Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/01/08
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_(5405189157)_(1).jpg){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![23 File:Boobs!_The_Musical_-_"Pizza_Every_Night".jpg](#File:Boobs!_The_Musical_-_"Pizza_Every_Night".jpg){kind=link}
2.JPG){kind=link}
_(4).JPG){kind=link}
_(14).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_(5405189157)_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5405189157)_(1).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It is a duplicate of File:Welcome, Nature. Seriously (from PLoS) (5405189157).jpg Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 02:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
_(5405189157).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5405189157)_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: flickr upload duplicate Saibo (Δ) 03:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
_(5405189157)_(1).jpg){kind=link}
non-notable artist (see en:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DJ Real U (2nd nomination)), thus out of project scope. Rosenzweig τ 17:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Also included is
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It is a duplicate of File:OA cake 1 (5091180896).jpg Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 01:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: speedied as fresh duplicate Túrelio (talk) 09:14, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
_(1).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is a home made photoshop picture, showing a footballer in a shirt he has never worn. To boot, both original pictures are "stolen" from the Net, and not copyleft. ChrisPsi (talk) 07:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Deleted by Polarlys Morning Sunshine (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
The user on flickr indicated that the source (圖片來源) of this picture is www.scienceinafrica.co.za and that it is not self-created. Invalid Creative Commons license. Martin H. (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Speedy delete / A.J. (talk) 12:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Possibly unfree file (a poster) Trijnstel (talk) 23:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Movie poster. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:01, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Possibly unfree file (a poster) Trijnstel (talk) 23:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted today by EugeneZelenko. Trijnstel (talk) 18:49, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. free CC-by image from flickr, can't spot no wrong licensing, no copyvio :bdk: 23:07, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Probably out of scope, but inaccessible for being password protected. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 12:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Password protected. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Password protected. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 12:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
delete Tristancotet (talk) 00:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:31, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
copyvio, cropping from The Apple Daily [1] 太刻薄 (talk) 01:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
![[1]](http://b1.rimg.tw/weichen/f9f6853a.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 12:32, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
this file is not notable, advertising purposes Reality006 (talk) 01:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Jameslwoodward. Yann (talk) 12:33, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Ce fichier est un logo, il est donc non-libre et ne peut être présent sur Commons. 78.218.20.60 11:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Polarlys. Yann (talk) 12:55, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
unused private photo, Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 13:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Mattbuck. Yann (talk) 12:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
female genital organ Tamerakkum (talk) 14:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy
Keep as clear "i don't like it" nomination. The image is high quality, in focus, definitely educational (thus in scope), under a free licence, and the subject cannot be identified from this photo. There is no reason for deletion. Per COM:PORN we must keep. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 08:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Jean-Frédéric. Yann (talk) 12:58, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
fema Tamerakkum (talk) 14:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep as clear "i don't like it" nomination. The image is high quality, in focus, definitely educational (thus in scope), under a free licence, and the subject cannot be identified from this photo. There is no reason for deletion. Per COM:PORN we must keep. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 08:59, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Jean-Frédéric. Yann (talk) 12:59, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
The filename indicates that this is not own work, but comes from Facebook (couldn't find it as of yet though). Every other file this user uploaded as "own work" was not by him, the only one of those that wasn't deleted was taken from another site and has a CC license (though the uploader claimed it as "own work" as well). Rosenzweig τ 15:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: From Facebook. Yann (talk) 13:00, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
I strongly doubt the validity of the license release. DS (talk) 17:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
outside project scope DS (talk) 16:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 03:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
![17:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/01/08#c-EugeneZelenko-2012-01-08T17:07:00.000Z-File:Boobs!_The_Musical_-_"Pizza_Every_Night".jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
![13:01, 14 January 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/01/08#c-Yann-2012-01-14T13:01:00.000Z-File:Boobs!_The_Musical_-_"Pizza_Every_Night".jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:04, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:06, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Hi, if its possible, could you remove this picture, I have another picture which I intend to replace this with. Aerev (talk) 18:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - in use. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 13:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Most likely copyright violation Craigboy (talk) 18:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- File is stated to be {{own}} - what's your evidence to the contrary? SalopianJames - previously Colds7ream (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete: Never mind, just spotted the ESA logo in the top-left. SalopianJames - previously Colds7ream (talk) 19:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Naked Pope. And other files from this painter (for example Hitler with George Bush, Hillary as Medusa: 10 paintings of bad quality). Out of SCOPE. Commons is not for publishing own art work. In use in en-wiki in article about this painter (2 phrases, deletion discussed). Shakko (talk) 18:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:10, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
cover-art from JPhysChem (as stated on given source website and confirmed at http://pubs.acs.org/toc/jpccck/113/7), therefore would be copyrighted/non-free DMacks (talk) 18:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:16, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless for lack of quality. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:13, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:17, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Lacks adequate evidence of being uploader's own work - no EXIF data, subject unrelated to uploader's other uploads, while also being a difficult subject for an amateur to get. Lack of location information also makes bird unidentifiable, and thus on no value to Commons. MPF (talk) 00:19, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
Comment The user's uploads appears to be all related and were submitted for Wiki Loves Love 2019 (see image descriptions). All the user's uploaded images also appear to be from one author and taken with one device (vivo 1610) on various occassion. All these image appear to be MOS:IRELEV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markoolio97 (talk • contribs) 08:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Disagree - this photo is not marked as taken with that device (no device shown at all). And it is not related to the other photos, which are all very commonplace items, not requiring any special fieldcraft skills the way an owl photo does. - MPF (talk) 08:00, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - unlikely to be own work + the white stripesat top and bottom do not argue in favor of own work. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:31, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
2.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
2.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
2.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:18, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
2.JPG){kind=link}
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:19, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:20, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:43, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:20, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused [2] and not terribly useful template, with a somewhat inappropriate name. ~ Rd232 (talk) 19:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:22, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
File transfered from en:File:Angela Gheorghiu.jpg (CC 3.0) but: "The picture was taken in 2007. Photographer: Gioacchino Cantone Copyright owner: Angela Gheorghiu". Description here (author): "I dont know". Summary: Unknown copyright issue. Gunnex (talk) 19:26, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
copyvio? OTRS? Svajcr (talk) 20:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Yann (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Donne des informations génantes vis à vis de personnes encore en vie P'TIFLOUV (talk) 21:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:26, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:28, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 23:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 23:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 13:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Personal unused selfportrait, out of scope Funfood ␌ 08:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Captain-tucker (talk) 03:50, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
this sunset could be taken anywhere, as no feature of the place it was shot from is portrayed. We already have plenty of sunsets. Japs 88 (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: As perscope, A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose Captain-tucker (talk) 03:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
No EXIF. Larger version her. Earlier version her Geagea (talk) 10:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 03:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio of http://www.distribus.com/fr/mentions-legales.htm Aʁsenjyʁdəgaljɔm11671 11:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- PS: same thing for File:Distribus premier logo.jpg. --Aʁsenjyʁdəgaljɔm11671 11:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Delete Non-free image. Pehaha (talk) 12:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Keep per COM:TO MIRROR (talk) 00:41, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 04:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Text in the picture: © Pascal Maillot. Text in the Metatata: Author: Pascal MAILOT, Copyright holder: pascal95@me.com. No evidence that the Uploader loglouis ist the Author because he uses an another camerara for his other photos too. Delete please. The picture should not be free. Uwe W. (talk) 11:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Probable Copyvio, COM:PRP Captain-tucker (talk) 04:03, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Crop from here: http://mundod.lavoz.com.ar/futbol/hugo-mattea-dejo-de-ser-el-dt-de-estudiantes, site claims all rights reserved. Funfood ␌ 12:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 04:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
File:The_Iranian_National_Museum_Of_Medical_Sciences_History,_Tehran;_Iran_(By_Dr._Maziar_Ashrafian_Bonab)_(4).JPG
[edit]_(4).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(4).JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, not encyclopediac, there are lots of better images about w:The National Museum of Medical Sciences History (Iran) and this image is not needed. AMERICOPHILE 12:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
This image is part of the history of the museum, and should be kept here.
- Comment This file is in use in the Farsi wikipedia and English wikipedia. Tm (talk) 15:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not in use on enwiki anymore (+ fawiki is not very important) AMERICOPHILE 08:41, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: As per scope, A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose Captain-tucker (talk) 04:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not in use anymore, out of project scope. Americophile 22:40, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --JuTa 10:48, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
File:The_Iranian_National_Museum_Of_Medical_Sciences_History,_Tehran;_Iran_(By_Dr._Maziar_Ashrafian_Bonab)_(14).jpg
[edit]_(14).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, not encyclopediac, there are lots of better images about w:The National Museum of Medical Sciences History (Iran) and this image is not needed. AMERICOPHILE 12:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
This image is part of the history of the museum, and should be kept here.
- Comment This file is in use in the Farsi wikipedia and English wikipedia. Tm (talk) 15:53, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not in use on enwiki anymore (+ fawiki is not very important) AMERICOPHILE 08:42, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: As per scope, A media file that is in use on one of the other projects of the Wikimedia Foundation is considered automatically to be useful for an educational purpose Captain-tucker (talk) 04:09, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not in use anymore, out of project scope. Americophile 22:41, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - you removed it from the Farsi article, just before this renomination. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
- I asked User:Jameslwoodward to remove them from Persian Wikipedia but he had trouble with right-to-left and couldn't do it. Furthermore, I'm an established user of Persian Wikipedia and I removed the images as a fawiki user, not a Commons user. Americophile 07:38, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --JuTa 10:50, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Source website no longer exists, copyright status not clear. Funfood ␌ 12:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio, http://www.adzfooddistribution.com/aboutus.php Captain-tucker (talk) 04:10, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
unused private photo, Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 13:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Captain-tucker (talk) 04:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
unused private photo, Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 13:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Captain-tucker (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
unused private photo, Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 13:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Captain-tucker (talk) 04:13, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
de:Herbert Horn died 1974. "Own work" does thus not apply. Widerborst (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 04:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
de:Herbert Horn died 1974. "Own work" does thus not apply. Widerborst (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 04:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
because I made some mistakes when upload this image and want to re upload it Djn1491 (talk) 15:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per uploaders request Captain-tucker (talk) 04:21, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This image was posted to skyscrapercity.com (originally taken from wowturkey) on May 10, 2009 by maximtsigalko. ^Takabeg (talk)
Deleted: Copyvio Captain-tucker (talk) 04:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I want delete it because I made some mistakes when upload this image and want to re upload it again later Djn1491 (talk) 15:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uploaders request Captain-tucker (talk) 04:25, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:11, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:52, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused text document of unclear notability. Out of project scope. Stefan2 (talk) 08:50, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:06, 19 June 2020 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 00:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:56, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of project scope. ■ MMXX talk 01:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- File:Michelle Webb live@ Bloombars 2011, Washington DC.JPG
- File:Michelle Webb live@ Adams Morgan Day Festival 2011, Washington DC.jpg Used on en:Michelle Webb
- File:Michelle Webb.jpg
■ MMXX talk 01:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Logo of some sort, used in a now deleted advert on en.wikipedia. no foreseeable use FASTILY (TALK) 05:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
potential defamation Bensin (talk) 08:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- This video, and the related photographs, are noteworthy works published in many Swedish newspapers, and I've managed to get them released by their author under a free license. Wouldn't adding {{Personality rights}} suffice? A deletion would be unfortunate. Plrk (talk) 16:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per Plrk. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:32, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
potential defamation Bensin (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- This video, and the related photographs, are noteworthy works published in many Swedish newspapers, and I've managed to get them released by their author under a free license. Wouldn't adding {{Personality rights}} suffice? A deletion would be unfortunate. Plrk (talk) 16:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per Plrk. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
potential defamation Bensin (talk) 08:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- This video, and the related photographs, are noteworthy works published in many Swedish newspapers, and I've managed to get them released by their author under a free license. Wouldn't adding {{Personality rights}} suffice? A deletion would be unfortunate. Plrk (talk) 16:09, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per Plrk. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
potential defamation Bensin (talk) 08:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- What? Why? Plrk 09:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- This video, and the related photographs, are noteworthy works published in many Swedish newspapers, and I've managed to get them released by their author under a free license. Wouldn't adding {{Personality rights}} suffice? A deletion would be unfortunate. Plrk (talk) 16:07, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- I see little encyclopedic value in the images and video and can think of little use for them other than to defame the depicted people. In which newspapers were the images published? Were they published uncencored? (If it's OK with you, let's keep the discussion regarding all 4 files on this page.) --Bensin (talk) 10:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- I must admit they were less published than I remembered. Although I can only find them in [3], the pictures and the video is first-hand documentation of a widely reported incident (the reference list of sv:Gategate provides a small sample), which is a rare privilege for Wikipedia. Plrk (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Nyheter24's emphasis, since founded in 2008, is tabloid journalism ("kvällstidningsjournalistik"). If that was the most credible news outlet that published the pictures then I wouldn't put too much weight on that argument. I am fully aware that the debate in the media would not exist without these files. Nevertheless, the files have little encyclopedic value, certainly no artistic value and can be used for little else than to defame the depicted persons. Removing them from Commons and the Swedish Wikipedia article would not substantially diminish the article. I'm not disputing the notability of the incident itself, but we shouldn't knowingly publish pictures of criminal suspects for the same reasons we shouldn't publish names of them. Doing so hurts our credibility. --Bensin (talk) 15:39, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- I must admit they were less published than I remembered. Although I can only find them in [3], the pictures and the video is first-hand documentation of a widely reported incident (the reference list of sv:Gategate provides a small sample), which is a rare privilege for Wikipedia. Plrk (talk) 13:56, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- I see little encyclopedic value in the images and video and can think of little use for them other than to defame the depicted people. In which newspapers were the images published? Were they published uncencored? (If it's OK with you, let's keep the discussion regarding all 4 files on this page.) --Bensin (talk) 10:30, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - video of a notable incident (in Sweden). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:40, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 07:58, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
doubtful educational value. the aragonese tower is very poorly portraited and the camp stove is on the way. Japs 88 (talk) 09:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 08:00, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Portrait is identified as Queen Katherine Parr at the NPG gallery and in biographies of the Queen; see James and Porter and NPG online site. 68.55.129.44 09:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC) See: National Portrait Gallery, Catherine Parr
Kept: PD-Art. Rename/correct the description as necessary. Yann (talk) 08:01, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
no author (painter), wrong license, copyright violation Polarlys (talk) 13:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, painting is possibly created posthumously, this means it is not clear if it is old or new. For a painting it is extremly unlikely that the painter is unknown, the repeated claim that the painter is unknown is dubious and noncredible. The uploader claims the date of creation is c. 1960, and he claims that the painter died 70 years ago the same time, thats illogical. --Martin H. (talk) 13:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, nope its not created posthumously because King Peter II was officer of Brithish RAF thats unifrom is all about. And about author i dont know found it on internet since King Peter was in exile he didnt have picture offical with uniform as king this was the only one.Snake bgd (talk) 21:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Even when it was created during the lifetime, it is not old enough for public domain. You picked a license at random now – this just does not work. --Polarlys (talk) 22:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- I dont see the point of this discussion then. I am trying to keep free image, only possible licence is british army since King Peter II wear RAF uniform with rank Air Chief Marshal.Snake bgd (talk) 00:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
For Snake bdg:
- Is this work old enough to be in the public domain? No.
- Has the rights owner explicitly released it under a free license? No.
Please read some basic rules (Commons:Licensing) before uploading stuff. Thank you, --Polarlys (talk) 09:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
For Polarlys:
Ok here are some facts. Right owner of painting is Crown prince Alexander Karadjordjevic since this painting is in his working cabinet. Here he gave premission to use any of art with him or his family or ancestors.
Translation using google translator: Site licenses www.royalfamily.org
We have permission to use material from the website of the royal family Karadjordjevic, provided the source of information.
The following is the text to that effect. Parts of the e-mail addresses I marked with a * due to the risk of unwanted emails. [edit] Question
From: Djordje Stakic <* @ gmail.com>
To: webmaster@royalfamily.org
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2004 18:44:38 0100
Subject: permission to use text
Webmaster site www.royalfamily.org
Dear Sir,
For some time there and developing a free online encyclopedia in the Serbian language Wikipedia. For this encyclopedia can anyone write whatever it wants and so is its content from day to day increases. You need to be on it and find biographies of members of the Karadjordjevic dynasty, especially those who were the rulers, and their heirs and descendants. Are we prepared for this internet encyclopedia could use information from your website? In particular, can they be transferred to biographies of members of the royal family, and their photos.
For details, I recommend you look at what it looks like this encyclopedia, and under what conditions can write text: sr.wikipedia.org / wiki /
On behalf of the Serbian internet encyclopedia
Djordje Stakic
Of course, on each side, which uses information from your site, it would set up a link to your site.
[edit] Reply
From: Vladimir Jablanov <* @ dvor.org.yu>
To: Djordje Stakic <* @ gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2004 19:05:02 0100
Subject: Re: Permissions for the use of text
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your interest. Content Karadjordjevic Families website is free You can use its contents with a little note that would be good to always specify the source when using the material. Will it be just, as you specify, linking to our site, or explicitly stating the source is not important.
Sincerely
Vladimir Jablanov
Webmaster— Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Snake_bgd (talk • contribs)
- This is not a permission. It doesn’t even cover photos or paintings. We want to use such content without limitation, in every context and everywhere (not just on Wikipedia) and even with commercial benefits. We need a written permission by someone who can give such a permission (certainly not the "webmaster" of a site which reads "All rights reserved") and is allowed to do so (being the subject of a photo doesn’t make you the copyright holder). --Polarlys (talk) 12:47, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The so called permssion -- which is not sufficient -- is also from the wrong person. Neither the subject of the painting nor the owner of the actual painting, own the copyright. The copyright belongs to the painter or his heirs and permission would have to come from them. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:02, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
doubtful educational value Japs 88 (talk) 17:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Useless personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 19:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
no longer used and desired Luxusfrosch (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 10:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
photograph, not just a picture of a road sign grillo (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - the tag {{PD-Vägverket}} does not apply. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:07, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I do not wish to share this file anymore. If you could, please remove it, if its possible, I have another better picture than this that I intend to replace it with. Aerev (talk) 20:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - in use. It does not stop you from uploading other contributions. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:11, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 08:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Uploader has requested for deletion at my talk page saying that they're not sure about publication date, I prefered to open a DR so someone might be able to help. ■ MMXX talk 22:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- I uploaded this image when I was pretty a newbie and now I want it to be deleted. Thanks AMERICOPHILE 09:03, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - in use. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:16, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use, license is irrevocable. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
The creator is unknown, hence wrong license Ymblanter (talk) 11:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- "In the following cases images fall into public domain after 30 years from the date of publication or public presentation (Article 16): 1) Photographic or cinematographic works. ..." No doubt the photo has been taken before the Revolution, hence is in PD. Speedy keep --Z 13:23, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Has it ever been published?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:02, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep publicity photo -> published; copyright expired. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 15:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
File was deleted.
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:27, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not 50 years old so believed to be still under copyright according to Malaysian Copyright Act 1987. Philafrenzy (talk) 23:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
No cogent indication of where this is located, so cannot determine whether covered by FoP. Accordingly, licence is incomplete. Rodhullandemu (talk) 23:52, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:34, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- You are generally held on the link to the source? Author of the post on the Practical Machinist portal directly said the source from which he digitized images: [4]: The Engineer magazine, 6 April 1917. Vade Parvis (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - {{PD-EU-no author disclosure}}. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:20, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 10:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:33, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- You are generally held on the link to the source? Author of the post on the Practical Machinist portal directly said the source from which he digitized images: [5]: The Engineer magazine, 6 April 1917. Vade Parvis (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 20:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- You are generally held on the link to the source? Author of the post on the Practical Machinist portal directly said the source from which he digitized images: [6]: The Engineer magazine, 6 April 1917. Vade Parvis (talk) 23:06, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 10:22, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep I changed the license to more appropriate {{Anonymous-EU}}. --Jarekt (talk) 16:27, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 10:19, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 20:52, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Used the same pictures from another source, in which the authority and there is no doubt that there described, where the photo was taken and what was done during military service. The license replaced to PD-USGov-Army. Any questions now? Vade Parvis (talk) 20:36, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
- So just make a scan of the page. I dont see anything in the source you are giving us here.98.88.54.247 05:34, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- You just blatantly lying.. Vade Parvis (talk) 07:47, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Tosh. What do you think will happen here if everybody must provide a scan or copy of the sourse? Don't bring it to the point of absurdity, please... Askold Ingvarssen (talk) 14:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
- (М. Коломиец, И. Мощанский, С. Ромадин «Танки Гражданской войны», издательство Армада, выпуск № 14, 1999 г.) It was published with a copyright notice between 1993 and 1999, and the copyright was renewed.98.88.92.10 20:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Хосспаде... Бронетракторы. Часть 1. М. Коломиец (М-Хобби. — 1997. — № 2): «в журнале "Броневое дело" в 20-е годы была опубликована фотография бронетрактора ХОЛТ, захваченного у белых».
Коломиец М., Мощанский И., Ромадин С. Бронетрактора // Танки Гражданской войны (Армада №14) — М.: Экспринт, 1999. — С. 17—19. — 58 с.: «Трофейный бронетрактор "Клейтон". (Фото из журнала "Броневое дело")». Any questions now? Vade Parvis (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:23, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- An absurd nomination. You are generally held on the hyperlink that is specified as a source? This military historic site (quite authoritative, among other things) includes photographies created exclusively in the period between World War I and World War II. Specifically, this presented a very rare American tractor of 1920s, used in the interwar period by the army of militaristic Japan as the prime mover and photographed on its military service in Japan forces. Thus, the image clearly corresponds to the license PD-Japan. If that for some reason it seems for you are not conclusive — just look at the radiator of the tractor: it set the emblem of the Imperial Japanese Army. Vade Parvis (talk) 15:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
-Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:48, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The fact that we do not know the author does not make this an anonymous work. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Private site" ([7]) — just a forum thread where posted scanned page from original Linn Mfg. (1916—1952) advertisement brochure, published in 1940: [8]. A signature to this photo in the brochure reads as follows: "First Linn tractor (1916)". Vade Parvis (talk) 21:23, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: 1940 publication could esily be in Copyright. PD-US-1923 certainly does not apply. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
-Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- «Private site» directly says that the drawing and accompanying text taken from the book "The American Agriculturist Farm Directory and Reference Book" published at 1917. Vade Parvis (talk) 21:04, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- So look up the "The American Agriculturist Farm Directory and Reference Book" and ge the name of the photograpther.98.88.54.247 05:27, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: PD US 1923 Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:54, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Since the unit does not have any markings on it, it is very likely this was taken by the manufacturer. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:34, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
-Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep this file is clearly marked as {{PD-USgov}}. MKFI (talk) 22:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment hmm, the source site, oldsnowplowequipment.wetpaint.com, does not seem to be a USGov site --:bdk: 21:29, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: THere is no evidence that it is a US government photo. SInce the unit was never put in production, it is much more likely that this is a manufacturer photo, or, perhaps, a photo from someone who bought the unit after the war. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:33, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 21:22, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 21:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:29, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Book published in 2002. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 21:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Book published in 2002. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:35, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
-Book published in 2002. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 21:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:28, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- It is quite absurd nomination. Have you watched the source? In the photo depicted up close trenchers of German Empire military forces during the First World War, created on the chassis of the tank A7V. However, if users for some reason doubts the veracity of this more than an obvious fact — and I can provide reference to a paper source confirming it (where, among other things, published one of those images). Vade Parvis (talk) 16:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
So now to the book, the original source of this photo is available. Photo taken from NARA ("At least a single example of the A7V-Schutzengrabenbagger trench-digger was completed, and it is seen here moving to the front on October 28, 1918 (NARA)"). Later I will add a reference to the book. Vade Parvis (talk) 13:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:36, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- It is quite absurd nomination. Have you watched the source? In the photo depicted up close trenchers of German Empire military forces during the First World War, created on the chassis of the tank A7V. However, if users for some reason doubts the veracity of this more than an obvious fact — and I can provide reference to a paper source confirming it (where, among other things, published one of those images). Vade Parvis (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
А. Г. Солянкин, М. В. Павлов, И. В. Павлов, И. Г. Желтов. Отечественные бронированные машины. XX век. 1905—1941 — Москва: Экспринт, 2002. Published in 2002. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:47, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep indeed. This image is takeh indeed from the book mentioned in the file description (I do have one on my book-shelve). As in other such cases, the photo is from official test report and juridically it is of USSR government authorship, which means PD. It is really seemed that our highly active anonimous have quite perfunctory approach for delition request... That's why I'm in deep doubt about his motives, honestly... Askold Ingvarssen (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
-Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep this file is clearly marked as {{PD-USgov}}. MKFI (talk) 22:16, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Jesus, do you really think that the transportation of damaged strategic bomber B-29 into into a repair center during World War II could photographed by the random civilian person, and even up close? Vade Parvis (talk) 00:33, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 20:57, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- "Source: А. Г. Солянкин, М. В. Павлов, И. В. Павлов, И. Г. Желтов. Отечественные бронированные машины. XX век. 1905—1941 — Москва: Экспринт, 2002. — Т. 1. — С. 306—307. — 2000 экз. — ISBN 5-94038-030-1". The impression that you were in a hurry to nominate to delete as many files — you have a large part of the studies are mixed copy-paste reasons for nominations. Vade Parvis (talk) 20:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep indeed. This image is takeh indeed from the book mentiontd above (I do have one on my book-shelve). As in other such cases, the photo is from official test report and juridically it is of USSR government authorship, which means PD. It is really seemed that our highly active anonimous have quite perfunctory approach for delition request... That's why I'm in deep doubt about his motives, honestly... Askold Ingvarssen (talk) 16:40, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
-Bad source. Possibly copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:07, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status. 98.88.92.10 21:11, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:39, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:13, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Status of this image is certainly clear. Anonymous, as usual, using his standard pseudo-justification for the fact of having links to an online source, not even trouble to look at it. Meanwhile, I took a picture from a reputable source, which clearly states that this machine was released a very small party in the 1920s and in 1929 from the failure of the design of this machine all copies were sent to be scrapped — or additionally indicated this source as evidence of this in the template date. To completely eliminate this kind of brought to absurdity, I now put the two sources to confirm the date, the description of each of the files, even where the image is taken from the same source. In addition, I now just in case was replaced the PD-Old template to the PD-UK-unknown, recommended in this case, as it turned out. Vade Parvis (talk) 14:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:41, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- An absurd nomination. You are generally held on the hyperlink that is specified as a source? Vade Parvis (talk) 15:02, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Status of this image is certainly clear. Anonymous, as usual, using his standard pseudo-justification for the fact of having links to an online source, not even trouble to look at it. Meanwhile, I took a picture from a reputable source, which clearly states that this machine was released a very small party in the 1920s and in 1929 from the failure of the design of this machine all copies were sent to be scrapped — or additionally indicated this source as evidence of this in the template date. To completely eliminate this kind of brought to absurdity, I now put the two sources to confirm the date, the description of each of the files, even where the image is taken from the same source. In addition, I now just in case was replaced the PD-Old template to the PD-UK-unknown, recommended in this case, as it turned out. Vade Parvis (talk) 14:38, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:43, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Status of this image is certainly clear. Anonymous, as usual, using his standard pseudo-justification for the fact of having links to an online source, not even trouble to look at it. Meanwhile, I took a picture from a reputable source, which clearly states that this machine was released a very small party in the 1920s and in 1929 from the failure of the design of this machine all copies were sent to be scrapped — or additionally indicated this source as evidence of this in the template date. To completely eliminate this kind of brought to absurdity, I now put the two sources to confirm the date, the description of each of the files, even where the image is taken from the same source. In addition, I now just in case was replaced the PD-Old template to the PD-UK-unknown, recommended in this case, as it turned out. Vade Parvis (talk) 14:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:44, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:37, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. Firstly, private site cannot have any copyright of this image as it was made before WWII (it's the historical fact that none of these vehicles survived the War). Secondly, copyright protection of official documentation photo in USSR was wery interesting. If the photo was of any artistic kind, the question of copyright could theoretically be raised, but thechnical photos like this one were published in specific literature or documentation without any copyright reference - images were published anonymously. This, according to Russian Civil Code, means PD if the publication was before 1943 (currently). Almost no special data was published about this vehicle after WWII, therefore almost every widely available images (exept those which were kept in archives) was somehow or another published before 1941. So, 99,99% that this image in PD. I'm even not sure, that the real author of this image cold theoretically be found... Askold Ingvarssen (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Procedural nomination per [9]. I am neutral. FASTILY (TALK) 21:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - no evidence of permission--Oleola (talk) 22:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- The image on the claimed source links to same photo on flickr with cc-nc-nd. Earlier the source was given as cicilia.com:BM21.jpg (with permission for Wikipedia, from where it seems to have been moved to here). User:Jdcollins13 changed the licence and might know something. Have all involved editors been contacted? --LPfi (talk) 11:39, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:27, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
There are better pictures of magnetic balls at Category:Neodymium magnet balls. This one is very blurry and dark. InverseHypercube 21:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
The author is unkown and the photograph may have been taken as late as 1942. We cannot rule out that the author died less than 70 years ago, so we cannot claim PD-old. — Kpalion(talk) 21:47, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- I have added the correct PD-Poland tag. Chesdovi (talk) 01:13, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. AFD on the new licence tag. — Kpalion(talk) 21:21, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Not a photograph - a sketch, and probably above the Israeli threshold of originality (cf. COM:TOO#United Kingdom - Israeli law is based on UK law). Otte Wallish died in 1977. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 23:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:25, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This image was posted to Wowturkey on July 20, 2005 by ekin. Takabeg (talk) 09:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
No valid copyright tag, the information when the creator of this work died is not given. Martin H. (talk) 14:26, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:02, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works Polarlys (talk) 15:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This image was posted to skyscrapercity.com on October 6, 2005 by ASIMOV. And then it was deleted. This image was posted to wowturkey on September 24, 2005 by Emre_meyavuz. Takabeg (talk) 15:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This image was posted to wowturkey on May 9, 2009 by mcagri. Takabeg (talk) 16:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This image was posted to wowturkey on May 9, 2009 by mcagri. Takabeg (talk) 16:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio. This file was the derivative work of this image that was posted to wowturkey on May 9, 2009 by mcagri. Takabeg (talk) 16:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The uploader belongs a group of socket puppets just for making self-advertsement. He or she cannot provide the real license. see meta:User:Kleuske/Huang_Xianfan Zhxy 519 (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
1944 image, license cannot apply. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
and File:Clara eugenia lopez obregon.png. Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, for the first see [10] (right side). Copyvio uploader, writing about presidential elections and decorating the article with some stolen photos. --Martin H. (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:30, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
and other football related photos by Example (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 17:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 00:25, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
The portrait is NOT Marie of Cleves; it is Anna of Austria, consort of Philip II of Spain. 68.55.129.44 06:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC) Please see: http://www.flg.es/ficha.asp?ID=8030
- That's no reason to delete it, but to rename it. Kleuske (talk) 06:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Not simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}}. January (talk) 09:25, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 17:32, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
This image is wrong and thus misleading: it shows the wrong number of seats (115 instead of 113) and accordingly the number of seats for the yellow and blue is +1 too high. I created a new correct and svg image: File:Legislativ-Yuan Wahl 2008.svg Furfur (talk) 11:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 17:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
BW low res without source, authorship, seems to be scan from book (not PD-Art), and we have a lot of big color pictures of that sculpture Category:Donatello's David. It is in use in many projects, maybe redirect to this one will be good. Shakko (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 17:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
- File:Vidovdanski hram, interior.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Not PD in the country of origin, en:Ivan Meštrović died 1962. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:51, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 17:43, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Official fraternity image uploaded as "own work" by User:HChung12 at en.wiki. There was no evidence of legitimate fraternity-sanctioned release. When the image was moved to commons, Kane5187 (talk · contribs) gave this explanation:
- Note from transferrer to Commons: As a logo, I was initially suspicious of the claim to public domain release. However, the original uploader was HChung12, and the Tri-Kap website from which this comes ( http://www.tri-kap.com/ ) lists a Harris Chung as the current president, and therefore the likely copyright owner of the logo. Just wanted to state for the record that although it may not seem so at first glance, this does appear to be a valid PD release. Dylan 04:24, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
Having a similar username to a fraternity officer isn't sufficient for legitimate release. First, there's no confirmation that the user is actually the fraternity officer himself--there's nothing stopping anyone from getting any username. Second, we can't be sure that the release was made "on behalf" of the fraternity, since the fraternity is the owner. Third, OTRS is designed to solve this exact problem and must be used. Fourth, this image is unused, so its deletion is no loss. GrapedApe (talk) 14:49, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 06:01, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Unknown date/author and source does not provide further info that indicates public domain due to age. Cold Season (talk) 02:50, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. shizhao (talk) 15:03, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
If you could, please remove this, if its possible, I have another better picture that I intend to replace it with. Aerev (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Once you are autoconfirmed you should be able to upload a new version right over this one. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 09:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 20:29, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete — doubts concerning the applicability of available licenses have already and I have, those who sell phisical original of the photo could specifically silenced the authorship. Vade Parvis (talk) 16:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 01:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Maybe out of scope and personal use. Please see [11]. Martial arts "Akogado" is not notable yet. I could not find other sources. Via null (talk) 06:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:07, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Uploaded in 7 December 2011. the date claim is 1997. The EXIF says 15 October 2003. And can be seen also her (7 Jul 2010). Geagea (talk) 10:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:09, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
1968 painting. Unlikely in public domain. deerstop. 13:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Dear Madams and Sirs,
I am the owner of the original Painting, and herewith I want to give the Picture/Image to public domain/Wikimedia! User:Pirla67. 16:21, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: While you may own the painting itself, you almost certainly do not own the copyright. Karl Stachelscheid died in 1970 and his heirs probably own the copyright. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
The US-Govt does not own copyright to this video, rather it is Soviet footage, meaning that copyright still lies with the Soviet-era publisher of the video. russavia (talk) 16:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Who is the Soviet-era publisher? The archives.org website says "This film is Soviet footage of its military weapons and capabilities", which would suggest the Russian government? If it happens to be on the Kremlin.ru website, then this would apply. I can't speak Russian so finding it would be very difficult for me. However, it would be worth a look. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
COM:DW Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- But those are permanently installed public monument at the very entrance, not quite sculptural work of art in the museum. In practice, same as this file. --WhiteWriter speaks 19:20, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- These scultures do not seem to be in an open place as required according to COM:FOP#Serbia. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well, they are, i will try to find some new image for you to see. It is on the opening of the cave, and this is just edge of the specific stone dome... --WhiteWriter speaks 19:42, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- These scultures do not seem to be in an open place as required according to COM:FOP#Serbia. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:16, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
This photo is not created by the U.S. Department of State. Martin H. (talk) 17:28, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose Clearly from State Department website [12]. Please offer more explanation. Who else would own rights to this image? Seems a bit screwy if the U.S. State Department is satisfied with using this image and Wikipedia is not. Plot Spoiler (talk) 03:55, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- oppose. I need to understand the rationale for deletion here. Link above seems to indicate is from US State Department, which should make it public domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikereichold (talk • contribs) 16:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Thats wrong. The requirement is not "published on state department website". The requirement is created by a state department employee. --Martin H. (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is obvious that the State Deprtment did not take the photo -- they're looking for him. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:18, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
appears to be a composition of two images, both of which are on websites that do not make license releases (http://www.people.vcu.edu/~khanna/Faq/Khanna.html and http://research.chem.psu.edu/awcgroup/bio.html); composed image does not appear to be present on the website of the given Source research group (and that site in general does not make CC release on itself) DMacks (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:25, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
File:Sallust_-_Des_Kaius_Krispus_Sallustius_Jugurtha_oder_Jugurthinischer_Krieg,_1829,_Übersetzung_von_einem_Unbekannten.djvu
[edit]Duplicate of version uploaded 8 January 2012. Daiukku (talk) 22:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Duplicate of File:Sallust - Übersetzer unbekannt, 1829.djvu; please use {{Duplicate}} next time. Also I don't think you should keep the Google logo in your .djvu. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 12:07, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
DSS2 / Wikisky Copyright - DSS2 image Credit: Palomar Observatory/WikiSky (link)
Hubble link) --Kheider (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Commercial use is prohibited without permission. . . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 22:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
Deleted by Dschwen: Does not allow for commercial use and/or derivative works
- Renomination #1
Unclear source: "blog" and "Flickr" (without further specification). Unclear author: "desconocido (anonimo)" = "undisclosed (anonymous)". Impossible to confirm that the author allows the image to be distributed under the specified licence. The licence requires attribution of the author, but it is impossible to attribute the author if the author is "undisclosed (anonymous)". Stefan4 (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete This does not appear to be the same image that was deleted earlier. However, I agree with the nom, without knowing the source, we cannot keep it. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:01, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted No source --Lymantria (talk) 16:47, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
This photo is not created by the United States Department of State. Martin H. (talk) 17:31, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Oppose Clearly from a State Department website [13]. Please offer more explanation. Who else would own rights to this image? Plot Spoiler (talk) 19:00, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. MBisanz talk 01:07, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
- Renomination #1
The file description claims "This image is a work of a United States Department of State employee, taken or made during the course of an employee's official duties". That's untrue. This file is not a photo created by a United States Department of State employee during the course of an employee's duties. There is no valid copyright tag on this file. Martin H. (talk) 06:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. It should be obvious that the image was not taken by a US Government employee -- the government is looking for the man and is using an image from an unknown source. The State Department may have the right to publish this image, but more likely they are simply using it to fill an urgent need, ignoring copyright. And, of course, there is no indication that they have the right to license it or make it PD. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Bei dieser Datei gibt es einen Rechtschreibfehler im Dateinamen. Maxtrab (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Die neue URL lautet http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wappen_Hambach_%28bei_Diez%29.png
Das neue Wappen wurde schon mit den passenden Artikeln verlinkt.
Datei findet keine Verwendung mehr und ist nicht mehr aktuell. Aktuelle Version der Datei ist hier zu finden: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wappen_Hambach_%28bei_Diez%29.svg 178.27.28.250 23:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:28, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
All files in Category:Memorial_of_Rebirth
[edit]Sadly, I believe these all need to be deleted per COM:FOP#Romania, as several photos of the Memorial have been in the past. I'd be glad to hear a rationale to the contrary, but I believe that is basically what Romanian copyright law would dictate. The Memorial is quite recent.
- File:Memorialul Renasterii - ansamblu.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renasterii - Detaliu .jpg
- File:Memorialul Renasterii - Detaliu.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renasterii - Statuie Carol I.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renasterii.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renaşterii.jpg
- File:Monument în cinstea eroilor Revoluţiei din Decembrie 1989.jpg
- File:Pamatnik1.jpg
Jmabel ! talk 01:11, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:24, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Memorial of Rebirth
[edit]The monument was built in 2005 by Alexandru Ghilduş (1952–). There is no freedom of panorama in Romania, permission from the architect is required.
- File:20140816 București 282.jpg
- File:Bucurestiul meu - panoramio (24).jpg
- File:Holding Up The Skies (71403821).jpeg
- File:Memorialul Renașterii 1.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renașterii 2.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renașterii 3.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renașterii 4.jpg
- File:Memorialul Renașterii 5.jpg
- File:Piaţa Revoluţiei - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Piaţa Revoluţiei - panoramio.jpg
- File:Rebirth Memorial.jpg
- File:Romania-1335 - Monument of Rebirth (7575716976).jpg
- File:Romania-1340 - Monument of Rebirth (7575721364).jpg
- File:Меморіал "Відродження" в Бухаресті.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&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}
A1Cafel (talk) 04:28, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- Sadly, all need to be deleted. - Jmabel ! talk 15:23, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
- Delete, non-commercial FOP of Romania does not fit COM:Licensing#Acceptable licenses. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:42, 1 July 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 06:15, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
Consumerization Report 2011
[edit]- File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 1.jpg
- File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 2.jpg
- File:Consumerization Report 2011 - Chart 3.jpg
Copyright violation/no source: These images look like scanned images and therefore do not seem to be the uploader's own work. If they indeed were the uploader's own work, why did he not upload the originals? Furthermore, they are statistical charts of such magnitude that the data behind them is without doubt gathered by a entire team rather than a single uploader. But they are not credited and it is unknown whether they have actually agreed to supply this data for free.
--Fleet Command (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 01:06, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
--- Happy to clarify:
>>> These images look like scanned images and therefore do not seem to be the uploader's own work.
I confirm I am the original author of analysis and charts. I uploaded new high resolution versions of the files which are also available on my website at BringYourOwnIT.com
>>> If they indeed were the uploader's own work, why did he not upload the originals?
These are in fact the originals created with Excel and PowerPoint.
>>> Furthermore, they are statistical charts of such magnitude that the data behind them is without doubt gathered by a entire team rather than a single uploader. But they are not credited and it is unknown whether they have actually agreed to supply this data for free.
I am the author of analysis and charts. The underlying data has been publicly released by Trend Micro on September,19 2011 - see https://imperia.trendmicro-europe.com/uk/about/news/pr/article/20110916135733.html. The source is credited on the Wikipedia page where the images were originally posted.
Any further questions feel free to contact me at CesareGarlati @ cal.berkeley.edu
Thank you!
--Cgarlati (talk) 00:48, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
Cesare
Files in Category:Hillsdale College
[edit]Photos of presumably copyrighted statues located in the US, not covered by US freedom of panorama. It can be assumed from the lifespan of the people depicted that these statues are not pre-1923.
January (talk) 08:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Question - were these statues copyrighted? when were they installed? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 22:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Seems the Thatcher and Churchill statues were installed in the last decade [14] and the Reagan statue only last year [15]. January (talk) 08:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 08:27, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. MBisanz talk 17:33, 15 February 2012 (UTC)
Jahresmittel Simulation
[edit]- File:Jahresmittel Simulation 1.png
- File:Jahresmittel Simulation 2.png
- File:Jahresmittel Simulation 3.svg
- File:Jahresmittel Simulation 4.svg
Files were only created to visualize a topic in an already archived discussion at de:WP (see here). Results contain methodological flaws and the R-code given in the original files at de:WP was not transferred. Oversimplified results should not be made available to a wider audience. Alfie↑↓© 13:32, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by خالد_سلطان (talk · contribs)
[edit]One image that looks like a copyrighted TV screenshot and four collages that also look like copyvios, but also raise the question if they are in project scope. The images should be deleted unless it is shown that they are both in project scope and not violating copyright.
Rosenzweig τ 16:56, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 13:03, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
A collection of book covers, which must be assumed to be copyrighted, and two images showing the author (who also seems to be a musician). One is from Facebook, and the other looks like a copyvio too.
- File:Despues que ha pasado el tiempo.jpg
- File:Cuando la luz vuelve.jpg
- File:Al compas.jpg
- File:Quejios.jpg
- File:Poemas de cuadernos.jpg
- File:De la musica.jpg
- File:Travesia de regreso.jpg
- File:Jacaranda .jpg
- File:Cantos de la espera.jpg
- File:Claustro de mis pasos.jpg
- File:Sueños de erato.jpg
- File:Poemusica.jpg
- File:Jirones de sentimientos.jpg
- File:Con la voz tmb.jpg
- File:Horas de retiro tmb.jpg
- File:A Orrillas Tmb.jpg
- File:Con la voz.jpg
- File:Horas de retiro.jpg
- File:A orrillas.jpg
- File:JSolano.jpg
- File:Jesussolano.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 17:12, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:59, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Taken from the private site. Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 21:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- An absurd nomination. You are generally held on the hyperlink that is specified as a source? Also, File:Somua-am-1938 02.jpg, not File:Fordson Trackson 1922 Japan.jpg. Vade Parvis (talk) 15:05, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 16:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Not taken by an "unknown French state employee" but by a German photograph. Probably from a German soldier's private collection. Le Petit Chat (talk) 08:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
- Deleted. Photographer unknown and there is no information regarding any publication more than 70 years ago. Thuresson (talk) 19:06, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Files by Ferchu agosto (and sockpuppets)
[edit]This user is stealing photos from the web, manipulating the EXIF data and uploading the result as "own work".
Examples:
- File:David Angeloff Huracan.jpg looks like a cut out of some blurry amateur photo, the EXIF claims author "ferchu_agosto", created with a Sony Cyber-shot DSC-S950 on 14 April 2010, but in fact the photo is a cut out of this one stolen from this blog.
- File:Estreno La reina de la quema.jpg, again according to EXIF created by "ferchu_agosto" with a DSC-F707 this time, in 5 May 2002, in fact stolen from Panoramio with the where the EXIF looks quite different.
- File:Pablo Lopez Huracan.jpg again says in the EXIF that it was taken by Ferchu with a DSC-S950 on 3 September 2011, in fact it is created by someone else and stolen from the website of the soccer club.
And so on, all copyright violation, most uploads contain this evil EXIF manipulation.
I normaly nuke such uploads. I fear however that silently resolving such problems in the background leads to a decreasing awareness on this project for such bad uploaders. Therefore it cant hurt if this finding is exposed and described here.
We need assistant and a better outreach for the meaning of free content, especially to the spanish speaking community, otherwise this project will be (more) badly damaged by users such as this one. --Martin H. (talk) 20:04, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Nota: possibly I forgot to list a file
- File:00 Alejandro Nadur Huracan.jpg
- File:01 Lucas Calvinio Huracan.jpg
- File:02 Esteban Daneri Huracan.jpg
- File:07 Héctor Desvaux Huracan.jpg
- File:10 Herny Gonzalez Huracan.jpg
- File:11 Ezequiel Llesona Huracan.jpg
- File:12 Cristian Tavio Huracan.jpg
- File:13 Ezequiel Filippetto Huracan.jpg
- File:14 Luciano Ospina Huracan.jpg
- File:14 Rodrigo Battaglia Huracan.jpg
- File:600px H Bandera Huracan.png
- File:Andrés Núñez Huracan.jpg
- File:Cristian Leiva Huracan.jpg
- File:Darío Soplán Huracan.jpg
- File:David Angeloff Huracan.jpg
- File:Diego Cocca Huracan.jpg
- File:Duco Tribuna visitante.jpg
- File:Emiliano Lencina Huracan.jpg
- File:Escudo Huracan.png
- File:Estreno La reina de la quema.jpg
- File:Ezequiel Gallegos Huracan.jpg
- File:Federico Ortiz López Huracan.jpg
- File:Fernando Pages Huracan.jpg
- File:Gaston Machin Huracan.jpg
- File:Gaston Monzon Huracan.jpg
- File:Gimnasio de box Huracan.jpg
- File:Gonzalo Martinez Huracan.jpg
- File:Hernán Zalcman Huracan.jpg
- File:Javier Campora Huracan.jpg
- File:Julian Botaro Huracan.jpg
- File:Kevin Cura Huracan.jpg
- File:La Quemita Huracan 01.jpg
- File:La Quemita Huracan.jpg
- File:Leonardo Villan Huracan.jpg
- File:Lucas Nania Huracan.jpg
- File:Luciano Nieto Huracan.jpg
- File:Martín Pautasso Huracan.jpg
- File:Matias Quiroga Huracan.jpg
- File:Mauro Milano Huracan.jpg
- File:Mauro Villegas Huracan.jpg
- File:Muriel Orlando Huracan.jpg
- File:Nahuel Oviedo Huracan.jpg
- File:Nicolas Velez Huracan.jpg
- File:Pablo Lopez Huracan.jpg
- File:Rodrigo Lemos Huracan.jpg
- File:Sanchez Prette Huracan.jpg
- File:Sede Social Huracan 01.jpg ([16])
- File:Sede Social Huracán.jpg ([17])
- File:Tomas Duco Panoramica.jpg
- Sextogrande (talk · contribs)
- deleted already
- Manantial99 (talk · contribs)
- Lunayalcorta (talk · contribs)
- Huracanlomas (talk · contribs)
- Deleted already
- Cah6grande (talk · contribs)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
Self written texts, out of scope of Wikimedia Commons. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content.
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 016.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 015.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 014.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 013.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 012.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 011.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 010.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 009.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 008.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 007.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 006.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 005.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 004.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 003.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 002.pdf
- File:أضواء البيان في إيضاح القرآن بالقرآن 001.pdf
- File:أحكام القرآن للكيا الهراسى 003.pdf
- File:أحكام القرآن للكيا الهراسى 002.pdf
- File:أحكام القرآن للكيا الهراسى 001.pdf
Martin H. (talk) 21:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Motopark (talk) 15:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:54, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
File:Rick james.jpg was uploaded by a user whom I blocked for vandalism on en.wiki. The image was used to represent [18] Rick James, an African American person [19] [20]. In short, this is not that Rick James, and I don't know who it is. Other uploads of this user suggest he was fooling around: File:Jacob not wahlin.jpg, File:WAHLIN.jpg are unused images (attempts to insert them on en.wiki were reverted) with no proper description, out of Commons scope. Materialscientist (talk) 04:53, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Possible attack images, vandalism or copyright violation (File:WAHLIN.jpg). Martin H. (talk) 15:03, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:James Bulger 1994.jpg
Liegt imho außerhalb des Projektrahmens; derartige private „Partybilder“ sind was für Flickr, aber nicht für Commons. Wurde iirc mal für den ge-SLA-ten de-WP-Unfugsartikel de:Norbertkrokodil verwendet Schniggendiller (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyright protected. No evidence of PD status.98.88.92.10 22:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep at least in regard to copyright, per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Gul Mudin.jpg, as it is obviously a shot of a soldier in duty. Whether we need this image is an different question. --Túrelio (talk) 08:02, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose you have a version of the image with mirror in it so we could make sure that person with copyright is "soldier in duty." Otherwise what you are saying is your personal opinion and not a fact. And therefore image needs to be deleted.98.88.100.52 18:22, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
- Its a STOLEN photo. OK! So its NOT owrs to keep. Some dishonest individual took it from private sirte. So all this talk is a fantasy and the fact is that we dont and cant possibly know if this is "CAMP COOK" and not some other place and we dont know who is taking photo WHY? becouse the uploader did not bother to ask all that before he stole the image!98.88.54.247 05:22, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Well... In that case, how do we know that YOU are honest, anonymous? Vade Parvis (talk) 08:13, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- "WE" dont need to know nothing about any anonymous. What we need from YOU is a permission from the site owner to take his and his friend property for your use. If you fail to do that then this image like many other you take from other peoples sites that were NOT created to be looted by the likes of you, will have to go. Sadly... So i suggest that YOU instead of bickering back and fouth just do what we are suggesting.98.88.54.247 15:08, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete I do not know why File:Gul Mudin.jpg was kept (it was kept by User:Jcb without any comment -- maybe it should be renominated?), but private photographs by US soldiers are protected by copyright. This is not something dubious, it's a fact. Look e.g. at opinion of Prof. Stephen M. McJohn:
...Nor does the bar apply to work by federal employees that is not part of their duties. So a senator's diary or the personal photos taken by a soldier are copyrighted.
- It doesn't matter if the photos were during the author's duties, it only matters if he or she was assigned by their employer to create this photo. See [21]:
A work, therefore, authored by a government employee which can be considered as an assigned or expected duty cannot be protected by copyright. A work voluntarily authored by a government employee and not intended for use by the government, however, can be protected by copyright. Thus, a copyright would exist in an article authored by a government employee at the direct request of a publisher or editor of a private publication, even though the article was written on government time and its content related to the author's official duties.
— John O. Tresansky COPYRIGHT IN GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE AUTHORED WORKS 1976
Deleted: As Trycatch points out, this image is likely a "personal photo[] taken by a soldier." No indication that it was taken during his official duties, so delete. Philosopher Let us reason together. 06:05, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Bei dieser Datei gibt es einen Rechtschreibfehler im Dateinamen. Die neue URL lautet http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wappen_Hambach_%28bei_Diez%29.png . Das neue Wappen wurde schon mit den passenden Artikeln verlinkt. Maxtrab (talk) 19:24, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Dann stellt man aber keinen Löschantrag, sondern einen Verschiebe-Antrag! Die Datei wurde übrigens im SVG Format um die Datei beliebig groß zu skalieren. Mit deiner PNG Datei machst du das wieder rückgängig. --Flow2 (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ich hab das jetzt mal erledigt. Deine Löschanträge musst du aber selber zurückziehen. --Flow2 (talk) 19:46, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Redirect kept Lymantria (talk) 16:20, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}