Commons:Deletion requests/2025/01/05

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

January 5

[edit]

Replaced by better res at File:Doktor Muchołapski 1890 cover.jpg. I tried {{Replaced}} or {{Better quality}} but they don't exist, so just nominating it here. Ping me if you know which template/tool I should've used. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 01:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus: Perhaps you meant {{Superseded}} although files will not be deleted just because of that template. Thuresson (talk) 06:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thuresson Tnx, that's probably what I meant. But anyway, this should be deleted, it is pointless. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 04:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is X, Twitter? 186.175.42.198 01:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't delete File:Ayşe Ünlüce, 4 Ocak 2025.jpg because I uploaded this file to Wikimedia Commons from Ayşe Ünlüce's X (Twitter) account. KenanTsubasa (talk) 01:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid they will delete it exactly for that reason, but at least I showed you how to categorize files. 186.175.42.198 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


I saw this file. This file doesn't seem useful to Wikipedia and any other sister projects for three reasons. This file hasn't been used in any pages, this file doesn't seem to be used in the near future, and Commons does not cater self-portraits or any other personal photos. TheNuggeteer (talk) 01:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete all. For identity / community flags like these, I'd suggest that a better guideline might be whether the flag is understood to represent the group by people outside that group. I see no evidence that this flag (or any of the other ones nominated) meets that criterion. Omphalographer (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By delete all, do you mean delete all the ones I've nominated over the past few days, or all the ones by this particular user, etc? HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:03, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I meant this and all of the other similar identity / community flags you nominated today. I didn't feel like copying and pasting the same comment to all of them. :) Omphalographer (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep this file will affect other mediawiki projects: https://meta.miraheze.org/wiki/File:Perisex_flag.svg, so technically com:INUSE. MikutoH (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
COM:INUSE only applies to Wikimedia Foundation projects, not to outside wikis like Miraheze. Omphalographer (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flag is currently in use for historical and educational purposes at: https://lgbtqia.wiki/wiki/Extersex Multiple references to uses outside of the educational wiki are provided. InfiniteProgress (talk) 05:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
External wikis have no connection to this one. In terms of the other "references" listed on the other wiki, one is a tumblr blog and one is a personal carrd site, which are not in any way reliable sources to confirm actual use. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:19, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused fictitious flag with no credible source listed to confirm current existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 02:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Composer Giuseppe Blanc died in 1969 so he can not have licensed his composition under a Creative Commons license. Thuresson (talk) 02:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What should it be licensed under then? Ironzombie39 (talk) 14:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Every other upload by this user has been a copyright violation. This has metadata and an [I suspect false] own work source, so user:Trade removed my No Permission tag, so I'm converting this to a regular DR. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Have to wonder what the red spot in the middle is for Trade (talk) 07:43, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused flag with no credible source listed to confirm existence/real life use; out of project scope. HapHaxion (talk / contribs) 03:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by DerekFair (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Uploader took a number of files from various websites and uploaded them as own work, which have been deleted. The images in this DR are all of their other uploads that don't have metadata, and therefore are likely also taken from the internet. (Uploader has 7 images that are from the same Galaxy S10+, which are not in this DR.)

The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 03:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files from ethniccommunities.govt.nz

[edit]

In the term of Use it's stated that "the Site’s design elements, photography, imagery or video content" are not licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 New Zealand licence. --源義信 (talk) 03:44, 5 January 2025 (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 more than doubt that the author is both at least 74 years old, released the photo under a Creative Commons license, somehow simultaneously took the photo in 1949 and 2018, is banned sitewide on enwiki, and has a history of copyvios both on enwiki AND on Commons. QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 12:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Notice that User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) uploaded a new version after the DR. The source of the image is apparently this copy (notice the defects) that is available since 2013. However, it is not specified when it was published and where, we only know it was taken in 1949. The image itself can be in the public domain in Europe (likely region of publication), but it was certainly not in 1996 at URAA time. That is, itt is still likely eligible for copyright protection in the US. Günther Frager (talk) 18:41, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept (non-admin closure): I redact my nomination. --QuickQuokka [⁠talkcontribs] 12:17, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Masur as no source (No source since) RAN (talk) 05:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a copyvio. The source for this image, the Wyoming State Archives, (archive link) says that the article is released under a CC license, but does not indicate that it owns the photo. The current website of the Wyoming State Archives has the photo here. It says the photographer and copyright status are unknown. Vigilant Cosmic Penguin (talk | contribs) 🐧 06:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep We generally trust that archives, and their legal representatives, know what they are doing when they release under a CC license. For instance my Flickr account may say that one of my images is copyrighted, yet, I may release it here under a CC license. --RAN (talk) 07:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the archives said they released the text of the article under this license, but not the image. Since the same archives currently list the copyright as unknown, I think that makes it clear. Vigilant Cosmic Penguin (talk | contribs) 🐧 06:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Film Hot isn't the copyright owner of the clip in which this person appears. The owner is Vietnam Television (VTV). Ctdbsclvn (talk) 06:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Bjh21 as no permission (No permission since) Krd 06:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: When I applied the "no permission" tag, the file was marked {{Cc-by-sa-4.0}}, which obviously does require permission. --bjh21 (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by DANY.SOUND(2023) (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Likely copyvio: unattributed musical compilations, some of them hours long; claims of own work seem dubious.

Omphalographer (talk) 06:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a copy of File:Drâa-Tafilalet in Morocco (Morocco view).svg Amr ibnu Kulthoum عمرو بن كلثوم (talk) 06:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete dupe. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:08, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


I put the reason on the talk page Abrazilianwikieditor (talk) 06:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I put the reason on the talk page Abrazilianwikieditor (talk) 07:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete both the file and its talk page in favor of File:Flag of JCP.svg: dupe. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:06, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by 16y7phgvvdeeyyyg (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: various unused (outside a userspace gallery) screen recordings, mostly of the user clicking around Wikimedia web sites. Unclear what these were meant to demonstrate.

Omphalographer (talk) 07:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by G08lin33 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope: unused self-made music (?) recordings.

Omphalographer (talk) 07:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: extracted audio (mostly music) from a gameplay compilation video. Not useful. Omphalographer (talk) 07:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As well as:
Omphalographer (talk) 07:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: extracted low-quality audio of a traffic accident from a YouTube video; not useful in this form. Omphalographer (talk) 07:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect copyright license. Photo mostly likely does not belong to uploader; it's been used in news articles etc seefooddiet (talk) 08:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User request. Leotalk 09:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User request. Leotalk 09:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy keep, if it's really your own work, per COM:INUSE. Also beyond the automatic courtesy deletion period. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

not own image, no author given no metadata uploaded by Groupe Ionis account Hoyanova (talk) 09:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation - the author of the woks is not the same as the person who posted the image. - tucoxn\talk 09:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license. Segoulas (talk) 10:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the subject and I did not give permission for the photographer to use this picture or to place it on wikimedia commons Applepix (talk) 10:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When you participate in a public event, being photographed is expected. If you want to try to demand a takedown, contact Wikimedia Legal, but make sure you have the law behind you. Otherwise,  Speedy keep. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 09:26, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am the subject and I did not give permission for the photographer to use this picture or to place it on wikimedia commons Applepix (talk) 10:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Speedy keep Ditto to my remarks on your other request for a takedown. Contact Wikimedia Legal if you have the right as a public person participating in a public event to nevertheless demand a takedown. To my knowledge, you do not. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Focused on copyrighted material. TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 10:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license Segoulas (talk) 10:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded it by mistake BDTrainLover (talk) 11:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:BDTrainLover, it's a bit beyond the 1-week automatic courtesy deletion period, so please let us know why you want to delete the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, please delete the image. 103.114.23.130 17:43, 6 January 2025 (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.

This image of her is taken by Ellina Noronen for Miss Finland Organization; unless contact COM:VRTS, this file along with the other photos related to Miss Finland published in 1976-2025 (mostly are fair use and unfree licenses) are copyright protected until 2026-2075 (50 years period and copyright expires after year end) according to Finnish copyright law; so you'll be waiting to entering the public domain within 50 years. See Commons:CRT/Finland for more information. Apipattana (talk) 05:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination after Krd says in that file edit summary previously it is obvious or not required. Apipattana (talk) 08:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I already withdrawal from nomination (I have no choice but I want to keep the file anyways) due to a matter as above. (non-admin closure) Apipattana (talk) 08:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no sign of the claimed CC0 declaration on the source site, and no VRT permission. I tagged the file as "no permission", then Apipattana opened a DR. Krd removed the "no permission" notice claiming "Permission for this file is obvious or is not required.", which led Apipattana to withdraw the DR 2½ hours after it was opened. I still think there's no permission at the source, so I'd like this evaluated (at least nominally) by the community. bjh21 (talk) 11:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think mediadrive.com, kuvat.fi and 1g.fi is actually a Finnish media host service which they have some of that websites were didn't shown a copyright notice like "Copyright © 2025, All Rights Reserved." on the bottom of the website (like in misssuomi.kuvat.fi), but it does have it on hlphotography.1g.fi (in which that website also includes a Miss Finland and Miss World Finland photos and videos footages). Apipattana (talk) 13:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This problem may cause some of them were think that media (related to Miss Finland) is no copyright restrictions and have licensed as a free license (like Creative Commons) and were can uploaded to Commons, but I think you'll should be recommended to waiting for 50 years (according to Finnish copyright law) to entering to public domain for that footages about Miss Finland published between 1976 and this year (2025) which is currently mostly are copyright eligible. Apipattana (talk) 13:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All of Miss Finland files and footages were are accepted here in Wikimedia Commons is a footages taken from the year of the pageant starts (which is in 1931) to 1974. (Also I forgot the mention, some footages were taken in 1975 will be entered the public domain in the next year (2026)), some of the newer ones may either will can be required to request permission via COM:VRTS or may deleted per COM:COPYVIO, or COM:NETC, or COM:CSD, because it will may be won't accept here on Wikimedia Commons. Apipattana (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also forgot again to mention that works related to Miss Finland published in 1975-2025 will be entered to public domain in 2026-2076 (copyright expires after year end) according to the Finnish copyright law. Apipattana (talk) 14:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Although this photo even it was shooted by Finnish photographer Ellina Noronen, Miss Finland Organization own rights to that photo and other photos related to Miss Finland, and it was stated on the bottom of the website (http://www.misssuomi.fi) is protected by copyright, stated "© 2024 Finnartist Oy", as well it does seen on the social media platforms and other medias very common. I should be recommended contact through Miss Finland Organization via email as stated in the organization's website (https://misssuomi.fi/ota-yhteytta/) or the aforementioned name photographer's email for more details about file permission which they may possible will can do or not in Wikimedia Commons. Apipattana (talk) 16:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I mean should be request permission via COM:VRTS. Apipattana (talk) 16:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license. Segoulas (talk) 12:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The depositor mentions that the owner of the website kurzy.cz. According to the link from the registrar of the state domain .cz: https://www.nic.cz/whois/contact/KURZY-JH/ the owner of the domain is Jan Hřebíček. I don't see any written consent from the author to use the site graphics or the embedding itself. Therefore, I believe that the file violates the CC license. Segoulas (talk) 12:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Kamal Omar123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal images, not in use. Out of project scope.

D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © IGOR CUGUNOV - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Wiki article related to the depicted band is also nominated for deletion on German Wikipedia for lack of notability of the band. The discussion seems to lean towards deletion so far: de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/5. Januar 2025#Red House Magic. Nakonana (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © IGOR CUGUNOV - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 12:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I recently uploaded a newer and more clear version of this same file here. I did not know this one existed or I would have just uploaded a new version in the same file. Is it possible to merge these two? Omnis Scientia (talk) 12:33, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Asdfghjkl550 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Wrong licenses! Not in Public Domain, images from the Web.

D Y O L F 77[Talk] 12:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright violation - the filename says the author is Nika Hölcl, no evidence of permission — Yerpo Eh? 12:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

copyright violation Pyb (talk) 13:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This image was previously used as a profile picture on the wiki page https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zdravko_Hribar. Today, we have replaced it with a new one, namely this https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ZdravkoHribar_-_Portret_(Svetlo_modro_ozadje).png. Therefore, we ask if the image https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zdravko_Hribar can be permanently deleted. Maj Edu (talk) 13:21, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I allow deletion of this photo. Noted reasons are accepted. Rosana Hribar (talk) 13:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This file is much larger than the other, so why is it useful to delete it? (Parenthetically, both files need much better categorization. Why doesn't one of you create a useful category for Mr. Hribar?) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

possible copyvio © Carina Antl - we would need a COM:VRT permission to keep this M2k~dewiki (talk) 13:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Nudity#New uploads of penis photo, not special enough to be educationally useful A1Cafel (talk) 13:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in Japan A1Cafel (talk) 13:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Indonesia A1Cafel (talk) 13:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Indonesia A1Cafel (talk) 13:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Indonesia A1Cafel (talk) 13:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Indonesia A1Cafel (talk) 13:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Indonesia.

A1Cafel (talk) 13:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 13:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in South Africa A1Cafel (talk) 13:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious solution for the f.o.p. problem. The particular photo is not of much concern. JMK (talk) 14:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Delf promotion. Nobody other than the very user/uploader is interested in these paintings... 186.172.243.79 13:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean self promotion. 186.172.243.79 13:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also the user has made an "article" about the painter (herself? his wife?) in user space. Almost 10 years without a real article. 186.172.243.79 14:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sculpture was completed in 2010 by Mxolisi Dolla Sapeta (1967–). There is no freedom of panorama in South Africa, permission from the sculptor is required A1Cafel (talk) 13:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Files uploaded by Mikagekawase (talk · contribs)

[edit]

per COM:FOP Japan. According to the article[1], this statue was put up in 2020 and its copyright is kept.

Netora (talk) 13:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP in South Africa, sculptor Anton Momberg is still alive A1Cafel (talk) 13:51, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No freedom of panorama in Kazakhstan A1Cafel (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2025 (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.

architect is the still alive Felino Palafox born in 1950. built in 2011. no freedom of panorama in the phils guaranteeing free and unrestricted reuse and reuse of photos of copyrighted architecture and sculptures

Mrcl lxmna (talk) 17:46, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. ƏXPLICIT 12:13, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The mosque was completed in 2011 by Felino Palafox (1950–). There is no freedom of panorama in the Philippines, permission from the architect is required

A1Cafel (talk) 13:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted Logo 2A01:CB1C:F07:D000:2062:8D87:6372:B4A4 13:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is broken and can no longer be used. The photo is not displayed. 2001:2D8:7437:E88:9825:7B54:9239:8BCE 13:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 13:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 13:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 13:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


No FoP for 2D works in China A1Cafel (talk) 14:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Per COM:TOYS A1Cafel (talk) 14:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


The building was completed in 1999 by Rafael Viñoly (1944–2023). There is no freedom of panorama in South Korea. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2094 A1Cafel (talk) 14:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


The photo is broken and can no longer be used. The photo is not displayed. 2001:2D8:7437:E88:9825:7B54:9239:8BCE 14:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a photo and is displaying for me. I see that its factuality is disputed, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:50, 5 January 2025 (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.

Per COM:FOP SK, there is no freedom of panorama in South Korea, where the threshold of originality for structures is incredibly low.

ƏXPLICIT 01:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See also COM:DM South Korea. Ox1997cow (talk) 17:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Per Ox1997cow, looks like Panmunjeom cases, below TOO. (wait, File:Korea Polytechnic IV Daejeon 01.jpg is problemic? that logo on pillar might be beyond TOO, ditto for File:Korea Polytechnic IV Daejeon 03.jpg and File:Korea Polytechnic IV Daejeon 04.jpg). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding Panmunjeom , photos of structures in North Korea or photos of structures in South Korea taken from North Korea both benefit from the FOP provisions of the latter. As noted at COM:FOP SK, this wall is protected by copyright. I highly doubt an entire building would get a pass. ƏXPLICIT 02:50, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Explicit: You screenshot is to me an automobile advertisement, which hence the cars are copyrighted enough, but here I see only many simple buildings. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:58, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have misunderstand my comment, as it had nothing to do with the car. The company that produced the advertisement linked above was sued by the architect of the building for infringing on his rights. The Seoul Central District Court agreed and ruled that the company must compensate him. My point was that a single wall exterior of a building is protected by South Korea's FOP laws. If that basic wall is considered complex enough to be protected—which wasn't even the focus of the commercial to begin with—then these more complex buildings would be, too. ƏXPLICIT 05:33, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Explicit:  Comment I agree that the ruling is a case in which it can be seen that there is no freedom of panorama in South Korea. However, I did some analysis. The building in the ruling is the UV House, and according to this introduction, the building is recognized for its creativity and art. (The UV House, designed by architectural designer Min Gyu-am, is a representative structure of Heyri that is recognized for its creativity and art in terms of the overall framework including the arrangement and combination of space and various components. I used Google Translate.) Then think of a building that doesn't. According to COM:TOO South Korea, As a condition of originality that can be recognized as a copyright, it is said that it is not an imitation, but that it can be distinguished from existing ones. If so, how about this one?
File:Microsoft Korea Building.jpg
If I talk about the building that appears as the main object in this photo, I would say that it is a simple rectangular shape and the walls are made of glass. If this is the originality that deserves copyright, I think it's like saying that there are so many copyright infringement buildings in the world. Therefore, I think it is not good to say that South Korea's threshold of originality for structures is very low. Ox1997cow (talk) 22:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of the ruling, the very definition of architecture is art. From en:Architecture: "Architectural works, in the material form of buildings, are often perceived as cultural symbols and as works of art." From Cambridge dictionary: "the art and practice of designing and making buildings". The UV House wall has already been deemed copyrightable—which does set a low threshold, just look at it—so we have to work from that in applying COM:FOP SK. The original Korean text of COM:TOO SK suggests (via machine translation, this Korean beyond me): "Article 2, No. 1 of the Copyright Act stipulates a work as a “creative work that expresses human thoughts or emotions.” In this context, creativity does not mean originality in a complete sense, and it is not just a work that imitates others, but the author. It only means that it contains the expression of one's own thoughts or feelings, and in order to meet these requirements, the work is only given the characteristics as the product of the author's own mental effort and can be distinguished from the existing works of other authors. It would be enough to be there." So a work does not even have to be completely original, it just requires the author to express themselves through their work. ƏXPLICIT 00:46, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No matter how very low the standard for threshold of originality is, there are certainly buildings that are not subject to copyright protection. Look at this file.
File:Seoul and N Seoul Tower.jpg (This file was undeleted by this undeletion request.)
Many of the buildings in this photo are simple, consisting of brick or stone walls and windows. If these buildings are copyrighted, the buildings in this photo are infringing on the copyrights of other buildings. But what about reality? When someone built one of the buildings in this photo, did they get the copyright permission of the other building? Of course, two or more buildings may have the same architect or construction company, but most of them do not know the architect or construction company, or even if they do know, the architect or construction company is often different.
Ox1997cow (talk) 11:16, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The onus of proving that a building in not copyrighted lies with the user arguing to keep it, which you have failed to do. South Korea's highest court in the country ruled a two-dimensional view of a wall in the background of a commercial shown for five seconds violated the architect's copyright. It is you who must argue that these three-dimensional photos of buildings are less original than that wall, which you have yet to do. What you have done, in addition to citing other files exist, is completely misrepresent the case of File:Seoul and N Seoul Tower.jpg, which was undeleted after being determined that the photo is of a cityscape that falls under the de minimis clause because there isn't a single building or structure as the main focal point. You should be well aware of this since you initiated the undeletion discussion to begin with. ƏXPLICIT 13:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see. Therefore,  I withdraw my nomination. However, I do not withdraw my claim to refer to COM:DM South Korea. Ox1997cow (talk) 20:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. There is no freedom of panorama for (modern) buildings in South Korea, per COM:FOP South Korea. As the example of the wall shows, this is also valid for parts of buildings. These images were all made to show the complete building, so they have to be deleted. --Ellywa (talk) 12:32, 27 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in South Korea.

A1Cafel (talk) 14:13, 5 January 2025 (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.

There is no FOP in France for architectural works. The sphere is the main subject of the photo.

68.193.210.74 23:44, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 09:40, 2 May 2016 (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.

There is no commercial freedom of panorama in France. All of these images under commercial-type Creative Commons licenses violate the posthumous copyright of the dead architects, w:fr:Adrien Fainsilber (1932–2023) and Engineer w:fr:Gérard Chamayou (1929–2019). A commercial license permit from their heirs is required.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 00:12, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The building was completed in 1985 by Adrien Fainsilber (1932–2023). There is no freedom of panorama in France. The copyright term of the country is 70 years, and the image can be undeleted in 2094

A1Cafel (talk) 14:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 999real (talk) 14:32, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No mention CC-BY-SA-4.0 at source (https://web.archive.org/web/20180329064617/https://www.lagolaye.fr/brasserie.html), all rights reserved, COM:PACKAGING 999real (talk) 14:34, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused personal photo by non contributor not in scope. Also the image is stated to be taken by someone else and there is no evidence of permission 999real (talk) 14:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unused screenshot of Wikipedia page, contain copyrighted logos in macOS app bar 999real (talk) 14:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personal drawing by non contributor, not educationally useful, not in scope 999real (talk) 14:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deeply confused AI-misgenerated image which fails to accurately represent frequency analysis of letters of the alphabet. Seems like it's mixed up the concept with that of audio frequencies, and drawn some kind of spectrogram with hundreds of data points, rather than the 26-ish for letter of an alphabet. It's also failed to render the alphabet, and drawn some kind of three-dimensional graph for an entirely two-dimensional concept. Belbury (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. I think the topic ka:სიხშირული ანალიზი is in fact frequency domain analysis, but the illustration is still nonsense. (I also have a suspicion that the article may be AI-generated as well.) Omphalographer (talk) 22:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image seems to have been first used in a Hurriyet article from 2017, where it credits Umut Can Karahasanoğlu as the author (rather than the Şehitler Galerisi [Martyr's Gallery]). Evidence would therefore be required that the author has licensed the image as tagged on its page. Gazamp (talk) 15:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Artportal (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Paintings are work of living artist w:cs:Miroslav Konrád, confirmation via VTRS is needed.

Gumruch (talk) 15:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Pangalau as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Takedown requested due to privacy concerns by the automobile's owner. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The deletion request statement is correct and would hope to get it removed as requested by the owner of the subject automobile. Pangalau (talk) 15:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we want to respect that request, wouldn't blurring the license plate be sufficient? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:41, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think removing the coordinates attached to the image and plate is enough. Pangalau (talk) 12:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The coordinates might or might not be a problem, but I wouldn't oppose their removal, as they're not important in this context. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Ukabia as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Wrong license. What is the correct license? —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The flag was created sometime in the twentieth century, so unknown to me. Ukabia (talk) 15:42, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Ibisco as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: G7. Cancellation for Poorly printed photograph. Replaced whit better photo already uploaded to Commons. Too old for G7, but  Delete. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 15:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I took two new photos of the same object with a better camera and better quality. [2] [3] I think it is not necessary to keep the photo of poor quality that I requested for deletion. Petro Stelte (talk) 15:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AI-generated image that doesn't much resemble any of the 58 genuine paintings that Commons has of this person in Category:Portrait paintings of Madame de Montespan. No prompt specified. Belbury (talk) 15:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

no author given no metadata no permission Hoyanova (talk) 16:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source: Mastenbroeks personal Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/story.php/?story_fbid=1091440046317523&id=100063546132538&_rdr Mondo (talk) 16:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Ergo,  Delete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:06, 6 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio! 186.172.125.139 14:47, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While the initial deletion rationale might be not a valid reason for deletion given the public event aspect, it looks like the comment by the IP user in the previous DR was missed: "Copyvio!" The photo is claimed to be an own work by the uploader, but the EXIF data says: "Author www.hannahcooke.de" and "Copyright holder Hannah Cooke". We'd need COM:VRT permission to keep the file. The uploader did edit the German Wiki article on Hannah Cooke[4] at some point, but did not indicate to be Hannah Cooke herself, as far as I can see. Nakonana (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 18:57, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio! 186.172.125.139 14:48, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:21, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Erstens haben wir keinen Beleg, dass dies wirklich zutrifft (könnte jeder behaupten), und zweitens ist das Bild offensichtlich bei einem öffentlichen Auftritt entstanden. Da muss man damit rechnen, fotografiert zu werden. Wende dich gegebenenfalls an COM:VRT. PaterMcFly (talk) 10:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: follow advice in DR; no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:13, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:19, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio! 186.172.125.139 14:52, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 19:01, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:09, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2025 (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.

Die abgebildete Person möchte, dass dieses Bild entfernt wird. Visible Artists (talk) 10:14, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Visible Artists as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Das Bild zeigt eine Person, die nicht mehr möchte, dass ihr Bild veröffentlicht wird. Das Recht am eigenen Bild wird geltend gemacht. Previously kept at DR. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:10, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No VRT permission. 186.173.92.106 17:40, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Same issue as with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jiré Emine Gözen 01.jpg: while the above deletion rationale may not be valid, there appears to be a copyright problem as the copyright holder's name in the EXIF data (Hannah Cooke) does not match the uploader's name (Visible Artists). Nakonana (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Le fichier est en doublon RaphaëlMignon (talk) 16:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Very low quality blurry image not useful 999real (talk) 16:39, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per COM:FOP Indonesia there are no freedom of panorama in Indonesia. It looks a bit too complex to be below COM:Too and too new to be PD-old. MGA73 (talk) 16:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by CFA as no permission (No permission since) Krd 17:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am the photographer of this photo, I uploaded to Wikipedia. FFelxii (talk) 17:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why so small? Could you please upload the original with EXIF data? Yann (talk) 17:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The original photo is only on my phone, when I went to upload it via my phone it said the IP was blocked. FFelxii (talk) 17:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have it as a HEIC file on my computer now. FFelxii (talk) 17:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was no reason to add no-permission in the first place. The photo has been used in many places on the net but they all credit the upload here, as far as I can see. I can't find any prior to the upload here, and it was claimed "own work" with a license, so permission was there. Higher resolution is always welcome, of course. Carl Lindberg (talk) 19:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have updated the file to be a higher resolution now. FFelxii (talk) 03:20, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Di (they-them) as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright not expired in the US, without original source it's impossible to know if there was a copyright notice Yann (talk) 17:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Mdaniels5757 as Copyvio (db-copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not public domain in the United States until 2041, see COM:HIRTLE|help=off Yann (talk) 17:55, 5 January 2025 (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.

False license claim. Yogwi21 (talk) 03:21, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion -- pd textlogo. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:11, 19 November 2019 (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.

Deletion requests/File:Kepsir logo new.png Hellokepsir (talk) 17:45, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Kept - no comprehensible rationale for deletion. Omphalographer (talk) 18:36, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{#invoke:Autotranslate|autotranslate|base=Speedynote|1=File:Kepsir logo new.png|2=[[COM:CSD#F10|CSD F10]] (personal photos by non-contributors)}} 103.3.221.251 18:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

License Uncertainty: I have flagged this image for deletion because I am unsure about its licensing. I took the photograph myself; however, it contains text that I did not write, and I do not have permission from the author of the text. I apologize for not clarifying this before uploading the image. Additionally, I have noticed that several other works by the same author have already been uploaded (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Signs_in_Bad_Kreuznach). I would appreciate any assistance, adjustments to the license, or clarification regarding this matter. Thank you. InfoNinja42 (talk) 18:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded the file and I want to delete it 45.128.121.169 18:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please log in and confirm. --Achim55 (talk) 18:54, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright is owned by Dr André Scheffel and the Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science, Munich. H0n0r (talk) 18:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This image is copyrighted. See notice on linked page. © JSC RUSNANO, 2009—2025 H0n0r (talk) 18:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Composite photograph where only parts of it are properly licensed. Top-right and bottom-left are freely licenced and we have them in higher-quality, so they are redudant. Top-left has no evidence of being freely licenced as it has not been digitally published to my knowledge and bottom-right almost certainly isn't as it belongs to Eddy Risch/the Landtag of Liechtenstein. TheBritinator (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Book cover with photograph, see COM:BOOK. Sitacuisses (talk) 19:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour,
cette image a été téléversée pour apporter une preuve de source lors de la rédaction d'un article. Comme on peut le lire dans la discussion où elle est cite, elle est bien sûr destinées à être supprimée le moment venu Bien cordialement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AntonyB (talk • contribs) 22:39, 5. Jan. 2025 (UTC)
@AntonyB: Your answer may refer to a different file, File:La disparition.jpg. For cases like that, Commons isn't the best option. You might send files per email or services like Wetransfer instead. Concerning File:Les plus beaux villages de France.jpg, you yourself added it to an article.
Il semble que votre réponse fasse référence à un autre fichier, File:La disparition.jpg. Dans de tels cas, Commons n'est pas la meilleure option. Vous pouvez envoyer les fichiers par courrier électronique ou par l'intermédiaire de services tels que Wetransfer. Concernant File:Les plus beaux villages de France.jpg, vous l'avez vous-même ajouté à un article. --Sitacuisses (talk) 22:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per the usage, this is a screenshot and not a photo, so this would be a COM:DW of non-free software. The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 19:25, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

César (sculpteur) est mort en 1998 voir https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%C3%A9sar_(sculpteur) Lomita (talk) 19:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a 2021 photo by the uploader of someone who died in 1985 Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 19:46, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Es existiert bereits die Kategorie "Category:Seeschlösschen-Brücke". Benutzer: Hapebalf schlägt ebenfalls Löschung vor (siehe Diskussion). Danielt. (talk) 19:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is a profile managed directly by my family's team that is also dedicated to the family coat of arms. Arevrenyi (talk) 20:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you requesting deletion? Whether you are or not, it's hard to see how this coat of arms is in COM:SCOPE. What's notable about your family? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


I have entrusted the rights to process my photographs and works to the Evrényi team. Arevrenyi (talk) 20:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Not a 2019 photo by uploader of someone who died in 1946 Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious claims of lciense, authorship, date Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:04, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have entrusted the rights to process my photographs and works to the Evrényi team. Arevrenyi (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Not a 2020 photo by uploader of someone who died in 1977 Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:12, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have entrusted the rights to process my photographs and works to the Evrényi team. Arevrenyi (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a great photo, though. How is it in COM:SCOPE? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


dubious contradictory claims Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

advertisment Karsten11 (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fully de-linked and superseded by Caracal_Geographical_Range.svg Elevator Vending Machine (talk) 20:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fully de-linked and superseded by Caracal_Geographical_Range.svg Elevator Vending Machine (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i want to suggest deleting this because there is no eductional value wikipedia sholdn't be nuduty hub COM:DICK 197.54.47.63 20:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelated, replaced by File:Synthese von Isotetrasilan.svg. Leyo 20:56, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelated, replaced by File:Isotetrasilane.svg. Leyo 20:58, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelated, replaced by File:Neopentasilane.svg. Leyo 21:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable copyright Nurken (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable how? It has an author and a full EXIF. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelated, replaced by File:Darstellung von Cyclohexasilan.svg. Leyo 21:05, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pixelated, replaced by File:Darstellung von Cyclopentasilan.svg. Leyo 21:07, 5 January 2025 (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.

Könnten diese Wappendarstellungen möglicherweise neueren Datums sein und somit urheberrechtlich geschützt? In Frage kommt zum Beispiel ein Rekonstruktionsversuch oder sogar eine eigenmächtige Ausschmückung des Kamins. GerritR (talk) 18:59, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: CoA looks old, if you have evidence that's it's not PD, I'll delete. --Abzeronow (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Es bestehen weiterhin Zweifel an der Gemeinfreiheit des Bildes. Nach dem vorsorgenden Prinzip ist der Löschantrag zu reaktivieren, weil man sich nicht sicher sein kann, wann und von wem das große Wappen gemalt wurde. Siehe dazu https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#File:Schloss-klingenberg-003.jpg GerritR (talk) 21:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing changed since 22 December, 2024. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:17, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Odesskaya oblast location map.svg. Incall talk 21:08, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Own work? 186.173.205.117 21:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A near-copy of File:Siberian Turkic Languages distribution map.png, with no indication of the source of the work. Most likely, an inaccurate map. Incall talk 21:16, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But COM:INUSE, so should be kept. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Changed it back to the original version. Incall talk 06:45, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Finno-Ugric Languages.png. Incall talk 21:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Die Verbindung ist zwar von 1907, aber wir wissen nicht, ob das Wappen in seiner Blasonierung genauso alt ist. Noch weniger wissen wir, ob die hier dargestellte Interpretation des Wappens alt genug ist. GerritR (talk) 21:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipNcC-fliUtKoSyVmzRmo9sspzTeemxQxeK7hazgknf9rgwkBsF0Dso5y0-v0CHhQg?key=WC1oZ3FGVEM2Sk5mZ3NFeEM0ZmRzQVQ0eHZMNDBB
Siehe Seite 6, Nutzung des Wappens in dieser Form (mit minimalen Abweichungen) seit spätestens 1912.
Siehe auch Wappenkunde:
https://photos.google.com/share/AF1QipPNqYXoKkJnemfwPodTtvwNv8YOEaSGuDQFpYV3N4PfMBAQcZZGcT6XNMjAbIqEjg?key=OTBFUS1OdkdQUnBrVVFyTjltV2x2WDBDR3M4ak5n Alrael (talk) 12:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Könntest du bitte in Zukunft eine einfache Google-Suche durchführen, bevor du diese ganzen Löschanträge stellst? Alrael (talk) 12:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Billboard in form of multiple windows (of Flamingo Las Vegas) combined lacks freedom of panorama and may go against COM:FOP US. George Ho (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Bolgradskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:23, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

La même photographie est publiée sous copyright sur cet url: https://booklips.pl/wywiady/komiks-dzialajacy-na-wszystkie-zmysly-rozmowa-z-danielem-chmielewskim-o-albumie-ja-nina-szubur-graficznej-adaptacji-powiesci-tokarczuk/ Limfjord69 (talk) 21:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Izmailskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:24, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Odesskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:26, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Podolskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:27, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Belgorod-Dnestrovskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Razdelnanskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:30, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File copying File:Berezovskiy rayon 2020.svg. Incall talk 21:31, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: plain text. Omphalographer (talk) 21:35, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope: plain text. Omphalographer (talk) 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by cross-wiki spammer. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by cross-wiki spammer. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:37, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by cross-wiki spammer. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by cross-wiki spammer. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spam by cross-wiki spammer. —Justin (koavf)TCM 21:38, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Without permission from the source 1. This is a reconstruction of the flag, so it may not be on wikimedia commons. Incall talk 21:52, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No freedom of panorama in Kazakhstan. Incall talk 21:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in Ukraine, and these images infringe on sculptural copyrights. The monument was inaugurated in 2007 and authored by sculptors Володимир Небоженко and Семен Кантур, as well as architect Павло Бережний.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in Ukraine. The monument dates to 1958, with no cited sculptor. If this is an anonymous work, then the image can only be undeleted once the longer U.S. copyright term expires (95+1 years from publication for pre-1978 foreign works due to COM:URAA), not the shorter Ukrainian term of 70 years. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:07, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


What is this? 186.173.205.117 22:14, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Is this IK? 186.173.205.117 22:17, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete NOT notable, out of scope, private photo. Taylor 49 (talk) 00:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not an own work. 186.173.205.117 22:20, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in Ukraine. The monument dates to 1961 and was authored by Ковтун М.. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:45, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Same case as Commons:Deletion requests/File:Лосинівка Памятник Шевченко 1.jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 22:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


This file was initially tagged by Fralambert as Speedy (SD) and the most recent rationale was: F10. The file is in use. DaB. (talk) 22:55, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just in case this was because there is a RfD on simplewiki and Wikidata. Fralambert (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no commercial Freedom of Panorama in Ukraine. The monument dates to 1991 and was authored by sculptor О. Скобліков.

JWilz12345 (Talk|Contributions) 23:03, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Copyrighted by the Republic of Türkiye, not freely licensed. Turkey joined the Berne Convention 1 January 1952 per COM:Turkey.

  — 🇺🇦Jeff G. please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 23:29, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep all. Trivial, below threshold of originality. Taylor 49 (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep. Text, star and crescent, and biometric passport symbol (the rectangle/circle at the bottom) are all well below the threshold of originality. Omphalographer (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Not eligible or copyright, just text and a pd symbol. --RAN (talk) 01:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Personal/Private photo. COM:OOS & COM:NOTHOST. Mitte27 (talk) 23:47, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. See w:2003–04 FA Premier Reserve League: "Best Player: Gary Bockhorni (Chelsea F.C)". My main objection would be  Delete No permission from the photographer and false PD license. The closing admin should not "Delete per nom" but delete as in scope but no permission (and also too small to really be useful). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]