Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/06/14
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
.jpg){kind=link}
A fake license; uploaded by a novice. Kf8 (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyvio Tabercil (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
A fake license; uploaded by a novice. Kf8 (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyvio Tabercil (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
A duplicate with misleading file name Abanima (talk) 16:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Unless the author of the picture can prove that it was taken on the day and the people there were in fact supprting Bashar, then we need to keep the name neutral. The information coming out of Syria cant be trusted at the moment. I dont want anther case of Amina Abdallah Araf al Omari -- The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: The image is duplicate with a misleading file-name. Tarawneh (talk) 05:49, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Logo copies from http://www.medialand.com.br/trabalho.php?id=8. Website says opyright © Medialand 2011. Not a simple logo, therefore not free to use. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy Jcb (talk) 07:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Logo copied from http://www.medialand.com.br/trabalho.php?id=7. Website says Copyright © Medialand 2011. Not a simple logo, therefore not free to use Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy Jcb (talk) 07:12, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Pardon me but isn't the rights to this photo held by AP Photo/Kevork Djansezian? And not the picasa account holder. Leoboudv (talk) 22:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. This account is an indiscriminate pile of anything movie-related: no trust. NVO (talk) 02:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Delete - Copyrighted--AP Photo's Kevork Djansezian..--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 04:57, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: obvious copyvio, as cc-license on Picasa is hardly credible Túrelio (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Vandalism Bahnmoeller (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Restored my image. --Bahnmoeller (talk) 12:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Duplicate of File:Aula Paolo VI-rooftop.jpg rubin16 (talk) 10:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a worse copy of SVG-file File:Движение поездов по станции Сонково.svg MaxBioHazard (talk) 14:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
Keep, we keep the original to maintain the attribution path, see Commons:Superseded images policy and note the reasons for not deleting, and that the deletion of superseded images has been discontinued!. -84user (talk) 14:54, 13 June 2011 (UTC)- Keep. The image quality itself is poor (not just low-quality format), so it's not the usual mindless replaceable-with-svg. However, must keep per attribution of that replacement svg as a derivative image. DMacks (talk) 08:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Personal picture of a little kid holding a toy Good twins (talk) 10:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused band/personal picture Good twins (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused personal picture poss of unknown band Good twins (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unknown band poss. Unused personal picutre Good twins (talk) 10:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused out of scope picture Good twins (talk) 10:02, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused out of scope image Good twins (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Un used out of scope picture Good twins (talk) 10:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused out of scope picture Good twins (talk) 10:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused Good twins (talk) 10:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused picture of a person who is not on wikimedia Good twins (talk) 10:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused personal picture Good twins (talk) 10:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Small, poor quality and unused personal image Good twins (talk) 10:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Commons is not a place for a colection of pictures of kids Good twins (talk) 10:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Educational value??? Unused out of scope Good twins (talk) 10:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Stupidly small poor quality Good twins (talk) 10:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Very tiny blurry image; orphan, uncategorized since 2008, no potential in-scope usefulness evident. Infrogmation (talk) 12:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
un used non free poster Good twins (talk) 10:24, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: No permission. --ZooFari 00:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Insufficient source and/or publication information provided to indicate that {{PD-Iraq}} applies. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 10:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nominator. --ZooFari 00:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused personal image Good twins (talk) 10:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused personal image Good twins (talk) 10:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused screenshot Good twins (talk) 10:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused picture of a kid Good twins (talk) 10:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:43, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused personal pic Good twins (talk) 10:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Collage of picture, resembling a news board, of an unnown guy. Unique contrib of the user. Not in use. No illustrative or educational purpose. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 10:45, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Microscopical picture of unknown guy with a guitar. Unique contrib of the user. Not in use, and not usable this way. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 10:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete -mattbuck (Talk) 10:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Promotional picture of a not notable band. Not in use. No illustrative or educational purpose. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:45, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
jpg version of a promotional picture of a not notable band. Not in use. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Another version of a not notable band promotional picture. Not in use. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of an unknwon man. No illustrative or educational purpose. Unique contrib of the user. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown man. No illustrative or educational purpose. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:46, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Promotional picture of a not notable band. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Promotional picture of a not notable band, metal I guess. Not in use, unique contrib of the user. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:47, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Portrait picture of unknown man. Not in use. Unique contrib of this user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:48, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Personal picture of the uploader. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknwon rapper. Not in use. No illustrative or educational purpose. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:49, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown guy playing guitar. No illustrative or educational purpose. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Does not appear to be notable. --ZooFari 00:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture ensemble of unknown man. Perhaps a joke. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:07, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Unused private image. GeorgHH • talk 16:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per nom--Hold and wave (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:52, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Are this notable persons? If not -> out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 16:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:52, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
low-quality (format and style) and incorrect geometry (alkynes should be linear); unused, replaceable by File:Dynemicin A.svg DMacks (talk) 18:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. File:Dynemicin A.svg is much better in terms of content, quality and file format. Materialscientist (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown woman. Not in use. Not notable person. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown band. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Another private picture of the same unknown band. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
3th picture of the series about this unknown band. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:11, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 00:54, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Promotional low quality picture of a not notable musician. Brazilian I guess. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of a teen guitarist. Not in use. Not notable musician. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of a teen drummer. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of a teen band from Mexico. Taken in the school gym. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
John Duncan died in 1945 (less than 70 years ago), his paintings are still copyrighted
This also applies to all the other paintings/drawings in Category:John Duncan --84.81.114.142 19:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - It's very unfortunate that we can't keep those wonderful works of art for a mere 4 years, but that's the way it is. :| -- Darwin Ahoy! 19:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 01:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Portrait/profail picture of unknown arab man. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per nom--Hold and wave (talk) 10:35, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Unidentified subject. --ZooFari 01:00, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown man. Not in use. Unique contrib of this user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of an unknown man on a stage with a microphon. No author. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Wedding picture - a good one even if not original - of an unknown man with an unknown, but nice, woman. No author. Not in use. Very probably out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
old version of the photo (incorectly rotated), the new one can be found here: Blokowisko - Poludnie - Wloclawek (1).jpg --Jamzewsizazamcze (talk) 20:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Now located here. --ZooFari 01:02, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Logo copied from http://www.medialand.com.br/trabalho.php?id=6. Website says Copyright © Medialand 2011. Not a simple logo, therefore not free to use. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by User:Yann. --ZooFari 01:03, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused, a bit strange image - taken from a film? - copy violation - out of scope (?! - I cannot image that this is useful) Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused (strange) private text - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted --ZooFari 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:52, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused private image - out of scope Cholo Aleman (talk) 20:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 01:04, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknown man. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:41, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:52, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private self-shot picture of unknwon man. Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:52, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknwon chinese girl. Nice indeed. But the picture has no apparent illustrative or educational purpose. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:46, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. --ZooFari 00:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Most probably not uploaded Shaqiri the footballer, but from a fan using the same name who grabbed it from his FB profile. Uploader also uploaded a copyvio from Noizy, also grabbed from the FB profile Darwin Ahoy! 00:01, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: OTRS verification required. --ZooFari 00:51, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Plain text in jpg format, out of project scope. Commons:Alcance_del_proyecto#Contenido_educativo_excluido. Martin H. (talk) 05:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:20, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
tagged for chemical mistake (missing H on an N); unused (replaceable by correct File:Saxitoxin structure.png) DMacks (talk) 05:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. The missing hydrogen could be added, but given we have a correct drawing File:Saxitoxin structure.png, delete. Materialscientist (talk) 04:21, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:34, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
tagged for several structural mistakes, replaced by corrected File:Vitisin A.svg DMacks (talk) 05:58, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete, this image and File:Vitisin A.svg, and redraw with a proper reference when needed - these images are unused anyway. I know nothing about Vitisin A and hope its structure is unique, but this is either only its fragment (full formula C56H42O12, CAS 142449-89-6) or I don't know what. For Vitisin A, see, e.g., [1] [2] [3]. Materialscientist (talk) 05:33, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- There are two distinct chemical compounds which have the name "vitisin A". The image File:Vitisin A.svg should not be deleted because it correctly corresponds to w:en:Vitisin A (pyranoanthocyanin) (the compound you are referring to is w:en:Vitisin A (stilbenoid). Ed (Edgar181) 14:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks, that is what I feared. It might be a good idea to clarify this in the image file and image caption (when used), to avoid confusion among people like me :-) Materialscientist (talk) 23:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- There are two distinct chemical compounds which have the name "vitisin A". The image File:Vitisin A.svg should not be deleted because it correctly corresponds to w:en:Vitisin A (pyranoanthocyanin) (the compound you are referring to is w:en:Vitisin A (stilbenoid). Ed (Edgar181) 14:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. File:Vitisin_A-2.png is an incorrect chemical structure. Ed (Edgar181) 14:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
tagged for structural mistake, replaceable by correct File:Sulfasalazine.svg; unused DMacks (talk) 06:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Google image search over .gov sites confirms this image is incorrect. Materialscientist (talk) 05:38, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:37, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope: can be replaced by a wikitable. Leyo 08:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Wording of some entries is confusing--was easy to fix when converted to wikitable (and only 1% the size!). Formatting was far from MOS and has spell-checking markups (!). DMacks (talk) 08:45, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Such tables should be in text. There is no reference and no links to this file. Materialscientist (talk) 05:50, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:20, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Faute dans le nom du fichier Leonard Paris (talk) 10:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Moved. Yann (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
doubtful license Postoronniy-13 (talk) 11:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per {{Textlogo}}. What exactly have you found doubtful in that license?-- Darwin Ahoy! 11:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept Jcb (talk) 10:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Picture of a boy soccer team, winners of a not notable trophy or tournament. No illustrative or educational purpose in sight. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Probably out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Google profile picture of unknwon man. Not in use. Unique contrib of this user. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 11:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Possible copy vio. Author France Télévisions under art license. Don't think permisson is give for use. aLSO copyrighted image surely Good twins (talk) 13:13, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 13:18, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
A scan from a paper or book. Probably not own work as claimed. What does the source say on copyright? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 13:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
advertising image not used by any page anywhere => outside project scope DS (talk) 14:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Uzbekistan. 84.61.178.142 15:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: just another straight building Jcb (talk) 10:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- File:Astrid Ellena-2.jpg
- File:01-Astrid-Ellena-Indriana-500x290.jpg
- Doubtful authorship. All these photos can be found through the internet on request "Astrid Ellena". Relatively low resolution, no original exif. Art-top (talk) 18:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No source, no permission. Yann (talk) 13:21, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused personal picture Broc (talk) 18:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:23, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
image taken from Facebook (the filename structure is the same of image files on facebook), probably not own work of the author. Anyway, it has no educational content, it's a personal photo. Broc (talk) 18:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No source, no permission. Yann (talk) 13:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
probably it's not own work of the author, as the image seems copied from Facebook. IMHO it's copyvio. Broc (talk) 18:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No source, no permission. Yann (talk) 13:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Error in filename, misleading 87.185.55.223 18:50, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Screenshot of non-free Mac OSX Software. Wdwd (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused (one inclusion in en userspace on a list of images that have verifiability problems, user contacted to handle), low-quality (style and file-format), and incorrect (tagged for extra methyl groups, confirming per replacement File:Brevianamide A.svg and cited ref for this image itself) DMacks (talk) 19:22, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. File:Brevianamide A.svg is much better in terms of content, quality and file format. Materialscientist (talk) 05:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
unused, low-quality (style and file-format), and incorrect (tagged for extra methyl groups, confirming per replacement File:Brevianamide B.svg and cited ref for this image itself) DMacks (talk) 19:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. File:Brevianamide B.svg is much better in terms of content, quality and file format. Materialscientist (talk) 05:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Tagged for all sorts of chemical mistakes; unused and low-quality style and fileformat (would be trivial to draw correct ones in any format if needed for an article) DMacks (talk) 19:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom. --Yikrazuul (talk) 18:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion. Leyo 05:39, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Tagged for all sorts of chemical mistakes; unused and low-quality style and fileformat (would be trivial to draw correct ones in any format if needed for an article) DMacks (talk) 19:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom + w/o source. --Yikrazuul (talk) 18:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:26, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Apparently an old unused version of Template:Deletion menu/es 194.106.43.95 20:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of two american borthers. The right one is a not notable "martial art" instructor, according to his profile in some sites. No illustrative or educational purpose. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Cropped vesion of the previous pic. Not notable martial arts american instructor. Private picture. No illustrative or educational purpose. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:27, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private portrait of that "martial arts" instructor. Strange suit. No educational or illustrative purpose either. Looks like self promotion. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Comment I forget: his wikipedia entry was deleted.--Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jcb (talk) 10:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Very simple windows paint - or sort of - doodle. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Donald duck like private drawing. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Delete ONLY THE CURRENT REVISION; no licensing information was given when the image was uploaded over another, perfectly good image, which can no longer be linked to. Drilnoth (talk) 23:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Greetings. Alex Pronove here. I took the peacock photo myself. I'm not yet that familiar with Wikimedia Commons but I thought that I did indicate the license correctly. By that I mean that I thought the license I chose for the photo specified that it was my own work and that it can be borrowed provided proper attribution is made. Would someone kindly show me how to fix this license? Thank you.
- Comment I did. I have added Information template that was missing. If you are Alex Pronove (alexcooper1). You didn't sign your comment. Is it correct?--Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 08:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Moreover, I guess you have used a very common name so you have overwrited the picture of someone else. But in order to restore the previous picture and to maintain your picture also, we need an admin.--Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 08:58, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Reverted. No need to delete the other image. I can be copied to another name. Yann (talk) 13:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Appears to be a television screenshot from the 1984 Olympics. Courcelles (talk) 23:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 13:30, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Portrait picture of a not notable canadian lawyer founder of a private company working in architecture. Not in use. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Logo of the company founded by the not notable canadian lawyer, or entrepreneur (he is not notable so it's difficult to determine his profession) Christian des Lauriers. Not in use. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
Private portrait of an albanian guy. No illustrative or educational purpose in the picture. Probable self promotion. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:11, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
bad work, I use File:HD Television.svg instead of this icon ([4]). Bloody-libu (talk) 01:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: The image is completely different from File:HD Television.svg, no suggestion that this one is out-of-scope. Skeezix1000 (talk) 23:57, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
no Freedom of Panorama for sculptures in the US - and this is a sculpture in the US. DS (talk) 01:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Oh, by the way -- if/when this gets deleted, let's make sure to save the completely unrelated photo of an Otomi-language choir. DS (talk) 12:09, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- That photo is already available separately under the somewhat more descriptive name File:Perropastormezquital.JPG (which is good, because otherwise we wouldn't have a valid license for that photo). —LX (talk, contribs) 12:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No FoP in the U.S. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:00, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Questionable copyright claim; is the uploader claiming to be both the photographer of the original photo, and the album cover? If so, why did they upload a low-res version via a website? Infrogmation (talk) 02:51, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Uploader has not responded to note on his talk page. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Questionable copyright claim; is the uploader claiming to be both the photographer of the original photo, and the album cover? If so, why did they upload a low-res version via a website? Infrogmation (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Uploader has not responded to note on his talk page. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:19, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Questionable claim. This doesn't sound at all like a 1920s 78 recording to me (yes, I have worked with recordings from this era quite a bit). The "Original Victoria Jazz Band" is a currently active band from the Netherlands website that specializes in 1920s style of jazz music, but that's quite a different thing from the recording dating from the 1920s. The group claims to have been founded in 1924, but Brian Rust's discography "Jazz Records 1897-1942" lists no recordings by this group having been issued in the era covered. I assume good faith from uploader, who got it from archive.org. Some error at Internet Archive? The sourcing on archive.org is quite vague; no date, no record label nor number. Without some confirming information I see no reason to assume this recording is PD, and much reason to doubt it is from a '20s 78 disc. Infrogmation (talk) 03:18, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Yeah, on second thought it does look questionable. I couldn't find a single hit except for something on the album list on their website. I guess I didn't do enough research before uploading. --Bsadowski1 07:07, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:20, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
source and license inconsistent and seem unlikely...looks like promotional/movie-ad image and uploader says it is a friend's, but that it is also his own and has permission to upload? DMacks (talk) 05:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Even if the image were created by the uploader's friend, we would need the consent of the friend through COM:OTRS Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
This poster was created by ru:Казанцев, Анатолий Алексеевич (see [5]), who died in 1984. Therefore still protected by copyright even if we presume it was first published in Ukraine. Blacklake (talk) 06:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- + File:SovietPosterTelephoneBoothCropped.jpg (derivative)
Poster by ru:Корецкий, Виктор Борисович (died in 1998) (see [6]), therefore still protected by copyright. Blacklake (talk) 06:05, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Poster by ru:Иванов, Виктор Семёнович (died in 1968) (see [7]). Will become PD in 2039 only. Blacklake (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:28, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Copyrighted picture, FOP does not allow, and its a clear derivated work of a copyrighted painting... ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:36, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
NO FOP in U.A.E, Law is not allowing to take photographs of buildings.. ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:37, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
L'image n'apparait pas dans l'article, probleme telechargement Leonard Paris (talk) 10:28, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: It seems to have been uploaded properly. Je ne peux pas identifier des problèmes avec le téléchargement. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
I find it difficult to believe, given the status of his other contributions, that this is genuinely the work of the uploader Ian Spackman (talk) 11:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:42, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Described as a ‘pirvate [sic] file from Windisch-Graetz Library’. But that does not give the owner of the library copyright in this image, which is clearly older than the date given on its description page. In the light of his previous uploads there is every reason to suspect copy-vio. Ian Spackman (talk) 11:37, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I suspect that the date given on the description page is that of the photograph of the image (which I would assume was the work of the uploader) rather than the image itself. However, judging by its style, the image itself is likely to date from the 19th or early 20th century, in which case there would be a strong chance that it is in the public domain (and thus not copy-vio). However, the information to show this for certain is currently lacking, so I reluctantly suppose we will need to play safe. PWilkinson (talk) 21:11, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. We know nothing about the original image. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:44, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Copy of wein-plus.com. Own work doubtfull. Source says © Copyright 1998 - 2007 Wein-Plus, Utz Graafmann, Erlangen. All rights reserved, reproduction only with written permission by Wein-Plus or Utz Graafmann. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Copyvio. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:46, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
yes Jacques Delaleuf 14:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: We need a better rationale than that to delete the image. As it stands, a plaza in Romania dedicated to De Gaulle would seem to be in-scope. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:50, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
and File:Shigakukan1.jpeg. Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination. Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
This is a portrait, not a photo. The licence given is for photos, and we do not have the author to check for PD-Old Cambalachero (talk) 02:43, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Subject died 1809. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- What does it matter? Anyone can make a portrait anytime, even centuries after his death Cambalachero (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- The drawing is old, there is a copy in the Alaska State Library, but I uploaded the original oil painting. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:25, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- What does it matter? Anyone can make a portrait anytime, even centuries after his death Cambalachero (talk) 21:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: The painting might be old, but is "old" is relative and we have no idea how old it is. It is not uncommon for portraits to be done decades or centuries after the death of the subject. The fact that the Alaska State Library has a copy does not mean anything - libraries have copyrighted materials in their holdings. I was tempted to save the original sketch (the sketch ought never to have been overwritten by the completely different painting), but again we do not know the author. It was published in 1971, but copyright in Argentina is 70 years p.m.a. (50 years p.m.a. in 1971). Skeezix1000 (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Poor quality unusable Good twins (talk) 16:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- It's not unusable. It is usable here: fi:Järjestelmäviesti:Vector.css. --Stryn (talk) 16:31, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: In use. – Kwj2772 (msg) 14:59, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
It's a photo and not a "document of State management such as ordinance, decision or directive, current news and bulletins". Therefore general PD-old rule should apply, and as of now the photo is copyrighted. Blacklake (talk) 14:16, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'll try trawling through the copyright laws to see if I can find anything that covers official photos. Lord British (talk) 15:47, 14 June 2011 (UTC) [EDIT:] Looks like this might apply, because this photograph is freely available online (I've found it in multiple places already just by Googling "Kim-Jong-un"). I know that the second point seems to be the focus of the box, but I don't see how the third can possibly limit its free distribution once it is on Wikipedia. Lord British (talk) 15:55, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
|
Copyright Law[1] of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Article 32[2]: A copyrighted work may be used without the permission of the copyright owner, in the following cases:
The Wikimedia Foundation is a non-commercial, non-profit organization, and thus the respective copyrighted work, created within North Korea (with legal jurisdiction north of the 38th parallel only), is permitted for use on all of the Wikimedia Foundation projects. |
 |
- I think this provision is Democratic People's Republic of Korea's equivalent to fair use, but not a free license. --Blacklake (talk) 10:31, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hmm, you might have a point. It would be best to get some sort of clarification first to see if this equivalent is against WP:FU. Lord British (talk) 19:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: reuse only free of charge (e.g. educational use) is fair use and not allowed on Commons. We had the template that you wrote above in Commons:Deletion_requests/Template:CopyrightedFreeUse-DPRK. See also Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:CopyrightedFreeUse-DPRK and Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:PD-North_Korea as well as a search. Martin H. (talk) 02:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Blocked copyvio (also the /lang page needs deleting too). Rd232 (talk) 21:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Blocked copyvio (also the /lang page) AlNo (discuter/talk/hablar/falar) 09:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Although the source does not state any license at all, it does not state the Free Art License either. If we assume the Free Art License was made up by the uploader, what license does apply? ~ Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- The file should be marked as missing permission in those cases, as I've done now. The FAL license is errouneously interpreted as "fair use" by many Upload Wizard users. There is no need to open a DR, unless there are other issues with the file.-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:40, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Image is copied from http://www.tigersmalls.com/main.html?src=%2Findex2.html#2,0 Although website does not state a license, uploader claims own work and gives it cc-by-sa-3.0 Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Image is copied from http://www.tigersmalls.com/main.html?src=%2Findex2.html#2,0 Although website does not state a license, uploader claims own work and gives it cc-by-sa-3.0 Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
- File:Marcel Hudima YÜKSELİŞ.jpg
- File:MARCEL HUDİMA n.jpg
- File:Marcel Hudima Yükseliş vs. Police Ankara Emniyet 2010.jpg
- File:Marcel Hudima Ankara Emniyet.jpg
- File:Marcel Hudima n.jpg
1) Marcel Hudima uploads photos of Marcel Hudima; doubtful that the uploader photographed himself in this situation. 2) All photos uploads in relatively low resolution, without exif. 3) Uploader changed authorship in prevention (exapmle: 1, 2 and in other files). 4) Not notable person (in ru-wiki article of hockey player nominated for deletion and likely to be deleted, deleted in tr-wiki). --Art-top (talk) 22:32, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Also pay attention to these and these user actions. --Art-top (talk) 00:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Uploader delete service template. --Art-top (talk) 11:43, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 20:02, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
and other photos by DEDAM (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom., uploads too suspicious. Inconsistent file names and some look like Facebook. Even the electric circuit diagrams are inconsistent and evidently grabbed from various sources. Wknight94 talk 12:26, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
the source says "© National Museum of Ireland" (I have added this now to the file's desc page). The justification why this is PD in Ireland is missing. Saibo (Δ) 00:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment A "© National Museum of Ireland" is copyfraud. It was certainly published in 1913 during the lockout, probably through the newspaper Irish Worker, edited by James Larkin. There is a signature at the lower right of the cartoon but the resolution is unfortunately too low to read it. --AFBorchert (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Hi AFBorchert, thank you for your comment. Yes, it could be copyfraud. But being published in 1913 does not make it Public Domain in Ireland, does it? Ireland has the PD-old-70 rule if I am not wrong.
- Tineye does only find the version at bbc and I couldn't find other versions with google images to find out the author. Hm.. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Right, we do need to know the author and as I already noted the resolution is too small to read the signature. As some of the caricaturists of the Irish Worker died more than 70 years ago (like Ernest Kavanagh who died in 1916) it could be PD but I do not know it. My comment was just a notice — as long as we are unable to learn who the author is, this has to be deleted per COM:PRP at Commons as we respect the copyright laws of the source country, i.e. Ireland, which has the common pma 70 rule. It is, however, due to its early publication date PD in the United States and can consequently be kept at en-wp. --AFBorchert (talk) 05:23, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Question - According to Commons:Licensing, copyright in Ireland expires 70 years after the date of publication "if the author is unknown or pseudonymous". Wouldn't that be the case here? --Skeezix1000 (talk) 23:55, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Everytime the same ... we need to get rid of those "anonymous work" templates"...
Yes, but we need to be sure. Currently we have no evidence that the author's name was not published in conjunction with the image. True is this: we do not know the author. Did you read AFBorchert'S comment "There is a signature at the lower right of the cartoon... " above? ;-) Do not tell me that such an image is an anonymous work. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 01:18, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- Everytime the same ... we need to get rid of those "anonymous work" templates"...
- I'm not sure what templates you are talking about. As for unknown authorship, you're right. I didn't read AFBorchert's comment closely enough, and somehow came away with the impression that the author was also unknown to the National Museum of Ireland. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 03:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- It was just what I thought - sorry. :-) Those e.g. Template:Anonymous-EU, Template:PD-anon-70, Template:PD-EU-no author disclosure and some others. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 03:30, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what templates you are talking about. As for unknown authorship, you're right. I didn't read AFBorchert's comment closely enough, and somehow came away with the impression that the author was also unknown to the National Museum of Ireland. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 03:10, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Not clear who the author is. Removed per Commons:Project scope/Precautionary principle. – Adrignola talk 17:05, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Private picture of unknwon man, probably a not notable musician (according to the other upload of him). Not in use. Out of scope. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 23:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: One of several types of files that are out of scope. – Adrignola talk 16:47, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
This is a derivative work of the MSN Butterfly at http://static.gulli.com/media/2009/gs_msn_logo.jpg. The design is exactly the same, but instead of colors it is black and white. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:57, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. – Adrignola talk 17:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
This is a derivative work of a copyrighted character (Boo from the Mario series of video games). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 16:59, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivative work. – Adrignola talk 17:37, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Fairuse. Most of the screen is copyrighted artwork of video game characters. --Vantey (talk) 20:39, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
I've processed the image with mosaic effect, to avoid copyright infringement. Already it may be OK. --Shoulder-synth (talk) 18:06, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment However, Nobody will understand what is this image. So it seems realistically unuseful for an educational purpose. and Unused. Out of scope. --Vantey (talk) 23:18, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Your unique claim, "out of scope", is not appropriate, because this image contains sample of Akiba-kei culture, and it enough satisfy the purpose of Wikipedia Commons. (Note: educational purpose is not required in here!)
Advice: If you want to control something without any contributions or constructive discussions, you should go to more chaotic categories where none is managed yet.
--Shoulder-synth (talk) 11:23, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment You do not even read Commons:Project scope at all. The Commons’ aims is collecting the realistically useful files for an educational purpose, so realistically unuseful files are out of scope, and should to be deleted.
- Even argued that the sample of specific culture, the following fact will not change: Nobody will understand what is this image, and realistically unuseful for an educational purpose. Commons isn't a site to collect indiscriminately, meaningless, low quality or unfree images. --Vantey (talk) 19:37, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Oh, sorry. Because already many deletion requests seems to be rejected under the common interpretation, "free-licensed image archive", I've recognized that the page is slightly not matched with the current situations.
Anyway, this image, advertisement bus with many displays on the side, is enough educational sample of Akiba-kei culture & advertisement car. Your opinion, "Nobody will understand what is this image", is a kind of your personal impression. --Shoulder-synth (talk) 00:27, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Fair use subject matter is the subject of the photo and is not de minimis. The scrambling of the imagery makes the file no longer useful for an educational purpose. Can be uploaded to a local Wikipedia under fair use terms if needed to illustrate an article. – Adrignola talk 18:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
In this image contains copyrighted artwork of anime characters, it's too big to consider De minimis. The subject of this image is including the artwork. Fairuse. --Vantey (talk) 21:21, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Additionally, this photograph is what caught on in a place where photography is prohibited, probably without permission. --Vantey (talk) 16:22, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The image notes leave me the impression that the subject of the image is not the anime characters. Whether or not photography was prohibited there is not a concern of Commons.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Per Prosfilaes --minhhuy*= (talk) 05:18, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep No problem still if photography was prohibited there. Vibhijain (talk) 13:10, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: De minimis. Not the main subject of the image, even if it is used in a K-Oh article. – Adrignola talk 19:47, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
We've received an image as a gift, which is very nice. The painting was made by Dorothy E. Dodds (1897 -1981), and because of that not yet PD. Her niece, who found her sketchbooks, donated the image, says uploader Bosslady. The question now is, is she able to release the image as cc-by-sa-3.0? Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
This is Bosslady, Rosemarie Breuer, speaking.
I don't know whether this is the proper place to reply to Jan Arkesteijn's proposal to delete my contribution (could you make it easier and install a "Reply to this message" button?).
I have been uploading this image on behalf of Mrs. Anne Labuschagne, who is the niece of the artist, the late Dorothy Dodds, and holds the copyright to Dodds' art work.
I recently uploaded a website (google for doddsd.html) with most pages of her recently rediscovered sketchbooks (some 120 pages) and marked all pages with copyright by Anne Labuschagne.
It is a great find and her paintings are superb. I scanned and "electronically cleaned" most of the pages, which was a hell of a job, considering that the watercolours were painted on silk paper and the books (not the painings) are 80 and more years old.
I would like to add a page on this artist at Wikipedia, but wonder whether I will encounter a delete proposal again? Please save my time and reply to this message! Thank you Rosie (Bosslady)
- Hello Rosie, you wrote that Dorothy's niece found the sketchbook. Does that make her the copyright owner? In other words, is she the legitimate heir to the copyright? Only then she can place an image under one of our free licenses on our system. After you found that out, follow the Commons:OTRS procedure. The procedure describes 4 steps and an e-mail template. Fill in the e-mail with the specific details and send it to the mentioned address. Then add the string {{subst:OP}} to the description of the uploaded file. After some time one of our volunteers will check the e-mail and make a note in the description of the upload that it was properly received. The deletion request will be closed after some time. If you want to write an article on Wikipedia that is quite alright, as long as you don't use copyrighted material, like litteral text from a book or a newspaper. If you tell it in your own words everything is okay. You can than add the image to the article. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 12:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No OTRS permission received. – Adrignola talk 21:42, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
No reason to believe the license is legitimate or the identification is accurate. Photo was uploaded to be used for vandalism in an English-wikipedia article The Big Bad Wolfowitz (talk) 21:15, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused low-quality photograph of non-notable person. Out of project scope. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 14:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by CamilleDazin (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. – Adrignola talk 16:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
The source points to a Flickr set of images. Although I could not find this particular image in this set, all images in the set appear to be All Rights Reserved Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 15:44, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Ben.MQ (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Unused duplicate of {{Lang-VICR}} Rd232 (talk) 17:12, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Duplicate page. --Alpertron (talk) 23:21, 28 August 2011 (UTC)
It is not in the public domain, It is a new recreation of 2 years ago --Producer (talk) 15:41, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
As per the exisiting law in United Arab Emirates, this image need to meet any of the following conditions for a place in commons.
Questions
- It is an official document or a work transferred to public property (art. 3);--Where is the official declaration for that, please provide the evidence, or advice how it become public property
- It is a work of applied arts and 25 years have elapsed since the end of the year in which it was created (art. 20-3). Images published before 1992 are PD based on the former copyright law-Its in use from 2008, so cannot consider for a PD status
- It is another kind of work and 50 years have elapsed since the death of its author (art. 20-1).- In use from 2008
- To uploader: Please provide where the image was first published and who created it..??? ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 05:00, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- I know officially, it was mentioned at http://www.mod.gov.ae/ar/portal/arm.aspx for the changes (but in the terms of authorship, it was a joint work. There is no law that I could quickly find that describes this coat of arms). The artist for the original arms this is based off of, I am not sure if he is deceased yet (or if he was, it would not have been 50 years). Yet, the date of official publication is May 1st, 2008 (with the changes being approved on March 23, 2008). I would say Delete for this one. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 05:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- This file was created by User:Justass, therefore it's his free version, and should be kept. Fry1989 (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- @Fry, This picture is called a derivated work of a copyrighted subject, please read COM:DW--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:52, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
- @Fry, that's nonsense, Justass took it from a (named) website. Jcb (talk) 00:27, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- This file was created by User:Justass, therefore it's his free version, and should be kept. Fry1989 (talk) 19:01, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
Captainofhope -- Under traditional European-derived heraldry, copyright doesn't work the way you think (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Coat of Arms of Kate Middleton.svg etc.). Not sure whether that's relevant here, though... AnonMoos (talk) 23:01, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
- There is no blazon for the arms (or even official text saying what it is). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 01:21, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- Are you sure? There has to be SOME sort of description. It doesn't make any sense to have something as important as a national symbol, and not prescribe what it is. Fry1989 (talk) 02:49, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
- @AnonMoos -You will get the answer at the end of this discussion..--...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 03:29, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
- The file should be kept. It's a coat of arms, that means there has to be a discription in UAE law on what this emblem is and consists of. Under that reasoning, it is free. Fry1989 eh? 00:38, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence for claimed copyright situation Jcb (talk) 00:28, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
- Renomination #1
As per the existing law in United Arab Emirates, this image is not in PD and its made in 2008. Authors life + 50 years are required to establish a clear PD status (New law amended in the PD-Template) ...Captain......Tälk tö me.. 08:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- Is the law from above in English; the direct law on the template is not working for me (or need an Arabic title to help look for it). Now, when I restored this image less than 12 hours ago, I found Article 3 to be the following:
3. Protection does not extend to mere ideas, procedures, methods of work, mathematical understandings, principles, and abstract facts, but extend to creative expression in any of them. Protection does not extend also to the following: (1) The official documents, whatever is their original language or the language translated to them, such as the texts of laws, regulations, decisions, international agreements, judgments, arbitrators’ awards and the decisions of the administrative committees having judicial competence. (2) The news, events and the current facts, which constitute merely media news. (3) The works transferred to public property. Nevertheless, the items in paragraph 1, 2 and 3 of this article if their compilation or arrangement or any effort thereof is characterized by creative manner shall enjoy protection.
- While closing the Undeletion Request at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#File:Coats_of_arms_of_the_United_Arab_Emirates.svg, I did manage to find a document from the Prime Minister Office with this new emblem on it. This document follows 3(1) under the law. Based on other DR's in the past about similar situations, such as http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Seal_of_the_National_Transitional_Council_%28Libya%29.svg where if the documents themselves are public domain, then any images or seals derived are public domain. I know this image has been through a DR many times, but I cannot see a reason why, under various other decisions in the past and based on the policies we have, this image cannot be kept. I also would like to note that the PD-UAE template was significantly changed after my restoration of this image and eliminated a lot of the other ways images/media can become public domain in that country. The law itself has not changed, so I ask that either a separate PD-UAE-exempt template is made or all ways an image can become public domain in the UAE is listed on that template (given so few images we have that used this template). User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 19:14, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- Another point; if what we had was "false information" on this template, then I somehow managed to find the Arabic version of this law from the above site (قانون اتحادي رقم (7) لسنة 2002 في شان حقوق المؤلف والحقوق). From what it gave me, this is what that above page says about my point from above: المادة(3) - قانون اتحادي رقم (7) لسنة 2002 في شان حقوق المؤلف والحقوق المجاورة :
المادة(3) لا تشمل الحماية الافكار والاجراءات واساليب العمل والمفاهيم الرياضية والمبادئ والحقائق المجردة لكنها تنطبق على التعبير المبتكر عن اي منها ، كذلك لا تشمل الحماية ما يلي : 1- الوثائق الرسمية ايا كانت لغتها الاصلية ، او اللغة المنقولة اليها ، مثل نصوص القوانين واللوائح والقرارات والاتفاقيات الدولية والاحكام القضائية ، وأحكام المحكمين والقرارات الصادرة من اللجان الادارية ذات الاختصاص القضائي . 2- الانباء واخبار الحوادث والوقائع الجارية والتي تكون مجرد اخبار اعلامية . 3- المصنفات التي آلت الى الملك العام . ومع ذلك تتمتع مجموعات ما ورد في البنود (1 ، 2 ، 3) من هذه المادة بالحماية اذا تميز جمعها او ترتيبها او أي مجهود فيها بالابتكار . My Arabic is is horrible, so when I put this through Google Translate, it gave me the same information that WIPO gave out. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 20:03, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per the Undeletion Request and all arguments made there. Captain Of Hope, its not realty prudent to nominate something for deletion immediately after it's restoration per a UnDR, simply because you disagree with the result of that UNDR. You made your views on the issue clear when you participated in the UnDR discussion. Fry1989 eh? 06:09, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Kept Our general rule on coats of arms is that each individual representation of a COA has its own copyright and is not a DW of the blazon or of other versions of the COA. I see no reason to come to a different conclusion here. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:20, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
This image is obviously a painting rather than a photograph and according to the Iranian copyright law is protected until 30 years after it's author's death. (Note that just photographs and movies are in public domain after 30 years of their publication) --Razghandi (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Eh? It appears to be a photograph with the subject posing in front of a fabric or painted background. It would be clearer under higher resolution. Holyoke, mass (talk) 15:43, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- I think it is a picture. If it is a painting, it is a near-perfect replica of a picture. 98.216.206.167 04:16, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not sure either if that's a painting or a photo, either way we need more detailed information about it's original source. ■ MMXX talk 19:17, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
- Here is that image in higher resolution, from the source page. --Myrabella (talk) 10:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- The high-res version is clearly a photograph, not a painting. Since it's more than 30 years old, it's presumably public domain. Holyoke, mass (talk) 15:03, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- Here is that image in higher resolution, from the source page. --Myrabella (talk) 10:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 00:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
unused personal foto Reinhardhauke (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
- He seems to be a notable pastor and church educator in Cleveland (of Uruguay origin). http://www.andresmiranda.org, http://www.mentor-internacional.com/4.html. --ŠJů (talk) 22:57, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
Kept Jcb (talk) 22:22, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Portrait picture of a not notable christian pastor. Not in use. Unique contrib of the user. Self promotion. Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 19:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I'm sorry to have reopened the issue but the own site of the subject cannot, in my opinion, be considered as a sign of notability. Apart of his site and few other ones related to him -interested in promoting him, I mean-, there are very few other independent (from him) or third sources indicating him as notable. Everyone could be director of something and writer, journalist, president, musician, composer, chief: it's just a matter of words. There are millions of examples like that in internet. And in real life. But notability is something else, for me. Just googling names, make a comparison with someone really notable and you will see the difference. --Giorgiomonteforti Speak your mind 00:30, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Deleted No evidence of permission from the professional photographer. – Adrignola talk 21:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
The country of origin for this file is the UK. One of its editors, EA Benians, died in 1952. He still holds the copyright in the UK. Jarry1250 (talk) 20:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Editor does not matter - anonymous work. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:53, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Work for hire, surely? Jarry1250 (talk) 18:30, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Kept: per Pieter Kuiper Jcb (talk) 00:32, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
