Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/01/24
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
sky NEWS content is copyrighted AMERICOPHILE 22:04, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio ■ MMXX talk 23:42, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Flickrwashing (Flickr uploader is not the author of the photo). See http://www.majaless.com/vb/showpost.php?p=220054&postcount=1 for an earlier version of the image (May 2008) with a watermark that was removed in the photo uploaded to Flickr. Razvan Socol (talk) 07:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Flickrwashing (the Flickr uploader is not the author of the photo). The Flickr image is dated December 2011, but at http://www.almadina55.com/vb/post915799-2/ the same image appears in a post dated June 2011. Razvan Socol (talk) 07:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Is this for real? I used to recommend this site to my daughters to search for images for their school works! 189.60.27.33 19:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Keep, seems pretty real to me ;) Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: (Speedy) - What exactly were you searching for when you came across this? I can't imagine one is very likely to find this randomly. I'm sorry you were shocked, but such is life - here at Commons, we host things which people may find objectionable, but we have them anyway because they are part of our educational mandate. Human sexuality is an important topic, and it is important that we have photos of it. We will not delete something just because you happen to dislike it. Please read out general disclaimer. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Try searching for "doggy"... The three first hits aren't cute puppies :) Prof. Professorson (talk) 21:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Permission on the website not includes modification and necessarily allows redistribution under same conditions. Martin H. (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Moved to Commons:Deletion requests/Watch Indonesia. --Martin H. (talk) 22:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Not sure this is "own work" as user uploaded a new version of File:Flowers.jpg which is a microsoft background Chesdovi (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright © 2004 National Geoscience Database of Iran mickit 22:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Not sure this is "own work" as user uploaded a new version of File:Flowers.jpg which is a microsoft background Chesdovi (talk) 16:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Obvious copyvio. mickit 22:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
copyviol Threecharlie (talk) 17:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Delete, all rights reserved [1]. You could have used {{Copyvio}}. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, change template now.--Threecharlie (talk) 21:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy delete as copyvio. Artem Karimov (talk) 07:49, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 11:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Error of creation of category. ComputerHotline (talk) 17:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: thecnical request. Coyau (talk) 18:31, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
image originally uploaded specifically to insult and demean specific people - as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Undelete/User:Rktect/Super_Ekgdz DS (talk) 15:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom and unclear source. Killiondude (talk) 01:00, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
no file, only description. XenonX3 (talk) 20:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 21:46, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#United Arab Emirates. 84.61.131.15 18:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- What does this user page have to do with anything? And if you're talking about the images on that page, you should review and nominate them individually; I don't think sunsets are protected by copyright in the UAE. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - I see no point to this at all, and frankly I think there has been enough discourtesy to LoverOfDubai as it is, without wiping out his/her userspace as well. If an image is copyrighted, it should be nominated for deletion; those that are deleted have and will be de-linked upon deletion. CT Cooper · talk 20:58, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard/User_problems#Keep_an_eye_on_IP_84.61.131.15 VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 03:18, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept, Nonsensical, disruptive and pointy nomination by a single-purpose anonymous user. Commons:Freedom of panorama contains no reasons whatsoever for deleting user pages. (Speedy non-admin closure.) —LX (talk, contribs) 15:40, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but I can't remove the links to the deleted images Image:Burj Al Arab Interior on 25 December 2007 Pict 1.jpg and Image:Burj Al Arab Interior on 25 December 2007 Pict 2.jpg from this page. 84.61.131.15 16:29, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- What are you talking about? Why do you want to remove the links to images on another person's user page. Ok, these were deleted, but so what. In addition to that it's trivial to remove the link to an image, anybody can do that. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 17:11, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry, but the abuse filter doesn't allow editing of user pages by unregistered users. --84.61.131.15 17:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not being able to edit user's page within registration is not a reason for deletion of that user's page. Speedy Keep. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 18:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Not being able to edit user's page within registration is not a reason for deletion of that user's page. Speedy
- Sorry, but the abuse filter doesn't allow editing of user pages by unregistered users. --84.61.131.15 17:36, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ignoring the images which haven't been deleted, it appears that some of the links to the deleted images have been removed by bots, and a few haven't. I will be bold and remove the dead links, while leaving the active ones, but outright deletion of the userpage is not appropriate. CT Cooper · talk 18:56, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. I stand by my original closing of the deletion request 100%, and I'd do it again. Given that eight four six one one three one one five would probably just reopen the request and I have no desire for an edit war, I'll leave that to someone else, though. Eight four six one one three one one five has not offered any valid reason whatsoever for deleting the user page – neither in the original discussion, nor after reopening the request. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Comment - Note that the user's IP address has changed to 84.61.139.62 (talk · contribs), and might well have moved on again now. CT Cooper · talk 11:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept, See previous Keep by LX. Nom individual images is OK but not a whole userpage because some images there may have to be deleted. --Denniss (talk) 18:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
redundant / bad quality, not useful, there are better photographies, for example File:Habima National Theatre DSC04207 (12).JPG Geitost diskusjon 01:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Captain-tucker (talk) 10:22, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality, not useful image, unused bot upload. What shall this be, a flash, the sun? What has London or Zurich to do with this? No need for rotation. Geitost diskusjon 01:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope --Jarekt (talk) 03:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:SCOPE: impossible to tell what it is supposed to be. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per above Techman224Talk 04:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:47, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality Kags (talk) 03:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality file Kags (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Looks to be a low quality image snapped through the windshield of an auto on a forested road. No indication that it shows anything notable or unusual that would compensate for low quality. -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality Kags (talk) 03:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality Kags (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:56, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Image does not match with the description and has a very bad quality. Kags (talk) 03:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:49, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Very bad quality image. Kags (talk) 03:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 07:50, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Image does not match with the description and has bad quality. Kags (talk) 03:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 08:09, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Company advertising! Dirk Van Esbroeck (talk) 04:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Reverted. Deleted watermark version. Yann (talk) 08:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I dont think its appropriate to have advertising overlaid on the image. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 07:57, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Top-right corner says: "Foto: Nestor Herrera" so it's probable a copyright violation (considering the other files from the same uploader). Razvan Socol (talk) 06:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:00, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
another copyvio, scanned from the Smithsonian's Animal encyclopedia. In the latest edition, this picture appears on page 99. Seb az86556 (talk) 07:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ok with that. - Zil (d) 17:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
From website http://msgalega.org/msg/web/, doubtfully own work. Rights not clear. Funfood ␌ 08:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:02, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Can't see what the purpose of this photograph is, unused and out of COM:PS Funfood ␌ 08:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:06, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Tagged on enwiki as "This image is believed to be non-free or possibly non-free in its home country, Mexico. In order for Commons to host a file, it must be free in its home country and in the United States. Some countries, particularly other countries based on common law, have a lower threshold of originality than the United States." so I want to verify my transfer. Bulwersator (talk) 08:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Question Does anyone know what the threshold of originality is like in Mexico? Are we sure that it is unfree there? --Stefan4 (talk) 18:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)- Keep For second time, this logo is inelligible for copyright per Mexican laws. Regardless our threshold of originality this logo is an image published by a governamental party. Tbhotch™ 19:23, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- And before you start asking for it, political parties are governamental organizations as they are registered into the Federal Electoral Institute. Furthermore, the law states "or a similar distinctive symbol belonging to an international or "recognized" organization, or NGO, operating in or outside of Mexico." (bold mine).
- See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logoconvergencia.JPG Tbhotch™ 19:30, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 08:03, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used in any article, replaced by File:Lactose hydrolysis.svg. Leyo 09:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:40, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Watermark suggests this image was just picked up from a website and uploaded to commons. The implicit assertion of "own work" is not credible. —Andrei S. Talk 09:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
I made a page instead of a catogory, sorry Thiotrix (talk) 10:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:05, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture of an unknown person, out of COM:PS Funfood ␌ 10:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture out of COM:PS Funfood ␌ 11:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Unused event time schedule, out of COM:PS Funfood ␌ 11:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
pic from deleted userpage and out of COM:PS AtelierMonpli (talk) 11:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Doubtfully own work, official poster from music event Funfood ␌ 11:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:11, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Collage containing copyrighted image: This image was posted to www.resimler.tv on December 13, 2007. Takabeg (talk) 12:25, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Image is low quality and obsolete and currently being used on http://www.blogger.com/profile/04425106524082828852 Performa4e (talk) 12:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
per watermarks unlikely "own work" of uploader. Túrelio (talk) 14:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Now found at http://indian-drama.com/sony-tv/parvarrish-on-sony-tv.html, where it was uploaded already on January 16. --Túrelio (talk) 09:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
out of scope (del on DE), own work?! (c) by the company Nolispanmo 14:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
out of scope (del on DE), not at all "own work?!" -> copy vio Nolispanmo 14:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:15, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
test Renneson (talk) 14:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 08:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Image is low quality and obsolete and currently being used on http://www.blogger.com/profile/04425106524082828852 Performa4e (talk) 12:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Orphaned image with compression artifacts, replaced by File:2-Methoxyestradiol.svg. Leyo 15:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere, replaced by better version. Leyo 15:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalents in Category:Colchicine. Ed (Edgar181) 12:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), replaced by better version. Leyo 15:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:45, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), replaced by better version. Leyo 15:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), replaced by better version. Leyo 15:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Paclitaxel. Ed (Edgar181) 12:46, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), replaced by better version. Leyo 15:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there is a superior equivalent. Ed (Edgar181) 12:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Personal art work, out of scope. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Personal art work, out of scope. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Personal art work, out of scope. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:14, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
and other uploads by EpicGabrielIsEpic (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:24, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
taken from http://www.alolaa.net/ without permission Chesdovi (talk) 16:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Same problem as File:فضيلة الشيخ سعيد الدعجاني.jpg Chesdovi (talk) 16:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:25, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
promotional Chesdovi (talk) 16:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, copyright violation [2]. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Private image, unused. GeorgHH • talk 17:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Private image, unused. GeorgHH • talk 17:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:27, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and has been replaced by the superior equivalent File:COMBRETASTATINS.png. Ed (Edgar181) 14:54, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere, replaced by SVG version. Leyo 16:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and replaced by the superior equivalent File:Wolframhexafluorid.svg. Ed (Edgar181) 14:51, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Vinblastine. Ed (Edgar181) 14:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Vincristine. Ed (Edgar181) 14:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Vinca alkaloids. Ed (Edgar181) 14:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Vinca alkaloids. Ed (Edgar181) 14:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and has been replaced by the superior equivalent File:Halichondrin B.svg. Ed (Edgar181) 14:55, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Discodermolide. Ed (Edgar181) 14:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused and there are superior equivalents in Category:Taxanes. Ed (Edgar181) 14:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 10:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
unused logo and out of COM:PS AtelierMonpli (talk) 11:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
out of scope (del on DE), own work?! (c) by the company Nolispanmo 14:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:06, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:07, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 15:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere, no description. Leyo 16:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. George Chernilevsky talk 20:08, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere, no description. Might even be a copyvio. Leyo 16:02, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom/ George Chernilevsky talk 20:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere. Leyo 16:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:09, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Is this image in scope? Educational content? GeorgHH • talk 17:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
unused personal image, blurry and out of scope. Japs 88 (talk) 19:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope: not realistically useful or educational, also, has potential use for personal attacks on other projects Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- It's only use in any project is on a user page on en.wiki. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:11, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Uploader, who also seems to be the Flickr-uploader seems to have made a mistake and wants his file deleted. But it was available under a compatible license on Flickr. Since it was nominated for deletion shortly after its upload, I think we could accept this request. In future, please note that you can't revoke cc-licenses if you change your mind. RE rillke questions? 16:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete on this case of a 1.5 day old upload. But the uploader should not hide the fact that this is his flickr account...and leave the source and author blank. I reverted his edit here. After all, nobody's perfect and we all make mistakes. --Leoboudv (talk) 03:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: File is not in use and since others can take a new photo I agree that we should respect the wish of the uploader. MGA73 (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
Found out that the file has already been uploaded before. Daylon124 (talk) 18:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, non-free logo. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No license Lymantria (talk) 10:14, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Low quality (resolution, badJPG), orphaned, better alternatives in Category:Polypropylene. Leyo 09:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Keep None of these are valid reasons. It's not a bad JPEG, it's a small JPEG, there's a difference. "Orphaned" is never a reason for deletion at Commons. Although there are many alternatives, it is impossible to judge which is "better" without knowing the context in which it is to be used, and that's a question of who and how they are planning to use it, which isn't predictable in advance. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:28, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- It is a {{BadJPG}}. There is no room for discussion here. --Leyo 12:34, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete With that many alternatives, and that poor quality, per Leyo. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: In addition to the quality concerns expressed above, the file is chemically misleading by not representing the polymeric nature of polypropylene. Ed (Edgar181) 20:08, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- KeepThe Work - the signature was not created in the UK, so COM:SIG#UKcannot apply - it was created in Singelkerk Amsterdam. Other signatures taken in the Netherlands appear to accepted (under their copyright legislation) so I don't see any immediate reason for deletion. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 09:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- I didn't see that in the file description. In that case, the signature can be kept. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:10, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- KeepThe Original Work (from which this is a derivative) - the signature - was not created in the UK, so COM:SIG#UKcannot apply - it was created in Singelkerk Amsterdam. Other signatures taken in the Netherlands appear to accepted (under their copyright legislation) so I don't see any immediate reason for deletion. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 09:46, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
- In that case, I don't think that there is any problem. I have adjusted the description to state that the signature was written in the Netherlands. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Due to the age of the image I doubt that {{Own}} is correct. Leyo 09:09, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Eni owns the picture and offers it with no restrictions.
- If it is neccessary to change the tag connected to the image, please do it or tell me how to do it.
- Kind regards and thankyou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lazaruslongmedia (talk • contribs)
- You need to send a permission to OTRS. --Leyo 09:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by User:Fastily. Ed (Edgar181) 13:05, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Collage containing copyrighted image and wrong image
- Copyrighted (non-free) image: This image was posted to Panoramio on July 7, 2009 by Cumali Uyan and the uploader claims "All Rights Reserved". But I think Cumali Uyan also took from ohter website. This image (photobucket) was posted to myzurna.com on September 7, 2006. But I think this was taken from www.el-aziz.net/. Takabeg (talk) 13:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Wrong image: File:Gypsum hills.jpg is an image taken in Mescitli, where is not in the Malatya Province but in the Sivas Province).
Takabeg (talk) 13:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:59, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
copyright infringement as original photo has a caption, probably taken from a website Lpdrew (talk) 07:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep you have not demonstrated copyright infringement but merely asserted it based on the fact that the Flickr uploader placed a caption on his photo. He has other photos from concerts and media events on his flickr account. No reason to suspect this is infringment. Warfieldian (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
- In fact, the uploader mentioned that the caption was from Rush Limbaugh's official website: "the Limbaugh website spelled [Sutherland's first name] wrong." 99.119.8.44 02:15, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, per astute analysis by Warfieldian (talk · contribs), above. -- Cirt (talk) 07:53, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - no reason given to doubt this flikr accounts release right. - Youreallycan (talk) 15:42, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep no reasonable basis on which to assert infringement - the basis that it "has a caption" is insufficient at this point. Collect (talk) 16:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
- Yes there is - again, the flickr user's description of this photo admitted this photo was from Rush's website. Lpdrew (talk) 04:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
- The reason Lpdrew believes this is a copyvio is probably because of the text in the description that reads "(note that the Limbaugh website spelled it wrong)" - the image itself has a caption at its bottom which this appears to be referring to. OSborn arfcontribs. 15:51, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- OK; so lets do some basic research. Tineye indicates that was hosted on Limbaugh's site in March 2006 (not available now), and also appeared on several other blogs at around the same time. I suspect it comes from there originally; given the context and that comment on the flickr post. Archive.org shows it on his website (note: you'll need to turn of Javascript for that link to work, otherwise it tries to redirect you..) on 11 April 2006, but with other images of identical structure. In that context: clear copyvio. --ErrantX (talk) 21:42, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete No indication the Flickr uploader has the rights to the image. Appears to be a promotional photo from Rush's website. OSborn arfcontribs. 22:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per ErrantX and his astute analysis (ht Cirt for that phrasing). NathanT 22:56, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete copyright provenance not clear, erring on the side of caution. Lankiveil (talk) 23:07, 8 April 2012 (UTC).
- Delete - per ErrantX. Better to err on the side of caution. Connormah (talk | contribs) 00:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Clearly a copyvio per ErrantX Kaldari (talk) 01:40, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
1951. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old nor PD in Latvia. sугсго 08:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 20:47, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
1953. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 10:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
1948. Not PD-Russia or PD in Armenia (70pma) sугсго 10:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:37, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Probably not own work. Seems to be scanned from a book. Razvan Socol (talk) 17:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Doubtfully own work, if person shown is born 1923, it may be that the pic is free, but we will need more infos Funfood ␌ 23:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Descr. says original author died 1968, so it may be not free Funfood ␌ 23:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Unofficial variation on Google logo. Unused, lacks notability, source is a 404. Not associated with Google. –Krinkletalk 23:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 22:35, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
Bad quality JDOG555 (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Renamed. Yann (talk) 07:53, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but there is no FoP in the UAE. Dura lex, sed lex. 84.61.183.12 13:56, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
- Nonsense! Its a picture of that guy with the buildings just de minimis. (Being a personal picture that's out of scope is another story.) -- 178.190.200.51 16:25, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Sand storms are not copyrighted; in use on user page. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Kept. - already by Jim - Jcb (talk) 13:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
Commons is not a family album Nino Verde (talk) 10:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - user image. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Speedy Keep It is true that Commons is not a family album, but we allow all users, even newbies, an image for their user page -- see User:Stoff. Please check to see if a file is in use before nominating it for deletion for reasons other than copyvio. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Watch Indonesia
[edit]Permission on the website not includes modification and not necessarily allows us - Wikimedia Commons - to perpetually redistribute under same conditions. Martin H. (talk) 22:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- File:84a-Transporting the ballots.jpg
- File:82-Transporting the ballots.jpg
- File:84b-Transporting the ballots.jpg
- File:K-03-At the polling center.jpg
- File:K-CNRT rally Dili 07'99-22.jpg
- File:K-CNRT rally Dili 07'99-24.jpg
- File:K-CNRT rally Dili 07'99-25.jpg
- File:K-CNRT rally Dili 07'99-26.jpg
- File:K-CNRT rally Dili Manuel Carrascalao 07-99-17.jpg
- File:Aileu Falintilcamp Okt '99, Xanana kehrt zurück-01.jpg
- File:0640 Commander Taur matan Ruak Aileu 2000.jpg
- File:0590 25. Falintil Anniversary 2000 in Aileu.jpg
- File:0240 Militia Leader Eurico Guterres 1999.jpg
- File:0250 Militia Commander Joao Tavares at Balibo Integration (1).jpg
- File:0265 Commander railakan Berelau 1999.jpg
- Die Webseite sagt klar und deutlich: "Texte, Bilder und andere Medien von Watch Indonesia! dürfen unter Angabe von AutorIn und Quelle frei verwendet werden." Was denn noch? Die Weiterverwendung ist klar bei der Genehmigung aufgeführt oder muss noch extra betont werden, dass die Bilder bei der Weiterverwendung auch umgestaltet werden dürfen? Entsprechende Angaben zur Freigabe kann ich bei Watch Indonesia! anfragen, die die Verwendung bei Wikipedia explizit genehmigt haben. Eigentlich wollte man die Bilder ja selbst hochladen, aber das war nicht möglich, weil Organisationen hier keine Accounts haben dürfen. --Patrick (talk) 13:28, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Die Freigabe im Impressum entspricht eher CC-BY als CC-BY-SA, ist also eigentlich noch "freier", als die Mindestanforderungen von commons verlangen. Irgendetwas, was auf NC oder ND hinweisen würde, ist dort nicht zu finden. -- smial (talk) 15:10, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Das ist nicht richtig. Die Aussage ist: "Du kannst Bilder von unserer Seite nehmen und weiterverwenden solange du uns als Quelle nennst". Die Aussage ist nicht: "Du kannst Bilder von unserer Seite nehmen, weiterverwenden und modifizieren solange du uns als Quelle nennst und du kannst anderen die Bilder zur Weiterverwendung anbieten solange diese uns als Quelle nennen, selbst dann, wenn wir unsere Nutzungsbedingungen geändert haben oder die Bilder auf unserer Seite nicht mehr verfügbar sind". Die Freigabe im Impressum hat mit einer CC-BY oder einer äquivalenten Freigabe nicht viel gemeinsam. Weder schließt sie die Modifikation des Werkes ein, noch ist sie unwiderruflich. --Martin H. (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Es ist nicht Bedingung für eine freie Lizenz, daß alle Aspekte der cc-by-regelungen erfüllt sein müssen. Modifikationsmöglichkeiten oder Unwiderrufbarkeit sind bei Watch Indonesia schlicht nicht geregelt. Ich schrub auch nicht, daß die Angaben dort der CC-BY entsprächen, nur, daß sie näher bei CC-BY als bei CC-BY-SA lägen. Es steht auf der Seite auch nicht, daß die Bilder nur in unveränderter Form verwendet werden dürften, sondern da steht, genau, sie sind frei verwendbar. Was genau ist an "frei verwendbar" unklar? Es existieren keine Einschränkungen. In einem Vertrag, in dem keine Einschränkungen formuliert werden, kann niemand nachträglich welche hineininterpretieren, sofern keine strafrechtlichen, sittenwidrigen oder sonstige rechtlichen Aspekte berührt werden. Es kann natürlich sein, daß Watch Indonesia das möglicherweise im Detail anders gemeint hat, aber das steht da schlicht und einfach nirgends. Da steht: Wir verlangen Autoren & Quellenangabe, alles andere ist uns egal, macht ansonsten, wat ihr wollt. Die Löschbegründung ist völlig absurd, allenfalls könnte diskutiert werden, ob es im commons-Lizenzsammelsurium nicht eine Variante gäbe, die besser als CC-BY(-SA) auf die Freigabe von Watch Indonesia passen würde. -- smial (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Macht was Ihr wollt steht dort nicht. Beispiel: X lädt heute eine Datei von der Seite runter und nutzt Sie. Morgen ändert die Webseite Ihre Konditionen oder verschwindet aus dem Netz. Übermorgen möchte Y das Bild nutzen, darf er aber nicht weil die Webseite die entsprechende Freigabe nicht mehr anbietet oder weil die Seite nicht mehr besteht. Y darf von X nicht kopieren da die Übereinkunft zwischen X und der Webseite zustande gekommen ist, nicht aber zwischen der Webseite und Y. Erkläre mir, was erlaubt es nun Wikimedia Commons - anstelle von X - die Datei heute zu kopieren und übermorgen anderen anzubieten zu Konditionen die zwischen dem Rechteinhaber und Y nicht zustande gekommen sind und nicht zustande kommen würden? Siehe auch Commons:Lizenzen#Welche Lizenz ist OK?. Im Übrigen muss Bearbeitung erlaubt sein, nicht nur nicht eingeschränkt. In einem Lizenzvertrag in dem eine Nutzungsform nicht erwähnt ist darfst du davon auszugehen, dass die Nutzungsform dem Lizenznehmer nicht gestattet ist, in diesem Fall ist etwas verwenden ungleich etwas verändern. --Martin H. (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Es ist nicht Bedingung für eine freie Lizenz, daß alle Aspekte der cc-by-regelungen erfüllt sein müssen. Modifikationsmöglichkeiten oder Unwiderrufbarkeit sind bei Watch Indonesia schlicht nicht geregelt. Ich schrub auch nicht, daß die Angaben dort der CC-BY entsprächen, nur, daß sie näher bei CC-BY als bei CC-BY-SA lägen. Es steht auf der Seite auch nicht, daß die Bilder nur in unveränderter Form verwendet werden dürften, sondern da steht, genau, sie sind frei verwendbar. Was genau ist an "frei verwendbar" unklar? Es existieren keine Einschränkungen. In einem Vertrag, in dem keine Einschränkungen formuliert werden, kann niemand nachträglich welche hineininterpretieren, sofern keine strafrechtlichen, sittenwidrigen oder sonstige rechtlichen Aspekte berührt werden. Es kann natürlich sein, daß Watch Indonesia das möglicherweise im Detail anders gemeint hat, aber das steht da schlicht und einfach nirgends. Da steht: Wir verlangen Autoren & Quellenangabe, alles andere ist uns egal, macht ansonsten, wat ihr wollt. Die Löschbegründung ist völlig absurd, allenfalls könnte diskutiert werden, ob es im commons-Lizenzsammelsurium nicht eine Variante gäbe, die besser als CC-BY(-SA) auf die Freigabe von Watch Indonesia passen würde. -- smial (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Das ist nicht richtig. Die Aussage ist: "Du kannst Bilder von unserer Seite nehmen und weiterverwenden solange du uns als Quelle nennst". Die Aussage ist nicht: "Du kannst Bilder von unserer Seite nehmen, weiterverwenden und modifizieren solange du uns als Quelle nennst und du kannst anderen die Bilder zur Weiterverwendung anbieten solange diese uns als Quelle nennen, selbst dann, wenn wir unsere Nutzungsbedingungen geändert haben oder die Bilder auf unserer Seite nicht mehr verfügbar sind". Die Freigabe im Impressum hat mit einer CC-BY oder einer äquivalenten Freigabe nicht viel gemeinsam. Weder schließt sie die Modifikation des Werkes ein, noch ist sie unwiderruflich. --Martin H. (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
DAs ist kein Argument. Bilder können auch von Flickr gelöscht oder ihre Lizenzangaben geändert werden. Solange die Angaben dort zum Zeitpunkt des Hochladens bei Commons mit den Regeln hier übereinstimmen, ist das kein Problem. Es gibt hier sogar Hinweise bei den Bildern, wo der Flickr-Hochlader die Bedingungen geändert hat, damit diese dann nicht gelöscht werden. Im übrigen hat Watch Indonesia! gerade WEGEN Wikipedia die Bilder als Galerie zur Verfügung gestellt, weil es mit dem Selbsthochladen nur Theater gab. Der Wunsch ist eindeutig: "Nennt die Autoren und die Quellen, dann könnt Ihr mit den Bildern machen, was Ihr wollt." Siehe auch die Diskussion in der deutschen Wikipedia, die ich oben verlinkt habe. --Patrick (talk) 22:00, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Ja, weil auf Flickr einem Lizenzvertrag zugestimmt wird (CC-BY oder CC-BY-SA) der die Unwiederrufbarkeit festlegt, während auf Flickr der Rechteinhaber diesem also zustimmt wird in diesem Fall einfach etwas angemaßt. Watch Indonesia - bzw. besser gesagt: die Fotografen als Rechteinhaber - sollen entweder eine freie Lizenz auf die Webseite stellen oder eine schriftliche Freigabe zu einer freien Lizenz geben entsprechend COM:OTRS/de. Eine solche schriftliche Freigabe musst du ja haben, immerhin hast du einen Account erstellt und Bilder mit einer freien Lizenz hochgeladen. Ohne eine schriftliche Bestätigung zu exakt dieser Lizenzierung wirst du wahrscheinlich kaum Rechtsgeschäfte im Namen der Organisation durchgeführt haben, oder etwa doch. --Martin H. (talk) 22:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Comment "Frei verwendet" verstehe ich als für uns absolut ausreichende Freigabe. Verwendung impliziert laienhaft die Veränderung. Schöner und eindeutiger wäre ein "frei verwendet nach den Bedingungen der Lizenz Creative Commons by-sa 3.0". Patrick, vielleicht mögen sie den kleinen Zusatz noch dahintersetzen, damit auch wirklich keine Missverständnisse aufkommen? Das sind tatsächlich keine Allerweltsaufnahmen und es wäre super, wenn sie hier unangreifbar gesichert wären. Martin ist keiner, der leichtfertig löscht. --Martina talk 22:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Ich gebe das mal weiter. --Patrick (talk) 10:45, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Im Impressum steht jetzt: Texte, Bilder und andere Medien von Watch Indonesia! dürfen unter Angabe von AutorIn und Quelle unbefristet frei verwendet werden. Bilder dürfen zur Weiterverwendung modifiziert werden. Von schwer wiegenden Veränderungen, die als evtl. politisch motivierte Fälschung gewertet werden könnten, bitten wir jedoch abzusehen. Letzteres ist vom Urheberpersönlichkeitsrecht abgedeckt, das auch ausdrücklich z.B. in CC-Lizenzen berücksichtigt wird. Sollte man einen Sxreenshot/ ein pdf dieser Freigabe vielleicht als OTRS-Ticket hinterlegen? --Martina talk 16:56, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Wenn jetzt keine Probleme bestehen, werde ich nun weitere Bilder hochladen. --Patrick (talk) 18:44, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Kept, Thanks for the constructive discussion and the clarification from their side. h-stt !? 17:10, 18 February 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fundacionfree (talk · contribs)
[edit]All these images come from http://arasaac.org/, on which they are licensed under the non-free cc-by-nc-sa.
- File:Escribir (1).png
- File:Escribir2.png
- File:Lectura.png
- File:Por favor.png
- File:Hablar.png
- File:Hogar 1.png
- File:Estudio2.png
- File:Ocio.png
- File:Comunidad educativa.png
- File:Llegar.png
- File:Dibujar 2.png
- File:Peligro 1.png
- File:Dar 1.png
- File:Aseo.png
- File:Psicomotricidad.png
- File:Secar las manos.png
- File:Sociedad.png
- File:Estimulación.png
- File:Cuerpo 2.png
- File:Cubo de imágenes.png
- File:Adaptación.png
Prof. Professorson (talk) 08:56, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
More files uploaded by Fundacionfree (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyright violations from http://arasaac.org/, see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Fundacionfree.
- File:Yo, también.png
- File:Política.png
- File:Planificar.png
- File:Libro.png
- File:Extranjero.png
- File:Hablar (1).png
- File:Comunicación aumentativa.png
Prof. Professorson (talk) 16:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
All files were already deleted with the exception of File:Libro.png and File:Extranjero.png which I have deleted as well as they have not been put under a {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} license as claimed but under an unfree cc-by-nc-sa license. --AFBorchert (talk) 07:38, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope images uploaded by Fundacionfree (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, no educational use.
Prof. Professorson (talk) 16:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Extended content
|
|---|
|
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 1[edit]Sculpture of Yevgeny Vuchetich who died in 1974. Unfortunately, no FoP in Russia and also copyrighted in the U.S. Excluded some pics which are de minimis, stamps, coins etc.
A.Savin 15:57, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: I am deleting all of the images with the exception of the RIA Novosti images, as it is possible that RIAN has obtained the necessary permissions. The issues related to those 2 RIAN photos need to be taken up with those collaborating with RIAN, and they will need to report back to us as to the outcome. The other photos are plainly covered by COM:FOP#Russia and have to be deleted. russavia (talk) 01:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 2[edit]Per COM:FOP#Russia: sculpture of Yevgeny Vuchetich who died in 1974.
Eleassar (t/p) 09:40, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
There is no FOP in Russia -FASTILY 23:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 3[edit]No FoP for sculpture in Russia, see also: Category:Russian FOP cases/The Motherland Calls.
A.Savin 15:17, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 00:29, 5 June 2015 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 4[edit]
Rodrigolopes (talk) 00:23, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per Atsirlin: No Freedom of Panorama for sculptures in Russia. --Storkk (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2016 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 5[edit]No Freedom of Panorama in Russia for artwork, including sculptures. The creator, Evgeny Vuchetich, died in 1974. Copyright expires in 2045.
Off-shell (talk) 08:00, 17 September 2017 (UTC) Deleted: No FoP for sculptures in Russia. --Wdwd (talk) 07:38, 25 September 2017 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 6[edit]No FoP in Russia for artwork including sculptures. Copyright expires in 2045.
Off-shell (talk) 07:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:24, 5 October 2017 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 7[edit]No FOP for sculptures in Russia. Author died in 1974.
Kulmalukko (talk) 14:04, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 7 February 2018 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 8[edit]Same reason as previously: No FOP for sculptures in Russia. Author (E.Vuchetich) died in 1974.
A.Savin 22:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC) Deleted: my turn. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 30 March 2018 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 9[edit]Another batch of derivatives (please note that OTRS permissions, if any, are from photographers, not from sculptors).
VLu (talk) 06:38, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination -- note that the fact that the work is surrounded by scaffolding does not somehow make it not copyrighted. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:00, 2 November 2019 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 10[edit]No FoP in Russia for sculptures. Undelete in 2045.
Off-shell (talk) 10:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. Sealle (talk) 11:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC) This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 11[edit]See COM:FOP Russia — the last-living sculptor died in 1974 (see the enwiki article), and still within the posthumous copyrigh term. Russian FOP is limited to architecture and garden designs only. Unless another copyright law change/reform will occur soon.
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 16:54, 21 December 2020 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 08:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC) |
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPEG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_fluoride.jpg){kind=link}
![13.60 File:Logo_"Nicht_der_Rede_wert"_-_black.png](#File:Logo_"Nicht_der_Rede_wert"_-_black.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
2.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPEG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPEG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPEG){kind=link}
.JPEG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](http://fs70.trilulilu.ro/imgs/TICristina/sapna-babul-ka-bidaai_baff2a6d3e46e7.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_fluoride.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_fluoride.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_fluoride.jpg){kind=link}
_fluoride.jpg){kind=link}
![10:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/01/24#c-Nolispanmo-2012-01-24T10:41:00.000Z-File:Logo_"Nicht_der_Rede_wert"_-_black.png){kind=link}
![20:04, 1 February 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/01/24#c-George_Chernilevsky-2012-02-01T20:04:00.000Z-File:Logo_"Nicht_der_Rede_wert"_-_black.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Postcard_of_Ljubljana,_Pre%C5%A1eren_Square_at_night_%284%29.jpg){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}
_08.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}
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 12
[edit]See previous nominations. A copyrighted public work that was unveiled in 1967. Its authors: Yevgeny Vuchetich (1908–1974) and Nikolay Nikitin (1907–1973). Russian freedom of panorama for works of art (sculptures, monuments, murals etc.) is noncommercial, thus unacceptable. COM:VRT authorization from the heirs of the sculptors is required.
- File:Мамаев курган (3).jpg ‐ cannot be COM:DM as the statue is the intended focus here.
- File:Родина Мать зовет.jpg
- File:Скульптура «Родина-мать зовет!» 3.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:59, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Minoraxtalk 12:09, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:The Motherland Calls 13
[edit]violating FoP rules of Russia (Category:Russian FOP cases/The Motherland Calls); de minimis not applicable
- File:Volgograd. Mamayev Kurgan memorial complex in winter.jpg
- File:Волгоград - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Скульптура «Родина-мать зовет!».jpg
- File:Скульптура Родина-мать зовет!.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Draceane talkcontrib. 11:54, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: by Missvain. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 01:04, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Lauridiazga (talk · contribs)
[edit]This user has uploaded many copyright violations. These two images, from two different cameras, look like official press pictures and are very unlikely the uploader's own work.
Prof. Professorson (talk) 13:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Yann (talk) 08:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
Post-1944 Photo. (First time the allied powers got a A4). Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-Old. sугсго 08:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Am closing this as COM:PRP russavia (talk) 03:03, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Ka-8 was build after WW 2 (see de:Kamow Ka-8). Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 08:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. High Contrast (talk) 13:41, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
The image doesn't match with the description Kags (talk) 03:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image does not match with the description and has bad quality. Kags (talk) 03:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
The author does not have a permission to use this image. Kags (talk) 03:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
2.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
2.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image does not match with the description and has bad quality. Kags (talk) 03:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
2.JPG){kind=link}
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:48, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
2.JPG){kind=link}
This image is not adequate Kags (talk) 03:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: ??? Denniss (talk) 13:46, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a booklet scan for product placement. Kobac (talk) 07:43, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a booklet scan for product placement. Kobac (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a booklet scan for product placement. Kobac (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a booklet scan for product placement. Kobac (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a booklet scan for product placement. Kobac (talk) 07:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:45, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Published 1953, not PD-Russia-2008 nor PD-OId-,# sугсго 08:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 06:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
en:Matvey Blanter died in 1990. Not PD-Russia-2008 or PD-old. sугсго 08:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. russavia (talk) 07:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
fr:Lev Knipper (composer) died 1974. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-Old- sугсго 08:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
1960. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old sугсго 08:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. russavia (talk) 07:58, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
1950-1958. not PD-Russia.2008, nor PD-Old. sугсго 08:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: PD-Russia is no longer a valid licence. As there is no other info, COM:PRP applies russavia (talk) 04:47, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Famous photo by en:Emmanuil Evzerikhin (1911, Rostov-on-Don - 1984, Moscow). Not PD-Russia -2008 or PD-Ukraine or PD-old. sугсго 10:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:42, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Georgi Zelma died in 1984 (see http://lumieregallery.net/wp/1672/georgi-zelma-biography/) not PD-Russia-2008 or PD-old. sугсго 10:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:42, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Georgi Zelma died in 1984 (see http://lumieregallery.net/wp/1672/georgi-zelma-biography/) not PD-Russia-2008 or PD-old. sугсго 10:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nomination russavia (talk) 04:05, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
prominent watermark suggests that image may not be originally from Flickr user and thereby not legitimately CC licensed, as website squashpics.com states "Photographs must not be copied from this site without the permission of Steve Line" Túrelio (talk) 14:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The same image could not be found on Squashpics.com nor other websites Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 14:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: http://www.squashpics.com/us_open_2007.htm Denniss (talk) 13:38, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Not sure this is "own work" as user uploaded a new version of File:Flowers.jpg which is a microsoft background Chesdovi (talk) 16:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:35, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, doesn't seem entirely useless to me, illustrates children snorkeling. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:34, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Almost certainly from this source, which has an NC license. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Almost certainly from this source, which has an NC license. Very similar to File:Camera AHM 1-sm.jpg, but this has more advertising material. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:53, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:32, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Most likely not a candidate for PD-AR: The player was from France and played in European leagues, no evidence that this photo was created in Argentina Polarlys (talk) 17:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Simple browser screenshot of some files hosted per FTP, out of COM:PS Funfood ␌ 17:30, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Has the content of Category:SuicideGirls ever been discussed before? http://suicidegirls.com/legal/ does not state a compatible license at all. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 18:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- The legal page says under Copyright: Content contained in any part of the Site may not be reproduced, copied, edited, published, transmitted, uploaded or downloaded in any way without the prior written consent and permission of SuicideGirls. SuicideGirls does not grant any express or implied right to any third party (including without limitation Users), under any trademarks, service marks, copyrights or other proprietary information or rights.
- The images in that category are downloaded from Flickr, but as far as I can see they are all published under a non-commercial license. Still, it looks like they were checked when they were imported here. It could be that the license was different at the time of importing to Commons.
- However, this looks like license laundering. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 18:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - has been discussed several times; search! /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I don't have time for that, but if it has been discussed before it's ok with me. It would be handy though, if the decision and link to the discussion is added to the talk page of the category. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 20:29, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - It's been discussed multiple times. Again - the SG images are fine here. The Flickr-Accout is the official SG account, verified by OTRS. SG did change the licences of some pictures, but that has no retrospective effect.--Lamilli (talk) 19:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Denniss (talk) 13:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
I think this is copyvio. the web site in watermark, http://wl.igg.com, is an all rights reserved site. Japs 88 (talk) 19:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Copy vio highly likely. At least the character seems familiar. And why put the watermark in if it is own work? Makes no sense at all. --Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 04:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Very unlikely his own work. No EXIF data, single purpose upload account Raymond 20:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, copyright violation [4]. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
![[4]](http://thversionkp.t.h.pic.centerblog.net/c8bq47ao.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:25, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Scaled down duplicate of File:Flag of Latvia.svg ~ Fry1989 eh? 21:58, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:24, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
en:Emmanuil Evzerikhin died in 1984. Not PD-old, nor PD-Russia-2008. sугсго 10:35, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
No evidence of date and/or place of publication. PD-Russia is no longer a valid licence. russavia (talk) 07:19, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Already Deleted Denniss (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
1952, not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 10:21, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Kobac (talk) 12:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted as per nomination russavia (talk) 12:57, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (badJPG), not used anywhere (replaced by File:PHPS on polar surface.png by the same author). Leyo 16:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, but in both, I don't see where "-NH3" is happening in the diagrams. And the proposed replacement has a dangling N–[nothing] bond (see annotation). DMacks (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unused, has disputed content, and has been replaced by the original uploader Ed (Edgar181) 12:39, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
1950, Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old sугсго 08:48, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: asper nom russavia (talk) 13:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
1952. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 08:50, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 13:14, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
1944. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 08:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 13:17, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Taken ~ 1955, see http://gaz20.spb.ru/modif_m72.htm not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 10:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 14:28, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
1945. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 10:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 12:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
COM:DW. One of the architects (see: http://www.opera-novosibirsk.ru/building/architecture.php) ru:Курилко,_Михаил_Иванович died 1959.Not PD-old, nor PD-Russia-2008. sугсго 10:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 12:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
COM:DW. One of the architects (see: http://www.opera-novosibirsk.ru/building/architecture.php) ru:Курилко,_Михаил_Иванович died 1959.Not PD-old, nor PD-Russia-2008. sугсго 10:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nom russavia (talk) 12:25, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
1942. Not PD-Old, or PD-Russia-2008. Undelete 2013. sугсго 10:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- What is the condtion for PD-Russia-2008?--Sanandros (talk) 22:33, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- template:PD-Russia-2008. sугсго 06:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- and why can't it remain with the actual template till we are sure about that?--Sanandros (talk) 01:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- We are sure about this photo. Photos published 1942+ aren't PD in Russia any more. see Russia-2008. The are some other images tagged with the old tag, which licence status is unkown. sугсго 09:09, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- and why can't it remain with the actual template till we are sure about that?--Sanandros (talk) 01:29, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
- template:PD-Russia-2008. sугсго 06:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Russia-2008 has the cutoff date of 1943. Therefore am keeping this, and will retag with PD-Russia-2008 russavia (talk) 12:31, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
1943. Not PD-Russia-2008, nor PD-old. sугсго 10:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Kobac (talk) 12:08, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:23, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
DELETE Nancy.ceo2020 (talk) 21:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 19:18, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
I posted this image on flickr, and AS A MISTAKE it was with creative commons license, because some other photos I used to upload have that license, so it was automatically assigned. Suddenly, some user, NOT ME, uploaded it here, before I changed it to all rights reserved almost 2 years ago. And now everyone in Publicity is using WRONG this photo, making commercial use of it. I DIDNT want it to be here. It's my work, and I want this to be deleted. I won a contest with this, I registered as my intelectual property and I signed to be an all rights reserved image because I received a prize, now I'm having these big problem. Tehzeta (talk) 23:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, this was two years ago, a lot of people may be relying on Commons as proof that it was released under a (irrevocable) free license. Prof. Professorson (talk) 00:50, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep While it is understandable that a person can make a mistake, but at this time it would be a mistake to delete this file. The fact that other people use this commercially will not actually change due to the fact that we delete it here (they will still have all the right in the world to continue to use it), but 2 Wikipedia projects will be denied the access to an educationally useful image. Also you can't revoke a CC licence, it's not even implicit, it's explicit there. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 03:42, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep can't revoke a CC licence.--Yearitems (talk) 20:49, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Licence is not revocable. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:30, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
All files Files by User:Wantonier
[edit]Wantonier (talk · contribs) All files by Wantonier are personal and aren't realistic useful. --GeorgHH • talk 18:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, they're most likely copyright violations too. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
I support deletion as the media is posted as english without an english description.Tradimus (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Denniss (talk) 13:28, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
Niet meer nodig voor Wikipedia! Deze foto word niet meer gebruikt. Klant01 (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:27, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Niet meer nodig voor Wikipedia! Deze foto word niet meer gebruikt. Klant01 (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:35, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Niet meer nodig voor Wikipedia! Deze foto word niet meer gebruikt. Klant01 (talk) 19:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Niet meer nodig voor Wikipedia! Deze foto word niet meer gebruikt. Klant01 (talk) 19:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:32, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted image, source: http://flagspot.net/flags/ru_tzar.html Yuri Pirogov (talk) 20:56, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 07:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:10, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Please do NOT delete this signature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.84.5 (talk • contribs) 2012-06-28T22:44:42 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unclear comparison of different etnicities; graph indeed comes from national statistics website, but content is confusing nonsense 188.246.77.39 09:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#United Arab Emirates. 84.61.131.15 18:01, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Prof. Professorson (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Sreejith K (talk) 22:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- As per the notice left on my Talk page, I will reiterate what I stated on Stefan4's Talk page—that "I am not familiar with copyright issues surrounding signatures, and if the signature is problematic, then by all means—please delete it!" Any direction is/would be appreciated! Thanks again for the heads-up, Londonjackbooks (talk) 01:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- There are some directions at COM:SIG. Signatures are considered to be too simple to get any copyright in some countries (e.g. the US and Germany) but not in other countries (e.g. the UK and the People's Republic of China). A lot of countries are not mentioned at all in those directions, so the status of signatures in those countries is unknown. The copyright for British signatures expires 70 years after the death of the signatory, so old British signatures are allowed and that is why this page belongs to the category Undelete in 2018. --Stefan4 (talk) 08:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I am at the mercy of those who know better! :) Londonjackbooks (talk) 12:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- There are some directions at COM:SIG. Signatures are considered to be too simple to get any copyright in some countries (e.g. the US and Germany) but not in other countries (e.g. the UK and the People's Republic of China). A lot of countries are not mentioned at all in those directions, so the status of signatures in those countries is unknown. The copyright for British signatures expires 70 years after the death of the signatory, so old British signatures are allowed and that is why this page belongs to the category Undelete in 2018. --Stefan4 (talk) 08:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK. Stefan4 (talk) 00:44, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Okay, what was the term of copyright in the UK in 1930? At that point, would it not have required registration and renewal to offer protection beyond three or four decades? To the extent that his is a creation within the context of copyright law it's 82 years old and 62 years after the death of the author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vanhorn (talk • contribs) 2012-05-10T02:59:25 (UTC)
- The United Kingdom has never required any copyright registrations or renewals. The signature is protected for life+70 years. Since the man died less than 70 years ago, it is still copyrighted. Can be undeleted on 1 January 1921 (as indicated by the undeletion category). --Stefan4 (talk) 11:24, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:48, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I'm nominating this only because someone, ostensibly Sinclair, complained about it on the English Wikipedia. I can't figure out who the author is, and the website given for it is dead. I can't even quite figure out the complaint by Sinclair. Bbb23 (talk) 02:17, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Archive.org wayback only has one snapshot of the dead website, from 2008, not showing this image; looks like a Myspace type site. [5]. Possibly an admin at nl:W who can look at the deleted original upload there might be able to have some info. -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - The nominator seems to have been confused by Sinclair's complaint. The basis of the complaint is entirely to do with Facebook's mirroring of our content and nothing specifically to do with our content per se. The above link by Infrogmation appears to show that the uploader is a Pro/Semi-Pro Music photographer who has generously donated his images to the project. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 15:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm glad you could make sense out of the complaint. Perhaps you can explain how the mirroring of our content at Facebook caused the complainant problems? Maybe I'm dense, but I still don't get it.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:58, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Mr Sinclair signed up to facebook and I'm still not sure whether he was just planning to use it for contact purposes or whether he actively wanted to market to his fans. Either way when he did a search for himself Facebook did what Facebook does and returned a page of his name instead of his profile. He looked at the page and did not realise that facebook automatically mirrors wikipedia content and presents it as pages - instead he thought that some fan was cyber squatting on his page and cut and paste copying the material from wikipedia. The best solution for him is to create his own page and build up more "likes" than the wikipedia mirror and to inform Facebook that their mirror is being pulled through from the wrong wikimedia project (fr rather than en) instead he's chasing a non-existent imposter all over the internet. Stuart.Jamieson (talk)
- Mr Sinclair posted to OTRS about the image - I have given him a link to this page for him to contribute to the discussion. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- I suppose that all that really matters is whether the image is free or properly licensed. As for Facebook, it doesn't help that I don't know how Facebook works (and don't use it). I'll defer to Stuart's understanding of Facebook and Sinclair's complaint.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:45, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
- Mr Sinclair posted to OTRS about the image - I have given him a link to this page for him to contribute to the discussion. Ronhjones (Talk) 21:09, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- Mr Sinclair signed up to facebook and I'm still not sure whether he was just planning to use it for contact purposes or whether he actively wanted to market to his fans. Either way when he did a search for himself Facebook did what Facebook does and returned a page of his name instead of his profile. He looked at the page and did not realise that facebook automatically mirrors wikipedia content and presents it as pages - instead he thought that some fan was cyber squatting on his page and cut and paste copying the material from wikipedia. The best solution for him is to create his own page and build up more "likes" than the wikipedia mirror and to inform Facebook that their mirror is being pulled through from the wrong wikimedia project (fr rather than en) instead he's chasing a non-existent imposter all over the internet. Stuart.Jamieson (talk)
From Richard Sinclair: 28 January 2012. It seems that the photograph of me (as it appears on Wikipedia English and France? etc... and also on a Feacebook Musician Catagory PAGE,) is the 'property' of Creative Commons and that I have the option to ask Creative Commons to REMOVE it. Thank you the irl is: http://fr.wikimedia.org/wiki/Fishier:Richardsinclair.jpg. Please remove it.
There has been a musician PAGE catagory, on Facebook created with it and with my name, with info from the French Wikipaedia. I want to have my own 'Richard Sinclair' Musician/Band catagory page on Facebook and to have this one removed thank you. http://www.facebook.com/pages/RichardSinclair/105524906147639?ref=nf Richard Stephen Sinclair (talk)
- Richard This photograph is not the 'property' of Creative Commons. It is the property of Jaak Geebelen who has chosen to publish the photograph through Commons. Mr Gleeben is professional photographer, and his photographs have been taken from the pit strongly suggesting permission to take those photographs has been granted. Even if you can show that permision was not granted the photographs were taken in Belgium (where no permission from the subject is required to take a photograph) and published in the Netherlands (where no permission from the subject is required to publish a photograph). Policy in such a case is generally only to remove if the commons is using the image to defame, or suggest commercial promotion, or if the image directly affects your privacy. I don't see that the image here falls into any of those categories.
- I've already contacted you directly about facebook - this issue is nothing to do with Wikimedia, Create your own page and gather followers and soon the wikipedia mirror page will be irrelevant. The existence of this mirror should not stop you doing that and if it is affecting it you need to talk to facebook about why it is affecting it. No one from wikimedia created that facebook page - it was facebook that created it and only they can answer your concerns. Stuart.Jamieson (talk) 22:12, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Thank you.
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:50, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
No information (date or author). Write on the italian wikipedia : Evita di trasferire questo file su Wikimedia Commons! VIGNERON (talk) 12:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I'm italian. Io sono italiano. This file Il file in questione has the PD-Italy license tag on it.wikipedia ha su it.wikipedia la licensa PD-Italia that is accepted on Commons. che è accettato in Commons. So, this file shouldn't be deleted. Quindi il file non deve essere cancellato. Thank you Grazie raul (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:51, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
No OTRS from the distillery. Kobac (talk) 14:52, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Я работаю в компании, которая выпускает эту водку. Это фото я взял у дизайнеров специально чтобы разместить тут. Мне что вам расписку прикреплять к файлу? Это даже не смешно. Сначала статью удалять теперь фото...удалите это у меня еще где-то штук 20 подобных. Из специально создают чтобы распростарнять. --Sladky2 (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
То же самое относится и к фото логотипа Глобал Спиритс. Это свободные картинки, которые специально и создаются чтобы их свободнго использовали.--Sladky2 (talk) 15:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: too simple, I think . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:52, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
This file has absolutely no use whatsoever. I created it to practice using Inkscape. It does not contribute in any way, Siddharth Patil (talk) 19:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- It's been on Commons for more than 4 years, maybe it's used externally by now; so keep. Prof. Professorson (talk) 20:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:54, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
There is already a duplicate of this file Fangusu (talk) 12:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
- Where is the duplicate? -- Elphion (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
There is a GIF version, which is the original version of the signature. Fangusu (talk) 14:40, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
- Where is it? --FormerIP (talk) 18:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:C.S.Lewis_signature.gif Fangusu (talk) 02:12, 13 November 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Duplicate file Ezarateesteban 12:22, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
The file deleted was the gif version, we kept the vectorized version Ezarateesteban 22:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:SIG#UK: he has not yet been dead for 70 years. Stefan4 (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:46, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Marta Pan
[edit]Marta Pan is a scuptor who died in 2008, so not in public domain until 2078. FoP in Japan is for buidings only (pictures of red sculptures) and no FoP in France (other ones). Pictures in the category but not in this deletion request where taken in the Netherlands, country with FoP ~
- File:Hakone Marta Pan 01.jpg
- File:Hakone Marta Pan 02.jpg
- File:IC Sculpture de Marta Pan devant le château de Coubertin.JPG
- File:Jardins et bâtiments universitaires.jpg
- File:Marta Pan 1992.jpg
- File:Rue siam 480x600.JPG
Léna (talk) 13:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Regarding the picture taken in the middle of the rue de Siam in Brest, France, there is no reason to delete it for it is a general view of the street. No copyright violation. By the way it is public art, and if you want to delete all the pictures of buildings or pieces of art which are not free of right, they won't be many pictures left in Wikimedia Commons... --Monsieur W (talk) 09:32, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, it is not an overview of the rue de Siam, since the artwork takes the middle of the picture, so no "de minimis" argument applies here. I know, it sounds stupid that public founded and public located pieces of art are still eligible for copyright protection, but it is sadly the case :( You still have to ask the artist (or, here, her heir(s)), to have the right to public this picture on the internet. I just want Commons to only host lawful pictures, and these ones are copyright violations :(. Léna (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- I haven't asked François Trazzi, the author of the picture, what was his intention when he took it, but I'm pretty sure he didn't want to take specifically Marta Pan's fountains, but just the street. After all, in the middle of the street, it is what we see - or what we used to see, the fountains in question have been modified...--Monsieur W (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah sure he didn't realize the fountain was on half of his picture. I know, it happens all the time, when I took File:Grand hôtel lampadaire Stanislas.jpg I didn't realize the Grand Hôtel was there, I was just taking pictures of the streetlights. I'm sorry but it really looks like you think I'm stupid enough to believe this. And, by the way, even if it was true, it would be irrelevant : copyright violations might be unintended, they are still copyright violations. Léna (talk) 09:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
- I haven't asked François Trazzi, the author of the picture, what was his intention when he took it, but I'm pretty sure he didn't want to take specifically Marta Pan's fountains, but just the street. After all, in the middle of the street, it is what we see - or what we used to see, the fountains in question have been modified...--Monsieur W (talk) 19:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- No, it is not an overview of the rue de Siam, since the artwork takes the middle of the picture, so no "de minimis" argument applies here. I know, it sounds stupid that public founded and public located pieces of art are still eligible for copyright protection, but it is sadly the case :( You still have to ask the artist (or, here, her heir(s)), to have the right to public this picture on the internet. I just want Commons to only host lawful pictures, and these ones are copyright violations :(. Léna (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
- Regarding this file, the "de minimis" argument clearly applies here. Clearly not the subject, and only occupies a small part of the picture. XIIIfromTOKYO
- True, but this picture is taken in France, country with no Freedom of panorama, and the building is quiet recent and imho beyond the threshold of originality. Thus, I agree about the de minimis argument for the sculpture, but sadly there's the building :) Léna (talk) 16:35, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per Nominator. Regarding the picture of the University, the artwork by Marta Pan is De minimis however the modern building of the university is not. PierreSelim (talk) 17:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Changed a "no permission" into a DR: Image is widely used and if someone has more info that can help save this photo it would be nice. If not we should delete. MGA73 (talk) 14:32, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
- Comment Source website of the American Hungarian Federation is currently missing. A check of the Internet Archive Wayback of the site in 2008 shows it with the text "Note: AHF believes that all pictures shown below are in the public domain, if there are any issues please contact us to discuss." I find the image reproduced in multiple places online, but couldn't find any giving photographer/source credit -- though given the time and circumstances the photographer may well have preferred to be anonymous. Any information on when and where this was first published? Is there a specific reason to think this is in need of some permission, and if so, from who? -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:19, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Kept. - now the source site states it's PD, let's assume that as long as we have no indication of the contrary - Jcb (talk) 11:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
no permission? Image was retagged as "no permission" by User:Martin H.; since that seems related to the earlier discussion, I am changing it to a deletion request listing. Infrogmation (talk) 00:27, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment The source site claims "AHF believes that all pictures shown below are in the public domain". That doesn't sound authoritative to me. At least one of these photos is a standard press photo: the one subtitled "Remains of Stalin statue" is this Keystone photo.
- Which, BTW, we have as File:Будапешт 56. Голова статуи Сталина.jpg... Lupo 17:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- I couldn't find this particular image here. A photo taken a moment earlier or later with the woman who's standing behind the head standing off towards the right is distributed by AP credited to one "Arpad Hazafi". That appears to be a pseudonym; "Hazafi" means "patriot" in Hungarian. Lupo 08:19, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- File:1956 hungarians stalin head.jpg is published in Gamboni, Dario, The Destruction of Art: Iconoclasm and Vandalism Since the French Revolution (Picturing History), p. 59, ISBN 0948462949; Reaktion books, London, UK; 2003. Gamboni sources the image to a Hungarian museum, the Legújabbkori Történeti Múzeum Fényképtára, Budapest, which appears to me to be the photo collection of the Museum of Contemporary History in Budapest. While they are almost certainly not the copyright owners, they might know more about this photo.
- In any case, the chances that this image is PD are slim. A 1956 photo is copyrighted in Hungary today, even if anonymously or pseudonymously published, and it was also copyrighted on January 1, 1996, so it might have been subject to the URAA restorations in the U.S. if the URAA restoration preconditions are fulfilled. So we really need to know where and when this was first published. If not in a country with a 50-year copyright term, it'll be copyrighted today in it's country of origin, and thus not OK for the Commons. If in the U.S., we'd have to consider the U.S. formalities (registration, renewal). If outside the U.S., it'd also be good if we could show a publication within 30 days in the U.S., otherwise the URAA would make it copyrighted in the U.S. If we could show such a publication within 30 days, we again would need to consider U.S. formalities, and the image might just be PD in the U.S. only and thus might be appropriate for local hosting at the English Wikipedia. If the image was unpublished until 1978 I guess it'd be also copyrighted in the U.S. (created 1956, published 1978 or later means 70y p.m.a. in the U.S. (if published 1978-2002, at least until the end of 2047), or the earlier of 120 years since creation or 95 years since publication if anonymous/pseudonymous). Lupo 13:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
- Comment {{Attribution}} says "copyright holder of this file allows anyone to use it...". Where exactly does the copyright holder say this? Thats the question I adressed with the missing permission tag. Looks like the copyright holder never said what we make him saying. And per Lupos research it looks like the file isnt free. Also File:Будапешт 56. Голова статуи Сталина.jpg?! --Martin H. (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted According to Lupo who has done research on this image, it is unfree -FASTILY (TALK) 22:47, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
because i am the owner and want to replace it. Tomodachidami (talk) 04:49, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
- Delete That's funny, it sure doesn't look like your work. That date is clearly wrong, among other things.--Prosfilaes (talk) 04:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Funny if you see it this way indeed. But owner does not necessarily mean creator. It's a Family picture wich I own.
Kept: No valid reason given for deletion Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
It's difficult to really justify keeping this photo. On one hand, it is not evident that the uploader is the copyright holder. He seems to believe that he is the copyright holder because he owns a print of the photo, but that is not how copyright works. (He might own the copyright if the photo was a work for hire and the uploader inherited the rights, but that is not demonstrated and was not even claimed by the uploader.) And if he is not the copyright holder, it makes it a copyvio to be deleted. On the other hand, if for some reason we nevertheless consider the hypothesis that the uploader is the copyright holder, he requested the deletion of the photo merely five days after he uploaded it, and we generally accept those requests. And then it should be deleted per the uploader's request. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:38, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
Deleted 22:47, 6 September 2012 by Fastily. Closed by . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:43, 10 September 2012 (UTC)