Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2010/09/11
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Not notable and out of scope BrokenSphere (Talk) 04:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Tiptoety talk 05:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Not notable and out of scope BrokenSphere (Talk) 04:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Tiptoety talk 05:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
yes Shearo (talk) 11:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC) --- Deleted, user request. --The Evil IP address (talk) 08:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Not in use, blank image, uploaded by author replacing real image, claiming license change, possible copyright violation --Savh, Any questions? 07:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, user request. --The Evil IP address (talk) 09:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Not in use, blank image, uploaded by author replacing real image, claiming license change, possible copyright violation --Savh, Any questions? 07:32, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, user request. --The Evil IP address (talk) 08:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
I was trying to create a "Category:Weoley Castle" but created this page by mistake, could someone please change this into a Category page please? Lepidus Magnus (talk) 14:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Otourly: Author requested deletion or blanked page: content was: '{{delete|reason=I was trying to create a "Category:Weoley Castle" but created this page by mistake, could someone please change this into a Category...' (and the only contributor was '[[Special:Cont
want to see images 69.156.56.201 19:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Nonsense dr. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
out of project scope, not used or categorized since September 2008 4028mdk09 (talk) 19:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Tee hee hee ...
Delete — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Leyo 16:35, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Is a missnamed copy of the image 50px--~ Saippuakauppias (talk) 11:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Exact or scaled-down duplicate: File:20 Kushok Bakula Rinpoche 2010-07-22.jpg -- Common Good (talk) 19:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad image Gigillo83 (talk) 09:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Exact or scaled down duplicate: Image:Italian traffic signs - old - divieto di transito agli autobus.svg
duplication and bad image Gigillo83 (talk) 09:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Exact or scaled down duplicate: Image:Italian traffic signs - divieto di sorpasso per tutti.svg
The uploader is a prolific crosswiki sockpuppeteer, with a long history of uploading files on Wikipedia with false copyright info, see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Cross-wiki sockpuppeteer, so AGF does not really apply here. The image is taken from the official website http://www.isu.ac.ir/English/President.htm of Imam Sadiq University where Kani is currently the President. There is no indication that the image was taken before 1978 as the uploader claims and it is unlikely that the university would have used such an old image. The subject was born in 1931 and the image looks more like the photo of somebody in his seventies than in his forties. Nsk92 (talk) 05:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: copyright violation. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 11:21, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
The uploader is a prolific crosswiki sockpuppeteer, with a long history of uploading files on Wikipedia with false copyright info, see Commons:Administrators' noticeboard/User problems#Cross-wiki sockpuppeteer, so AGF does not really apply here. There is no indication as to why the image was first published in the 1950s, as the uploader claims. Nsk92 (talk) 05:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: copyright violation. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 11:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
liio 78.1.190.151 13:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Reasons? --Panther (talk) 12:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. No valid reasons. --Panther (talk) 09:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope (??!!), small Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:39, 28 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Useless in Commons because of the very dominating watermark Wouter (talk) 13:30, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
- Delete /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:30, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 12:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
personal picture, not in use. out of project scope Martin H. (talk) 00:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 12:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from Copied from http://www.google.com.br/imgres?imgurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/sites/9100/9172/BARROS.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/103/10302008.asp%3FttCD_CHAVE%3D6806&usg=__KcGqj-zixa2UdAPOd88uaxgigNE=&h=360&w=640&sz=102&hl=pt-BR&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=nhwzDxGr0Z9sJM:&tbnh=134&tbnw=165&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dpor%2Bsol%2Blagoa%2Bbarros%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D867%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=289&vpy=90&dur=1190&hovh=168&hovw=300&tx=116&ty=38&ei=yUWITICiFoLGlQfh-tS3Dg&oei=yUWITICiFoLGlQfh-tS3Dg&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=30&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0 . Same source as File:Porlagbarros.JPG Ednei amaral (talk) 04:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete if the uploader will not provide some reasonable explanation, I think everything uploaded by him/her should be deleted. Trycatch (talk) 22:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/sites/9100/9172/Catedral.JPG&imgrefurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/110/11025015.asp&usg=__7Zgws-AEBBC5MZ85SW6kzZpwoL8=&h=428&w=640&sz=196&hl=pt-BR&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=63Z6OnRJkzB3NM:&tbnh=166&tbnw=208&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcatedral%2Bos%25C3%25B3rio%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:pt-BR:official%26biw%3D1403%26bih%3D809%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=rc&dur=392&ei=90SITITQOsL58AbKpbVW&oei=90SITITQOsL58AbKpbVW&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=22&ved=1t:429,r:0,s:0&tx=96&ty=56 . Same source as File:Catedralosorio.JPG. Ednei amaral (talk) 04:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Trycatch (talk) 21:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.google.com.br/imgres?imgurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/sites/9100/9172/bandeira.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.osorio.rs.gov.br/003/00318005.asp%3FttCD_CHAVE%3D105341&usg=__U1bV7SiR68C0Kxfi02Xq-xSJ__0=&h=480&w=640&sz=56&hl=pt-BR&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=ZQsfNDSnaJknAM:&tbnh=144&tbnw=204&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbandeira%2Bos%25C3%25B3rio%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D867%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=360&vpy=83&dur=1000&hovh=194&hovw=259&tx=43&ty=144&ei=9QCLTKH2FYylnQep6syFCg&oei=9QCLTKH2FYylnQep6syFCg&esq=1&page=1&ndsp=30&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0 Ednei amaral (talk) 04:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Delete Unknown license. Luispihormiguero Any problem? 
21:05, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:42, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
No source. No authorship information, unknown copyright situation. Jcb (talk) 22:06, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:53, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.google.com.br/imgres?imgurl=http://www.cultura.ufpa.br/petcivil/imagens/logo_ufpa.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.cultura.ufpa.br/petcivil/links.php&usg=__f-qeWh9kbQszbjMm4CL4oksh3EE=&h=714&w=565&sz=90&hl=pt-BR&start=1&tbnid=GzOLb1Vqi8pP_M:&tbnh=140&tbnw=111&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dufpa%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26sa%3DN%26biw%3D1280%26bih%3D867%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1 Ednei amaral (talk) 22:52, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/6080133 Ednei amaral (talk) 03:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. BTW better it's better to use speedy deletion for cases like this. Trycatch (talk) 22:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Personal picture, not in use - out of scope Martin H. (talk) 09:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. ZooFari 14:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at Image:Italian traffic signs - limite minimo di velocità old.svg. ZooFari 14:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at File:Italian traffic signs - motopista (1959).svg. ZooFari 14:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at File:Italian traffic signs - old - viale pedonale.svg. ZooFari 14:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at File:Italian traffic signs - old - riservato alle autovetture.svg. ZooFari 14:16, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
"may be reproduced by other agencies" is not reuse by anyone and does not include modification, so it is not free enough Martin H. (talk) 10:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete. Besides this restrictive exception, the material is under the general copyright notice, which does not make it free. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. ZooFari 14:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at File:Italian traffic signs - telephone old.svg. ZooFari 14:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
duplication and bad quality image Gigillo83 (talk) 10:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. SVG at File:Italian traffic signs - old - pericolo d'incendio.svg. ZooFari 14:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Yet another low quality penis picture. Martin H. (talk) 15:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Art? In my view a case for speedy (scope). ← Körnerbrötchen » ✉ 20:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 12:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Racial undertones to category, what defines ethnographic? --Max Rebo Band"almost suspiciously excellent" 15:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Comment I created this category in order to respect other pre-existing categories (Category:Ethnographic female toplessness, Category:Ethnographic nude children...). Ethnography has nothing to do with racism (we could also have ethnograpic pictures of white people). Those pictures generally come from ethnographic studies, therefore there should be nothing wrong about categorizing like that. There's nothing racist in that. A long time ago I was against creations of categories like "black women" but in that case ethnography is linked to no precise people. Seeing racism in that seems like paranoia to me. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 16:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment: Suggest this be transferred to "Commons:Categories for discussion". It occurs to me that it may be better to categorize such images by ethnic or national group rather than simply have generalized "Ethnographic ..." categories. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 08:01, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Agreed, we have the Category:Women of Brazil category, so subcategorising to Category:Nude women of Brazil makes more sense than dumping them in "ethnographic nude women". Max Rebo Band"almost suspiciously excellent" 12:21, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. No valid reason to delete. Yann (talk) 12:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
replaced by File:spoorlijn_bilthoven_zeist.png Wiebevl (talk) 13:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
Keep No reason to delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:27, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
replaced by File:spoorlijn_bilthoven_zeist.png Wiebevl (talk) 13:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Different imafe. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
Not railway line Groningen Delfzijl, uploaded 3 years ago. Wiebevl (talk) 00:21, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Not worth renaming. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 01:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:09, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
screenshot of SPSS software; copyright violation Rcragun (talk) 21:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Ineligible for copyright. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
replaced by Spoorlijn stadskanaal zuidbroek.png Wiebevl (talk) 08:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
- Keep File:Spoorlijn stadskanaal zuidbroek.png is a very different image. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:02, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
Out of scope. This is a graphical representation of a table of text uploaded for a (now deleted) spam article. Also the figures are sourced from standards agencies, which may mean the content is not PD. Guy 16:02, 9 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
no educational content 173.170.157.188 02:29, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep in use in main space and on multiple user pages. Trycatch (talk) 23:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
This photo is from the Minnesota Legislature website. The uploader asserts that it is in the public domain. However, Minnesota Attorney General Opinion 852 concludes: "State agency data constituting original works of authorship are protected by federal copyright law. Certain restrictions may be placed upon use of public data." (December 4, 1995) The photo is freely available to the public, but not free of copyright. Jonathunder (talk) 12:34, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - not a free photo. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:31, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:14, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
No FOP in the United States; Bufano died in 1970. BrokenSphere 17:51, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Sculpture has been created 1937, installed in 1938, but 1) SIRIS don't write anything about copyright notices on it: [1]. 2) I can't find artwork copyright renewal artwork in years 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967 (I think there are almost no outdoor sculptures that have been renewed). So it's either {{PD-US-no notice}} and {{PD-US-no renewal}} Trycatch (talk) 20:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:38, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
Without knowing what it could be IMHO out of scope. btw: its unused. JuTa (talk) 08:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Without knowing what it could be IMHO out of scope. btw: its unused. JuTa (talk) 08:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
"My computer" as source, low resolution, seems out of scope. The Evil IP address (talk) 08:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
"My computer" as source, I highly doubt the {{PD-RO-exempt}} claim. The Evil IP address (talk) 08:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
"My computer" as source and the very low resolution lets me think this is a copyvio. The Evil IP address (talk) 08:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:18, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, out of scope Martin H. (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
user is not the author, license status not clear Ronn (talk) 15:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Bart Welten died 1970. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- All media in Category:Bart Welten are suspect. --Satrughna (talk) 19:50, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
This picture may be a problem I am not sure who has made this picture. Joosttib (talk) 08:39, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Copyright violation:
Private image or self-promotion. Anyway, useless for WP --Алый Король (talk) 20:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 01:57, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
work signed by en:Hisui Sugiura (died 1965), not an organizational work, thus copyright not expired Sushiya (talk) 13:55, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 01:58, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- Undeleted: as per [2]. Yann (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Unless this cover is using a old painting, June 22, 1981 is not old enough for PD-old. Rocket000 (talk) 02:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 01:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
I can't imagine any Wikimedia-type purpose for this image. Orlady (talk) 03:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 01:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Non-notable band, out of scope. BrokenSphere (Talk) 04:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 01:59, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
The the uploading user Jcmurphy, was blocked sometime back for "faking OTRS permissions and impersonating another user on Commons. I am quite sure this image is also with a fake licence. Rehman(+) 04:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- It seems to be a postcard (see lower left corner) - sorry I had not noticed that before. --Bahnmoeller (talk) 09:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- No problem, fakes like these seep into Commons by accident quite frequently. ;) Rehman(+) 13:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.mv-brasil.org.br/Figuras/inicial_halloweenehocacete.jpg , accessed from http://www.mv-brasil.org.br/cartazes.htm Ednei amaral (talk) 15:35, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=413885 , accessible from http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://i117.photobucket.com/albums/o61/ulilopes/rioclaro.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php%3Ft%3D413885&usg=__08tFew_7lKAQpgIvyKDIvnnbLlk=&h=226&w=370&sz=40&hl=pt-BR&start=0&tbnid=4bpR1i72Nm-p9M:&tbnh=125&tbnw=204&prev=/images%3Fq%3Drio%2Bclaro%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26safe%3Doff%26biw%3D1398%26bih%3D809%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=685&vpy=460&dur=2668&hovh=175&hovw=287&tx=191&ty=123&ei=8q5LTNvBL5-RnAeL26WCDw&page=1&ndsp=24&ved=1t:429,r:15,s:0 Ednei amaral (talk) 03:28, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.google.com.br/imgres?imgurl=http://i271.photobucket.com/albums/jj127/fly_jf/vista2.jpg&imgrefurl=http://conhecatresrios.blogspot.com/2009/02/cidade-vista-do-alto-01_01.html&usg=__AqgJu7oeK5tFmoNlUpHGgKoTmBQ=&h=600&w=800&sz=408&hl=pt-BR&start=2&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=uqHzjWqTssSQeM:&tbnh=107&tbnw=143&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dtr%25C3%25AAs%2Brios%26tbnid%3DltJrUNSoX-t3wM:%26tbnh%3D0%26tbnw%3D0%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-BR%26sa%3DX%26imgtype%3Di_similar%26tbs%3Disch:1 , with worse quality... Ednei amaral (talk) 01:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:01, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.radioca.com.br/?p=641 Ednei amaral (talk) 00:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:03, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:WMATA Orion 4359.jpg. The two files are from the same original file, but are processed differently, so I think it might be outside the scope of speedy deletion. Nonetheless, it is redundant. SchuminWeb (Talk) 05:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. Better to delete the other file. Other file has been resized from the original (upscaled) & recompressed, quality loss in this operation is considerable. And it's not a good idea to delete original photograph. Trycatch (talk) 22:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Deleted File:WMATA Orion 4359.jpg per Trycatch. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
This unused image is not correct according to US Military specifications. File:Roundel of the USAF.svg is the correct rendering of this image to sourced specifications. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Where is the incorrectness?--Sanandros (talk) 06:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- If you look at File:Usaf roundel.gif, the top white stripe is supposed to touch the outer point of the star. There is no gap between those. Plus, in the terms of colors, this is too light according to File:MIL-STD-2161A (AS).pdf. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:08, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Poor source, seems out of scope anyway. The Evil IP address (talk) 08:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
This image and File:TheWire-v2-i12-30Aug02.pdf are duplicates. Mea culpa. Another contributor placed a speedy on this file. I disagree, I think File:TheWire-v2-i12-30Aug02.pdf is the one that should be deleted, in order to be consistently named with the hundreds of related files I uploaded. --Geo Swan (talk) 09:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment -- the original speedy nominator moved their nomination from this article to the other article. (Thanks!) So I think this can be closed as moot. Geo Swan (talk) 14:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
See w:Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2010 September 11#File:Leeman.JPG Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. The objection raised at WP:EN was lack of FOP, but this is in the UK, where FOP for sculpture is well established in public places, including museums, even though an entry fee may be required, see Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#United_Kingdom. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Does not satisfy US requirements of COM:FOP Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, out of scope Martin H. (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:23, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, out of scope Martin H. (talk) 10:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:27, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
This image is a derivative work of a copyrighted work, the lion on the guernsey itself is protected by the Australian Copyright Act. --Bidgee (talk) 11:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: not simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}}. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
License tags incorrect, but in any case this logo seems to be too complex to be ineligible for copyright. The equivalent on enwp - en:File:PLI Logo.jpg - is tagged as a non-free logo. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete for nominator's reasons. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Out of scope. Used exclusively for self-promotion on en.wp by an account who is now blocked for sockpuppetry, see ANI thread. Sandstein (talk) 11:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Out of scope and no real value outside of promoting a non-notable book. Kindzmarauli (talk) 16:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Out of scope and as discussed has no value outside of promotion for a NN book, can't be used for any other purposes. --Cameron Scott (talk) 10:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:33, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value, → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 11:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value, → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value, → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 11:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused private image, no educational value, → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 11:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:34, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:35, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:38, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Four_Points_by_Sheraton_Sheikh_Zayed_Road_Under_Construction_on_2_February_2007_Pict_1.jpg
[edit]No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
File:Four_Points_by_Sheraton_Sheikh_Zayed_Road_Under_Construction_on_2_February_2007_Pict_2.jpg
[edit]No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:41, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:42, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:44, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:46, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:49, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete I agree with you. Luispihormiguero Any problem?
21:06, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo, low resolution 99kerob (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Delete Poor quality image. Luispihormiguero Any problem? 21:16, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 15:31, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:52, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
too small, probably violation of personal rights, out of project scope, not categorized or used since September 2008 4028mdk09 (talk) 19:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:54, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Source URL doesn't indicate works are freely licensed Fletcher6 (talk) 19:41, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Seems like it does, Port Authority is a public institution 75.70.122.23 23:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- But see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Public_domain#U.S._government_works which says: "State and local governments usually do retain a copyright on their works. 17 USC §105 only places federal documents in the public domain." The Port Authority is some kind of subsidiary of the New York and New Jersey governments. The Flickr gallery linked to from the source page also has its pictures under All Rights Reserved. Unless there is something that makes clear images from this page can be freely used, it's doubtful they can be used here. Fletcher6 (talk) 11:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
GET A LIFE!
They may indeed retain a copyright but since MY taxes PAID for it I AM the copyright holder - You may use the photo with my permission.
There you have.
- Shouldn't that be clear case? MrEskola (talk) 15:31, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, your "permission" means nothing. The rule is to protect the project from liability, and to encourage people to upload freely licensed images. Fletcher6 (talk) 20:40, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Get a life Fletcher6, don't you have anything better to do than "Police the Internet"?
- You made a simple honest mistake, not realizing state and local gov. works can't be assumed in the public domain. That you can't admit a mistake and resort to personal attacks says more about you than this nomination for deletion says about me. Fletcher6 (talk) 03:26, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. The Port Authority web site and their Flickr site have (c) and "All rights reserved" all over them. There is absolutely no reason to believe this is PD. MrEskola, I suggest you tone down the personal attacks a little. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:00, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused pie chart showing unknown information. Out of COM:SCOPE and possibly spam. Wknight94 talk 20:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:10, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Unused image of a form apparently related to software? Out of COM:SCOPE and possibly spam. No idea why this even needs to be an image since it's just words. Wknight94 talk 20:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:11, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Lower resolution duplicate: the hi-res file which replaces this image can be viewed here. Star reborn (talk) 23:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep just a construction site. Trycatch (talk) 01:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep what kind of copyright was infringed by this image? Trycatch (talk) 00:58, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing copyrightable here, not even nearly. Trycatch (talk) 00:54, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:47, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Not in use, blank image, uploaded by author replacing real image, claiming license change, possible copyright violation --Savh, Any questions? 07:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Polarlys: no proper source
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 17:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. empty cat Túrelio (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
Non Commercial License according flickr. JuTa (talk) 11:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep The picture was reviewed by Alphax who was sysop at that time, and I don't see a reason why not to believe to their. Other pictures by this flickr user also were free licensed in 2006 (see Internet Archive: [3]), but the licenses later have been changed to more restrictive. Trycatch (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Admin reviewed Flickr image. No reason to distrust. -- Common Good (talk) 20:24, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - Clear FOP violation...subject on focus cannot be avoided using de-minimis--KALARICKAN | My Interactions 08:03, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:16, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Unknown author. GFDL means everybody has to name th author, which is impossible in this case. BTW: Its near to "out of scope" without knowing what and where it is. JuTa (talk) 22:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep don't really see a problem, the author is zh:User:台灣少年 (I've updated the description). And BTW it's not nearly "out of scope", the subject was properly described in filename. Trycatch (talk) 00:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Thx for completing the description and categories. Well, the (google) translation of the filename gave me just "Monument to August 22". The August 22 I realy didn't interpreded as monument name but just as a date. The author down in th table I've realy overlooked. --JuTa (talk) 00:23, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Note: this has survived a previous DR, but that was related to scope, not copyright. There is no general Freedom of Panorama exception in Taiwan, which only allows reproduction for non-commercial purposes. The subject is a modern artwork, which does not seem de minimis in this depiction to me. Storkk (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Taipei Taiwan 228-Monument-01.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Taipei 228 Monument. Storkk (talk) 16:48, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
- Also note that the designer still alive in 1994. Storkk (talk) 16:50, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 11:34, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
No such flag exists or ever existed Alex:D (talk) 13:21, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 20:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
No such flag ever existed in Romania. The state flag was the simple tricolor w/o any coat of arms Alex:D (talk) 13:27, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 20:37, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
This restoration are so simple, that we dont have use of it. We have photos of skulls. Conty (talk) 18:34, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader request. Kameraad Pjotr 21:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Dinosaurs had no kneecaps, and no claws on fronttoes 4 and 5. The eyes are also too large. Conty (talk) 18:33, 25 June 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader request and out of project scope. Kameraad Pjotr 21:23, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
not in use Alanbuchanan (talk) 13:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader request. Kameraad Pjotr 20:33, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
looks like private images, but overwrites another earlier image ([4]). If in scope suggest rename to something like Chequerboard_patterned_field.jpg. See also File:Aaa.jpg which has this same image overwriting a different one by a different uploader. 84user (talk) 17:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- The overwriting is not licensed, so we cant use it. Plus, according to the file size of 500x375 the overwriting image is likely taken from panoramio or flickr as 500x375 is the typical thumbnail size of such websites. --Martin H. (talk) 23:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Deleted both versions. The original was out of COM:SCOPE spam used only on a en.wp spam page (now also deleted). The latter per non-commercial license at Flickr. Wknight94 talk 17:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing copyrightable here. Trycatch (talk) 22:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The buildings in the background fall under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:35, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 17:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep The Acico Twin Towers (the main subject of the photograph) don't show it external design (see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa). Everything else can be considered de minimis -- I've cropped finished Park Place on the right, and it's possible (if it's necessary) to pixelate the building on the left. Trycatch (talk) 23:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The other buildings fall under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 17:05, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
COM:FOP#United_Arab_Emirates - No Freedom of Panorama (White building on Left is still copyrighted) ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 18:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:57, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the photograph. Kameraad Pjotr 17:07, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 17:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Part on the bottom may be cropped if necessary. Trycatch (talk) 23:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 17:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:22, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:16, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:24, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Keep If the building is not completed, we can keep its photo, although there is not FOP in its country. Luispihormiguero Any problem? 21:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:18, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:26, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:32, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:31, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 17:35, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 01:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - A building site, plus some concrete blocks, not copyrightable. CT Cooper · talk 15:50, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep building in early stage of construction, no external structure visible. MKFI (talk) 19:21, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 19:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
The Blueman group website and at the blue man group shows the policy CLEARLY states that there is NO image taking during the performance, CLEARLY a copyright violation. Joe Gazz84 (talk) 19:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - that's a non-copyright restriction, and unless they make you sign a contract they really have no way to enforce it. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- They specifically state they do not allow photos when you walk in the doors and that is part of the policy when buying tickets. You cannot take any photographs. They are restricted. Joe Gazz84 (talk) 18:09, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Maybe Keep, maybe Delete?
- Commons:Image_casebook#Museum and interior photography specifically addresses Joe Gazz84's concern and is clear that it is not a problem for us.
- Commons:Image_casebook#Concert_photography, however, suggests that we must worry about the set, stage, and prop design. I suspect that this image is a copyvio for that reason, but I'd like to see comments from others. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 03:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
- That is a main reason for my concern, I also have seen them remove pictures from Flikr though for the copyright violation. Same for youtube. It should be deleted because of a CLEAR copyright violation, when tickets are purchased you agree that if you take a picture you violate copyrights. As you can see it was deleted from Flikr most likely for a copyright violation. Clearly a Delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Gazz84 (talk • contribs) 16:58, September 25, 2010 (UTC)
- That is a main reason for my concern, I also have seen them remove pictures from Flikr though for the copyright violation. Same for youtube. It should be deleted because of a CLEAR copyright violation, when tickets are purchased you agree that if you take a picture you violate copyrights. As you can see it was deleted from Flikr most likely for a copyright violation. Clearly a
- No. As noted above, anything printed on the ticket, or as part of the ticket sales process is irrelevant to our decision here. It has nothing to do with copyright. The fact that the photographer may be breaking a contract does not affect Commons (I say "may" because such contracts may be difficult or impossible to enforce, depending on the venue). The only question we have is whether there is anything in the image that is copyrightable. Maybe yes, maybe no. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
- I will check with Flikr and see if I can get a reason as to why the image was deleted, if it was copyright then I will contact the venue and ask if any of the set or items in the picture are copyrighted.Joe Gazz84 (talk) 23:03, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
- No. As noted above, anything printed on the ticket, or as part of the ticket sales process is irrelevant to our decision here. It has nothing to do with copyright. The fact that the photographer may be breaking a contract does not affect Commons (I say "may" because such contracts may be difficult or impossible to enforce, depending on the venue). The only question we have is whether there is anything in the image that is copyrightable. Maybe yes, maybe no. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, non-copyright restrictions are not a concern of Commons; the props are de minimis. Kameraad Pjotr 21:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
has been deleted befor because of copyright violation as its not 'text only'. I guess that the head could be PD (File:Flag_of_Corsica.svg) so maybe we just need to remove the airplane with tail in the top part of the image. Amada44 talk to me 10:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Delete The head is still a unique rendering, vote to delete.--Svgalbertian (talk) 01:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Kameraad Pjotr 21:19, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
This image is a derivative work of a copyrighted work, the lion on the guernsey itself is protected by the Australian Copyright Act. --Bidgee (talk) 11:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: not simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}}. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:56, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Kameraad Pjotr 20:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 21:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 12:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep construction site, nothing copyrightable here even nearly. Trycatch (talk) 01:09, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep construction site, not copyrightable. MKFI (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 19:26, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- I don't understand your problem. This picture was taken at the beach of Jumeirah Beach/Dubai. By the way ... why is the deletion request by IP??? --Pe-sa (talk) 17:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- The picture shows not an single building with details ... it' a panoramic view ... this is in my oppinion not a case of your FoP. Do you wan't make a deletion request for all pictures of the UAE??? --Pe-sa (talk) 07:01, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
|
Copyright warning: A subject in this image is protected by copyright.
This image features an architectural or artistic work, photographed from a public space in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Except for broadcast programmes, there are no Freedom of Panorama exemptions in the UAE, which means that they cannot be photographed freely for anything other than personal purposes. However, images depicting buildings during construction showing incomplete prominent exterior designs, and those subject to de minimis, are permitted. If a copyrighted architectural or artistic work is contained in this image and it is a substantial reproduction, this photo cannot be licensed under a free license, and will be deleted. Framing this image to focus on the copyrighted work is also a copyright violation. Before reusing this content, ensure that you have the right to do so. You are solely responsible for ensuring that you do not infringe someone else's copyrights. See our general disclaimer for more information. |
_(1790).png){kind=link}
_(1790).png){kind=link}
_(1790).png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(1790).png){kind=link}
_(1790).png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=732822635#File:Sugiura_Hisui_Tokyo_Subway_1927_poster.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/9/9b/20100324095456%21Aa.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: skyline image, the individual buildings are DM. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:07, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:10, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:48, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep image of skyline, no design details visible. --Elekhh (talk) 06:42, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in the UAE. 84.61.170.180 20:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- speedy keep clear de minimis, above deletion had been overturned by community consensus. --ELEKHHT 21:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
- Keep COM:DM as previously said. Jeriby (talk) 23:03, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Kept per above and Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2011-02#File:Dubai and skyline.jpg. There was no new arguments after the undeletion request. Trycatch (talk) 02:14, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:13, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:46, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep. "Under construction" means the architectural work was not finished ---> FoP regulation does not apply ---> not copyrighted Julo (talk) 10:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, the exterior of the buildings is sufficiently finished to warrant copyright protection. Kameraad Pjotr 19:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Executive Towers Under Construction on 22 June 2007 Pict 1.jpg. Kameraad Pjotr 19:45, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 19:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:49, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:31, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per CT Cooper. --Elekhh (talk) 06:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 19:54, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:32, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 19:59, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:04, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:13, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 20:16, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 18:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Kameraad Pjotr 18:55, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
This image is a derivative work of a copyrighted work, the cat face on the guernsey itself is protected by the Australian Copyright Act to the Geelong Football Club. --Bidgee (talk) 11:12, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete: not simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}}. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:57, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Kameraad Pjotr 21:40, 30 January 2011 (UTC)
Source is given as http://academia.gov.ua but at the foot of the English version the site states "© 2010 National Academy of Arts of Ukraine". Presumably we would need evidence of permission for this. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- There's a OTRS in the system about that image, but is not authorized yet. Béria Lima msg 10:12, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Source is given as http://academia.gov.ua but at the foot of the English version the site states "© 2010 National Academy of Arts of Ukraine". Presumably we would need evidence of permission for this. Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Hello. Would you pls help me and tell what kind of permission-letter should i sent to Wikipedia-Commons to prove that the Academy is aware of using the photos from their site? I send the letter signed by the vice-president of Academy to W-Commons several months ago, but obviously I made it incorrectly.. Maybe you can advice me the best way to do it? ElenaCahn (talk) 15:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC) ←message moved from talk page Trycatch (talk) 22:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment: please follow the instructions at "Commons:OTRS". — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 07:55, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:26, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Wrong file version & name Karloman23 (talk) 11:33, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
It's copyrighted logo 99kerob (talk) 12:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio.--Svgalbertian (talk) 01:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
This image has an OTRS ticket, but I suspect that that only gives a permission by the photographer Christophe Pasquet; the artist is not mentioned in the description, and probably this was uploaded without his or her permission. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Panoramafreiheit [5]. Rama (talk) 14:59, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- ¿¿ FOP for King Kong all over the world? Even in France? Even if not permanent? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:29, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
no description, perhaps copyright violation, not categorized or used since September 2008 4028mdk09 (talk) 19:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment file page is empty. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing nearly copyrightable here. just a construction site. Trycatch (talk) 01:06, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - A simple construction site that is not copyrightable. CT Cooper · talk 15:52, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep construction site. MKFI (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 19:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:55, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 19:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 00:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The picture falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 19:52, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing copyrightable here, not even nearly. Trycatch (talk) 00:52, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 20:02, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:52, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 00:51, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:57, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 20:05, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:53, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 00:50, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Less useful with the reflection but per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The picture/other building falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:59, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, nothing copyrightable in the picture. Kameraad Pjotr 20:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:49, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 16:00, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 20:47, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing copyrightable here. Trycatch (talk) 00:48, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - A building site, so no FoP issue. CT Cooper · talk 16:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep construction site. MKFI (talk) 20:47, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 20:48, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:57, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:47, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo/picture falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 16:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 20:51, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 16:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 21:04, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:43, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The finished looking "bits" near the top are trivial, but could be cropped out if necessary. CT Cooper · talk 16:04, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 21:07, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Concur. Nothing copyrighted here. — Xavier, 21:08, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 20:54, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 14:00, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 00:13, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Concur. Nothing copyrighted here. — Xavier, 21:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
Kept, per Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Kameraad Pjotr 20:58, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
this stamp is copyrighted -jkb- (talk) 09:50, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 23:31, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
17:23, 31 January 2011 Jameslwoodward deleted "File:Straub Mäuseschwanzphänomen.jpg" (Per Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Straub_Mäuseschwanzphänomen.jpg
This is obviously not James McClinton. Pure attack image from www.GodHatesFags.com. 78.55.61.136 13:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Commons is not censored. Yes, it's an attack image, but it has educational value, that's why it was uploaded. Trycatch (talk) 01:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep It IS an attack image (even worse than Der Stürmer of the Nazi era), but I would rather rename (so that it is clear this is an example of political hate of an extreme right-wing pseudo-religious organisation) than delete it. --Jacek79 (talk) 11:24, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
- DONT KEEP. Comon. Its an image from a racist website. Should we now post images from black panthers and neo-nazi websites to just to stir up trouble? Where is the permission from whoever the jackass who drew it? Delete it! Meishern (talk) 16:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Not because the image is racist, but because it is derivative work. --Karppinen (talk) 20:21, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Copyright violation, derivative work of an unfree photo. --Martin H. (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 06:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 23:36, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Delete - No FOP in UAE --Common-Man | My Interactions 21:24, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 23:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 23:38, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - possible FoP issues are DM in this case - Jcb (talk) 10:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:05, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - possible FoP issues are DM in this case - Jcb (talk) 10:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - possible FoP issues are DM in this case - Jcb (talk) 10:33, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - possible FoP issues are DM in this case - Jcb (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Previous nomination (reason "no FOP in Dubai") was closed with"possible FoP issues are DM in this case". However, both buildings appear far too large for de minimis to be defence. Both buildings appear architecturally complete and therefore copyright the architect, one of whom is Cox Group, but no evidence that they have given permission. The OTRS linked here is from the photographer, and not sufficient. Unless I am missing something - if so could the necesaary licensing permission be made clearer in the description? 84user (talk) 20:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete The entire purpose of the image appears to be the tallest building on the photo, so that building is not de minimis. The photo also shows a couple of other surrounding images, but since those couldn't be avoided when taking the photo, those other buildings are in my opinion de minimis. --Stefan4 (talk) 12:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 00:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - possible FoP issues are DM in this case - Jcb (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Briefly: no FOP in UAE, see See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Park Place on 29 May 2007.jpg and Commons:Freedom of panorama#United_Arab_Emirates; subject appears too large for de minimis to be plausible defence, see Commons:De minimis, example section shows possibly permissible panoramas but this definitely does not fall into that case. 84user (talk) 20:51, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 00:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. - although borderline - Jcb (talk) 12:17, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:08, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:09, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:21, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:23, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:42, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:24, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Building on the left can be cropped if necessary. Trycatch (talk) 23:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:43, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:25, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:45, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:46, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The logo falls under Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics, see Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Burj Khalifa. Trycatch (talk) 23:38, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. CT Cooper · talk 15:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 12:36, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 07:29, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 12:38, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Photos from City of Strasbourg website
[edit]- File:Salles de l'Aubette.jpg
- File:Bateau mouche sur l'Ill .jpg
- File:Aubette.jpg
- File:Bassin Austerlitz.jpg
- File:Roland Ries, Sénateur-Maire de Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Zénith Strasbourg Europe 2.jpg
- File:Zénith Strasbourg Europe.jpg
- File:Cour européenne des Droits de l'Homme.jpg
- File:Conseil de l'Europe 2.jpg
- File:Parlement européen.jpg
- File:Aubette (intérieur).jpg
- File:Place Kléber.jpg
- File:Médiathèque André Malraux.jpg
- File:Pistes cyclables.jpg
- File:Véloparc.jpg
- File:Nouveau Tram Citadis.jpg
- File:Christkindelsmärik (marché de Noël) - Place Broglie.jpg
- File:Décorations de Noël .jpg
- File:La Place Kleber à Noël, avec son grand sapin.jpg
- File:Parc de l'Orangerie - le Temple de l'Amour.jpg
- File:Pavillon Joséphine - Parc de l'Orangerie.jpg
- File:Bateau mouche & Pont Tournant.jpg
- File:Maison à colombages 2.jpg
- File:Vue générale Strasbourg + cathédrale.jpg
- File:Place Gutenberg.jpg
- File:Place Kleber.jpg
- File:Strasbourg Cathédrale nuit.jpg
- File:Maison Kammerzell 2.jpg
- File:Cathédrale - Horloge astronomique.jpg
- File:Cathédrale - vue extérieure.jpg
- File:Pharmacopée 2.jpg
- File:Pharmacopée.jpg
- File:Palais des Droits de l'Homme .jpg
- File:Conseil de l'Europe.jpg
- File:Extension du Conseil de l'Europe CUS .jpg
- File:Parlement Européen- vue 3.jpg
- File:Orchestre Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Concert Strasbourg 2.jpg
- File:Concert Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Parlement Européen- vue 1.jpg
- File:Parlement Européen- vue 2.jpg
- File:Façade de l'opéra de Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Les caves historiques des hospices civils - XIVe s.jpg
- File:Village de Noël miniature.jpg
- File:Roland-Ries, Sénateur-Maire de Strasbourg - février 2009.jpg
- File:Pont des deux rives.jpg
- File:Stade Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Basket Strasbourg.jpg
- File:BMX Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Patinoire Strasbourg 2.jpg
- File:Patinoire Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Archives Strasbourg 2.jpg
- File:Conservatoire Strasbourg 2.jpg
- File:Conservatoire Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Défilé Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Noel Strasbourg 5.jpg
- File:Noel Strasbourg 4.jpg
- File:Noel Strasbourg 3.jpg
- File:Noel Strasbourg 2.jpg
- File:Noel Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Marché de Noël gâteaux de Noël "Bredele".jpg
- File:Marché de Noël illuminations .jpg
- File:Marché de Noël le grand sapin .jpg
- File:Marché de Noël invité Russie .jpg
- File:Marché de Nöel concert.jpg
- File:Marché de Noël Village du partage.jpg
- File:Marché de Nöel village des enfants.jpg
- File:Marché de Nöel et enfant.jpg
- File:Patinoire Marché de Nöel Strasbourg.jpg
- File:Le Vaisseau.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Place_Broglie.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
COM:L (Publication of derivative work must be allowed) and source website terms of service are not compatible. It was argued on Commons:Bistro by some people that "libre de droits" means "free licenced". "Libre de droits" is used by professional photographers as a translation of "en:royalty free" (see fr:Banque_d'images#Licence_libre_de_droit or for example here about the swiss Keystone agency, therefore we need to see the full legal code of that royalty free contract in order to see if the City of Strasbourg has the permission to sublicence the works, and if it is free enough. In case the photographers are civil servants, the dispositions of the French intellectual property code for works by civil servants apply, and we need both a permission from the photographer and from the administration employing him or her. --Teofilo (talk) 07:06, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- By the way, the pictures are from a part of the website called "Presse" which means "news media". So it does not seem that the pictures are available for other kinds of users. Teofilo (talk) 07:26, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Among the things not compatible between the TOS of the source website and COM:L is that an "express permission" is required. My understanding is that every user must get in touch with them separately. It is difficult to think that the fuzzy word "libres de droits" on another page of the website could have the power of overriding the website's TOS written in legal language. Teofilo (talk) 07:58, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep (except the FOP photos). as :
- (i) The TOS concerns the all the sites, the mention the photos are free to use concerns the photos and so are specific to a part of the website, and actually are an express permission.
- (ii) I don't share the teofilo analysis than libre de droit is always de translation royalty-free, as the royality-free expression is widely use in French and generally request an initial payment for the images, which can then be used without pay further amounts.
- (iii) The website gives an explicit attribution clause: « L'utilisation des photographies doit obligatoirement comporter les indications qui suivent le © », which combined with the title « Galerie libre de droit » leads to an explicit license with attribution clause. --Dereckson (talk) 09:36, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I think Teofilo concerns are valid. There is a very simple way to settle this, actually: contacting the City of Strasbourg and asking them about what they meant, instead of arguing over the vocabulary used. Jean-Fred (talk) 10:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment OTRS needed for each image and his author (recent buildings exepted, which are not acceptable anyway). --Barbetorte (talk) 10:45, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- (Small comment)I just had a look at this German version of the Keystone presentation and I found this interesting for German/English/French speakers and translators : the German word for "Free Licence" is "Freie Lizenz" and the German for "royalty-free" is "Lizenzfrei" (de:Lizenzfreiheit). So they are juste the same words put in a different order, but their meaning is quite different ! Teofilo (talk) 11:07, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment I will contact the City of Strasbourg regarding this issue. Meanwhile, is it possible to open an OTRS ticket ? --Rudloff (talk) 18:28, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Le ticket OTRS sera soit la permission envoyée par leurs soins, spécifique à Wikipédia, soit le mail résumant l'échange que tu enverras à permissions-commons
wikimedia.org. --Dereckson (talk) 00:31, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Le ticket OTRS sera soit la permission envoyée par leurs soins, spécifique à Wikipédia, soit le mail résumant l'échange que tu enverras à permissions-commons
Deleted. - we didn't receive any OTRS ticket about this - Jcb (talk) 13:00, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
I doubt the uploader scanned this text, especially as someone managed to find it in the (vague) "Republic of Macedonia internet resources" on en.wp (w:File:Ustav VMRO Obedineta.jpg). This source is too vague to determine proper authorship and whether PD in Macedonia. Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:56, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- I didn't scan it myself. This is a document of nonexisting since 1936 organisation - it's obvious PD (why in Macedonia?). --Мико (talk) 08:16, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep PD-Old. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:44, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
- Comment However we need to determine if it's PD in the US as well, or else commons can't host it by law. Perhaps {{PD-US-1996}}, but only if we can determine Serbian copyright law in 1996. Magog the Ogre (talk) 15:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- If you must worry about stuff like that, just add {{Not-PD-US-URAA}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep + PD-Old. A reliable source also was given-a book ВМРО(обединета). Документи и материали, кн. I, Скопjе, 1991, с. 217. IMRO (United). Document and matrials. book I, Skopje, 1991, p. 217. 88.203.200.74 14:14, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:04, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Files of User:Sparkey28
[edit]
Out of scope. No permission. --78.55.154.219 10:43, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:23, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Files of user:Vigreco2010
[edit]- File:Tabella vi greco.GIF
- File:Valore vi greco.GIF
- File:Grafico funzione vi greco.GIF
- File:Funzione vi greco.GIF
- File:Rata con vi greco.GIF
- File:Rata di un finanziamento.GIF
All these images has been uploaded in order to expound an original financial theory of the uploader's, I don't see any other possible use apart from that which is not allowed by wikis' policies. --Vituzzu (talk) 10:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 02:28, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Trycatch (talk) 01:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Per precedent at Burj Khalifa, buildings with far from finished exteriors are not copyrightable, and hence FoP does not apply. The building on the right with some finished exteriors is probably Commons:De minimis. CT Cooper · talk 15:53, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep nothing nearly copyrightable here. Trycatch (talk) 01:04, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - Some concrete blocks that are not copyrightable. CT Cooper · talk 15:54, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep construction site. MKFI (talk) 20:54, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 13:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
- Keep the building not showing exterior characteristics. Part on the right can be cropped or pixelated if necessary. Trycatch (talk) 00:53, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:06, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 14:01, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 14:02, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
No FoP in the UAE. 84.61.172.89 15:11, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - not empty - Jcb (talk) 13:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Bl sndr family photos
[edit]
Unused private pictures, not in scope of Commons. --Martin H. (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 12:49, 18 September 2010 (UTC)