Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/07/31
 |
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}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.gif){kind=link}
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Kann mir bitte jemand erklären, warum das Bild gelöscht werden soll und warum nicht die Originalvorlage File:Sternwarte Hannover im Betrieb.jpg des Bildes, das ich nachbearbeitet habe? --AxelHH (talk) 09:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
OTRS# 2011072810012562
- (Deutsch:) Weil das Bild infolge OTRS ticket 2011072810012562 urherberrechtlich geschützt ist. Auch File:Sternwarte Hannover im Betrieb.jpg ist jetzt zum Löschen freigestellt. (English:) According to OTRS ticket 2011072810012562, both this image and File:Sternwarte Hannover im Betrieb.jpg are copyright violatons. Both are now marked for speedy deletion. Asav (talk) 00:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Das Quellbild ist eine Urheberrechtsverletzung - damit natürlich auch deine Bearbeitung. Dass das Quellbild eine urheberrechtsverletzung ist, hat Asav per E-Mail (OTRS) erfahren. Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 03:01, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Aber warum soll es denn eine Urheberrechtsverletzung sein, wer kommt auf diese Idee? Ich habe den Benutzer angeschrieben, aber er antwortet nicht. --AxelHH (talk) 17:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Ich habe vom Benutzer Skyman Nachricht bekommen, dass es wohl tatsächlich so ist, das es nicht mehr in Wikimedia stehen soll. Schade um das schöne Bild. Vielleicht gibt es bald ein neues. --AxelHH (talk) 21:21, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Irgendwer hat anscheinend unserem OTRS-Team glaubhaft versichert oder eine Quelle genannt wodurch klar ist, dass es eine Urheberrechtsverletzung (z.B: fremdes Foto) ist. Die OTRS-Leute sind gewählte Benutzer, denen diese Aussage geglaubt wird. Andere OTRS-Leute könnten die Aussage ja auch überprüfen. Nur wir eben nicht. Ist es nun klar? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 01:30, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- Wie Saibo sagt, ist uns eine Urheberrechtsverletzung dokumentiert worden. Deshalb ist die Löschdiskussion eigentlich überflüssig. Asav (talk) 17:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC) (OTRS-Team)
Das hat mir der Uploader nun auch mitgeteilt, dass eine URV vorliegt. Auf den ersten Blick konnte ich nicht verstehen, warum. Es ist eben schade um das Bild, das auf div. Seiten verwendet wird. Wenn es sein muss, dann bitte das Bild löschen, ich muss dann noch die entsprechenden Seiten mit dem dann fehlenden Bild korrigieren. --AxelHH (talk) 19:18, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, per OTRS. Túrelio (talk) 21:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Am I blind or source doesn't state it as CC-0? I only see (C). Herr Kriss (talk) 02:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedily deleted as repost. It was deleted as copyvio multiple times already. Trycatch (talk) 10:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Probably not original copyright holder; discription misleading. Almafeta (talk) 06:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: I'm pretty sure the w:goatse.cx image is not free. Wknight94 talk 01:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
quality, size and depicted scene make me think that this is a copyvio screenshot, likely from a internet video stream. Grand-Duc (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- No, estás equivocado. tomé esta foto cuando fui a ver ese show. No es de ningún video ni nada por el estilo. Recorte los marcos porque salían otras personas y no la había enfocado a ella solamente. Por lo tanto, no veo razón por la que debe ser borrada. Gracias. --MarioNone (talk) 20:06, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Good enough for me. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yann as no permission (No permission since) I don't believe this is own work, but there was already a DR closed as Kept. Yann (talk) 10:14, 21 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: I believe the uploader, honestly. The quality looks like it was cut out of a photograph of a stage show. I've taken countless photos like this at concerts and performances. I'm not convinced it's a copyvio. If one wishes to renominate this file with another policy-based rationale, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. Happy holidays. --Missvain (talk) 16:13, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Translation I got was "Scanning a photo of my property." That's not particularly acceptable as a source, as it dosen't say who took the photo or where it was scanned from. On his userpage, it's in a section of scans of other peoples' work (the other ones I checked had full sourcing information). Sven Manguard (talk) 00:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Most likely copyvio from BMW press material, e. g. here ("source:BMW"): http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/10/06/world-premiere-bmw-k1600-revealed/ NSX-Racer (talk) 01:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I support deletion, it is clear that the photos are copyvio and shouldn't have been uploaded to Flickr under that licence. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Also copyvio from BMW press material, e. g. here: http://www.bmwblog.com/2010/10/06/world-premiere-bmw-k1600-revealed/p90066646/ NSX-Racer (talk) 01:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I support deletion, it is clear that the photos are copyvio and shouldn't have been uploaded to Flickr under that licence. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Correct. So why did you upload them from flickr to Commons, as it was obvious?--NSX-Racer (talk) 16:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Hindsight is a very powerful tool. --Biker Biker (talk) 19:22, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Probable copyright violation, used in hoax/vandalism articles on enwiki Acroterion (talk) 02:23, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Out of project scope, personal image Acroterion (talk) 02:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Not used, the painting doesn't resemble her, but most important: it's clearly a spam. Herr Kriss (talk) 02:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Copyright violation: album art. (I should have nominated the file for a speedy deletion. I clicked the wrong button by mistake. Sorry.) Novice7 (talk) 04:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: 05:13, 31 July 2011 by Tabercil, closed by Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
non-free fair use image Tone.itdown1901 (talk) 05:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Promotional image of some sort. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY (TALK) 05:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Non-free screenshot of a commercial site (en:Steam (software)), featuring backdrop from a video game (Counterstrike?). ~ NVO (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Unused personal photograph. Not clear that the person pictured is the copyright holder since photograph does not appear to have been taken by him personally. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 08:36, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium Moros y Cristianos 08:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Restored: as per {{FoP-Belgium}}. Yann (talk) 08:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium Moros y Cristianos 08:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium Moros y Cristianos 08:39, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium (sculptor died 1967) Moros y Cristianos 08:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium (sculptor died 1967) Moros y Cristianos 08:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Belgium (sculptor died 1967) Moros y Cristianos 08:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Uploader :
- SandsCamel (talk · contribs)
i think it is a copyvio. According to wikipedia's article : Sandhurst Cricket Club
It was suggested at the time that Sandhurst's cricket pitch resembled a cross between the Somme and the Sahara. Therefore, it was duly decided that - with Christie's consent - Sopwith the Camel would be taken as the club crest.
False own work claim. False claim of authorship. I think uploader has no copyright rights to publish it in the public domain, nor that this image was previously in the public domain.
Other informations are false :
- Real author is Andrew Christie.
- Real date of creation is unknown
I would also advice deletion of the contaminated derivative work File:Schachtelkamel.jpg--Lilyu (talk) 09:38, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal photograph: Commons is not somebody's private photo album High Contrast (talk) 09:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal photograph: Commons is not somebody's private photo album High Contrast (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal photograph: Commons is not somebody's private photo album High Contrast (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Personal photograph: Commons is not somebody's private photo album High Contrast (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:48, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Surely not the own work of the uploader. Copyright violation? 79.237.182.91 11:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Keep with {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:50, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Surely not the own work of the uploader. Copyright violation? 79.237.182.91 11:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep with {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 17:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:52, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
"Talk pages are not for general chatter; please keep discussions on talk pages on the topic of how to improve the associated article." Mathonius (talk) 11:03, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Bad name. Correct name is existing "File:BSicon RP4h.svg" Dialnica (talk) 12:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. :-) --Tuvalkin (talk) 16:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
I doubt it is own work. Same picture available at http://www.flickr.com/photos/super_crispin/2654877804/ and marked "copyrighted" Teofilo (talk) 13:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
The author who matters is the illustrator, "TARAC OC" ? "FARAG OG" ? who signed the picture on the bottom left corner. Teofilo (talk) 13:55, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Withdrawn. I think the author is probably Géza Faragó (1928 death). Teofilo (talk) 14:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
This file needs OTSR because i've found it here: http://www.tks.ru/columns/dvoinyh/ Askarmuk (talk) 14:20, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
linked sourced do not match the compilation anymore, some images require proper attribution but that's missing, PD license is wrong as CC licensed source images are in use Denniss (talk) 14:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in UAE. Not de minimis in this case - the tower is the main subject. Ben.MQ (talk) 14:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete No FOP in the UAE. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:52, 1 August 2011 (UTC)- Delete agree that meets criteria based on no FoP in UAE. Warfieldian (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Copyvio. Tekstman (talk) 14:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- After an email of the uploader (owner of club's website) I changed date and license. Now: Keep Tekstman (talk) 17:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- After an email of the uploader (owner of club's website) I changed date and license. Now:
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Copyvio Tekstman (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Original Flickr license disallows commercial use. This file cannot be hosted on Commons. De728631 (talk) 15:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
I've made some changes. It's okay now?--EstherC (talk) 15:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Image still has a 'Non-Derivative use' Restriction. That's not acceptable on Commons. But perhaps this image should not be deleted yet and the uploader notified what license is acceptable here. The acceptable flickr license is either "Attribution Creative Commons" on flickr (CC BY Generic) or Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons on flickr (CC BY SA Generic). I'll notify the uploader myself. So, give this DR some good faith. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 05:48, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- I think that was however not a reason to add a speedy deletion tag while this discussion is running. A deletion discussion also serves the purpose of telling the uploader what is wrong and what could be improved. As you rightly speculated, this image should not be deleted speedily. De728631 (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
We had change the license on flickr now. Please, can you check if it's okay now? Thanks a lot!--EstherC (talk) 07:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- That looks good now, merci vielmals, Esther. Problem solved, Keep. De728631 (talk) 15:56, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Esther has changed the license to CC BY Generic and I flickrpassed it. I assume that she is the copyright owner...of course. --Leoboudv (talk) 20:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: That appears to be a bad assumption -- credit on the Flickr page reads "by Dunja Kiefer", so this is not EstherC's work and will require OTRS permssion from Kiefer Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Unlikely to by own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Unlikely to by own work: small resolution. All other upload by this user originated from SkyscrapperCity. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Also this one is stolen from skyscrapercity as google similarity search suggests. Martin H. (talk) 12:22, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: unused web site logo. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copied from http://www.saudiannals.net/ which has a copyright notice at the bottom of the page Crusio (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:05, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copied from http://www.saudiannals.net/ which has a copyright notice at the bottom of the page Crusio (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:06, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Bad name. Correct name is existing "File:BSicon RP4h.svg" Dialnica (talk) 12:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Agreed. :-) --Tuvalkin (talk) 16:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
There is absolutely no evidence that deceased photographer Iain Macmillan ever released this photo under a free license. The license on a third party's Flickr page is clearly specious. Dockino (talk) 16:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Well, but I hope the trial and if you have to remove the photo, unfortunately, but hopefully it is resolved, a cosulta on Flickr licenses that can be put are not?.--Josedm (talk) 01:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:11, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
derived work of a copyrighted work of architecture, no COM:FOP in Russia, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Останкинская телебашня (Ostankino-Tower).JPG AFBorchert (talk) 16:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
this file is on flickr . creative commons 2.0 generic --Tonchino (talk) 11:48, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: The image may be CC, but it infringes on the copyright of the architect. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
derived work of a copyrighted work of architecture, COM:FOP does not apply in Russia, see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Останкинская телебашня (Ostankino-Tower).JPG AFBorchert (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:12, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Info file log reveals it is a Flickr-imported file ([1]), which now exists as File:Ostankino TV Tower (4248137473).jpg. Useless to categorize this deletion request, and no point to undelete a file that may become a duplicate to be speedy deleted anyway. _ JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 13:47, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No FOP in France. 84.61.137.220 18:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:25, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
pomyłka w pliku silu (talk) 18:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: 14:32, 6 August 2011 by Túrelio, closed by Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
copyvio Ben Skála (talk) 20:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:17, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
logo of an irrelevant / not notable company uploaded by the creator of the (now deleted due to non-notability and marketing language) article in dewp. Saibo (Δ) 20:57, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:19, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Promotional rather than educational; out of scope. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:09, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope High Contrast (talk) 12:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
unused personal image with no description Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 12:13, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Who are what is this supposed to show? Unless a reasonable explanation comes up that this is actually someone/-thing notable, delete as out of project scope. Rosenzweig τ 22:00, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:26, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Album cover not simple photograph, PD-Italy doesn't apply Trixt (talk) 00:18, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- migrate to english; italian wikipedia "non free album cover" Slowking4 (talk) 17:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- A US citizen is needed to upload a file under fair use on en.wiki. On it.wiki there isn't fair use for covers, and explicit permission from the copyright holder is mandatory (see it:Template:Cover).--Trixt (talk) 18:15, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: "A US citizen is needed to upload" is not correct -- anyone could do it -- WP:EN is for everyone, not just US citizens. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- Mmmh... I'm not a public international law expert but I don't think so. AFAIK it may be inaccurate - perhaps changing "US citizen" with "A person who is subject to US laws" is better - but correct. In fact, for territorial principle and nationality principle, when uploading a file on en.wiki I must respect US laws (where the content is finally stored) and Italian laws (I'm Italian in Italy); so, uploading a file under fair use I would commit an Italian laws infringment, because in Italy fair use doctrine is not provided.--Trixt (talk) 21:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor Shalbat (talk) 14:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Possible copyvio took it from http://www.grupoimq.es/es/es-index.html --Andrea (talk) 23:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor Shalbat (talk) 14:43, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Possible copyvio took it from http://www.grupoimq.es/es/es-index.html , pdf file out of scope. --Andrea (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Posiblemente extraida de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC) Translation: Possible copyvio took it from http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html
- Delete Per nom. --Andrea (talk) 23:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio --Andrea (talk) 00:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:00, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:48, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. --Andrea (talk) 00:45, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. --Andrea (talk) 00:49, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio. --Andrea (talk) 00:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio --Andrea (talk) 00:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Posible violación de los derechos de autor. Probablemente extraída de http://www.grupoimq.es/es/maqueta_clinica_imq_zorrotzaurre.html Shalbat (talk) 14:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio, out of scope. --Andrea (talk) 00:54, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Inaccurate information about the authorship - likely obvioulsy a copyvio. At least one onther instance of this photograph could be found via Google, albeit in a smaller resolution. Grand-Duc (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC) / Didn't see the mention of "youtube" in the first place... Grand-Duc (talk) 00:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Bad quality, named incorrectly (wrong species). Icetigris (talk) 01:45, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:33, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
Incorrect copyright info -- original is not property of uploader as claimed (H.R. Geiger art 'Penis Landscape') Brianhe (talk) 00:33, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:FAIRUSE Aude (talk) 01:58, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation—this is a screenshot of Traktor, a commercial software package. —Bkell (talk) 08:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative work Aude (talk) 02:00, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Abrunho (talk · contribs). No evidence of permissions. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:59, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Aude (talk) 02:03, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Nicocoop (talk · contribs). Ununsed personal photos, album covers, small/inconsisten resolutions, missing EXIF images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. FASTILY (TALK) 02:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Freredarme (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. FASTILY (TALK) 02:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by Hikusi (talk · contribs). Unlikely to by own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:49, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. FASTILY (TALK) 02:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
bici a pedalata assistita 93.33.105.167 16:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Please describe proper reason why deleting this one in English. Rico Shen contact... 14:12, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Keep, unless a better reason is given A reason in English is absolutely not required, but a good reason in the user's choice of languages must be provided. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:09, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
This is not {{PD-ineligible}} Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:37, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Why? The text you see in the picture is Dongala Muta (film title) written in Telugu language. Dongala Muta translates to Gang of Thieves in English. I don't think this text or image is eligible for copyright. --Sreejith K (talk) 06:00, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- If you zoom in on the image [2] you will see it has a fairly complex background. I'm also not convinced that's a standard typeface for a font, rather than an artistic rendering of the letters. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- The background is just Crumpled Paper texture which you can add in any good image editing software with ease. About the font, దొంగల ముఠా is how Dongala Mutha is written in Telugu, as per Dongala Mutha and is not largely different from what you see in the image. --Sreejith K (talk) 09:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- If you zoom in on the image [2] you will see it has a fairly complex background. I'm also not convinced that's a standard typeface for a font, rather than an artistic rendering of the letters. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
![[2]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Dongala_Muta_Promo_Poster.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep per Sreejith K. @Ogre: please study COM:TOO. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:14, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
File that contains photos taken from the internet ([3][4]). Probable copyvio. ThiagoRuiz (talk) 17:25, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
![[3]](http://www.flyshop.com.br/imgprodutos/4956.gif){kind=link}
![[4]](http://www.pccomputadores.com.br/imgs/produtos/3185g.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep Image Please look at the labels on each image that you have identified above. The ones that you have identified have Stickers on them with what appears to be Intel or 3Com on the labels. The labels or stickers on the SFP modules within this file File:Avaya-10G-ERS-8600.JPG are not the same images because the images within this file do not have the labels with 3Com or Intel on them. Geek2003 (talk) 18:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- The file resolution is so low that the labels can be easily manipulated. The other parts of the images are extremely similar (despite the resolution difference), it's not possible that they are different images. ThiagoRuiz (talk) 19:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Image - If you still think this needs to be addressed, I can create a new high resolution picture and upload it after I complete resolution of the other requests at Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by James38 allowing us to replace this picture with a better picture. Please do not delete the original until I can upload a new image to prevent broken links on the pages that currently using the picture. Will this help to resolve this problem? Geek2003 (talk) 09:21, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
- Is this the image resolution that you are looking to add to to resolve the resolution problem? Geek2003 (talk) 04:08, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Still waiting for an answer???? Geek2003 (talk) 22:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
- Actually, the problem is the copyright, not the resolution. If you replace the copyrighted photos I don't see any reason to delete the file. ThiagoRuiz (talk) 00:43, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- OK thanks for explaining that. So I need to replace just the SFPs, in the picture correct? If so I already have a picture of a SFP that I took and posted above. To get it in this picture, I will have to white out the background first and this will take some editing then remove the old SFP from the picture and insert the new SFP into this picture, correct? Then upload the new picture as a new version of this image. Is this correct? Geek2003 (talk) 05:05, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- Altough I don't have much experience with Commons, I believe the procedure is correct. ThiagoRuiz (talk) 16:47, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
- I will start to work on modifying the above picture. Geek2003 (talk) 11:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
- I tried to load a new version of the file, but kept getting MIME errors so I loaded it with a PNG extension File:Avaya-10G-ERS-8600.png as a new file. How do we upload this new version to resolve this problem? Geek2003 (talk) 10:11, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
- I will start to work on modifying the above picture. Geek2003 (talk) 11:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. FASTILY (TALK) 02:45, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
per http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Photographs_by_Lewis_Carroll because of User:Pieter Kuiper who can't be bothered to change the speedydelete into a regular deletion request. Commons is fucking ridiculous. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 20:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
.gif&action=historysubmit&diff=56965332&oldid=56765904){kind=link}
- Keep No reason for vulgarities; the person who wants to get a file deleted should make the deletion request. This file should be kept, of course. Country of origin is UK (see en:Alexandra Kitchin), Carroll has been dead for more than 70 years. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:24, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
- I'm not going to argue with you would be a waste of time. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 20:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 18:35, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
.gif){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
either undelete file:Xie_Kitchin_with_umbrella_by_Lewis_Carrol,_c1875.png or delete this file as well 80.135.32.205 09:21, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Speedy keep - this is not the place to make undeletion requests. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:34, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- It's a deletion request. I understand that the nominator points the fact that it's the same image and therefore the fate of this file must be consistent with that of the other file. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. Already decided. Per Commons:Deletion requests/Photographs by Lewis Carroll. This file was missed by the mass deletion only because it was not correctly categorized at that time and thus was not found. Now that it has been found, it is subject to the same conclusion. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Nonsense. It was put in Category:Photographs of children by Lewis Carroll when it was uploaded. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:14, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- [5] vs. [6]. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 19:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- Ok, I see. Anyway, Dodgson's photos of en:Alexandra Kitchin were in circulation amongst his contemporaries, which means publication (a publishing house with isbn number is not a requirement). "He marketed and sold his pictures." The Xie pictures are even called "influential", and they inspired works by other artists. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
- [5] vs. [6]. --Cwbm (commons) (talk) 19:16, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
![[5]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AKitchin%2C_Xie_(Lewis_Carroll%2C_1874).gif&action=historysubmit&diff=44883307&oldid=38314286){kind=link}
Deleted As the nom says, either we have to change our minds about all of Lewis Carroll's work, or we must delete this. There is no reason to keep this and ignore the others.
Although I don't like the result at all, it is clear that the recent publisher correctly exploited a loophole in US law. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:45, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Yoghurt packagings
[edit]- File:Ehrmann Almighurt Popcorn Mais.jpg
- File:GoatMilksYogurt.jpg
- File:Joa&Sofool.jpg
- File:Mao niu suan nai.JPG
- File:Morinaga CurryYogurt Package.jpg
- File:SheepMilksYogurt.jpg
- File:Sojasun Esperanto yoghurt 1.jpg
- File:Three cups of yoghurt.jpg
- File:Valio Gefilus Max20100405 34.jpg
- File:Valio Gefilus Max20100405 35.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Mustikka-vadelma20100325 23.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Mustikka20100318 24.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Vadelma ja Mustikka20100406 01.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Vadelma ja Mustikka20100406 02.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Vadelma ja Mustikka20100406 03.jpg
- File:Valiojogurtti Vadelma ja Mustikka20100406 04.jpg
- File:YoghurtIngredients.JPG
- File:Ryongsong yogurt.jpg
- File:8 Yoghurt Drinks.JPG
- File:Armenian Ayran.jpg
- File:Ayran 20090404 001.JPG
- File:Ayran and Baniza 20090404 002.JPG
Derivative work of copyrighted packaging. -- ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 09:29, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete (but I have not checked them all). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:54, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- comment. There is a different opinion, see Commons:Deletion requests/Wine labels, Commons:Deletion requests/File:A 4 Litre Cask of Australian White Wine.jpg. Sysops: sort out your differences on the subject. NVO (talk) 12:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: The wine label case was not good precedent for a number of reasons. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:23, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Fehlerhaft und irreführend Wefo (talk) 19:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kopierte Begründung:
Keine Übereinstimmung mit http://www.rmrl.de/radios/20/27_28/loewe/oe_333/oe_333_sp.htm
[edit]
Aus der originalen Beschreibung http://www.rmrl.de/radios/20/27_28/loewe/oe_333/oe_333.htm ist nicht ersichtlich, welche Stufe wann die Gleichrichtung vornimmt. Aber aus der Schaltung gehen zwei mögliche Beschaltungen des Eingangs hervor, wobei der Gitterableitwiderstand nicht dargestellt, aber erwähnt ist. Solche unklar gezeichneten Fälle waren damals durchaus normal.
Durch die ausdrücklich vorgesehene negative Gittervorspannung kann in der ersten Stufe nur bei sehr hohen Empfangspegeln eine Gleichrichtung erfolgen, und diese dürfte dem Konzept der Mehrfachröhre, die ja in der Beschaltung nicht verändert werden kann, nicht entsprechen (für NF ist der erste Koppelkondensator zu klein). -- wefo 10:22, 1. Jan. 2010 (CET)
Bei der Schaltung eines Nachbaus http://www.jogis-roehrenbude.de/Bastelschule/OE333-Nachbau/Schaltung-Neu.gif, der natürlich ohne die originale Dreifachröhre auskommen muss, sind Heizung und Gitterableitwiderstand sinnvoll dargestellt: Der Fußpunkt des Gitterableitwiderstandes ist mit dem positiven Ende des Heizfadens verbunden. Dafür ist aber der Koppelkondensator C3 viel zu groß dargestellt, was bei großer Aussteuerung zu verzerrter Gleichrichtung führen würde. Also: Nicht alles glauben! -- wefo 10:33, 1. Jan. 2010 (CET)
- Die Innenschaltung der 3NF wurde von Wolfgang Holtmann nachgemessen und Reihenschaltung der Heizfäden festgestellt. Siehe http://www.radiomuseum.org/tubes/tube_3nfb.html. Einen Fehler gibt es mit Gitterspannung G1. Beim OE333 gibt es keine Gitterbatterie, ein Anschluß der Anodenbatterie wird als Nullpunkt verwendet. Nullpunkt bedeutet hier der Anschluss der Anodenbatterie welcher mit Minuspol der Heizbatterie verbunden ist. Laut OE333 Bedienungsanleitung sind die Spannungen G1 4,5V oder 6V und Nullpunkt 6V bei frischer 90V Anodenbatterie und G1 3V oder 1,5V und Nullpunkt 3V bei alter 90V Batterie. Diese Spannnungen sind natürlich die Beschriftungen auf der Batterie. Die Vereinfachung G1 = Nullpunkt ist für mich zulässig weil eine solche Einstellung von Loewe empfohlen wird. (nicht signierter Beitrag von AndreAdrian (Diskussion | Beiträge) 22:09, 3. Jan. 2010 (CET))
Mir ist nicht ganz klar, wie Wolfgang Holtmann die röhreninterne Schaltung gemessen hat. Man kann den Glaskolben zerstören, aber dann braucht man nicht zu messen, sondern nur zu kucken. Sinnvoll wäre die Messung der Gitterspannungen beim Gitteranlaufstrom. Diese Spannungen würden durch ihren Versatz Aufschluss über die Schaltung der Heizung geben. Nun habe ich aber ein Schaltbild der Röhre ergoogelt: http://www.jogis-roehrenbude.de/Roehren-Geschichtliches/Loewe-Roehren/Loewe.htm und http://www.rmrl.de/radios/20/27_28/loewe/oe_333/oe_333_sp.htm. Da ist zu sehen, dass das Gitter des mittleren Systems nicht so zugänglich ist, dass diese Gitterspannung gemessen werden könnte.
Damals war die Funktechnik noch in der Entwicklung begriffen, aber der Begriff des Audions hatte sich von der Gleichrichtung am Sperrpunkt (da war das „Gitter“ noch außerhalb des Kolbens) ganz eindeutig zur Gittergleichrichtung verschoben. Auch eine Gleichrichtung am Übergang in die Sättigung war nach diesem „state of the art“ kein Audion.
Auch in der neuen Variante der Schaltung ist das erste System nur ein HF-Verstärker, denn am Gitter gibt es keine NF. Die mittlere Gittervorspannung ist gemäß Zeichnung die halbe Heizspannung und negativ. Die relativ geringe Heizspannung genügt völlig, um eine praktisch lineare HF-Verstärkung zu erreichen. Diese HF gelangt an die Gitterkombination des mittleren Systems. Hier ist die Amplitude des HF-Signals dann groß genug, um auch ohne Rückkopplung eine Gleichrichtung durch das ohnehin recht empfindliche Audion zu gewährleisten. Wegen der fehlenden Rückkopplung ist aber weitere Verstärkung notwendig, um eine ausreichende Lautstärke zu erzielen. Bei der Nachbauschaltung sind die Aspekte der Gittervorspannung und des Audionbetriebs nachvollziehbar: http://www.jogis-roehrenbude.de/Bastelschule/OE333-Nachbau/Schaltung-Neu.gif.
Ich möchte Dir wirklich empfehlen, Benutzer:Wefo/Audion einschließlich der Literaturstellen zu lesen. Gruß -- wefo 23:49, 3. Jan. 2010 (CET)
Nutzlose Kritik
[edit]
Die Schaltung ist in mehreren Beziehungen falsch, Kritik prallt offenkundig ab. -- wefo 21:12, 31. Jul. 2011 (CEST)
- Keep. No valid reason given.--Wdwd (talk) 20:24, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Commons does not decide whether a drawing is accurate -- that is up to WP editors. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:17, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
according to [7] Fernrohr (talk) 10:05, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
- keep, no good reason for deletion Gérard (talk) 18:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
- OMG, copyvio is a GOOD reason to delete. --Fernrohr (talk) 18:32, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept. - per Gérard, insufficient information in DR to judge this - Jcb (talk) 23:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
No FOP in Russia. Architect's rights violated. 91.76.4.67 20:11, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
- Why singular ("Architect" - two men were credited as lead desighers) and why are their rights violated? (architect's exclusive right expires with death). Ah, never mind, delete for the sake of Allesmuller-wannabees. NVO (talk) 23:42, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
Deleted Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:18, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
Restored per UnDR -- Russian FoP law has changed. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:52, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
unused image from japan - wrong copy rights tag - copy violation Cholo Aleman (talk) 10:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
unused something from japan - scanned from somewhere - copy violation Cholo Aleman (talk) 10:38, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
- The other images of the same user have the same problem. --Chris.urs-o (talk) 19:06, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
unused something from japan - scanned from somewhere - copy violation Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:41, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
unused something from japan - scanned from somewhere Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:46, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
unused something from japan - scanned from somewhere Chris.urs-o (talk) 10:44, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. FASTILY (TALK) 02:42, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
