Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/07/27
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
What the.... Useful anyone???? Globalwheels (talk) 14:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Vandalism - gone Herby talk thyme 15:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Picture of a 1968 building in France, country with no freedom of panorama Léna (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Keep It is just an entrance, moreover this file was first on french wikipedia. So that I would claim that if deletion is decided, the file can be brought back to french wikipedia (with User:Coyau's bot for example). Thanks. Jeriby (talk) 17:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- this is just an entrance. This entrance, of an aviation school, represents the wing of a plane, so for me it totally meets the originality threshold. Léna (talk) 18:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No FOP in France; file restored on frwp. Coyau (talk) 00:00, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:SS Norway (2).jpg Oxyman (talk) 20:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: duplicate file Nilfanion (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Album cover, a copyrighted image. Bill william comptonTalk 10:27, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Infrogmation (talk) 15:56, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Album cover, a copyrighted image, and no special permission is provided. Bill william comptonTalk 10:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Infrogmation (talk) 15:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Album cover, a copyrighted image, and no special permission is provided. Bill william comptonTalk 10:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright violation. Infrogmation (talk) 16:01, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
This is Artandimage. The artist did NOT grant permission to put this image into the public domain. He granted permission for me to post it for Wikipedia purposes only. It must be removed! Help! Artandimage (talk) 03:17, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
This is Opendude42. Artandimage has attempted to remove the Help:Contents page. This has disabled users from using the Help pages. The image shoould be removed, but the page should not! Opendude42 (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2012 (GMT)
Kept: per Opendude42 McZusatz (talk) 23:41, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Category:Bahnstrecke Weilheim-Schongau Karl432 (talk) 17:28, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, of course I want the listed category file to be deleted (due to a mistype in its name), not the help file itself which I inspected only to see how I do this. I simply assumed that when I click "nominate for deletion" I had first to specify the file which I wand to be deleted. -- Karl432 (talk) 17:31, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Kept (non-admin closure): test nomination. darkweasel94 21:26, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
No PLans To use This Page Richard Alexander Cadieux (talk) 03:40, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense DR. ★ Poké95 11:20, 25 July 2016 (UTC) (non-admin closure)
i dont want to put this picture in common DgitalTechs (talk) 17:54, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense DR. --Achim (talk) 21:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bali_Democracy_Forum Diplik (talk) 02:06, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense, no valid reason for deletion. --jdx Re: 03:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Personal photos Marcello Hughes (talk) 00:52, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
- Admins, please warn the DR opener seriously. --E4024 (talk) 01:02, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense, speedy closed. --jdx Re: 01:09, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
File: Slumber Party - Rebels in Pinkville - 2018.jpg Arik Mirondo (talk) 15:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Kept: Nonsense, speedy closed. --jdx Re: 17:04, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archivo:Iglesia_del_Sagrado_Coraz%C3%B3n_Jiquilpan_Michoac%C3%A1n.jpg Jackie RGarcia (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Speedy kept, the photo of the church is not a reason to delete Help:Contents. -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 22:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Pexels-photo-3772623.jpg Franz.zilvah (talk) 01:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Keep (non-admin closure): Nonsense nom. Why this page is nominated for some many times... Stang★ 02:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Uploaded by a cross-wiki vandal who is known for vandalizing the Erich Gonzales article in en.wiki (see http://toolserver.org/~luxo/contributions/contributions.php?user=112.202.72.28&blocks=true for details) WayKurat (talk) 15:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused bus image, copyvio likely, alternative images of the same type already available :bdk: 04:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded by a cross-wiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused "out of scope" bus image + copyvio very likely :bdk: 04:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded by a crosswiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused bus image, copyvio likely, alternative images of the same type already available :bdk: 04:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded by a cross-wiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused "out of scope" bus image + copyvio very likely -- :bdk: 04:34, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded by a cross-wiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused bus image, copyvio likely, alternative images of the same type already available -- :bdk: 04:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Uploaded by a cross-wiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused "out of scope" bus image + copyvio very likely :bdk: 04:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
uploaded by a crosswiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused bus image, copyvio likely, alternative images of the same type already available :bdk: 04:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
uploaded by a crosswiki vandal WayKurat (talk) 15:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: unused "out of scope" bus image + copyvio very likely -- :bdk: 04:35, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Improper CC license on the source page. The original prohibits derivative works CC-by-ND which rules out use on Commons. De728631 (talk) 19:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted, Flickr photographer has it tagged as Attribution-NoDerivs 2.0 Generic (CC BY-ND 2.0), not allowed on Commons. Infrogmation (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in France and likely copyrighted architecture and lighting scheme. Grand-Duc (talk) 22:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. Copyvio. Photo from Le Monde: http://s1.lemde.fr/image/2007/06/25/600x300/927918_3_d3cd_oeuvre-de-l-artiste-sophie-calle-a-la-station.jpg and http://www.lemonde.fr/culture/portfolio/2007/06/26/a-toulouse-les-nouvelles-stations-de-metro-sont-aussi-des-oeuvres-d-art_927928_3246.html Photo Saada/Schneider. -- Asclepias (talk) 02:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedied as copyvio. Rosenzweig δ 16:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The Prime Minister of Canada DOES NOT have a flag. Delete. Fry1989 (talk) 21:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: Speedy delete -- duplicate of File:Lilia burbońska.svg Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
This user is uploading flags under false names and uses.The PM of the United Kingdom does not have a personal flag. This is a proposal to change the UK flag to include Wales in symbolism. Fry1989 (talk) 21:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedy delete --duplicate of File:Flag UK+Wales.svg Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:14, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
SVG bug. The file is currently in use, but can be replaced by File:Flavon.svg or File:Flavone acsv.svg (e.g. by creating a redirect after deletion). Leyo 18:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete Per nom. --Yikrazuul (talk) 16:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: I left a redirect to File:Flavon.svg Ed (Edgar181) 01:59, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal picture, out of scope. Martin H. (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete as there is no use to see of this not useful personal image. --Saibo (Δ) 01:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; silly personal photo, unused, no in scope usefulness evident. Infrogmation (talk) 15:54, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal picture, out of scope. Martin H. (talk) 00:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete as there is no use to see of this not useful personal image. --Saibo (Δ) 01:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
File:Freemasons of the Danish Order of Freemasons.jpg can be deleted. I have created the image and uploaded it. (The image is almost identic to File:Danish freemasons.jpg - the difference is just the unnecessary words. Therefore, we don't need File:Freemasons of the Danish Order of Freemasons.jpg and it should be deleted). Will somebody please delete File:Freemasons of the Danish Order of Freemasons.jpg? Fanoftheworld (talk) 00:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:28, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
seems to be: photo is by "Luciano Vicioni" date: 16/10/2007 http://www.abcdmaior.com.br/noticia_exibir.php?noticia=3941 → jpg Saibo (Δ) 00:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted artwork/architecture. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 01:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted artwork/architecture. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 01:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted artwork/architecture. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 01:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
out of scope Warfieldian (talk) 01:53, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Probable copyvio as I remember seeing this photo online years ago. This is the uploader's only contribution and TinEye gives 201 results. jonkerz♠ 02:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:34, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This poster was taken from http://www.toronto.ca/graffiti/brushoff.htm, copyright City of Toronto. Steamroller Assault (talk) 03:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
sorry, I doubt you are the author of this card. Did you draw it? Probably not. Who is the author? Where did you download it? How old is it? Saibo (Δ) 03:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I doubt you are the author. Did you draw it? I gues: no. Who is the artist? When did he die? When was this painting produced? Saibo (Δ) 03:55, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - derivative of a painting by Zabateri (Hans Zatzka, 1859-1949). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Mbdortmund (talk) 11:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Clearly out of Commons scope. Photo of girl, taken by herself. It has no educational use. ThiagoRuiz (talk) 05:24, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Lady Gaga with braces! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:37, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Logo of a college, definitely a copyrighted image as college was established in 1994, so not in public domain (as per PD-India) either. Bill william comptonTalk 05:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
no longer used and desired Luxusfrosch (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
wrong year in filename, replaced by File:Villa Berg, Ansicht von Südosten, 1849.jpg Gerd Leibrock (talk) 08:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This tome III is now includ in File:Descartes La Géométrie.djvu Pdebart (talk) 08:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
falsch: bildtitel www.lewelsch.ch (talk) 08:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Not a reason to delete. Please use {{Rename}} to change image names. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:34, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
wrong year in filename, replaced by File:Villa Berg, Ansicht von Nordwesten, 1849.jpg Gerd Leibrock (talk) 08:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Mbdortmund (talk) 11:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
The file is used in a self-promotion page on eswiki, and is intended to promote a business; out of Commons’ scope. —Fitoschido [shouttrack] \\ 27 July, 2011 [09:13] 09:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
The file is used in a self-promotion page on eswiki, and is intended to promote a business; out of Commons’ scope. —Fitoschido [shouttrack] \\ 27 July, 2011 [09:15] 09:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:36, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
not use Pdebart (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: While "not used" is not generally a reason to delete, gif is not a favored format and we have several of these. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Another self-promotion file used to spam eswiki. Out of Commons’ scope. —Fitoschido [shouttrack] \\ 27 July, 2011 [09:35] 09:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
svg-file not working properly Niklas R (talk) 09:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: corrupted svg Mbdortmund (talk) 11:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
orphan and promotional 92.27.97.179 10:00, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted by Yann Mbdortmund (talk) 11:43, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No license, also it's an official seal of Quintanar de la Orden, so it might be copyrighted. Bill william comptonTalk 10:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:38, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Album cover, a copyrighted image, and no special permission is provided. Bill william comptonTalk 10:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Mbdortmund (talk) 11:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Main subject is an artists' impression of a building which is probably copyrighted Sweetie candykim (talk) 12:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- keep PD - FOP UK Slowking4 (talk) 00:45, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete The photograph is of an artwork, not a building. The finished structure will fall under FOP, but this is an artist's impression of it.--Nilfanion (talk) 07:21, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Only other contribution of the uploader was a copyrighted band logo for the band "The Killerelay" (inscription on clocks). Dubious own work claim, though I couldn't find this on the internet. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 12:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
not use Pdebart (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:39, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
inferior quality, tiny and there is a much better equivalent: File:AUT Aigen im Ennstal COA.jpg Herzi Pinki (talk) 12:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
sure, the alternative is much better...
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Not use Pdebart (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Not use Pdebart (talk) 12:29, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Not use Pdebart (talk) 12:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:41, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Uncorrect redraw of File:POL Inflanty IRP COA.svg — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dark Eagle (talk • contribs) 12:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: We often keep more than one realization of a COA -- also, this is in use, so policy forbids deleting for this reason. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
sinestesia isn't heir of Kandinsky. (and COM:DW). --sугсго 12:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:54, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
main subject is an artist's impression which is most likely copyrighted Sweetie candykim (talk) 13:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope - no educational content. Removed from Norwegian Wiki article for this reason, not used in other articles. Deerhunter (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Seems to be a screenshot of the copyrighted game "Armed Assault" Avron (talk) 14:04, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Per the linked source, this image is copyrighted and not released under the license below. No OTRS ticket showing any released permissions. TParis (talk) 14:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:00, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
photo of copyrighted map, no freedom of panorama in bosnia[1] Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:01, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Missing author, source and permission. Onderwijsgek (talk) 14:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- This is strange. Nominator is also uploader of picture. It was originally uploaded with a full description, author, and permission info but then removed in subsequent edits. Keep unless better rationale is given. --P199 (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
duplicate of File:Friendly Airport Limousine.jpg WayKurat (talk) 15:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: 04:38, 28 July 2011 by Bdk, closed by Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Unlikely to by own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
and File:20060807-ustorf-ppress.jpg. Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
It has no documentation. Bruno Ishiai 15:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:06, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Unlikely to by own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
and File:Wonderspleen2.jpg. Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:07, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Coprighted Artwork to show specifically this game. IMO Not de minimis. We have other images of GBA cartridges. Pixelize or delete Kungfuman (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Picture of a 1968 building in France, country with no freedom of panorama Léna (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Copyright infrignement in respect of the authors of the poster and the photo contained in this image. According to the law at the location it has be be established permanently in a public right of way, this poster is intended to stay only for some weeks. Eingangskontrolle (talk) 16:30, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:13, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I doubt that this is useful for educative purposes. GeorgHH • talk 17:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Personal work, out of scope. --P199 (talk) 22:07, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Unused private image GeorgHH • talk 17:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: 11:48, 3 August 2011 by Mbdortmund, closed by Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Moved from speedy. Not so clear case. http://www.federalregister.gov/articles/1997/08/22/97-22338/copyright-restoration-of-works-in-accordance-with-the-uruguay-round-agreements-act-list-identifying Yann (talk) 17:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete It arguably has a US copyright, as it was filed for copyright restoration (a formality for our purposes, but a definitive statement). It also arguably has a UK copyright; w:Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 is a little confusing, since it says that pre-1957 UK films are protected as dramatic works or photographs, not films, but since it was based off a novel by Ethel Lina White (1876–1944), I assume it would be covered by her copyright. TCM credits w:Sidney Gilliat (1908-1994) and w:Frank Launder (1906-1997) as screenwriters, and their articles mention them writing for this movie, so whoever would be considered the "author" for legal purposes, I think it's got a long time to go. (Hitchcock didn't die young either.)--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete As for UK the w:Copyright Duration Directive (93/98/EEC) amended the copyright act of 1988:"Films are protected for 70 years from the death of the last of the following people to die [Art. 2(2)]: the principal director, the author of the screenplay, the author of the dialogue and the composer of music specifically created for use in the cinematographic or audiovisual work." Including works that had entered public domain before 1993 (as this film had). --Nedergard (talk) 11:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
According to Commons:Money#Greece it is not OK to use images of the Greek drachmae banknotes. MGA73 (talk) 19:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
All files in Category:Banknotes of Greece:
- File:100 drachma.png
- File:1000 drachma.jpg
- File:1000 drachma.png
- File:1000 drakhma.jpg
- File:50 drachma.png
- File:500 drachma.png
- File:500 drachmas.jpg
- File:Democritus12.jpg
- File:GRC-10000-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-10000-rev.jpg
- File:GRC-1000d-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-1000d-rev.jpg
- File:GRC-100d-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-100d-rev.jpg
- File:GRC-200d-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-200d-rev.jpg
- File:GRC-5000-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-5000d-rev.jpg
- File:GRC-500d-anv.jpg
- File:GRC-500d-rev.jpg
--MGA73 (talk) 20:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Some files is/were licensed {{PD-self}} and others {{PD-GreekGov}}. On File:Democritus12.jpg another user added a disputed + the reason "Derivative of copyrighted work. Copyright for greek banknotes/bills/paper money is owned by the Bank of Greece S.A., not by the Greek Government". --MGA73 (talk) 20:12, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Even though Commons:Money#Greece says it's not OK, the language seems vague to me. I wonder what constitutes "use" of the banknote images. Is simple display the same as incorporating the banknote design into some other for-profit commercial venture? If I am completely mistaken, then by all means delete what I uploaded. Scratchmarc (talk) 02:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons requires that images be free for all use, commercial as well as non-commerical. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Privacy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.65.181.179 (talk • contribs) 20:28, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Not a valid reason for deletion of a Category Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:25, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Privacy 12.169.97.130 16:20, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- "Privacy/stalker (mandatory)" - according to 208.65.181.179. Mathonius (talk) 16:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Speedy keep No valid reason for deletion. Please do not nominate this again. Repeated actions without a reason are vandalism. If there is something you don't understand, you may post a note on this DR's talk page or on my talk page. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Logo of some sort, used in a now deleted advert on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 20:47, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
PDF text in Spanish about some governmental organisation in Quintana Roo, Mexico. Out of project scope. Rosenzweig δ 20:54, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Out of scope and speedy for me --Herby talk thyme 07:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:26, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Unused and not needed. There is 59,739 files in Category:Images from Forest & Kim Starr and they do not need the template. DR is for the template and the sub-templates it use. MGA73 (talk) 21:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:31, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
unused photo of Belgian punk rock band with no notability as deleted here fr:Sport Doen - out of scope Santosga (talk) 18:02, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:23, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
unused logo of Spanish travel agency [2] with no notability or article in es or other wiki projects - out of scope Santosga (talk) 18:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:22, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
This picture was not taken in Argentina (and probably not by an Argentine photographer). This is a picture from a Colombian soccer team (Millonarios Fútbol Club[3]), so it's probably subject to Colombian copyright, and therefore not in PD. Giro720 (talk) 22:14, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:49, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I have serious doubts about the educational value (it was used on a -speedy deleted- article on DE-WP). And there is also a problem with logos on Commons, isn't it? Grand-Duc (talk) 22:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
No longer needed, and non-conforming to wikipedia terms. Freeknowledge10 (talk) 22:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:51, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
No longer needed, nonconforming to wikipedia terms. Freeknowledge10 (talk) 22:34, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:51, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
I do not really know spanish, but this strongly seems to be an advert... the user also has only 1 (now deleted) edit at eswp. Saibo (Δ) 23:10, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:57, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal image used for spam on enwiki, possibly unfree Acroterion (talk) 23:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Out of project scope, advertising Acroterion (talk) 23:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal image, out of project scope Acroterion (talk) 23:58, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Unused. Obviously a historical work edited by the uploader to include their username, not the uploader's own work. Upload is only edit by this user. Dcoetzee (talk) 23:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per nom; unused personal image, likely derivative problem. Infrogmation (talk) 16:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Eventa Simracing (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. – Adrignola talk 15:18, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
Photography of a copyrighted work in France, country with no Freedom of Panorama. Léna (talk) 12:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any information on the sculptor -- perhaps someone else has more to offer. It's hard for me to see whether this is recent or early 20th century? Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:52, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Have asked on Léna's user talk. Suggest not closing either way until that's clear.
- James F. (talk) 17:03, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry for not being explicit enough : Deshimaru (the subject of the sculpture) was born in 1914 and he's obviously older than 27 in this sculpture. Anyway, the garden was created in 1981. Léna (talk) 17:08, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
- Very well, deleting.
- James F. (talk) 17:21, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Subject of work is in copyright (subject born 1914 thus sculpture is in copyright). James F. (talk) 17:24, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Not use Pdebart (talk) 12:31, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: File already deleted, just closing the debate. James F. (talk) 17:04, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Photography of a 1968 copyright work in France, country with no freedom of panorama. Léna (talk) 16:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The building is depicted in background, like a COM:DM, and with no very original design. Moreover this file was first on french wikipedia. So that I would claim that if deletion is decided, the file can be brought back to french wikipedia (with User:Coyau's bot for example). Thanks. Jeriby (talk) 17:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- The work is not the building but the sculpture just in front of it. Léna (talk) 18:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Comment The composition of the photography is really bad because it's almost centered on the art work and not on the building. However it might arguably be COM:DM is quite small on the photography. PierreSelim (talk) 18:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Info File restored on frwp. And I agree with Lena, no COM:FOP in France --> Delete --Coyau (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- If you agree with Léna, then this image can't be on fr.wp either. Fr.wp doesn't host pictures of non-free sculptures any more than Commons. -- Asclepias (talk) 03:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- There are some weird usages on French version of Wikipedia such as Fair use for recent buildings (i.e. we don't care about copyright for buildings). Don't get me wrong, I totally disagree on this usage, however I think noone will ever sue wikipedia for thoses pictures (unless being a kind of an i***t wanting to ruined his e-reputation). PierreSelim (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Of course it can, it is picture of a sculpture on which one can't see the sculpture. Honnestly. --Coyau (talk) 14:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Then you changed your mind and you don't want to delete it from Commons? -- Asclepias (talk) 15:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Did you only understand the initial request or are you trolling? --Coyau (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- Then you changed your mind and you don't want to delete it from Commons? -- Asclepias (talk) 15:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- Of course it can, it is picture of a sculpture on which one can't see the sculpture. Honnestly. --Coyau (talk) 14:40, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- There are some weird usages on French version of Wikipedia such as Fair use for recent buildings (i.e. we don't care about copyright for buildings). Don't get me wrong, I totally disagree on this usage, however I think noone will ever sue wikipedia for thoses pictures (unless being a kind of an i***t wanting to ruined his e-reputation). PierreSelim (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- If you agree with Léna, then this image can't be on fr.wp either. Fr.wp doesn't host pictures of non-free sculptures any more than Commons. -- Asclepias (talk) 03:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I had trouble seing the sculpture, the picture is so small. --Coyau (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- For sure it's not QI ^_^ PierreSelim (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: File transferred to frwiki for Fair Use; copyright issues. James F. (talk) 17:07, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Felix de Weldon died in 2003 and holds copyright of the sculpture. The photo might be PD but the sculpture is not per FOP-US Brad101 (talk) 19:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep It is a photograph of the sculpture, not a copy of it. There are other elements, the lighting, the sky, the trees, etc. This is the photographer's artistic interpretation. There are many photographs of copyrighted sculptures in commons, see Category:Love by Robert Indiana, do you think all of those should be deleted? --rogerd (talk) 20:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Sorry, that's not a valid argument. See Commons:Derivative works. Luckily, Robert Indiana failed to put copyright notices on most of his LOVE sculptures (with the exception of one at Wichita State University), so most of those photos are OK. howcheng {chat} 23:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Is there any reason to think that this memorial, which seems to be on federal land and government-owned, wasn't commissioned by the US Marine Corps and therefore in the public domain? Dominic (talk) 21:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- sadly, after the Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Korean War Veterans Memorial lawsuit, it's clear that commissioned art is copyright artist. however, if the artist was a government employee, then PD. if we want FOP like UK, we need to lobby congress. easy non free rationale though. Slowking4 (talk) 00:52, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The SIRIS record does indeed state that Felix de Weldon owns the copyright and that the copyright statement is on the sculpture itself. Being copyrighted in 1954, the copyright would have expired in 1983 it would have required renewal at that time. In the Library of Congress copyright records for de Weldon, there are two entries for "Marines raising flag on IWO-JIMA", but neither of them were created 1982 or 1983 (one is in 1986 and the other is 1993), so {{PD-US-not renewed}} is probably applicable. howcheng {chat} 23:57, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- migrate to en:wikipedia with Non free 3D art. (hmm - what is the status of a renewal too late, but registered? is that the copy published date, not unveiling?) Slowking4 (talk) 00:48, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hard to say if those renewals apply to this specific statue—de Weldon made a bunch of these over the years. howcheng {chat} 05:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep I updated the licensing per Howcheng's instructions. Brad (talk) 09:03, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/Category:USMC War Memorial, in which the entire category of photos of the monument was kept. howcheng {chat} 18:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- It's all good. The article en:United States Marine Corps is up for featured article review and the photo licensing needs to be top notch. Thanks for your help. Brad (talk) 10:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Listing as PD-US-not renewed James F. (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bruxton as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No freedom of panorama for 3d sculptures in the United States, the sculpture is was dedicated in 1954. Felix de Weldon (the sculptor) died in 2003 Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:28, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Please do not tag photos for speedy deletion based solely on FoP issues. This image is visible on a Wikivoyage page, where we have a free use policy that allows us to upload photos locally for fair use, but we can't upload a speedily deleted file that no longer exists, so we (and any other wikis using this image) need time to take care of this. Thanks for your future cooperation with existing Commons guidelines. Also note the thread above about the non-renewal of the copyright. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep based on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_in_Category:Marine_Corps_War_Memorial Famartin (talk) 17:44, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The United States does not have FOP for sculpture especially when the sculpture is copyrighted. I believe that the copyright was renewed several times including in the year 2000: Document Number: V3456D053 Date of Recordation: 2000-08-11 Entire Copyright Document: V3456 D53 P1-3 Date of Execution: 23Apr98; date of cert.; 7Aug00 Title: Head of David & 6 other titles; sculptures / By Felix DeWeldon, artist. Notes: Agreement. Party 1: Charles Huller & Felix DeWeldon. Links: List of titles: 001 Head of David. 002 Discus thrower. 003 Bust of Kennedy. 004 Iwo Jima war memorial. 005 Pieta. 006 Brudus. 007 Colossus of Rhodes. Names: Huller, Charles DeWeldon, Felix. The rest of my rationale has been copied into the nomination above. Bruxton (talk) 04:31, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- The record that you found is not for a renewal: all renewal copyright numbers start with "RE", and the record will actually say "Renewal registration for" (example). So the record you found is for another version of the statue. —howcheng {chat} 07:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @Howcheng: , The artist may have registered the sculpture in 1977. Then in 1993 he apparently registered VAu000265428- (Title: Marines raising flag on IWO-JIMA). In any event I do not think we can assume that the copyright was not renewed. Seems he was active in copyrights and this sculpture was his pièce de résistance. Bruxton (talk) 13:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- That article only states that he visited the office in 1977, but for the sake of due diligence, I searched the 1977 records for "Felix Weldon" and found no results. I also tried "Iwo Jima" and there were no relevant results (besides, the statue wasn't even eligible for renewal yet). I get what you're saying about him being attentive to copyrights (here is the original 1954 registration), and if you find the evidence that he renewed it, I will 100% support deletion. —howcheng {chat} 17:03, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks @Howcheng: , The artist may have registered the sculpture in 1977. Then in 1993 he apparently registered VAu000265428- (Title: Marines raising flag on IWO-JIMA). In any event I do not think we can assume that the copyright was not renewed. Seems he was active in copyrights and this sculpture was his pièce de résistance. Bruxton (talk) 13:44, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion - no renewal. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
I have uploaded this picture of my grandfather and now I want to delete it as its being misused by giving it a false name 119.153.54.212 22:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep I do not understand this request -- but on the face of it, it should be a keep because licenses here are irrevocable. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Keep - and apart from that, it is {{PD-Pakistan}}; notable people in this image. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Marthelati (talk) 08:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Kept: No good reason to delete given irrevocable nature of licence. James F. (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
picture of my grandfather which i uploaded from his personal album and now I want it to be deleted as its being misused under a false name Ambkhan (talk) 22:17, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep the photo is free, {{PD-Pakistan}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep I do not understand this request -- but on the face of it, it should be a keep because licenses here are irrevocable. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Kept: No good reason to delete given irrevocable nature of licence. James F. (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I have uploaded this picture of my grandfather's brother and now I want to delete it as its being misused by giving it a false name Ambkhan (talk) 22:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Irrevocable license. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:50, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Kept: No good reason to delete given irrevocable nature of licence. James F. (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
Was marked as copyvio from http://blog.xuite.net/sallyz.chen/01 by User:Mys 721tx. It looks simple enough, so I thought about marking it PD-ineligible, but I don't read Chinese (which this is presumably) and don't know what it says. Is it above the threshhold of originality? Is it in project scope? Rosenzweig δ 16:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo Lymantria (talk) 06:48, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
There is no proof that the file is released under CC; indeed, it is extracted from someone's Facebook page. Killervogel5 (talk) 22:56, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I intern for the photographer who took it and it was extracted from his official website. I've forwarded e-mail communication with the author to the permissions e-mail address. - Gregjee
- Regardless of your position with the photographer, I look forward to seeing if a professional photographer actually wishes his or her work to be released for anyone to use or alter for commercial purposes. You did note that in your e-mail, right? Including a link to the appropriate CC license might be a good idea. Killervogel5 (talk) 23:06, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Please help me with what I have to do to keep this picture up. I did what the template put on the photo told me to do and I forwarded an e-mail from the photographer granting special permission to use his photos. Is there another specific licence you think I should attach to it? - Gregjee
- No, but it's not up to me. I just know that most professional photographers don't as a rule release their work for anyone to use freely and without compensation, but we'll see. Killervogel5 (talk) 23:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Well, he did and I have the e-mail to prove it. - Gregjee
- Like I said, "we'll see". Killervogel5 (talk) 23:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
In progress, OTRS ticket 2011072710015678. – Adrignola talk 15:47, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Since Adrignola got there first, I'll leave it to him to close this, but I note that the initial e-mail at OTRS did not cover our needs and, in any event, was from a g-mail account. I am generally unwilling to accept OTRS permissions from accounts at g-mail and its competitors because, obviously, they could come from anyone. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 15:56, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know how to multi-nom on Commons, but it's worth noting that all of this user's other contributions that I have seen are licensed similarly and taken from a Facebook page. If those should be rolled in, someone else might take care of that. Killervogel5 (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: no valid permission received for a long time Denniss (talk) 17:39, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
there is another page http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nome_Gold_Rush Valugi (talk) 11:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: now being a redirect Jcb (talk) 16:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Vicky5143 (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. – Adrignola talk 18:25, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
{{FoP-Hungary}} does exist. But is a cemetary a "public place"? Grand-Duc (talk) 23:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- 1. Cemetery is a public place. In Hungary and in other countries. 2. This image is taken in the municipality of Dubník (Hungarian: Csúz), Slovakia. --Amba (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, by common sense I would say that a cemetery is indeed a public place. But I think that most of them have some kind of controlled access, e.g. being closed at night time. This characteristic could arguably make them not "public enough" in Germany, which is a country with a quite liberal FOP - there is a court ruling that the Panoramafreiheit does not apply when there is a mechanism of controlling the access (even when it's free of monetary charges) to the premises, in said ruling, the grounds of Sanssouci Palace. I do not know how this kind of question is handled in Hungary and Slovakia, but I filled the DR because there could be a problem. Ah, and by the inscription on the gravestone, we learn that it's not older than 80 years (being created in 1931), which makes it likely that the creator, the stone cutter, is not dead for at least 70 years, so we need a solid rationale for a FOP exemption. Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 23:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:FOP#Slovakia and Amba; a cemetery is a public place. MKFI (talk) 19:04, 17 August 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Public place. – Adrignola talk 01:30, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Was marked as copyvio by User:Redtigerxyz: "No proof on the website [4] claiming the art form is PD-art". Rosenzweig δ 18:13, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- The file is all over the web now [5], hard to say how old it actually is. --Rosenzweig δ 18:22, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No information at all to even find out how old it is. Martin H. (talk) 12:37, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
(see other talk page messages from this uploader) ... seems to be from http://www.francodarocha.sp.gov.br/novo/index.php?pagina=historico JPG has HTTP modified date "13 Okt 2008" Saibo (Δ) 01:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Files by Viktor Ljungström uploaded by Ljungstream (talk · contribs)
[edit]Photographs by Viktor Ljungström are clearly identified as non-free on viktorljungstrom.se, and there is reason to believe that the account Ljungstream was created by someone posing as Viktor Ljungström in order to upload copyright violations.
Following a notice on the Swedish Village Pump making this assertion, I looked into the history of these files.
Photos taken by Viktor Ljungström were previously uploaded in 2008 by Bergsbjörnen (log) and deleted on copyright grounds. Ljungstream's uploads were made in 2010 and added to articles on Swedish Wikipedia by sv:Användare:Ljungstream and sv:Användare:DegaZ (who have very similar user pages and have made similar edits with similar spelling errors). Both Bergsbjörnen and DegaZ have notices on their user talk pages (Bergsbjörnen, DegaZ about textual and image-related copyright infringements (and Ljungstream has a notice about unsourced machine translations).
The photographer's website has identified the photos as non-free at least since February 2009. In that situation, we normally require permission to be submitted to OTRS. We don't have that, and as demonstrated, there is good reason to believe that the uploader is an impostor with a shady copyright record.
I'm using the regular deletion process rather than tagging as {{Copyvio}} in order to provide this rather lengthy explanation, but I think it's a pretty clear-cut case, so a speedy deletion would be good considering that the copyright holder is legitimately upset.
- File:Stefan Åkerman.jpg
- File:Robert Gustafsson.jpg
- File:Viktor Rosin.jpg
- File:Joakim Henberg.jpg
- File:Therese Wislander.jpg
- File:Emelie Otter.jpg
- File:Jimmy Otter.jpg
- File:Niklas Forsmoo1.jpg
- File:Johan Mårtensson.jpg
- File:Lisa Karlsson.jpg
- File:Karin Nydén.jpg
- File:Anna Larsson.jpg
- File:Jiveby.jpg
- File:JonasLarholm.jpg
- File:IF Hagen.jpg
- File:IFK SKövde Fk.jpg
- File:Erica Widell.jpg
- File:George Hannah.jpg
- File:Skultorp star1.jpg
- File:Skultorp star.JPG
- File:MagnusFrisk.jpg
- File:JoarGjerde.jpg
- File:ThereseWallter.jpg
- File:AndreasLarsson.jpg
- File:GunnarBlombäck.jpg
- File:LisaWirén.jpg
- File:AngelicaWallén.jpg
- File:AndreasAsp.jpg
- File:AndreasNilsson.jpg
- File:JonasSamuelsson.jpg
- File:MattiasJohansson.jpg
- File:AndreasCederholm.jpg
- File:DanielKomayesh.jpg
- File:AntonHellberg.jpg
- File:MarkusHagelin.jpg
- File:RobinWärn.jpg
- File:MarcusLitborn.jpg
- File:ErikSvernling.jpg
- File:JacobOdh.jpg
- File:PeterCarlsson.jpg
- File:MagnusJärlström.jpg
- File:MikaelAppelgren.jpg
- File:FredrikArvidsson.jpg
- File:JohanElf.jpg
- File:Miro Prohorenko.jpg
- File:JohanSjöstrand.jpg
- File:LinusLake.jpg
- File:KristianSvensson.jpg
- File:MagnusJohansson.jpg
- File:Niklas Forsmoo.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 12:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete per Commons:Bybrunnen#Falsk användare som stulit bilder; I agree that it would be good to speedy these. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:11, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
- Delete As shown by LX's research above this is almost certainly a copyright fraud. Also the imposter account User:Ljungstream should be blocked. /FredrikT (talk) 22:26, 8 August 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed that the script I used to create this nomination failed to notify the uploader. I've done that manually just now, but they must already be aware of the nomination, as they have edited File:Jimmy Otter.jpg, which is tagged for deletion. Sorry for the procedural mistake. Now, it's been nearly three weeks, the case seems pretty clear-cut, and there is consensus to delete. Could we please get this taken care of? —LX (talk, contribs) 10:07, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
- Argh! Now I see why it wasn't dealt with. It also wasn't added to the daily logs, so it was only linked from Commons:Bybrunnen. My bad. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:10, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
Has the original photographer ever been contacted directly[6] about this issue? --Túrelio (talk) 09:32, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
- There is no reason to doubt that it was the photographer himself who wrote this complaint on the Swedish commons village pump. Please delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:46, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per the provided evidence obvious copyvios. --Túrelio (talk) 09:54, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Files of User:Metrodelima
[edit]- File:Estacion Metro de Lima .jpg
- File:Estacion grau.jpg
- File:Metro de Lima Gente.jpg
- File:Metro de Lima columnas.jpg
- File:Metro de Lima 2011.jpg
These images are all taken from an online forum and originally belong to different contributors of that web site, some images are even watermarked with the nick name of their original posters. Here is the source of the pictures:
- http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=837458&page=562
- http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=837458&page=589
- http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=837458&page=596
- http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=837458&page=601
I think the images should be deleted out of respect of their original authors who have no idea their pictures have been reuploaded to Wikimedia Commons by someone who claims that is his own work. --190.237.121.148 01:19, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
What a mess... File:Fəxri Vəkilov.jpg, File:CVekilov001.jpg taken in 2011 by J. Vekilov? File:Ismayil Umudlu.jpg - doubtful own work (small, no exif-data); File:1051.jpg, File:1049.jpg - definitely not PD-old-100. File:Cavanşir Vəkilov23.jpg - who was the author? File:Mirzaaga.alizade3.jpg - what is a home-file? Some photos out of project scope. Please distinguish between own work and not own work, add sources and credit the actual authors.
- File:Fəxri Vəkilov.jpg
- File:Ismayil Umudlu.jpg
- File:HasanHasanov.jpg
- File:CVekilov001.jpg
- File:1051.jpg
- File:1050.jpg
- File:1049.jpg
- File:CAVANŞİR VƏKİLOV5.jpg
- File:Səməd Vurğun.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov---00002.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov23.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov20.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov19.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov18c 25.jpg
- File:Cavanşir Vəkilov18.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--7.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--6.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--5.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--4.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--3.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--2.jpg
- File:Cavanshir-Vakilov--1.jpg
- File:Mexdixan-vekilov-1955-08-08-8.jpg
- File:Mirzaaga.alizade3.jpg
- File:Mirzaaga.alizade1.jpg
- File:Mirzaaga.alizade.jpg
- File:Javanshir vekilov.jpg
- File:Mehdixan vakilov esas.jpg
RE rillke questions? 13:27, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Files already deleted, just closing the debate. James F. (talk) 17:04, 10 August 2011 (UTC)
I doubt the authorship of the uploader on these pictures. Mirəli Seyidov passed away in 1992, Mehdixan Vəkilov in 1975. The sources given for File:Cavanshir mehdixan vakilov.jpg and File:Cavanshir mehdixan vakilov 2.jpg are e-mail attachments.
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 17.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 16.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 14.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 15.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 13.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 11.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 12.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 10.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 07.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 08.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 09.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 04.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 06.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 05.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 01.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 02.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov 03.jpg
- File:Mirəli Mir Ələkbər oğlu Seyidov.jpg
- File:Səməd Vurğun və aşıq Şəmşirlə- Kəlbəcər.jpg
- File:MEHDİXAN VƏKİLOV.jpg
- File:Cavanshir mehdixan vakilov 2.jpg
- File:Cavanshir mehdixan vakilov.jpg
Leyo 23:15, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 01:15, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
and other uploads by Parikhit phukan (talk · contribs). Looks like scans of collection cards. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
About these Pictures
[edit]
These pictures my solely collection and made in Adobe photoshop 7.0. These pictures are property of Assam. I want to share all. Because all pictures are not available. I want to cancel deletion request. But I have not proper idea of cancellation and GNU share policy.
- You are uploading other peoples photos with the claim that you created them. Thats wrong. You can not share this files here, you not own any intelectual property rights on them and you cant publish them under a free license. Dont upload such files, read the Commons:First steps! --Martin H. (talk) 02:33, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own work. – Adrignola talk 18:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
I doubt solely own work/ permission. For example File:Formation lors de la victoire de championnat de tunisie 2008 .png is published elsewhere on the web. File:Formation type lors de la victoire championnat de Tunisie en 2008.png is a derivative.
File:Maillot club africain.png- File:Coupe de tunisie .png - removed background of this photo
- File:Formation type lors de la victoire championnat de Tunisie en 2008.png
- File:Formation lors de la victoire de championnat de tunisie 2008 .png - from here?
RE rillke questions? 15:43, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Comment File:Maillot club africain.png is probably solely own work. -- RE rillke questions? 15:45, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Moved from the discussion-page:
- pourquoi la photo doit supprimé c est une travail personnelle — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adnen1985 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 27. July 2011 (UTC)
- Quelle photo? Il y a 3 images.
- J'avais ajouté des informations. Sont-elles vraies? -- RE rillke questions? 09:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. by others Polarlys (talk) 10:20, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Qatar so photographs of architecture are considered copyrighted.
- File:Stade international de Khalifa wc2022.jpg
- File:Stade Education City wc 2022.jpg
- File:Stade Al-Janoub.jpg
- File:Stade 947.jpg
- File:Stade international de Khalifa.jpg
- File:Stadium 974.jpg
- File:Stade Education City wc2022.jpg
- File:Education City Stadium.jpg
- File:Lusail Stadium.jpg
Adeletron 3030 (talk) 13:56, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
- ???? Adnen1985 (talk) 18:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:Freedom of panorama#Buildings and sculptures as works of art and let me know if you have any specific questions. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 19:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Adeletron 3030: Please, I need you clarify me this: what about these photos of Lusail Stadium (listed below) ? all of them show interior views during football matches focusing on the spectators and players so architechtural details are not clearly visible. Could they be exempted of Qatar FoP?
- Files are:
- File:Brazil vs Serbia.jpg
- File:Brésil vs Serbie.jpg
- File:Stade de Lusail match Brazil vs Serbia.jpg
- File:Lusail Iconic Stadium - 2022 FIFA WC.jpg
- File:Uruguay vs Portugal.jpg
Thanks in advance Fma12 (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Fma12 My honest answer is that I'm not sure, but they're probably fine since the distinct architectural designs aren't visible within the stadium. Adeletron 3030 (talk) 15:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- File:Brazil vs Serbia.jpg, File:Brésil vs Serbie.jpg and File:Stade de Lusail match Brazil vs Serbia.jpg are under the FOP because of De minimis. Keep if the photos are own from Adnen1985. They are useful, very few photos of WC2022 compared to the previous WC2018 in Russia. --Brateevsky {talk} 15:36, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: no FOP in Qatar. Kept: all the match photos per COM:DM. --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:18, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Those were marked as copyvios by User:Herbythyme remarking "I really don't think this is "own work" at all". However, to speedy images uploaded here in 2008, I'd need something a bit more concrete, so I'm turning this into a regular deletion request.
- File:Passport-1424.JPG
- File:1140E-7.JPG
- File:8692SF.JPG
- File:8648.JPG
- File:Nortel CS1000S.JPG
- File:8630GBR.JPG
Rosenzweig δ 16:11, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Firstly I agree with Rozenzweig in practice (which Is why I tagged them and didn't delete them). I'd like to see what the uploader has to say (and maybe an associated uploader) but these look like corporate images to me and there is nothing to suggest they are "own work". At best there would be a proper link to a real source. --Herby talk thyme 16:46, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Disagree - I investigated these images in the past and the ones that were on the Nortel.com web page were not the same as these images. Some have the picture turned, some have extra GBIC or SFP connectors or other minor differences. Now that Nortel is no longer selling these and they are all getting re-branded with the Avaya logo, it will be hard to find these images on any company web page. Geek2003 (talk) 03:23, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- However what we need is the actual source - own work it is not. --Herby talk thyme 06:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Understand that source work is desired, but we don't have any proof that it is not his work, yet. If you can do some research to help with this it would be appreciated. If we do find that he has uploaded inappropriately please identify that specific picture and I will upload a new version of the picture to resolve the problem, without deletion. If I can not take one I will reach out to the others on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Nortel page to get assistance. Geek2003 (talk) 12:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Given the lack of source on these the best approach would be to upload properly sourced new images anyway. --Herby talk thyme 12:41, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Understand that source work is desired, but we don't have any proof that it is not his work, yet. If you can do some research to help with this it would be appreciated. If we do find that he has uploaded inappropriately please identify that specific picture and I will upload a new version of the picture to resolve the problem, without deletion. If I can not take one I will reach out to the others on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Nortel page to get assistance. Geek2003 (talk) 12:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am removing the delete tag, because this issue is resolved. I will start to upload new versions of the pictures to provide original sources. Geek2003 (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- However what we need is the actual source - own work it is not. --Herby talk thyme 06:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- And I reverted your edits. Please don't remove delete tags before an admin decides the matter. --Rosenzweig δ 14:04, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- I am uploading new versions of the images. Geek2003 (talk) 14:11, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- Rosenzweig, I have started to upload new sourced images. I uploaded the file and then went back and removed the delete tag. Is this how you want the resolution accomplished? Geek2003 (talk) 14:48, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
- I answered on your user talk page. --Rosenzweig δ 15:18, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:12, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Flags of Dominican Republic towns and regions
[edit]Basically this is a nomination of the following categories and all their contents:
- Category:Flags of the Municipalities of the Dominican Republic, Category:Flags of the Provinces of the Dominican Republic and Category:Flags of the Regions of the Dominican Republic. (If the categories are empty after the removal of the files they should also be deleted).
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Most, if not all, of these flags were originally uploaded to en.wikipedia by the w:User:MRDU08 (and various socks), who was banned in 2009 from WP for uploading copyvios. The flag uploads from this user appear to be completely fictional. Some are clearly garish creations in Paint, are possibly clipart copyvios or have implausible text defacing the flag. There isn't any reason to beleive any uploads originall by MRDU08 are genuine flags.
Unfortunately, its all but impossible to tell which of these are from MRDU08, as good-faith contributors have transferred the files here and the sourcing info was not always accurately copied. This nomination covers all files in the categories, but if a file was not created by MRDU08 or can be shown to be valid it probably should be kept. (Note - some files have been listed individually for deletion for same reasons)--Nilfanion (talk) 19:15, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete I nominated a bunch of "flags" from MRDU08 over at en.wp for deletion. This should properly cleanup the ones that were transferred to Commons. However, I have no objection to keeping any of the individual flags if they are shown to be "real". Drilnoth (talk) 19:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete. Also, per Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/MRDU08, we should ensure all the flags uploaded by MRDU09, MRD2009 and RepDom809 are caught by this nomination and deleted, as all of these are likely suspect as well. — Andrwsc (talk) 19:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:27, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
Possible copyvio - own work is not impossible, but the permission links are dead so no confirmation possible. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:04, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:37, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
WW plastic models
[edit]- File:French soldier uniform WWI.jpg
- File:French soldier early uniform WWI.JPG
- File:French colonial soldier WWI.JPG
- File:French soldier WWI.JPG
Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:German Infantry 1916.JPG. --Jean-Fred (talk) 21:28, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
- Si ces uniformes sont les uniformes officiellement utilisés, il n'y a la dedans aucune œuvre de l'esprit, par contre si ces équipements sont une invention du musée alors oui, il y a copyright du créateur de mode. Il y a peu de chance que le créateur de mode ou le musée viennent dire qu'ils ont inventé une œuvre qui aurait juste un lointain rapport avec la tenue des soldats de la WWI. --P@d@w@ne 07:36, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Français : Si historicair a obtenu l'autorisation de prendre les photos et les mettre sur Commons, on peut peut-être obtenir un ticket OTRS (des gens que ce soit une oeuvre collective du musée / une oeuvre d'un membre du musée) et donc régler cette histoire ?
- English: If historicair had the oral authorization from the museum to take pictures and upload them on Wikipédia, we might be able to have an OTRS ticket from them.Léna (talk) 08:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- The referred DR was about the « model of a personn » (aka plastic guy), not the uniform.
- So this is about the rights of the 'sculptor', authorization of the museum (even if nice) is irrelevant in this case. (Moreover, historicair mentions "permission to use on Wikipedia", which is not enough for Wikimedia Commons). Jean-Fred (talk) 08:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I thought the 'sculptor' might be the museum. Léna (talk) 09:12, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep it looks like the museum dressed some standard en:mannequins in uniform, and maybe glued a mustache on. Inconceivable that the maker of the mannequin could claim copyright on the photo. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 11:05, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The mannequins are utilitarian stuff, not meant as art and not expressing the personnality of its creator (per Commons:Guide de référence#Objets courants~). Boréal (talk) 17:49, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept - Jcb (talk) 14:40, 24 September 2011 (UTC)