright and is unfree for commercial licensing distribution here.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 20:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dit betreft een door mijzelf geuploade afbeelding. Naar mijn mening conflicteert deze afbeelding met de AVG eisen die de rechthebbende stelt. verzoek deze te verwijderen. Referentie: defensie.nl/copyright. RDKor (talk) 20:41, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Watermark Mounir Neddi (talk) 20:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Own work as claimed is doubtful; a much larger version of the photo can be found here ([4]). --Rosenzweig τ 18:25, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Users other uploads lacked valid source information, casting doubt on whether this is truly own work. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:58, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Public domain
The heirs of this work's copyright holder (usually the creator) have released it into the public domain. This applies worldwide.

In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so:

The heirs of the creator grant anyone the right to use this work for any purpose, without any conditions, unless such conditions are required by law.

Photograph taken of the El Zein residence in Jibshit, South Lebanon in 2018, permission was granted for free use by current heir of residence — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aldm 1234 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That permission would ideally be sent by the heirs to COM:VRT. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I will ask the heirs to send a permission to COM:VRT. Aldm 1234 (talk) 14:16, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2 reasons, 1 this is clearly from an FOI request given the name so the source and license is incorrect. The original source is https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/328443/Annex_A_-_FOI_30960_Mrs_Hair.pdf

Secondly, its completely wrong, the senior grades have a portcullis not a wheel so the rank markings shown have no bearing on reality. Spartaz (talk) 21:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oversight Commons:Deletion requests/restricted use (convention BnF-ADM-xxxx-xxxxxx-xx) - categories/Hartl, Sabine Gzen92 (talk) 21:35, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by George 30130 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unlikely to be own work

Didym (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: fictitious micronational flag. Omphalographer (talk) 21:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: fictional per description. Omphalographer (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Advertising billboard of temporary nature. Infringement of graphic artists' copyright on the artwork. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Handelt es sich hier um das offizielle Wappen der ehemaligen Gemeinde Unsen? Oder ist es eine urheberrechtlich geschützte Erfindung? GerritR (talk) 22:05, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Derivative work of standees bearing pictures of the faces of the new graduates, plus tarpaulin. Multiple copyright infringements, no permission from the artists who made these obviously-temporary works of graphic arts. No FoP. Must be  Delete. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:11, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Menu tarpaulin. No commercial PD licensing permission from the graphic artists and photographers of the pictures in the temporary tarpaulin. Copyvio,  Delete. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:13, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


This is the identical temporary tarpaulin as this one. COPYVIO. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:15, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Copyright infringement, no permission from the artists who created these temporary tarpaulin/billboards. Similar to this case. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Similar to Commons:Deletion requests/File:0525jfFunnside Highways Sunset Barangay Caloocan Cityfvf 15.JPG. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Same as Commons:Deletion requests/File:0525jfFunnside Highways Sunset Barangay Caloocan Cityfvf 15.JPG. Copyright infringement. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:21, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Same as Commons:Deletion requests/File:0525jfFunnside Highways Sunset Barangay Caloocan Cityfvf 15.JPG. Copyright infringement. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:22, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by User:Mitthilfaldesai

[edit]


These are Derivative Works. The source of the artwork contained within the files is not given --Headlock0225 (talk) 22:25, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete
I request the deletion of this file as I uploaded it by mistake when starting in Commons. The original .SVG file is also uploaded and I consider this one as an exact duplicate with no sense as the .SVG is a higher quality image and .PNG versions can be exported on demand from it.
At this moment the .PNG version is not used in GlobalUsage so the removal shouldn't be an issue.
The comparison between the files to demonstrate their total similarity can be seen below.
  • PNG version requested for deletion:
AIM-120C5
AIM-120C5




  • SVG version to remain in Commons:
AIM-120C5
AIM-120C5




The .png version is bigger... not to say massive. When I exported it, I did it with the near-to-real missile dimensions. This size of file is not useful, from my point of view, when using it in Internet environment. Another bad point is the file size, heavier than the original .SVG.
It is important to consider that if someone needs a huge .PNG, it can be exported from the original .SVG (also a smaller file, if necessary). This is the advantage of the Scalable Vector Graphics as stated in Commons:Transition to SVG:

SVG has these advantages

  • It is not a pixel-based image file format and thus is scalable indefinitely to any size without loss of sharpness.
  • Since it is resolution-independent, the file size is the same regardless of the image's resolution.
To sum up... the .SVG file is useful as it allows any Commons user to export raster files in any kind of format and in sizes according to their own needs (using adequate software such as Inkscape). Finally, I consider the .PNG version of this files as not useful at all as everything the .PNG can do for Commons users, can be done by its equivalent and original version in .SVG format (and much more).
MorMor 100Polar (Mensajes aquí) 22:51, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploades by User:DenisMironov1

[edit]

AI generated fantasy pictures, no educational value --Veliensis (talk) 22:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Я думаю тема фантастики имеет образовательную ценность и возможно искусственный интеллект заменит дизайнеров и будет широко использоваться, это первые шаги и довольно интересные результаты, а какие вы хотите картинки и на какие темы, напишите запрос к этой нейросети, если эти не устраивают?--DenisMironov1 (talk) 22:52, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete. I really don't see the educational value in any of these images. At best it's a collection of implausible concept art and pin-up women. Omphalographer (talk) 00:18, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete all -- AS (Artificial Stupidity) lack of edu value, out of scope. DELTREE Category:Images generated by Shedevrum and all its subcats with all content including but not limited to Category:AI-generated concept vehicles by Shedevrum Category:AI-generated concept buses by Shedevrum Category:AI-generated nude women by Shedevrum. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:52, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete all but the seven which are in use as example images from the AI at ru:Шедеврум. Pretty much COM:F10, as personal images from the uploader using an AI to doodle what a funny vehicle or a naked woman might look like. Belbury (talk) 10:28, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete all ‒ AI garbage, no edu value -- LevandeMänniska (talk), 13:30, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

out of project scope Didym (talk) 22:56, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image does not match object description or source link https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/9173 MorrisStuff (talk) 22:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant to File:Energy Star logo.svg The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete ultimately redundant, possibly piracy, possibly AS (Artificial Stupidity). Taylor 49 (talk) 00:45, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation, not own work, (Copyright - 2024 Futureal Management Szolgáltató Kft.) Source: https://www.futurealgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/budapest_one_teljes-422.jpg JSoos (talk) 23:27, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Out of COM:SCOPE. Unused logos that depict the personal imaginary country's flag according to the uploader's jawiki talk page.

Netora (talk) 13:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]