Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2011/10/11
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Jean-Daniel_Rohrer,_2011.jpeg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![77 File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_III_"Firmamentum_Sobiescianum,_sive_uranographia"_-_Frontespizio.jpg](#File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_III_"Firmamentum_Sobiescianum,_sive_uranographia"_-_Frontespizio.jpg){kind=link}
![78 File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_I_"Prodromus_Astronomiae"_-_Frontespizio.jpg](#File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_I_"Prodromus_Astronomiae"_-_Frontespizio.jpg){kind=link}
_of_DSC01545.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nominator Denniss (talk) 02:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
I donot want it online anymore Langdon3000 (talk) 14:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request Jcb (talk) 15:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
out of COM:SCOPE: depicted minor not notable, picture of bad technical und due to personality rights issues hardly usable. After the day of upload no more activity on any Wikimedia project by the uploader. Túrelio (talk) 20:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Delete No notable kid, no categories, no use, no sense. He's describing his activities and hobbies, the name of his High School, her favourite sport-club... Commons is not Facebook. --Andrea (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Could be allowable under {{Userpage image}}, otherwise not. The red-eyes are almost comically bad. AnonMoos (talk) 00:24, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope, not used on a userpage thus deleted Denniss (talk) 05:43, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Unused image and out of scope. Warfieldian (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I had uploaded this quite a while back. I don't need this file. You may delete it.Pratiklahoti8004 (talk) 12:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request Powers (talk) 00:50, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
prevents file moving (required by uploader) Papatt (talk) 14:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontroversal maintenance, could have been filed as a speedy, IMO Courcelles (talk) 10:14, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Just to be sure: is this simple enough to avoid a copyright? Yann (talk) 02:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- See other files here: Special:Contributions/Ammazzavampiri. Yann (talk) 02:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Keep It's only pure text! --Curvepilot (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)- Keep Don't it always seem to go? --Leftdown (talk) 16:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Puplic Domain! --79.219.168.28 17:02, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: 3D effect and texture can meet the threshold. I ignor the sockpuppet "votes" of the uploading sockpuppeteer. Martin H. (talk) 15:30, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
copyrighted image from http://www.eklavya.org / invalid OTRS tag added by uploader —DoRD (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission from source for 2 months now. Martin H. (talk) 15:38, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
copyrighted image from http://www.eklavya.org / invalid OTRS tag added by uploader —DoRD (talk) 18:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission from source for 2 months. Martin H. (talk) 15:39, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
That person flicker page is filled with copyrighted baseball cards and such, most likely a copyvio from MLB Delete Jaranda wat's sup 20:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete this and File:Palmeiro gl.jpg - same Flickr user. Wknight94 talk 02:25, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal modification of the offcial flag File:Flag of the Dominican Republic.svg. No sources for this version, has the user's name in the file name, it's obviously a self-promotion. ~ Fry1989 eh? 00:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal modification of the offcial flag File:Army flag of Dominican Republic.svg. No sources for this version, has the user's name in the file name, it's obviously a self-promotion. ~ Fry1989 eh? 00:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal modification of the offcial flag File:Naval Jack of the Dominican Republic.svg. No sources for this version, has the user's name in the file name, it's obviously a self-promotion. ~ Fry1989 eh? 00:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
DW of the text and the two photos on the info sign since there is no FOP in Romania. Saibo (Δ) 01:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Derivative work? Yann (talk) 01:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom. Derivative work of copyrighted product cover--Quan (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Low resolution, bad quality image about products Quan (talk) 02:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:31, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope. Yann (talk) 02:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Bad quality personal image, out of scope Quan (talk) 02:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
,_Jean-Daniel_Rohrer,_2011.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Jean-Daniel_Rohrer,_2011.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative work of non-free art? Yann (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
,_Jean-Daniel_Rohrer,_2011.jpeg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
,_Jean-Daniel_Rohrer,_2011.jpeg){kind=link}
Personal image, out of scope Quan (talk) 02:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal image, out of scope Quan (talk) 02:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 02:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Modern statuary; clearly mobile, so unlikely to be covered by FOP even if we knew where it was taken Prosfilaes (talk) 03:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete: good point – missed it when I cropped the image. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 03:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Casual snapshot of a concert, band appears non-notable based on basic Google search. I think we can spare this image. Missvain (talk) 03:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned promotional material for non-notable rock band. Out of scope. Missvain (talk) 03:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Casual snapshop. Commons isn't a photo album! Out of scope. Missvain (talk) 03:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Appears to be a casual snapshot, but I could be wrong...and if I'm not wrong, out of scope! Missvain (talk) 03:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Appears to be a casual snapshot. Lack of description, author and categories don't help. Missvain (talk) 03:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope text of poetry, but sure if the poetry is copyrighted, but I don't know Spanish copyright text law...? Missvain (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned casual snapshot. Lack of description doesn't help. Missvain (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:33, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope casual snapshot that isn't great quality, former image uploaded was a personal photo, as well. out of scope. Missvain (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Dom_Sviatoslav_Shevchuk_e_Dom_Volodômyr_Koubetch,_OSBM_(arquivo_pessoal_de_Laressa_Cristina_Gaudeda_Marciniuk).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
error Marcos R Leão (talk) 03:41, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Hier der Grund. falscher Dateiname Joergsam
This file has already been re-uploaded with another name. Papatt (talk) 03:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
corrupt version of image at en.wiki [1] - bot transfer didn't work Skier Dude (talk) 04:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A500_and_A50_Junction.JPG){kind=link}
Keep - I just reuploaded the file from en wiki. You could have done that yourself instead of raising a DR. --Sreejith K (talk) 05:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Casual photograph of individual, I was unable to find much information to questioning the notability. Scanned image, if we keep we should find out the permission situation. SarahStierch (talk) 04:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned logo image personal artwork whatnot. SarahStierch (talk) 04:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:34, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned book with lack of description, possible copyvio due to artwork on cover.. SarahStierch (talk) 04:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
low quality (hand-drawn, with numerous associated resolution and artifact issues), superceded by File:KleinBottle2D covered by Möbius strips.svg. Only use is on an image notice-board requesting high-res computer equivalent (which has obviously now been handled, so no loss to remove it from there) DMacks (talk) 04:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned promotional logo for a band. SarahStierch (talk) 04:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Promotional flier. SarahStierch (talk) 04:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Rather entertaining personal photo. Sorry boys, out of scope! SarahStierch (talk) 04:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope promotional material...or...not? SarahStierch (talk) 04:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
personal artwork or promotional material that is orphaned and appears not educationally valuable. SarahStierch (talk) 04:18, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal promotional material. Out of scope! SarahStierch (talk) 04:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Possible promo or research project? Could be out of scope. SarahStierch (talk) 04:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Low quality snapshot that I can't see having any educational use. SarahStierch (talk) 04:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal promotional photograph. Out of scope. SarahStierch (talk) 04:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
very small out of scope promotional material. SarahStierch (talk) 04:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:37, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Appears to be a deriviative work (a screen shot made into a "comic"). Fairly out of scope, as well. SarahStierch (talk) 04:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Possible copyvio of a book cover? SarahStierch (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
out of scope personal photo. SarahStierch (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
out of scope orphaned promotional logo. SarahStierch (talk) 04:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photograph, orphaned. Out of scope. SarahStierch (talk) 04:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
non-notable promotional logo. SarahStierch (talk) 04:28, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Promotional photograph for artist that does not meet notability standards. I think we can spare it. SarahStierch (talk) 04:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned promotional logo. SarahStierch (talk) 04:29, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Book cover, possible copyright violation. Missvain (talk) 04:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope personal research material. Missvain (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal research from school? Not sure if this is something we keep or not? Missvain (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:01, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
image used only in promotional page deleted off enwiki DS (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete Article it was used for has been deleted. Zach.vega1 (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
image used only in promotional page deleted off enwiki DS (talk) 04:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like this photo has been deleted twice, and uploaded twice, by the same user. Missvain (talk) 04:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
First, source page is (c), no evidence of a free release. Second, I doubt that Paul O'Callaghan (cited as "author"), the author of a 2009 biographical essay, is also the author of the photo (of a man who died in 1973). NVO (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (UTC) NVO (talk) 04:41, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
unnecessary low resolution image - a high quality version is already available as File:Earth Western Hemisphere.jpg Ww2censor (talk) 04:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
non-notable promotional material. Missvain (talk) 04:50, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal material, out of scope. Missvain (talk) 04:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Orphaned personal photograph. Missvain (talk) 04:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned perosnal photograph. Missvain (talk) 04:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Orphaned personal/promotional photograph. Missvain (talk) 04:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Cropped MTV logo. Also not sure if this is copyrighted? Missvain (talk) 04:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope personal photo. Missvain (talk) 04:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:00, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
The logo for AVG is not self made, and cannot be licensed with a "self" license. However, could it qualify for a different free license? -- Deadstar (msg) 07:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_III_"Firmamentum_Sobiescianum,_sive_uranographia"_-_Frontespizio.jpg
[edit]
This is a copy (low resolution) of File:Hev_frontespizio_uranographia.jpg Cicciopasticcio00000 (talk) 08:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
File:Johannes_Hevelius_-_Prodromus_Astronomia_-_Volume_I_"Prodromus_Astronomiae"_-_Frontespizio.jpg
[edit]
Copy (low resolution) of File:Hev_frontespizio_prodromus_astronomia.jpg Cicciopasticcio00000 (talk) 09:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
out of scope (del. on DE), no "own work" -> copy vio Nolispanmo 09:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
copy vio, out of scope (del. on DE) Nolispanmo 09:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
copy vio, out of scope, not used Nolispanmo 09:41, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the US unfortunately. Statue in The American Adventure in the World Showcase pavilion of Walt Disney World's Epcot.-- Deadstar (msg) 09:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I ( the original uploader) have replaced it with a better quality version and is therefore of no use and a waste of space.please remove from allcategories. i tried by editing the page manually.Apologies from a novice wikopedian of good intentions. Katwyk (talk) 10:51, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Comment duplicate larger file is File:Gargoyle Guthugga Pipeline Records GPR001.png. Did you draw this label yourself? Otherwise it is likely to be copyrighted by the artist. -- Deadstar (msg) 12:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Reproduction of copyrighted content. See also en:Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#Subway_cookies. – Quadell (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete straightforward photo of poster.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Since the image does have a fair use statement and is used properly under the fair use rules, I see no reason to delete it completely, but rather to simply move it back to en.wikipedia and any other language using it under fair use rules. My original question was regarding what license to use. The photo itself was posted with a free use license, but contains trademarked and possibly copywrite material. Dbiel (talk) 04:45, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it would fulfill en.wiki's NFCC. I don't think it's display is necessary to fully understand the article it's in, and the image isn't discussed in the article itself. – Quadell (talk) 20:17, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- Good point! Just because it is related to the subject does not mean it actually adds to the subject.Dbiel (talk) 04:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't think it would fulfill en.wiki's NFCC. I don't think it's display is necessary to fully understand the article it's in, and the image isn't discussed in the article itself. – Quadell (talk) 20:17, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
copyrighted. No permission for this file. File:Neandertal Roque Saint Christophe.jpg of the same subject was deleted for the same reason, and IT HAD A VALID PERMISSION !!! Jebulon (talk) 14:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I don't know where there should be matter for copyright. The scene has no value. So if it is deleted or not will really make no change. If you want to delete, feel free - lol. Traumrune (talk) 21:52, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:58, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
There is no evidence for a PD-USGov license. And it seems that there has never been given a valuable evidence. I suppose that this image is some copyrighted image publication of Pratt and Whitney 80.187.102.98 14:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Copyrighted. This sculpture has been created by Elisabeth Daynes, which is still alive. Not in public domain I'm afraid. Jebulon (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep Straight up keep, the authors have clearly released the work into the public domain; the sculpturer Elisabeth Daynes being one of those authors. I no longer support commons anymore, the reason being utterly foolish nominations for image deletions like this, when it is blingingly obvious that its PD. Did you even read the comments by the originators? Wee Curry Monster (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- It needs an OTRS ticket. Can someone sent the organization one? Jaranda wat's sup 20:42, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- The release is clearly shown bei the author, ... he's a member of the university's staff ... so I think, the picture doesn't have to be deleted - ergo: keep Redlinux (talk) 10:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: You may believe that the release is clearly shown, but there is no valid link to any release. Show me the release (on my talk page) and I will undelete it at once. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:57, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I don't believe of own work. No meta data. This user has not any other contribution that shows "own work". Many hits on Google images. Wouter (talk) 14:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:55, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
It has no description. It is in a low resolutions. There are thousands of images of mountains. It has no reallistically educational purpose that can not be found in a better image of a mountain. Bestiasonica (talk) 15:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:40, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
out of scope?, unused, no cat. Pibwl (talk) 22:46, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Deleted by User:Ellin Beltz. EoRdE6(Come Talk to Me!) 01:48, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
and File:Mitisculture.jpg, File:DSC02687.JPG. Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
This is a derivative of a piece of recent artwork. ALE! ¿…? 15:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
I have my doubts whether this artwork and the others of the Biennial are "permanently situated in a public place" as stated by the law. ALE! ¿…? 15:48, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
_of_DSC01545.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_of_DSC01545.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
_of_DSC01545.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
_of_DSC01545.jpg){kind=link}
Personal vanity photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:54, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Blurry, personal photo, out of scope. P199 (talk) 16:22, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Low resolution photo with Odnoklassniki social network service' logo. Kobac (talk) 16:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I will download replacement without logo. --Dima io (talk) 17:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
surely a copyvio: PDoldGermany for a picture (screenshot?) from Pakistan of a living person Antemister (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Insufficient evidence that uploader was authorized to license this logo, and it's too complex for {{PD-textlogo}}. It should be used on the English Wikipedia under a fair-use justification. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 17:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
one of those not really funny fun-pictures created during the en:2011 Germany E. coli O104:H4 outbreak Antemister (talk) 17:10, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
No indication that this is a work of the U.S. government. Original source: [2] howcheng {chat} 17:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Person the image claims to portray did not ever exist. Article on en.wikipedia the image was used in G3'd as a blatant hoax. Not used elsewhere. The Bushranger (talk) 17:25, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
This file appears to be the same picture as is on IMDB; http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1721177/resumephotos?v=me703831126 and has been uploaded to wikipedia with the name; IMDB PRIMARY.jpg Liamdavies (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. Copyvio. Discussed at Commons:Help desk/Archive/2011/10#Wrong picture. Uploader never replied. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:03, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity pic. P199 (talk) 18:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
widely used collage containing deleted image. -- Common Good (talk) 18:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete even with a replacement image the compilation is a copyvio as it lacks proper author attribution for the source images. --Denniss (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- Keep The image of Grigoras Dinicu was replaced meanwhile. The other pictures are ok. --Olahus (talk) 22:26, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:52, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Licence CC-BY-NC-SA sur Wiki-Brest (cf source) Gaëlle FILY (talk) 19:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Licence CC-BY-NC-SA sur Wiki-Brest (cf source) Gaëlle FILY (talk) 19:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:42, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
user:Ludwigpesch claims that the painting is by a artist who was still living 1998 (according to this user). As there is no other author/source information we should delete it or find out who the painter is / how old it is. copyright for artwork 60 years p.m.a. in India Saibo (Δ) 20:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:51, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:00, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:45, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:04, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:06, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:07, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:46, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:09, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Individual photographs do not constitute a published edition, so {{PD-SG-edition}} is wrong: see "Commons:Licensing#Published editions of work or works". {{PD-SG-photo}} is the appropriate licence, but can only be used if 70 years have passed since the end of the year in which the photographs were taken. In other words, the licence can only be used on photographs taken before or in 1940. Also, there is insufficient evidence that the photograph was published in Singapore. — Cheers, JackLee –talk– 21:11, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
unused, low quality image of unknown dog. Also, file name is only one letter. WhiteWriter speaks 21:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution except self-promotion. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 12:48, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
- When you nominate an image for deletion, it is essential that you tell us that the file is in use as that is generally a bar to deletion for the reasons you state.
- Delete With that said, the only use of this file is on a WP:FR user page that consists entirely of files that have single letter names, such as this one. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
- [3] - Mr. Nscorpionking uses the resources of the fund for other purposes. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 03:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:04, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
looks like cv --NoCultureIcons (talk) 21:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
looks like cv --NoCultureIcons (talk) 21:20, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:47, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
looks like cv --NoCultureIcons (talk) 21:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Not in use, not quality, from user with 7 edits in 2008 Shakko (talk) 22:08, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
potential copyright violation (image taken with iphone 5, without mentioning original source) ColdCut (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
Advertise of http://www.d2capitalpartners.com/ Ciaurlec (talk) 22:13, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:48, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Looks like the same image found here albeit with different colour balance. Smaller version also found here and here. Likely copyvio. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Delete - Image existed on this page since 2008. The article and image on Commons and de.wiki were created in 2010. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:01, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Not done There is no reason to delete this file. Owner of this Portrait is Prof. Dr. Juergen G. Heinrich himself. The portrait was added on his page on his behalf! --Ls-10 (talk) 15:35, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- If he took the photo himself, we need his permission. If someone else is the copyright holder, we need their permission. That it was added on his behalf is irrelevant. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:43, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- The "nd" template is used for admin. You are not an admin. Use "oppose" or "keep" instead if you wish to oppose the deletion. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:42, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Belgium is not a parking lot, this image was misused as a bad joke on fr:Anvers, nl:Brugge and nl:Antwerpen yesterday Ivory (talk) 23:19, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:49, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
How are we suppose to believe that this sketch was made by the uploader himself? there's no permission. Bill william comptonTalk 00:08, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- By assuming good faith perhaps? The uploader elaborates "This is a pencil sketch done by me in Dec2004. [...] The sketch is done by reference to a photograph from one of his Albums." and he mentions a web address with more of his drawings. The same picture is at this page where he writes drawing is "one of my passions" and he uses "0.5 mm 2B lead". How do you know whether or not I made the pictures I say I made? Regards, Ivory (talk) 01:33, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Delete - Sadly, Derivative work --Sreejith K (talk) 06:59, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: By the author's own admission, it is drawn from a photo that is presumably still in copyright. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:50, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Out of scope logo. SarahStierch (talk) 04:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Oprhaned logo. Unable to figure out the educational value of this. Out of scope. Missvain (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Oprhaned logo. Unable to figure out the educational value of this. Out of scope. Missvain (talk) 04:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:19, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
This image is not Flickr user's own work because of its watermark "©2010 Brian Megini" Quan (talk) 07:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
This image is not Flickr user's own work because of its watermark "©2010 Brian Megini" Quan (talk) 07:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:20, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Copyvio 217.13.237.34 07:39, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
This appears to be a professional studio portrait, possibly an official government work, and thus unlikely to be created by the original en-WP uploader. howcheng {chat} 16:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: (not by me) Jcb (talk) 15:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Probably copyviol with incorrect licence Marco dimmi! 18:01, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:21, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
falsches Bild Nanan19 (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request Jcb (talk) 15:18, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
This image is likely not Flickr user's own work because of its watermark "©2010 Brian Megini" Quan (talk) 07:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Strange, as the Flickr user is identified by his name. However, there is another shot from the same event also carrying this watermark. --Túrelio (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: In doubt we delete it. license laundering Ezarateesteban 00:00, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Questionable licensing. This is Flickr sourced, with a CC-by-sa licence. However the original image, as licensed, has a clear magazine watermark. The Commons version has cropped this watermark. Although unclear, there is a reasonable assumption that the "by" licence is assuming that this attributional watermark is retained. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Keep I uploaded the image without a watermark (equal speaks here Template:Watermark), the license is accepted here on Commons and the image has no problem, she just was cut by me, see the source. Truu (talk) 11:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- Removing a watermark isn't a problem. However uploading it with a different licence from that with which it was offered under Flickr would be. The question is: "Did the original licence require the preservation of the watermark?" (and whether we've thus complied or not becomes obvious).
- An argument that "CC licences don't need watermarks" would be moot. The real question is what licence this image was offered under: If this was "CC with attribution by the embedded watermark", then we can't crop the image like this. If that's the licence it was offered under, that's what we get - like it or not. Similarly we can't claim that "CC-by-sa licences on Commons are free licences and permit watermark removal": That may be the case, but that's not (see above) the licence with which this image was offered, and so it shouldn't even be on Commons. The simple blanket statement "Commons content is free" doesn't mean that anything you find on Commons is free, rather that the few non-free things that find their way onto Commons need to be removed. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:23, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
The license cc-by-sa-2.0 allows the use of images derived, see Template:Cc-by-sa-2.0, I put the author and the true source, has no problem with this picture!! the Commons allows the use of this image. Truu (talk) 16:09, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- And another thing, the administrator Wikitanvir allowed the use of this image in Commons, see the image review. Truu (talk) 16:15, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept: license ok, allow derivative work Ezarateesteban 00:01, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Although Guevara's famous picture is in the PD, this picture does not carry any information about its creation. Therefore, it's impossible to claim that it was "used more than 25 years ago". Really? How can it be claimed? Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:30, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Ezarateesteban 00:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
If no author information is provided and no information about its publication is available, how can we claim it was published in Cuba and therefore be in the public domain? Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:32, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Ezarateesteban 00:04, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
On which grounds Cuba legislation is used here? Otto Bettmann is a German photographer and no information is provided about the publication of the picture Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:34, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Ezarateesteban 00:05, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
unnecesary crop of File:05_10_05_soldiers_in_old_city_1.jpg Jarekt (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Comment According to User_talk:NatanFlayer#stop_vandalism the only reason this image was created was to make content of File:05_10_05_soldiers_in_old_city_1.jpg "appropriate" for Category:Toddlers. I find this to be some bizarre attempt to censor Commons content. --Jarekt (talk) 14:05, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom, personality rights Ezarateesteban 00:07, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Possible hoax, see also the contribs and deleted contribs of the uploader British jew. Trijnstel (talk) 18:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Ezarateesteban 00:11, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Possible hoax, see also the contribs and deleted contribs of the uploader British jew. Trijnstel (talk) 18:15, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Possible hoax, see also the contribs and deleted contribs of the uploader British jew. Trijnstel (talk) 18:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Author for the image unknown, mybe NOT PD shizhao (talk) 00:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I don't see any reason to doubt Wikimachine's claim to be the author of the drawing. It's not labeled as PD, so that's moot.--Prosfilaes (talk) 15:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Bencmq (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
Tagged as speedy, then deleted. The uploader complains, so let's do a proper DR. Yann (talk) 14:03, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hi. I think the deletion was a mistake. I uploaded the file on Commons since Template:PD-UA-exempt provides that "symbols and signs of enterprises, institutions and organizations" are not under copyright. FC Sumy is registered in Ukraine as LLC (Товариство з обмеженою відповідальністю, see uk:Суми (футбольний клуб). And the user, who listed the file for deletion, changed the correct PD-UA-exempt for "non-free logo" without giving a reason. --Blacklake (talk) 10:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 13:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
DOKDO noted here is Tsushima. Please refer to corrrect map. 174.114.35.111 02:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. It is firm Commons policy not make choices in map disputes. There are many areas of the world that have two or more names and we do not choose -- we let WP editors and other users choose which image that want to use. You may add {{Disputed map}} to this file description if you wish. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
The current license of the image is PD-US which is highly doubtful as the work is neither from before 1923, nor is it certain that the author is 70 years dead, and so on. Mps2 (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
The inset image (taken from [4]) was taken from a (copyrighted) video screen from the stage at Live 8, therefore the image is not free. Dream out loud (talk) 06:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:15, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Hier der Grund. falscher Dateiname Joergsam
This file has already been re-uploaded with another name. Papatt (talk) 09:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Falscher Dateiname Joergsam (talk) 21:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: It is a waste of Commons resources to do this. Please use {{Rename}} when you want a file name changed. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
This image might not be in the public domain outside of the United States; this especially applies in the countries and areas that do not apply the rule of the shorter term for US works, such as Canada, Mainland China (not Hong Kong or Macao), Germany, Mexico, and Switzerland. The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:37, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- May be public domain of Russian Empire? Юкатан (talk) 09:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:28, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
not deleted just edited they have the lagging and leading strand mixed up in arabic 96.125.32.67 09:45, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason for a DR. Use {{Disputed diagram}} Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:32, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
and other uploads by DariusBieber (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
User doesn't make the image. It's an official logo from Peruvian Navy (see http://www.marina.mil.pe/), so it's a derivated work from a logo. Superzerocool (talk) 16:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I did the image (from zero with photoshop, for example the resolution is better and many details drawn), but this is not mi design, it's a derivated work from a public image (that design is a work from a member or an employed from the Marina de Guerra del Perú, and like work from peruvian gobernment this image is in the public domain).
- I don't know somethings about licenses (because all is write in English), but I hope I had made good corrections now. Regards. --Midheridoc (talk) 22:26, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- Could you also please link the original logo? By the way: it is not all in English (see the language bars on top of help pages). For example: please see Commons:Sobre las licencias and Commons:Marcas de derechos de autor.
- Hmm, couldn't find anything in Commons:Licensing#Peru or Commons:Copyright tags about Peruvian Government works... But in Copyright Law - Legislative Decree No. 822 of April 23, 1996, Art 57: "not eligible for copyright protection: [...] official texts of legislative [...]". In the English translation there is only "text" mentioned (but not all government works). Maybe this is different in the Spanish Original? Maybe this is different in case law. But currently it seems as if logos could be copyrighted. Had a random look at 10 files in Category:Military symbols of Peru and Category:Coats of arms of Peru: non had a correct copyright tag regarding the copyright status of the original work/logo/CoA. All had "own work" tags only. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 22:34, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:36, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Only hide the old version's content (revision delete) - DW since there is copyright for artwork 60 years p.m.a. in India. Saibo (Δ) 19:58, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- I have added the following clarification which makes sense only if the image of S. Rajam is reproduced in full (holding his own painting):
- A picture I took of my musical guide, the singer and painter S. Rajam (1919-2010) taken at his home in Mylapore (Chennai). His painting depicts the most revered Carnatic composer, Sri Tyagaraja (1767-1847). See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Rajam Photo taken by Ludwig Pesch for the purpose of publication with his personal permission. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ludwigpesch (talk • contribs) 2011-10-16T22:31:59 (UTC)
Ludwig, in der neu hochgeladenen Version schreibst du: "for the purpose of publication with his personal permission". Wir haben das Problem, dass wir permissions eigentlich schriftlich brauchen. Selbst wenn nicht - hast nur du die Erlaubnis bekommen oder gilt sie für jedermann weltweit, für jeden Zweck (inkl. kommerzieller Nutzung und Veränderung)? Viele Grüße --Saibo (Δ) 23:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC) Oh, just saw, that you have added the comment also here. Please add new comments at the bottom and not on top. :-) I have moved it down. --Saibo (Δ) 23:12, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
- The artist has died last year, so a permission can no longer be given by him. So please delete my image of him altogether as it is incomplete and meaningless without his painting! Ludwig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.163.201.127 (talk • contribs) 2011-10-16T23:08:37 (UTC)
- Yes, sure, he is no longer with us... but someone (his heirs) have inherited the copyright on his painting now. They could theoretically give a permission. Your photo is not useless without the painting it is still a portrait photo of him - and apparently we do not have another currently. --Saibo (Δ) 23:16, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
Keep - The painting is a deriviative work of this painting in {{PD-India}} --Sreejith K (talk) 07:04, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- also derivative works are copyrighted if the action of the new painter exceeds the threshold of originality. Just because the original is PD doesn't mean that the DW is PD, too. Cheers --Saibo (Δ) 12:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, but not in this case. Here, the image is so identical that even the background is copied; if you look closely. --Sreejith K (talk) 13:24, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Kept: per Sreejith K Jcb (talk) 14:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Files of User:Gringos123
[edit]- Image:Bellissimo.gif
- Image:Gringos3.gif
- Image:Gringos1.gif
- Image:La carta che conta.gif
- File:Criber1.gif
- File:L'ultimo bicchiere.jpg
- File:Costruttori.gif
- File:Jachie.gif
- Image:Semolino.png
- Image:Cry.gif
- Image:Cami 1.gif
- File:Cami2.gif
- File:Cami.gif
- Image:Deboreh.gif
- Image:Deborah.gif
- Image:Zoro.gif
- Image:Zoro1.gif
- Image:Rosica.gif
- File:Forzzaaa napoliii.gif
- File:Rifallo.gif
- File:Posteriore e anteriore.jpg
A collection of animated gifts and pngs which have little to no educational merit. --Missvain (talk) 04:43, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Hier der Grund. falscher Dateiname Joergsam
This file has already been re-uploaded with another name. Papatt (talk) 10:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Falscher Dateiname Joergsam (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted:
It is a waste of Commons resources to do this. Please use {{Rename}} when you want a file name changed.
Also, do not open a second Deletion Request when one is already open. That is also a waste of our resources.
Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:16, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Hier der Grund. falscher Dateiname Joergsam
This file has already been re-uploaded with another name. Papatt (talk) 10:17, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Falscher Dateiname Joergsam (talk) 22:03, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:19, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Henkeboj94 (talk · contribs)
[edit]User name indicates birth in 1994, most images were taken before that. Also, they seem to have scanning artifacts as if they were scanned from books.
- File:Diana II in the evening.jpg
- File:Silja Europa 2009-05-25.jpeg
- File:One of Estonia's first days in Tallinn 1993.jpg
- File:Estonia, 5th December 1993.jpg
- File:Estonia's first days in Tallinn 1993.jpg
- File:MS Estonia vid värtahamnen september 1994.jpg
- File:Silja Star in Turku 24th May 1990.jpg
- File:Silja Star 1990.jpg
- File:Viking Sally 1990.jpg
- File:Estonia in Stockholm archipelago.jpg
- File:Inside MV Estonia.jpg
- File:The entrance hall inisde MV Estonia.jpg
- File:MV Estonia with Ice damage at the 25 march 1994.jpg
- Note This image has been challenged as a copyright violation via email, refer to Template:OTRS ticket--Fæ (talk) 18:17, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
- File:MS Viking sally 1987.jpg
grillo (talk) 14:57, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- The user has since uploaded the pointless, unexplained and OR'ish File:EUROPA.png. That one would probably be self-made though... /grillo (talk) 14:36, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:39, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Uploads by User:Mynameisohhih
[edit]- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (1).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (2).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (3).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (4).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (5).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (6).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (7).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (8).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (9).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (10).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (11).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (12).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (13).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (14).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (15).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (16).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (17).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (18).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (19).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (20).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (21).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (22).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (23).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (24).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (25).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (26).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (27).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (28).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (29).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (30).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (31).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (32).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (33).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (34).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (35).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (36).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (37).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (38).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (39).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (40).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (41).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (42).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (43).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (44).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (45).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (46).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (47).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (48).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (49).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (50).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (51).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (52).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (53).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH UP (54).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (3).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (4).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (5).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (6).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (7).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (8).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (9).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (10).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (11).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (12).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (13).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (14).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (15).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (16).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (17).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (18).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (19).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (20).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (22).jpg
- File:REALWISHALL VISHAL SINGH (23).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Commons is not for personal photos. This is not Facebook, Picasa, Flickr! --P199 (talk) 15:47, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:41, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Personal photo album of Hasan Sami Bolak
[edit]
Out of scope, user has uploaded dozens of personal photos which are unused and go beyond the allowable one or two photos for personal use on an editor's userpage. Multiple different photos are used on different wikis on his user page. I nominated the majority of the ones in his personal category but left off a few that were in use in non-user page ways on other wikis. Warfieldian (talk) 20:23, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Image:Erciyes_tv_7.02.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak - Berke dğm..jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak -sçm .jpg
- Image:Hasan_Sami_Bolak_Ansk.jpg
- Image:HSB.İst.gklrde.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak -Roterdam.jpg
- Image:Hsb-anskl.gif
- Image:H.S.Bolak-M.jpg
- Image:Hasan S. Bolak ans..jpg
- Image:Hsb.tabloll..jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak-Ans.Kanal Gez..jpg
- Image:Nevin-H.S.Bolak -19.Kasım.2006.jpg
- Image:Hasan_Sami_Bolak_-_(İtalya'da).jpg
- Image:Nevin-Nihan-Hasan Sami Bolak ... Avanos- 22 Eylül 2006.jpg
- Image:Hasan_Sami_Bolak_(Milano).jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak - İtalya'da.jpg
- File:Necip Fazıl 17-04-1965 Kayseri Tren İstasyonu.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami BOLAK.jpg
- Image:Kanal gezisi-Amsterdam-Özhaseki-Hasan Sami Bolak-A.jpg
- Image:Hasan_Sami_Bolak-_Neptün_Heykeli.JPG
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak-Dylg copy.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak-Fikret Hisarlıgil.jpg
- Image:Mehmet_Özhaseki_--Hasan_Sami_Bolak.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak - PRTR.jpg
- Image:Hasan Sami Bolak (Temmuz 2007).jpg
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak-Mehmet Özhaseki.jpg
- File:Efe Hisarlıgil-Tilki Avı.jpg
- Image:Efe-Berke Hisarlıgil.jpg
- Image:Hasan-Sami-Bolak-2006.jpg
- Image:Berke Hisarlıgil 2008.jpg
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak - Nevin Bolak - 9 Ekim 2010-Girne.jpg
- File:Hasan Sami BOLAK - İzmir, Güzelbahçe, 2.09.2011.jpg
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak -İzmir, Güzelbahçe (4.09.2011).jpg
- File:Nevin - Hasan Sami Bolak - Mersin-Tömük. 1.10.2011.jpg
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak - Eğribucak'ta...jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
| List of images |
|---|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
I really would have preferred these to be listed individually. Keep for the following:
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak- Neptün Heykeli.JPG - interesting and in scope
- File:Efe Hisarlıgil-Tilki Avı.jpg - interesting and in scope
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak -Roterdam.jpg - in use
- File:HSB.İst.gklrde.jpg - in use
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak - Berke dğm..jpg - in use
- File:Erciyes tv 7.02.jpg - in use
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak - (İtalya'da).jpg - in use
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak-Ans.Kanal Gez..jpg - in use
- File:Hasan S. Bolak ans..jpg - in use
- File:H.S.Bolak-M.jpg - could be in use at tr:Mehmet Özhaseki
- File:Hsb-anskl.gif - in use
- File:Kanal gezisi-Amsterdam-Özhaseki-Hasan Sami Bolak-A.jpg - could be in use at tr:Mehmet Özhaseki
- File:Hasan Sami BOLAK.jpg - in use
- File:Necip Fazıl 17-04-1965 Kayseri Tren İstasyonu.jpg - in use many places
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak (Milano).jpg - in use
- File:Nevin-Nihan-Hasan Sami Bolak ... Avanos- 22 Eylül 2006.jpg - in use
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak-Dylg copy.jpg - in use
- File:Hasan Sami Bolak-Mehmet Özhaseki.jpg - could be in use at tr:Mehmet Özhaseki
- File:Mehmet Özhaseki --Hasan Sami Bolak.jpg - could be in use at tr:Mehmet Özhaseki
- File:Berke Hisarlıgil 2008.jpg - in use
- File:Hasan-Sami-Bolak-2006.jpg - in use
- File:Efe-Berke Hisarlıgil.jpg - in use
| List of images |
|---|
|
Wknight94 talk 23:35, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
- Comment I listed them together as a group because I agree any one picture would likely be in scope if taken individually since users are allowed to have one or two images of themselves for use on their user pages. When taken together as a whole though is when it becomes a problem that he has many, many pictures of himself scattered around various wikis and some not in use at all. If this is OK to have an entire personal photo album, then by all means we can keep all the many images of himself that are in use on his various user pages. Warfieldian (talk) 02:34, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
- Agree with Wknight94, keep the picture of the lower list and remove the others. Neozoon (talk) 21:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
Deleted and kept per list above. Note that I started by deleting all of them. Usually, when someone requests that certain images not be deleted, he or she will remove them from the delete list (the upper list here) and put them in a new list (the lower list here). Since they were not in alpha order, I did not notice that that had not been done here, so I simply deleted everything in the upper list, assuming that those in the lower list were different. I have subsequently restored all those on the lower list.
I should add that I tend to agree with the nom. I think most of the remaining images are also out of scope, but I don't feel strongly enough to simply delete them all. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:29, 18 October 2011 (UTC)