Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2009/06/19

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

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive June 19th, 2009
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.

File:Xkt-1 hud.JPG

[edit]

当該写真は朝鮮日報（chosun Ilbo）の記者の資格で撮影したにもかかわらず、個人著作物のようにされているが、朝鮮日報側の使用承諾がない。--hyolee2/H.L.LEE (talk) 02:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

2008/05/08, Yu Yong Weon emailed to me. He permit the use of ALL HIS PICTURES AT http://bemil.chosun.com/ AS GFDL. He is the best military reporter at chosun.com, No.1 newspaper in south korea.

His email : [1] -- WonRyong (talk) 03:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hyolee2 insist that Yu Yong Weon is chosun.com's repoter. So, He is not copyright holder. But, in korean websites, so many bemil.chosun.com Yu Yong Weon's pictures are posted to many blogs, board, etc by his permission, not by chosun.com.

http://bemil.chosun.com/ is No.1 military site, chosun.com is No.1 newspaper in south korea, Yu Yong Weon is the first military reporter at chosun.com, famous very much. http://bemil.chosun.com/ is his site, not chosun.com's site. -- WonRyong (talk) 03:31, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://bemil.chosun.com/ is his site, not company's site. I emailed with him twice directly. He "clearly GFDL permit" to me. Your's insist is that he have no right to permission? Ask to him, not to me, not to commons. -- WonRyong (talk) 03:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please forward permission to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org, or they will be deleted. Kwj2772 (msg) 13:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. per evidence. This evidence does not prove they are free, but says it is difficult to grant permission. Images from this site are not free. Kwj2772 (msg) 13:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

User:Drork

[edit]

I stopped contributing to this project. Please delete my userpage and my talk page. --Drork (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you need the userpage? I decided I don't want to be associated with the Commons anymore. Drork (talk) 14:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you have right to delete your userpage. --Dezidor (talk) 14:54, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant the talk page. Please delete it as well. It's part of my right to leave. Drork (talk) 16:29, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It will be pity, it includes interesting discussions about categories. --Dezidor (talk) 16:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please see m:RTV. I think deleting the userpage and blanking the talk page will be sufficient.  — Mike.lifeguard 16:31, 19 June 2009 (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.

File:Pike's_Peak_Hillclimb_2005.jpg

[edit]

This is Brian Steggeman's only flickr image on Commons and it failed the review within 6-7 mths of upload. No evidence it was ever free enough for Commons. Leoboudv (talk) 01:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done VIGNERON * discut. 15:29, 24 June 2009 (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.

File:Bernard_Carayon.jpg

[edit]

Claims subject is the author which seems unrealistic. Author is most likely a professional photographer which authorization is needed to republish here. More over the photography has been published in several websites and magazines (http://www.forumeco.com/articles/article.php?idA=431, http://www.valeursactuelles.com/public/valeurs-actuelles/html/fr/articles.php?article_id=4174, http://www.lexpansion.com/economie/actualite-economique/le-patriotisme-economique-c-est-l-inverse-du-protectionnisme_166370.html). Nakor (talk) 01:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 21:25, 22 June 2009 (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.

File:Pardo33.jpg

[edit]

User does not have permission to release this image into the public domain Sillyfolkboy (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 15:38, 24 June 2009 (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.

File:Лиза Арзамасова.Jpg

[edit]

I have not seen any author's permission -> it's probably copyright violation. Delete. - Аурелиано Буэндиа (talk) 08:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. by Tryphon Yann (talk) 21:29, 22 June 2009 (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.

Norro categories

[edit]

I believe it is bad taste to name things after users. Norro has no proof he created the first voting symbols and even so we should not be naming categories after the original creator, which means absolutely nothing on a wiki. Ipatrol (talk) 00:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep but rename. It's nice to have all of the similarly-styled icons located in one place, although I agree that the name could be changed. Perhaps Category:Round Wikimedia icons, since that is where they are most used? I also noticed that you already upmerged most of the categories... shouldn't that have waited until discussion was completed (my bad if I'm wrong on this; I don't know the details of Commons' deletion policies). --Drilnoth (talk) 03:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    This theme have not specially thing to do with Wikimedia, and It can exists many icon themes used or not buy many Wikimedia projets, then "Category:Round Wikimedia icons" is not helpfull. ~ bayo or talk 09:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I mentioned that as a possibility since it is in Category:Vote symbols which is itself in Category:Wikimedia icons. Perhaps Category:Round 3D icons would work, since they do have the shading which makes them seem 3D-ish? The flat icons could probably be kept in their new location in Category:Vote symbols since there aren't very many of them. --Drilnoth (talk) 15:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I create icon categories by theme all this icons (before you remove them) look like the same. Thanks a lot for your stupid remove of all categories i add in many files. If the category use a bad name rename it, do not remove the category (you are welcome to create a magic name for this theme). And anyway, thanks for your comment on my talk page. But, well... I love spending my time for nothing. I hope you will revert yourself. ~ bayo or talk 09:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need to get mad bayo, I'll help readd the category (don't worry about it :). But a new name would be nice. The problem is: what name? "Icons by Norro" was a logical choice although not completely accurate and unlike "Tango icons" or "Crystal icons", no one will know what this is referring to, so can create some random name for it. Rocket000 (talk) 13:01, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How about "Norricons"? :-) Rocket000 (talk) 13:08, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That actually doesn't sound too bad. No specific name springs to mind, but "Norricons" is no more descriptive than "Nuvola" and the like. --Drilnoth (talk) 15:38, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think bayo wants to get away from specifics like "Wikimedia" or "Voting" since that's only how these images are commonly used on Wikimedia projects. And I support the move away from that too. It makes a lot sense when you look at it from a reusers' perspective, who may or may not know anything about their main purpose to us. Norricons (or whatever) on the other hand is just a meaningless name (it still gives some credit to the original creator, but that's irrelevant). The problem with descriptive names like "Round 3D icons" is that they don't limit what can be included and aren't a "theme". I always have trouble categorizing groups of icons like these, which clearly should share a common category, yet lack a name. Rocket000 (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe that we should give "credit" through titles. It's not done on any project. By not naming things after users, we emphasize the communal nature of the project. I suggest Norro prove that he/she actually created this theme and if so then we should make a note in the licensing section in order to comply with the original license.--Ipatrol (talk) 22:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying that we should keep the files at the current name; just that they should be in a category together, not upmerged. I agree that the previous name was problematic. --Drilnoth (talk) 03:09, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. It is useful to have a specific category to group these icons together. The name is probably not ideal, but this is just a matter of moving it. –Tryphon☂ 08:23, 27 June 2009 (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.

Images of Mkd111

[edit]

The images of Mkd111 (talk · contribs) appear to be copyright violations. Several pictures have no EXIF data and the ones that do have at least four different cameras. One has a URL watermark. Three other images have already been deleted as copyvios. Wknight94 talk 02:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:55, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Joey_adams.jpg

[edit]

can't change the license details put in by mistake Bangkokreporter (talk) 06:32, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete, duplicate of File:Joseph Abramowitz.jpg, which BTW should be deleted too unless an appropriate license can be found (cannot be {{PD-old}} if the author is unknown). The source website states that "it is believed that all material on this web site is in the public domain", but there is no rationale to back it up. –Tryphon☂ 11:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted copyvio. Sv1xv (talk) 06:46, 27 June 2009 (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.

File:Jessica_Tsang.jpg

[edit]

I did not give permission for this photo of myself to be placed online. Jessyt81 (talk) 07:33, 19 June 2009 (UTC) I did not give permission for my photo or name to be uploaded onto this website. Jessyt81 (talk) 07:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:54, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Lisa_Harrigan_and_Jessica_Tsang.JPG

[edit]

I would like my name (Jessica Tsang) to be removed from this website please and thank you. Jessyt81 (talk) 07:34, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:54, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Contents.png

[edit]

Out of scope: contents of en:Monosaccharide nomenclature; not used anywhere (in en-wp there is another file with the same name). Hystrix (talk) 15:23, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:53, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Carboxysome 3 images-en.svg

[edit]

Only text is vectorized, embedded raster image, raster image present in commons --IngerAlHaosului (talk) 16:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So, why would it justify deleting the image? Having vectorized text allows for easy localization, so we should definitely  keep it. –Tryphon☂ 21:19, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep — df|  09:57, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:52, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._Kirwan_1986.jpg

[edit]

Le Moigne is not copyright holder, not eligible for relicensing 77.195.221.56 16:44, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:52, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._Brane_Cantenac_1973.jpg

[edit]

Trademarked material 77.195.221.56 16:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept, and added {{PD-text}}. Sv1xv (talk) 06:48, 27 June 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._Mouton-Rothschild_1964.jpg

[edit]

Trademarked material 77.195.221.56 16:49, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:51, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Château_Latour1.jpg

[edit]

Trademarked material posted without authorization 77.195.221.56 16:52, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Commons does not care about trademark. The image here looks PD-Old. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment PD-old ? The label was printed in or after 1958 ! Cdlt, VIGNERON * discut. 15:34, 24 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, false license, derivative, uploader is not copyright holder, no indication is free licensed for any other reason. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:54, 1 July 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._Mouton-Rothschild_1961.jpg

[edit]

Trademarked material submitted without authorization 77.195.221.56 16:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:45, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._Calon_Ségur_1966.jpg

[edit]

Copyrighted material posted without permission 77.195.221.56 17:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:45, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Etiqu._de_Mouton-Rothschild_1965.jpg

[edit]

Trademarked material posted without authorization 77.195.221.56 17:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. –Juliancolton | Talk 16:44, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Onondaga_County_Route_41_NY.svg

[edit]

Onondaga CR 41 is unsigned and no shield for it exists in reality. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 18:28, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And this is a problem why? --Latebird (talk) 16:51, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Eh...I really don't care, but it definitely shouldn't be used anywhere. Any usage of this in any article on any project is wrong. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 20:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep - No reason to delete. Graphics like this are often used on maps or in other decrciptive material, whether there are actual physical signs on the road or not. --Latebird (talk) 11:46, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
kept: no valid reason for deletion --h-stt !? 14:42, 14 August 2009 (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.

File:Onondaga_County_Route_236_NY.svg

[edit]

Onondaga CR 236 is unsigned and no shield for it exists in reality. TMF Let's Go Mets - Stats 18:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

kept: no valid reason for deletion --h-stt !? 14:43, 14 August 2009 (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.

File:Textures_img_5344.jpg

[edit]

Probable bot umpoad mistake, unusable without a description for any use Coyau (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, unused undescribed mystery image; out of scope. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:06, 1 July 2009 (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.

File:Textures_img_5348.jpg

[edit]

Probable bot umpoad mistake, unusable without a description for any use Coyau (talk) 18:47, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted per nom, unused in Wikimedia, out of project scope. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:58, 1 July 2009 (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.

File:Textures_img_5340.jpg

[edit]

Probable bot umpoad mistake, unusable without a description. Plus in what country is this building? (COM:FOP?) Coyau (talk) 18:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, unused undescribed mystery image; out of scope. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:01, 1 July 2009 (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.

File:Textures_img_5341.jpg

[edit]

Probable bot umpoad mistake, unusable without a description. Plus in what country is this building? (COM:FOP?) Coyau (talk) 18:56, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, unused undescribed mystery image; out of scope. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:59, 1 July 2009 (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.

File:Dioda_by_David.JPG

[edit]

Not used. Diagrams shouldn't be in jpeg. We have other files such as File:Diode symbol.svg -SCEhardT 19:30, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted Julo (talk) 11:43, 26 June 2009 (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.

File:Drew_Powers_Better_Quality.jpg

[edit]

Appears to be a promo photo - no indication of why the uploader would own the copyright -SCEhardT 19:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Pruneautalk 14:37, 15 August 2009 (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.

File:Konegen_Sergey.jpg

[edit]

no notability, article in ru.wiki just deleted Andrei Romanenko (talk) 20:18, 19 June 2009 (UTC) Лицензия обновлена.[reply]

Deleted. Pruneautalk 14:38, 15 August 2009 (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.

File:KTF_SHOW_Daerijeom.jpg

[edit]

This picture is mainly for the presentation of logo. If the logo that cannot be used freely is not allowed in commons, I think it needs to be deleted. (Commons:De_minimis) Jtm71 (talk) 12:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It took a mobile phone shop, not the logo. It's trivial. --Ryuch (talk) 16:17, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The site explaining its brand is here, and the notice on the prohibition of the misuse of their Brand Identity is here. Jtm71 (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't those more be trademark restrictions? As long as our use is not violating the trademark, that is typically not an issue. Commons considers copyright issues only. Personally I think that is pretty much de minimis; it is a photo of one of their stores. It is on the exceedingly extreme edge of considering this an infringing copyright violation, given: 1) it is a rather simple logo, and I'm not sure what the threshold of creativity is in South Korea and 2) South Korea has freedom of panorama for buildings, or at least nearly so (seems some dispute on that). The use of the logo on the storefront is clearly OK, and this photo simply depicts one of those (obviously) allowable uses. I'll go for  Keep. Carl Lindberg (talk) 03:17, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. Per Carl Lindberg. –Tryphon☂ 08:34, 27 June 2009 (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.

File:長崎平和記念像2009.jpg

[edit]

Copyright violation of art.

Artist:
日本語: 北村西望
(Kitamura Seibō ,1884-1987)
Place:Nagasaki,Japan.
Note:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan--KENPEI (talk) 22:27, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 16:56, 24 June 2009 (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.

File:Nordhavn47a.jpg

[edit]

(no reason) --DavidPickett (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep No reason given for deletion --Simonxag (talk) 20:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Permission only for smaller versions (File:Nordhavn47c.jpg). --MGA73 (talk) 21:46, 15 July 2009 (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.

File:Nordhavn47b.jpg

[edit]

(no reason) --DavidPickett (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep No reason given for deletion --Simonxag (talk) 20:43, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted Only permission for lowres (File:Nordhavn 47d.jpg). --MGA73 (talk) 21:50, 15 July 2009 (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.

File:Vagif_mausoleum.jpg

[edit]

Mausoleum was built on 1982 year. We don't know author of this image. It is not PD-old, PD-RusEmpire or PD-Russia. Dinamik (talk) 15:15, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mausoleum was built in USSR, and now Russia has rights for photoes which was made in USSR. Can you find PD-USSR? Not. Thus - PD-Russia.--Interfase (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{PD-old}} or {{PD-Russia-2008}}? {{PD-Russia}} isn't a valid license nowadays. It can't be {{PD-old}}, because mausoleum was built on 1982 year, it can't be {{PD-Russia-2008}}, because we don't know author of this image. Dinamik (talk) 21:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Author make this image in Soiet Union.--Interfase (talk) 08:08, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete. source clearly states: © All rights reserved, by Ismail32. --Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

deleted, --Polarlys (talk) 10:25, 31 August 2009 (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.

File:Charles_nicolle_g.duhamel_r.arcos_et_dr_Gerard_debout.jpg

[edit]

Very unlikely it is own work by uploader, description (who's who) is unclear Abanima (talk) 18:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, the uploader was notified on 5 February 2009 about problems with source. --Abanima (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Nilfanion (talk) 08:29, 3 September 2009 (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.

File:Beyonce_Opening_Concert_Tour.jpg

[edit]

Very unlikely that beelover9481, see the photostream http://www.flickr.com/photos/beelover9481/, is the sole copyright owner of this and the following photos. Martin H. (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

--Martin H. (talk) 19:24, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And User:Beelover9481s uploads, see the log for some blatant copyright violations. --Martin H. (talk) 19:25, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete probably a copyvio too. Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 02:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Wknight94 talk 02:11, 19 September 2009 (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.

File:Santarosasul.jpg

[edit]

The license is PD-self, but the source is an url [2]. At that website there is no information that the uploader here is the author. Ö 12:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted, no permission. Kameraad Pjotr 19:56, 7 December 2009 (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.

File:Valbovap.jpg

[edit]

There are reasons to believe this image was scanned from a copyrighted book, probably "Boken om Valbo" (Valbo kommun, 1970). 130.240.63.53 12:03, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted as the copyright status of this COA remains unclear. --AFBorchert (talk) 00:37, 2 January 2010 (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.

File:Gochaku Castle 08.jpg

[edit]

Copyright violation of writing.

Note:Freedom_of_panorama#Japan.--KENPEI (talk) 14:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 KeepThe following plaque of historic spot isn't only depending on thought or creative writing but also explanation of the fact. So it hardly say to infringe the copyright of writings not at all.Please refer to Commons:Deletion requests/Plaques in Japan a standard of judgement.--ブレイズマン (talk) 13:49, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Insufficient FOP in Japan. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 23:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion debate is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

PL voivodship

[edit]

Logos of Polish voivodships are copyrighted. LeinaD dyskusja 16:12, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm adding the actual list of files:
I don't know if {{Polishsymbol}} covers this kind of images; how "official" are they? Can you explain why you think they're not official symbols?

Deleted. It's a logo for commercial/advertisment purposes, not defined by any act or official document. Masur (talk) 12:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How and by whom are they decided on if they are not official? --Slomox (talk) 13:11, 26 November 2009 (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.

Images of Polimetla

[edit]

All these images of User:Polimetla are previously published at [3]. Per the usual Commons:OTRS process, the user must verify that they are the creator of these previously-published images. However, the user was notified on June 11th to send OTRS permission for the article en:Brother Joseph Thamby, and failed to respond within 7 days. As such, we can expect no response either for an OTRS request for these images. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:16, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've just received word at en:User talk:Dcoetzee that OTRS is again in contact with the photographer. Several of these photos depict signs or plaques, and these will still have to be deleted, since India's freedom of panorama is modelled on the UK's and considers these graphic works, rather than works of artistic craftsmanship. They are not PD-text due to the long length of the text. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:06, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We have to presume that this contact has failed. The individual was asked for verification of identity on June 20th and has not responded. OTRS:2009061110034988. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:43, 7 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I am the photographer for this pictures. What I need to do now?

Thank you, Bhavani (— Preceding unsigned comment added by Polimetla (talk • contribs) )

Deleted. They can be undeleted if the user goes through the OTRS system. Killiondude (talk) 07:47, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2009/06/19&oldid=34056253"