Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/09/26

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive September 26th, 2011
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.semana.com/economia/atrapados-salida/120253-3.aspx Felviper (talk) 05:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted Infrogmation (talk) 15:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.ofecfuturoscientificos.com/gustavo-petro.html Felviper (talk) 05:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No FoP in the United States. If it was created by Henry Moore, it'd be post 1923 most likely. Missvain (talk) 01:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment When was it erected? If it was first erected in the United States prior 1978, it would have needed a copyright notice and possibly renewal to still be in copyright.--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I was unable to find any records of this piece in my public art databases that I use for research. I'm not sure on the erecting, and it seems the photographer is unaware as well. The piece could be more contemporary than led on to believe, I actually doubt it's a Henry Moore, as I can't find any documentation of the piece in my books. Perhaps I've been misunderstanding the panorama law in the states - if the piece was installed pre-1978 it's okay unless you can prove copyright? What if that's so tough to do, and you can't prove yes or no? thanks! Missvain (talk) 13:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Prior to 1978, placing a statue on public display was publication. Thus it required a properly placed copyright notice to be visible on it. If you actually have the statue at hand, by definition that's not hard; if you can't clearly see a copyright notice, then it's not properly placed. If there is a copyright notice and it's older than 1963, you can look up to see if it was renewed.--Prosfilaes (talk) 13:38, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Sadly we don't know the name of this piece, and I am 4 hours away from it :) Not sure what type of action we should take in this matter than. Missvain (talk) 13:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I am the photographer, I live three blocks away, I have extensively researched attempting to determine the sculptor and have been unable to come up with anything. There is, essentially, no information with which an informed decision can be made. When the DR came up I requested a speedy deletion as the author of the image, but the request was undone -- incorrectly in my view -- by Prosfilaes. As the author and only contributor I should be able to request deletion of the image at any time, regardless of a DR. That request can be turned down by an admin, but a non-admin should not short-circuit my request. As such, I am re-instating the speedy request. Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: contributor requested speedy on unused file, copyright unknown  — billinghurst sDrewth 16:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The Coat of arms of the UAE was deleted. We are currently having a discusion at Commons:Undeletion ([1]) about undeleting it. It appears it will most likely be undeleted, but whether or not it is, this isn't the proper process. This filemust be deleted, and the other one can be undeleted as long as there is no reasonings to maintain it's deletion. ~ Fry1989 eh? 03:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Wait until UDR is done. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 21:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I'm sorry to re-nominate, but as File:Coats of arms of the United Arab Emirates.svg was restored per an unDR, we don't need two. ~ Fry1989 eh? 02:59, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think if this is deleted, the other file needs to move here since it is supposed to be "coat of arms" not "coats of arms." I would call for a merge and delete. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 03:15, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I would also agree with a merge (I forgot to mention that as an option, and I don't know of a "merge template"). Fry1989 eh? 03:54, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's only scale down, so I'll take care of it. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 06:40, 10 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Closing: Case since solved, file redirected - Badseed talk 15:07, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Seriously doubt "own work", probably taken from here --~ El Grafo (talk) 20:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Metadata credits the commercial photographer as Chad Slattery see http://www.chadslattery.com/ unlikely to be uploader. MilborneOne (talk) 21:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Speedydeleted. The metadata says:

Caption: Peace Eye Korean Wedgetail
Artist: Chad Slattery
Copyright: Copyright © 2010 Boeing. All Rights Reserved.

Thats pretty clear. --Martin H. (talk) 22:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Corrupt file. I tried multiple uploads but was unable to upload it properly. The original file is available in english wikipedia. Sreejith K (talk) 10:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedied as (intended) dupe of File:Logo Cartoon Network 2004-2010.svg Túrelio (talk) 09:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unified with Category:Château de Termes — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArnoLagrange (talk • contribs) 10:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedy -- empty cat      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Replaced by Category:Châteaux du pays cathare "Cathar castles" is a wrong name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ArnoLagrange (talk • contribs) 10:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: 11:10, 26 September 2011 by Foroa, closed by      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:52, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Bad licence. "Own ork"?? Nietito666 (talk) 00:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to upload another picture, but I can send it to you through e-mail. --User:Netito777 04:43, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
And what then? The others would have to take my word on that? There's no need to bother with secrecy: if you do not want to upload the images here, upload them somewhere else and give a link. There are pages like ImageShack or Photobucket. In such sites you don't have to use a free licence, nor is there any restriction on the actual content of the photo (it may lack the 90º rotation, or be an uncropped informal photo with friends; it won't be deleted because of that) Cambalachero (talk) 18:02, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The original and complete picture. --User:Netito777 21:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Cambalachero (talk) 22:36, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per Infrogmation. Rosenzweig τ 10:29, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE and unused. Uploader's only contribution. Apparently just a picture of some little girl. Anonymous author means source is unclear as well. Wknight94 talk 01:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE and unused. Apparently a test upload with no clear use. Wknight94 talk 01:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/politica/jj-rendon-pide-que-%E2%80%98lucho%E2%80%99-garzon-se-retracte-y-pida-perdon Felviper (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: Http://www.agenciadenoticias.unal.edu.co/nc/detalle/article/una-universidad-reaccionaria-y-postrada.html 190.25.194.91 05:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:42, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/politica/jj-rendon-pide-que-%E2%80%98lucho%E2%80%99-garzon-se-retracte-y-pida-perdon Felviper (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/educacion/mineducacion-analizara-posibilidad-de-crear-un-estatuto-unico-docente-23912 Felviper (talk) 05:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:43, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/educacion/mineducacion-analizara-posibilidad-de-crear-un-estatuto-unico-docente-23912 Felviper (talk) 05:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:43, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: Http://www.cali.gov.co/publicaciones.php?id=19930 Felviper (talk) 05:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That page is a page of the state, i don't know who say "Gubernamental" in english. All the contents in that page are free to use. -- Sahaquiel - Hast du eine Frage? 20:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Copyvio. The site it was taken from says "Todos los Derechos Reservados © 2011". Rosenzweig τ 10:44, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: Http://www.partidoconservador.org/partidoc/index.php?doc=congresista&cid=37&co Felviper (talk) 05:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:32, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/nacional/angelino-garzon-califica-de-%E2%80%9Cabsurda%E2%80%9D-la-violencia-en-colombia-31679 Felviper (talk) 05:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:41, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/nacional/angelino-garzon-califica-de-%E2%80%9Cabsurda%E2%80%9D-la-violencia-en-colombia-31679 Felviper (talk) 05:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:40, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.emisoraatlantico.com.co/noticias/34-noticias/563-el-concejo-visible-alejandro-char-.html Felviper (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:39, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.elespectador.com/impreso/bogota/articulo-276382-venta-de-etb-primera-prueba-de-fuego-de-clara-lopez Felviper (talk) 05:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:38, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: Http://bitacorapolitica.wordpress.com/2008/10/25/revolcon-en-el-das-por-seguimientos-al-polo-democratico/ Felviper (talk) 05:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:37, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.revistagobierno.com/portal/index.php/politica/camara-de-representantes/7168-los-abusos-de-los-contratistas-los-paga-la-poblacion Felviper (talk) 05:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:36, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.eluniversal.com.co/cartagena/politica/jj-rendon-pide-que-%E2%80%98lucho%E2%80%99-garzon-se-retracte-y-pida-perdon Felviper (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.opanoticias.com/politica/?debemos-movilizarnos-para-defender-las-regalias?-_7051 Felviper (talk) 05:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:35, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted image: http://www.farandula.com.co/protagonista-femenina-tvynovelas/ Felviper (talk) 05:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Rosenzweig τ 10:34, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

confidential Mperumal (talk) 06:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: You cannot delete your user talk page Jcb (talk) 15:10, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Upload of this file didn't work out. Couldn't manage to get it right, so please delete this file as well as the older version. Visur Urbanitas (talk) 09:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per uploader's request. File is incomplete/corrupt. Rosenzweig τ 10:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

the original picture has been overwritten with what is clearly a promo poster with no evidence that it is released under the same licence ass the previous picture - please revert back and delete this pic Off2riorob (talk) 11:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved. Reverted to the original photo. {{Dont overwrite}} annotation given to the uploader. --ŠJů (talk) 12:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks - Off2riorob (talk) 15:01, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: and deleted the inserted copyvio version. Rosenzweig τ 14:08, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused poor quality (pixelated, low-res). High quality raster and vector alternatives available in Category:Benzylpenicillin DMacks (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom NEURO  07:55, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE photo of some guy - apparently the uploader? Published on Myspace so needs COM:OTRS permission anyway. Wknight94 talk 01:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:03, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE and unused (past use on es.wp was deleted long ago). Apparently some non-notable writer. Wknight94 talk 01:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:04, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE, unused and blurry/low-quality. Apparently just some guy. Wknight94 talk 01:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:06, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE, unused, and probably includes COM:DW of unfree content. Wknight94 talk 01:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope and copyvio George Chernilevsky talk 16:06, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE and unused. Apparently a picture of uploader's friend that is supposed to be funny Wknight94 talk 01:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:07, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Terrible quality photograph that makes it virtually noneducational. Orphaned. The terrible quality of this collection make it out of scope. Missvain (talk) 04:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC) And the rest of these photos can go with it for the same reason:[reply]

Missvain (talk) 04:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope, unusable poor George Chernilevsky talk 16:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Small, orphaned, personal photo with virtually no educational use due to the size and lack of description. Missvain (talk) 04:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned out of scope logo. Missvain (talk) 04:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:11, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned "raid" banner, single upload by user, out of scope. Missvain (talk) 04:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:12, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope orphaned personal photo. Missvain (talk) 04:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:13, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

out of scope promotional material. Missvain (talk) 05:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:13, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned, used in a now deleted article on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 06:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned, used in a now deleted article on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 06:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:14, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unused, author "signed" the picture, potentially offending file name a×pdeHello! 07:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned vanity photo, low quality, out of scope, no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 07:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:17, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Logo of some sort, used in a now deleted advert on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 07:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

no use this image, only used page was deleted S-PAI (talk) 09:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:18, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Imagen obsoleta. 83.52.243.74 14:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope. Private photo George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Touting petition drive, orphan, out of project scope. Infrogmation (talk) 15:06, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Text only. Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:21, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and File:Hass.jpg. Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:22, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:23, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and File:Nisa in action.jpg. Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:47, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Non-free logo, no evidence of permission. The article it was intended for on enwiki has been deleted (w:CheckESNFree). January (talk) 19:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope and copyvio George Chernilevsky talk 16:49, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Scaled down duplicate of File:Coat of Arms of the Philippines.svg. Also, per this deletion, this is the third time this user has uploaded this file. If he does it a 4th time, I'd suggest a block. Fry1989 eh? 21:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Scaled down duplicate George Chernilevsky talk 16:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Promotional image of some sort. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder FASTILY (TALK) 23:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:51, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Promotional image of some sort, used in a now deleted advert on en.wikipedia. Likely copyrighted. No reason given to suggest that uploader is copyright holder. FASTILY (TALK) 23:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:51, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Bad information: Who's the photographer? When he died? Nietito666 (talk) 00:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Missing essential information Lymantria (talk) 05:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

You're the author? Come on... Nietito666 (talk) 00:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Lymantria (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No freedom of panorama for public artworks in the US. These pieces were created post-1923 and are not federal. Sorry! Missvain (talk) 01:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Lymantria (talk) 10:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

non free logo. see en:File:UB SEAL.png Bluemask (talk) 02:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Lymantria (talk) 05:53, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No Free Art Libre License at http://www.turkmilitary.com/ - just a regular copyright notice. Hohum (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 20:24, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Confidential Mperumal (talk) 08:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: already deleted (not by me) 99of9 (talk) 10:07, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by Christian von Holst (talk · contribs): No evidence of permissions from photographers. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Diese Seite kann gelöscht werden, weil eine bessere Version der Datei hochgeladen wurde. Die Einverständniserklärung des Photographen Horst Rudel wurde am 27.8.2011 an permissions-commons-de@wikimedia.org via Email gesandt. Die übrigen Einverständniserklärungen sind in Arbeit und wurden zum Teil auch schon gesandt.

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

bessere Version dieser Datei wurde inzwischen hochgeladen.Christian von Holst (Diskussion) 13:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Christian von Holst (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: this image per uploader request - mass request cannot be processed this way, because uploader uploaded a lot of images after this request Jcb (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

bessere Version dieser Datei wurde inzwischen hochgeladen.Christian von Holst (Diskussion) 13:53, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Christian von Holst (talk) 14:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 22:45, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A seal like this one is definitely not so simple that it qualifies for {{PD-ineligible}}; therefore, we have no evidence that this image is freely usable. Nyttend (talk) 14:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by EugeneZelenko Courcelles (talk) 17:53, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

bessere Version der Datei wurde inzwischen hochgeladen.Christian von Holst (Diskussion) 14:25, 7 September 2011 (UTC) Christian von Holst (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:41, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No FoP in the United States for public artwork. This piece was completed in the 1960s. Missvain (talk) 01:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can the file be transferred to the category <Fair use images of three-dimensional art> on en.wikipedia.org? Norbert Nagel

How? I'm a user from Germany. I'm familiar with uploading files to commons, but have no idea how to upload to en.wikipedia.org or to de.wikipedia.org. However, I agree to the deletion request. The reason for the deletion request appears to be justified. Norbert Nagel(talk)

@Bencmq There are a lot of works there that shouldn't be here, as far as I know. I just haven't "sat" down and went through those. Generally I stumble across things when I'm doing my own work in a category (I work in art history - on and off Wiki). I encourage people to become comfortable with the law and copyright regarding public artwork and to participate in making sure these images are understood as fair use, not free. Missvain (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry that wasn't meant to be a sarcastic or whatever. Yes  Delete (and move to local project under fair use if possible). What I wanted to point out is that there are many similar photos. I had a brief discussion last month about some images in that category with someone else. The question was, if the statue is given to the UN by another country, are there possible legal transfer of copyright to the UN or whatsover... Of course we need evidence to back them up, otherwise they cannot be kept here. Unfortunately I forgot about this issue. This DR reminds me about it.--Bencmq (talk) 16:18, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for stating you weren't meaning to be sarcastic, I appreciate that. I had someone recently be sarcastic by placing images on my talk page of artwork that might be questionable in regards to FoP (but it's in a non-US country and I don't feel comfortable making calls like that) and I actually found my feelings a bit hurt by their actions! :) So I appreciate above. I wondered the same thing about the UN situation - but, I figure, without above and beyond research, we don't know, and it's better to be safe than sorry :) Missvain (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep We can close this! Happy to say the copyright is unknown after confirming with United Nations staff. Here is the quote from our emails: "Excellent question. This is an issue we are currently investigating ourselves. Thus far the legal team has not made a final recommendation regarding copyright of gifts donated to the UN." Great news for the public domain (for now!). Missvain (talk) 22:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Not because of the UN Staff comment, but because it is evident that Pomodoro did not sign his work and therefore this is PD-no-notice. (see SIRIS for details)      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:39, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of COM:SCOPE and unused. Apparently just a photo of some woman. Wknight94 talk 01:23, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was used in an article on en-wiki and here is a small text from that article just as info:
Brigitte Dale (born July 14th, 1980 in Las Vegas, Nevada) is a writer and video blogger who currently lives in Lincoln, Nebraska. ...
Dale's first video appearance was in the July 2006 premiere of The Popcrunch show, a videoblog she created for popcrunch.com. Since then, Dale has also produced and hosted video blogs for Celebrityweek, StyleDash, and is currently the producer of [2]TV Squad Daily for TV Squad (a property of AOL's Weblogs, Inc.), which she has been producing daily since December 2006.In addition to being a video blog producer, Dale is a freelance writer. She authors an advice column in the Lincoln Journal Star titled "Catty Girls Discuss", and also contributes to an [3]online blog of the same name. ...
Her TV Squad Daily videoblog was [4]praised by Amanda Congdon on an ABC News video on October 25th, 2007. ...
So she is not just "some woman". But she was not found notable enough for Wikipedia. --MGA73 (talk) 16:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
A non-notable blogger? Seems like a bit of a reach for COM:SCOPE, but what do I know? Wknight94 talk 19:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

FoP again, the same image. Sphere Within a Sphere was created post-1923 and is not a federal work. Missvain (talk) 01:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep We can close this! Happy to say the copyright is unknown after confirming with United Nations staff. Here is the quote from our emails: "Excellent question. This is an issue we are currently investigating ourselves. Thus far the legal team has not made a final recommendation regarding copyright of gifts donated to the UN." Great news for the public domain (for now!). Missvain (talk) 22:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: canceled by nominator Jcb (talk) 14:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files of User:Mike1951

[edit]

The only two file uploads by user, two very poor quality images that lack in educational merit due to quality. I know we argue about "quality images" but, we do have way better photos of breasts that are large format (no pun intended) and less blurry. =) --Missvain (talk) 03:18, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Not useful with very poor quality. Some better photos exist George Chernilevsky talk 16:08, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

According to the Article 27 of the Turkish copyright law, the copyright of those files have not expired.

Art. 27. The term of protection shall last for the lifetime of the author and for 70 years after his death. If there is more than one author, this period shall end upon the expiry of 70 years after the death of the last remaining author. The term of protection for works that have been first made public after the death of the author shall be 70 years after the date of death. The term of protection in the cases determined in the first paragraph of Article 12 shall be 70 years from the date on which the work was made public, unless the author reveals his name before expiry of such term. If the first author is a legal person, the term of protection shall be 70 years from the date on which the work was made public.

Thank you for your interest. Why do you think this photograph was a work of 1925 ? When we compared with his pictures taken in 1920s (he looked very young, for example this was taken in 1923, this was taken during WWI, this was taken in 1920s, and this (second from left) was taken in 1925), we easily understand it was taken after selection to speaker of the Grand National Assembly. Takabeg (talk) 06:15, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I find this argument convincing. Besides, the image should be deleted also for the simple reason that it lacks a source – and without a source, the claim of dating to 1925 can't be taken at face value anyway. Lymantria, would you consider re-opening your early closure of this part of the nomination? Fut.Perf. 06:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Takabeg (talk) 05:16, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just a further notice about copyright times: please keep in mind that we need PD status in the US, not just in Turkey, and for that to apply, we usually don't need 70 years before the present, but 70 years before 1996. Fut.Perf. 06:24, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Those files were uploaded with the template PD-TR-Gov. As long as I understand, many users misunderstand and use erroneously this template. Takabeg (talk) 13:51, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Do you know this file ? Takabeg (talk) 13:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

[edit]

Deleted: (not by my) - the other files cannot be processed from this DR, because files have not been tagged and uploaders have not been notified Jcb (talk) 14:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Shio Z's uploads

[edit]

A bunch of grainy, unused crotch shots made with the user's cell phone camera. Out of scope. Dominic (talk) 06:27, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned, used in a now deleted article on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use. FASTILY (TALK) 06:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Mperumal (talk) 06:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

confidential Mperumal (talk) 07:26, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Per Uploader's request. Private photo George Chernilevsky talk 16:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image free to use only in context where the Parliament is described. No advertising or sales promotion allowed. Wolfgangus Mozart (talk) 06:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I thought this was recorded in the UK; however, it was recorded in the US, so it would be under copyright. InverseHypercube (talk) 07:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; please  Keep. According to Template:PD-US-record, this is in the public domain. InverseHypercube 22:26, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Under new laws that have passed since this was posted in 2011 this song had a copyright restored to it until 2026. We need to delete until then, sadly. SDudley (talk) 14:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination, Undelete in 2026. --Abzeronow (talk) 22:23, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Author, en:Viktor Deni, died in 1946 -> not 70 years p.m.a. yet. For proper attribution and review see ISBN 9780820450087, pp. 30-31 or the countless print-on-demand merchants on the web. Support their business, delete from commons. ~ NVO (talk) 07:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:07, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

converted to regular DR by me from a speedy by IP 141.84.69.20 for "Unsufficient license, doesn't allow redistribution, relicensing, etc.". --Túrelio (talk) 07:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Same problem with File:Internet-device-Vista 64.png and File:Poison icon.png. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I got the license from Iconspedia. But it only says it's free. The same for the poison icon, File:Silverware icon.png. File:Internet-device-Vista 64.png says it is allowed for commercial usage. Analysing them now I think these licenses are incomplete. I wouldn't say they contradicts their official page because everyone can redistribute their work with a diifferent license and states on their pages a different thing.Mizunoryu (talk) 15:16, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a license.txt linked that makes the mentioned restrictions.[16] First and foremost, no alteration is allowed. In the outside world, "free" only means cost-free.--141.84.69.20 18:40, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: after replacement Jcb (talk) 14:22, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

These are identical (except in size) and have a large DO NOT COPY mark on it. Taken from "the website", I presume this is from the church website. -- Deadstar (msg) 08:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

MOBICON mascot art provided to MOBICON, Inc. courtesy of Steven Moore. RE: Promotions Governor, MOBICON XV FASTILY 13:15 07 October 2011(UTC)


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

low resolution, missing EXIF, likely copyvio Hoangquan hientrang (talk) 10:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:23, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The source does say "Public domain: Copyright has expired according to Canadian law. No restrictions on use.", so the image was uploaded in good faith. However, the image appears to be from the 1960s (gven the architecture and the car in the background), and the en-wp article does state that this station was built in the 1960s. It is unlikely to be public domain in Canada, and without any author information or a precise year, it is impossible to know for sure. Skeezix1000 (talk) 11:02, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are correct. According to this book the new Oshawa station opened in 1967. Secondarywaltz (talk) 17:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's too bad. This is a great image, and it's especially interesting to contrast it with contemporary images of the building, to see how VIA has modified this modernist building to give it a retro, "old-time train station" look. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 20:18, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think it would qualify for Fair Use in the Wikipedia article? Secondarywaltz (talk) 22:13, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If it's used in an article, and the article discusses the 1960s era station, then there would be a good fair use argument to use a lower resolution version. The other suggestion that just occurs to me is to ask the Oshawa Historical Society where the image came from, with a view to seeing if the Society or the copyright holder (if it's not the Society) would be willing to freely license it. Since they obviously thought it was PD, they may be amenable to it. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 10:37, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep. If the source/owner is the Oshawa Historical Society and they clearly state that it is PD, why are we questioning it? Maybe it has nothing to do with its age but it was released as PD. --P199 (talk) 22:10, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I wish it were that easy. The Historical Society image description doesn't release the image into the public domain, but instead states that "Public domain: Copyright has expired according to Canadian law" (emphasis added), which is patently incorrect (and the reference to Canadian law means there is no way we can construe the reference to public domain as being a release). We also do not know whether the Society owns the copyright and is even in a position to release the image. That's why I suggested someone contact the society. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 22:33, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

It looks like a copyvio. There is no information about the identity of the author of the photo Iaaasi (talk) 11:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is a present-day photo of a 1100 years old artefact (Iaaasi (talk) 12:00, 26 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]
Also, please don't get me wrong: we both know that the image depicts a 1100 year-old artifact. But as soon as you take a photo of such artifact yourself you create a new creative work which is automatically protected by "new" copyright as well. So I'm sorry but this picture cannot remain on Commons at its present state. -- CoolKoon (talk) 13:02, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the picture and the source.Fakirbakir (talk) 17:35, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm afraid the problem still persists. The image you've changed the link to has also shown up somewhere else (i.e. published), namely in the very same article as where the original image came from. This means that (even though the image's uploaded to HU WP) the copyright problem still persists and the version from HU WP might be deleted as well (especially without an appropriate "fair use rationale", since the public domain license just simply doesn't apply, because the picture itself is presumably only a couple of years old, not much more). So if you REALLY have to use this picture in a couple of articles, you should just upload it e.g. to EN WP, mark it as a copyrighted picture and fill out the fair use rationale table. Otherwise you can also ask for a permission from the author of the picture or visit Bodrog-alsóbű and ask around for the artifact to be able to take a photo of it. You could post that picture here then and release it into the public domain. -- CoolKoon (talk) 19:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:36, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This image infringes the copyrights of Carl Nesjar and Pablo Picasso.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep There is FOP for buildings in Norway. The mural relief seems to be a stable part of the building as its inseparable architectural element. --ŠJů (talk) 13:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so -- although I have only a basic knowledge of the Norwegian law, in the USA there is FOP for buildings, but we do not keep murals painted on buildings. I think this is the same situation. The Picasso/Nesjar work is a flat work, not a sculpture or other architectural element.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:48, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
«§ 24. Kunstverk og fotografisk verk som inngår i en samling eller som utstilles eller utbys til salg, kan avbildes i katalog over samlingen og i meddelelse om utstillingen eller salget. Katalog kan bare fremstilles ved trykking, fotokopiering eller lignende metode.
Kunstverk og fotografisk verk kan også avbildes når det varig er satt opp på eller ved offentlig plass eller ferdselsvei. Dette gjelder likevel ikke når verket klart er hovedmotivet og gjengivelsen utnyttes ervervsmessig.
Byggverk kan fritt avbildes.» [17] (Artwork and photographic artwork can be depicted as long as it is on permanent display at or close to public place or road.)
Basically; as long as its on display at a public place and part of an building and not the main motif its legal, but if you crop the image and try to sell it, then you violates the artists rights. Its the same with all images from public places in Norway, it may or may not be legal depending on wetter something is or is not the main motif and wetter it is or is not at a public place. In addition its also dependent on the context the image is used, if its used in an article about the depicted art its nearly always legal. Such images should be uploaded to the Wikipedia projects, because there they are definitly legal, but I don't think there is any real problem with this one as Y-blokka was targeted as part of the 22th July bomb attack in Oslo. Aka news event and so forth. Jeblad (talk) 23:07, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The entire paragraph reads, in translation:
"Works of art and photographic works may also be depicted when they are permanently located in or near a public place or thoroughfare. However, this shall not apply when the work is clearly the main motif and the reproduction is exploited commercially."
Picasso is the main motif here. Commons requires that images be available for commercial use, so paragraph 24 does not offer any help. That is consistent with our policy at Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Norway which forbids our keeping images of art located in Norway that is still under copyright protection.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:47, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Its about commersial use of a part of the image. Your interpretation would make any image from Oslo illegal to use on Commons as there are artwork spread out everywhere. It has been discussed to some length with experts on the field in Norway and more or less everyone says Commons is not responsible for any use of altered images. Its the responsibility of the reuser to not alter an image so it violates the local law. The artwork on the wall is not the main motif, the building and its surrounding are the motif. The artwork is part of the building, and the building is clearly legal to depict. Jeblad (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that the question of whether the Picasso is de minimis is a close call -- you think it is, I think it is not. We will see what our colleagues think.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:49, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note that your interpretation would make it necessary to delete pictures such as File:School and blocks in Ammerud.jpg because there are artworks on the blocks. In my opinion a photo of a building where a large part of the building is an artwork does not make the photo of the building a copyvio of the embedded artwork. Perhaps an even better example is File:Lyskapellet2.jpg. This is a tiny church and it is impossible to make any photo of it without getting some artwork in the picture. In Norway this is a completely legitimate picture, in some other countries its not. This is another example of an illegitimate picture after your interpretation File:Oslo raadhus1.JPG where there are artworks all around the building. Here is another church that is fun File:Arctic Cathedral in Tromsoe.jpg. One of the walls is one huge window of stained glass File:Norwegen tromso eismeerkathedrale.jpg. Its difficult enough to figure out whats on permanent display in Norway. ;) Jeblad (talk) 15:14, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps an even better example; most of the statues and artwork at Nidaros Cathedral is not in the public domain, they are rather new. Which ones are original statues, thats the question… In Norway its legal to take photo of the building, and also the artwork, even as main motif as long as its done in a context were the artwork is described somehow. Funny, one of the statues are actually Donald Duck! ;) Jeblad (talk) 15:38, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: DM, although this might be borderline - not the main focus, covers below 10% of the picture Jcb (talk) 14:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This image infringes the copyright of the sculptor, Ruffin Hobbs, who died in 2008.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the comments made in respect of the following deletion request: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Princeton_University_old_rusty.jpg also apply to this image deletion request. It seems sensible that all discussion be dealt with in one place.

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This image infringes the copyright of the sculptor, Ruffin Hobbs, who died in 2008.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:43, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the comments made in respect of the following deletion request: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Princeton_University_old_rusty.jpg also apply to this image deletion request. It seems sensible that all discussion be dealt with in one place.

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:44, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Porusenie licencie Pe3k 11:33, 1 June 2010 (UTC) (Translation from Slovakian: License violation. - --ŠJů (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2011 (UTC))[reply]

this id double with Pohlad na Visnove.jpg Pe3k 12:25, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


Kept: but deleted the other (newer) upload Jcb (talk) 14:46, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Definitely a screenshot of a film, copyvio. Bill william comptonTalk 12:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

See talk page: newer version with white background has been added. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 14:14, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: missing link to eventual replacing file Jcb (talk) 14:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by V suma (talk · contribs). No evidence of permission. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:49, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by Aekoroglu (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:25, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other photos by Jeormagu (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: this file, reason couldn't be generally applied Jcb (talk) 14:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I´ve uploaded this picture again to take part at wiki loves monuments. ==> Graz I Innere Stadt Uhrturm 2.jpg | I´ve uploaded the first one 5 day bevore Competion has started, because I didn´t notice that there is that competion and I wanna take part at it. The picture is one of my best taken monument photographs... Gegensystem (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I´ve deleted all Links and linked the Article to the new File. Deletion should not affact any other sites... -- Gegensystem (talk) 15:42, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You can simply use {{duplicate}} instead of DR. --ELEKHHT 11:40, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Zdjęcie wysłałem przez pomyłkę, zła jakość. 31.61.108.203 15:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Powyższe zdjęcie załadowałem przez pomyłkę. Zdjęcie nie jest zbyt ostre. Poprzednio zapomniałem się zalogować.Andrzej Stempa ````Andrzej Stempa 21:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by SportsOrgy (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and File:GregRust2011.jpg. Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:57, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by Szsfoto (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 14:59, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and other uploads by CrackersTeam (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:52, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:00, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

and File:People lining up to pick up buckets with dry food Karachi.jpg, File:Protest Warrior-Dallas.jpg. Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:57, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This promotional image is widely available (~800 hits on Google image search) before uploading to Commons, for example this dates back to May 2008. The user's limited contribution contains another deleted file on English Wikipedia. No proof of permission unless we get something like OTRS confirmation. Ben.MQ (talk) 16:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:01, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I think its not you own work? Copyright of > http://www.transavia.com/hv/main/splash Nummer 12 (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-textlogo Jcb (talk) 15:03, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Derivative of a presumably non-free work, which is unlikely to be covered by freedom of panorama. LX (talk, contribs) 17:36, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The sign which was photographed is mostly simple text; might the rest pass de minimis?
The other elements of the sign are clearly an integral part of the sign itself. I hardly think you could call their inclusion incidental. LX (talk, contribs) 05:28, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 15:10, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

dbbf KlodiN (talk) 17:51, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyvio. The night-time light display of their sound and light show is protected under copyright, except in a panoramic view. See Category:Eiffel Tower at night. VIGNERON (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: just ordinary electric light isn't eligible for copyright Jcb (talk) 13:26, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Pretty much illustrates the definition of derivative work. Are you allowed to copyright your photo of someone else's photo from 1990 in Hong Kong? (Depressingly, this has been on Commons since 2007 and is in use.) -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:56, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

Die Datei kann gelöscht werden, weil heute eine bessere Version davon hochgeladen wurde.Christian von Holst (Diskussion) 10:40, 13 September 2011 (UTC) Christian von Holst (talk) 10:48, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Translation: File can be (speedy) deleted because better version available at File:Christian von Holst 2006-05-10 und Christofer Conrad, Foto Wilhelm Mierendorf, Stuttgart.jpg. --Krd (talk) 20:32, 20 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:55, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

copyvio, in case PD-ineligible does not apply here Antemister (talk) 19:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete, certeainly not published under FAL as claimed here, why did the uploader wrote such nonsense to the file description? Inventing a graph with such clarity and explanatory power is enough work to justify a copyright protection. --Martin H. (talk) 18:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior file. See pre-existing SVG file File:Flag of Ecuador.svg ~ Fry1989 eh? 20:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: not duplicates Jcb (talk) 13:28, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

User has uploaded this file 5 times. See File:Carahsoft logo BCSC.jpg, File:Carahsoft logo BLUECSC.jpg, File:Carahsoft logo blue CTC.jpg and File:Carahsoft logo blue CARAHSOFT.jpg. Get rid of them all. ~ Fry1989 eh? 20:26, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

image looks like it's been taked from a site (shadows), though uploader implies "own work". AzaToth 20:58, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Zdjęcie wysłałem przez pomyłkę, zła jakość. 31.61.108.203 15:44, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Powyższe zdjęcie załadowałem przez pomyłkę. Zdjęcie nie jest zbyt ostre. Poprzednio zapomniałem się zalogować.Andrzej Stempa ````Andrzej Stempa 21:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I'm not sure about this, but: this photo is labeled as PD-US government, but the website it comes from says "All Rights Reserved. 1997-2011 Sandia Corporation. For copyright inquiries, contact webmaster@sandia.gov." (Sandia Labs is run by Lockheed Martin Company.) Federal agencies never assert that they own the copyright to their websites. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:22, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Uploader identifies himself as part of the group; either promotional upload, or copyvio AzaToth 22:29, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:04, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as im aware, all the images are free to use as they have been added to wikicommons and seem to have the correct source and licence given, otherwise it wouldnt be used at all. If there seems to be an image that isnt free to remix or use then just change the photo for another, i dont want to make it complicated. Thankyou.Hispania (talk)

CC and GFDL licensing conditions require every re-user of so-licensed images to state the original author, license types other than PD shall be stated as well, PD images made by others should at least have the author name stated (not really needed for PD-old, PD-Art or similar). Neither of the CC images used for this compilation state auther and license, the compilation violates the attribution condition of the CC-licensed images in use. --Denniss (talk) 01:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:52, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Plus one source image was identified as a copyvio. Denniss (talk) 23:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As far as im aware, all the images are free to use as they have been added to wikicommons and seem to have the correct source and licence given, otherwise it wouldnt be used at all. If there seems to be an image that isnt free to remix or use then just change the photo for another, i dont want to make it complicated. Thankyou.Hispania (talk)


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:09, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Plus one image was deleted as copyvio Denniss (talk) 23:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:10, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:11, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Attribution is provided through hyperlinked thumbnails in the source field. Attribution through hyperlinks is standard practice for derivative works here as far as I am aware. Yoenit (talk) 23:00, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • This may be a common practice but it's not conform with a license requiring proper author attribution. Especially if the compilation is tagged with a self- license thus reusers often only attribute those who made the compilation. --Denniss (talk) 23:34, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have heard the argument brought up before about the way Wikipedia uses images in articles, namely that images have to include license and author in the caption, rather than merely provide a link back to commons when clicking the page. It is certainly a valid point, but as it affects hunderds of montages and potentially millions of derivative works it is really something which should be discussed on a noticeboard rather than the deletion page of a single compilation. Also, it is a few minutes work to include author titles and licenses in the source field for this image, why did you propose deletion rather than fix it? Yoenit (talk) 06:21, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a {{Sofixit}} matter, assuming that all licenses are compatible, not something requiring deletion. NW (Talk) 18:44, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep not a a valid reason for deletion... Tag it to be fixed.--Rafy (talk) 09:02, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:49, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
File:Armenian people.JPG

two source iamges of the compilation have been deleted, they have to be removed from the compilation or the compilation has to be deleted. The issue with improper author attribution is unresolved as well. Denniss (talk) 22:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Fastily --Denniss (talk) 11:12, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Contains en:File:LeoCarrillo.jpg and en:File:Ybor statue.jpg – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:14, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:13, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: source is stated (and was already stated at the moment of nomination) Jcb (talk) 13:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Contains en:File:LeoCarrillo.jpg and en:File:Ybor statue.jpg – Finnusertop (talkcontribs) 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. .     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:13, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

New version lacks at least one source, not a single original author is properly attributed (nothin at all) but this is required for most of the images Denniss (talk) 20:46, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It has been reverted to the older version. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 01:38, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: deleted older versions Ezarateesteban 00:14, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image authors (of the more recent images) are not stated, neither the license they are released under, both is required by their license thus the compilation is a copyright violation. Denniss (talk) 23:15, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept - Jcb (talk) 13:31, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Darkfreem798 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Poor quality, educational value unclear, per COM:NUDE and better pictures available in Category:Phimosis.

Mathonius (talk) 23:32, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep None of the current images show the phimosis from the angle shown, and the model's stark difference from the rest of the images in Category:Phimosis is a welcome addition. I do not find it violates COM:NUDE in any way whatsoever. - Taric25 (talk) 03:10, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. Jcb (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

El articulo no se tomo en cuenta en Wikipedia no es necesario una publicacion de esta en Wikiimedia commons Co per ni co (talk) 04:01, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. Jcb (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]