Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/04/23
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Straatzangers,_1928,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
_Ansingh_(1875-1959),_Portret_van_Coba_Ritsema,_1905,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
,_Madeliefjes_in_een_zilveren_beker,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG){kind=link}
,_Jonge_vrouw_met_rode_hoed,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
,_Meisje_met_sinaasappel,_1915,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG){kind=link}
,_Staand_schoolmeisje_in_grijze_jurk,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
,_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek,_foto2.JPG){kind=link}
,_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
,_Portret_van_G.J._Hofker_(1864-1945),_1920,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
Possible copyvio. Description is just "gfdg" and source is unknown. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 00:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: A better upload can be done. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
File is a blank page, should be deleted as it has no use. ~ Gsingh (talk) 03:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: blank page Julo (talk) 04:48, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope; besides I doubt own work of the uploader because the photographer of this phote must be the person himself depicted on the image 188.104.112.53 16:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Actually upload by vandal/attack account - images removed from en wp so speedy - thanks Herby talk thyme 17:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Author died in 1959, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Ah, sorry. They're both painters. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Author died in 1959, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Why 1959? The artist died in 1918 according to the source and to our category. It seems more credible than 1959 anyway, since she was born in 1851. --FA2010 (talk) 17:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, I see. The depicted person died in 1959. How silly. KEEP --FA2010 (talk) 17:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Aha, sorry. they're both painters. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Author died in 1959, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Ah, sorry. They're both painters Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Author died in 1959, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Aha, sorry. They're both painters. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, and architecture have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that usually we can not keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately the FOP exception does not apply in this case. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Sorry. Outdoors is OK. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, and architecture have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that usually we can not keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately the FOP exception does not apply in this case. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Sorry. Outdoors is, of course, OK. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Authorship not clear. Also this is a joke -- the container would hold around 500 pounds (250kg) of water -- far more than any person could carry. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS permission received Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Authorship not clear. Also this is a joke -- the container would hold around 500 pounds (250kg) of water -- far more than any person could carry. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:38, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS permission received Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:48, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Authorship not clear. Also this is a joke -- the container would hold around 500 pounds (250kg) of water -- far more than any person could carry. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Keep In 5 seconds, you could see, it's not a joke. Maybe Jim would carry the container full with water - smart people carry Paul empty^^ — YourEyesOnly (talk) 12:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Perhaps I'm particularly dumb, then, but if it isn't designed to carry clean water to places that need it, then what is it for? Surely the world does not need a new intermediate storage device. The pictogram calls out filling it with a pail from an open source -- surely that is not a good idea anywhere that it might be used?
- Aside from that, as I said in the nom, the real question is that apparently our uploader is not the sole author. IN any event, this will need permission, as described at Commons:OTRS. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Permission will be made clear shortly (Adding OTRS Pending). Multiple authors were wrong, now corrected to one author. The Waterbackpack is for cleaning water, not for carrying or storing water; maybe one should first read and then judge about other people's life-saving projects. See this as an answer to all three delete requests. — Fgsww (Talk)
Kept: OTRS permission received Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:47, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
190.43.3.98 20:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)ffofdmfdif 190.43.3.98 20:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Closed, nonsense request. --Martin H. (talk) 10:57, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
190.43.3.98 20:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)bbnbnbnb 190.43.3.98 20:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Closed, nonsense request. --Martin H. (talk) 10:56, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:47, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
promo shot, no educational value. Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Hystrix (talk) 05:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:51, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 11:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:25, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:32, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:23, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:45, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: unused personal photo. Hystrix (talk) 05:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:04, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Larger, older version of the image appears here: http://yamazaj.com/news/120793 ~ Ytoyoda (talk) 03:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Resolution too high for thumbnails, also duplicate ~ Edoddridge (talk) 04:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request russavia (talk) 18:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:53, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:54, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 18:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Color version available at File:Stadsgezicht Rotterdam 1660.jpg. ~ Vincent Steenberg (talk) 07:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per uploader request russavia (talk) 19:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
From a website - no note on permission - see the website address on image. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 09:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence of permission russavia (talk) 19:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
This is a fairly recent sculpture on display in the US. There is no Freedom of Panorama in the US and no indication of permission from the sculptor. So the photo is a derivative work without permisssion and thus a copyright violation. Sorry. ~ Simonxag (talk) 09:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Is this an actual android? Like a functioning robot? Where is the separability test for something like that? -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 10:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- This is a model of P.K. Dick, it's a sculpture, just like a waxwork is a sculpture or a toy model is a sculpture. I don't think the robot inner workings are copyrightable, but they're not on display. You could try arguing that the photo is of a functioning robot that happens to have some artwork applied and that the artwork is de minimis: except that such a claim is obviously false - the photo is useful (and used) to illustrate Dick and almost useless in illustrating robots. --Simonxag (talk) 19:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- The argument wouldn't be based on de minimis, it would be based on the useful articles rule. The law hasn't quite caught up with this question for androids though. The most I could find was cases involving toys that are reproductions of real objects (and courts have almost universally enforced the copyright). The separability test says to what degree can we separate the image of the object from the object when determining useful function and copyrightable art. By the way, this is a real functioning robot[1]. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 22:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- I'm afraid this isn't a photo of a functioning robot, even though the object is a functioning robot. Sound crazy? Well, a photo of a bronze statue is not a photo of a bronze casting, even though the statue is a bronze casting. A bronze casting carries no copyright restrictions and you can photograph such a thing (a machine part or just some block made to test the casting process) without any problem. But a photo of a bronze statute is a photo of the artwork and the same is the case here: this particular robot is an animated statue of Dick and is unsurprisingly being used to illustrate articles on that author. --Simonxag (talk) 08:46, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination russavia (talk) 19:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Delete - subject is probably notable, but the watermark may indicate that this is a copyright violation and exif says "Photographer:Avinash Gawade Di7 studios". /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Polarlys (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
If I understand correctly, the series was drawn by Jens R. Nilssen, who died in 1964. Since Norwegian copyright expires 70 years pma, this is not in the public domain until January 2035. ~ Jafeluv (talk) 10:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination russavia (talk) 20:02, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --GeorgHH • talk 08:34, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:46, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal photo. Animalparty (talk) 00:15, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
- Delete and protect please: Per nom and too generic filename, that may be confused with WMF or MediaWiki. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:55, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Again, out of scope -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Likely not own work: FB code in EXIF data. Needs COM:VRT. And if deleted, I suggest to COM:SALT this common filename. P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Yann (talk) 21:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Polarlys Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:49, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope, spam Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 11:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:57, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I made a mistake Vbsgroll (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Magister Mathematicae as no license (no license) Sanandros (talk) 12:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- And he changed a lot on that day when he tagged it with no licnece. He also assumed a source. I'd like to read what Magister Mathematicae thought at that day.--Sanandros (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Fastily Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Hekerui as no permission (no permission since) - Copyvio of the French home office / Ministère de l'Intérieur Trizek here or on fr:wp 14:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Clear copyvio. NNW (talk) 16:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Question What’s copyrightable here? Jean-Fred (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- It's the sum of the map's design, how the départements d'outre-mer et alii are arranged, their sorting, their scale, the frames around it etc. As you can see here there are lots of possibilities to do it in a different way, with variations of the colours, without a headline, without a world map... NNW (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violation russavia (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Montage of four images. None of them are sourced, but three are listed as own work in the uploader's list of files. Top-right one of unknown source. Bottom-right one proposed for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:BRIAN with female acquaintance.jpg. Stefan4 (talk) 16:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:42, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons:Project scope Polarlys (talk) 09:11, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Straatzangers,_1928,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
,_Straatzangers,_1928,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1952, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Straatzangers,_1928,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: by Multichil Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Straatzangers,_1928,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG){kind=link}
File:Maria Elisabeth Georgina (,Lizzy') Ansingh (1875-1959), Portret van Coba Ritsema, 1905, Olieverf op doek.JPG
[edit]_Ansingh_(1875-1959),_Portret_van_Coba_Ritsema,_1905,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Ansingh_(1875-1959),_Portret_van_Coba_Ritsema,_1905,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1959, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:33, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Author dided less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:38, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Lucie van Dam van Isselt (1871-1949), Madeliefjes in een zilveren beker, Olieverf op paneel.JPG
[edit],_Madeliefjes_in_een_zilveren_beker,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG){kind=link}
,_Madeliefjes_in_een_zilveren_beker,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1949, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uthor died less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Jonge_vrouw_met_rode_hoed,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Jonge_vrouw_met_rode_hoed,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1961, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:54, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uthor dided less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Meisje_met_sinaasappel,_1915,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Meisje_met_sinaasappel,_1915,_Olieverf_op_paneel.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1961, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uthor dided less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Jacoba Johanna Ritsema (1876-1961), Staand schoolmeisje in grijze jurk, Olieverf op doek.JPG
[edit],_Staand_schoolmeisje_in_grijze_jurk,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Staand_schoolmeisje_in_grijze_jurk,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1961, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uthor dided less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:39, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Author died in 1961, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Author died less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:40, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Wilhelm Christian Georg Rueter (1975-1966), Bloemstilleven,1918, Olieverf op doek, foto2.JPG
[edit],_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek,_foto2.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek,_foto2.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1966, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Author died less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:41, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
,_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Bloemstilleven,1918,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1966, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 17:59, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Author died less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
File:Willem Gerard Hofker (1902-1981), Portret van G.J. Hofker (1864-1945), 1920, Olieverf op doek.JPG
[edit],_Portret_van_G.J._Hofker_(1864-1945),_1920,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Portret_van_G.J._Hofker_(1864-1945),_1920,_Olieverf_op_doek.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Author died in 1981, so the painting is still under copyright and this image infringes. There is no FOP for museums in the Netherlands. Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 18:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Author died less than 70 years ago Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of project scope: personal image. ~ Acroterion (talk) 19:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
190.43.3.98 20:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC) asdscads 190.43.3.98 20:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Martin H Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
High-res photo of copyrighted cover ~ Tournesol (talk) 20:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Changed template on the page since it's Copyright violation and can be speedy deleted. -- Tegel (talk) 20:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: by Polarlys Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
unused personal photo ~ Robot Monk (talk) 23:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:43, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Courcelles 22:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Courcelles 22:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Courcelles 22:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Courcelles 22:58, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:57, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Also copyvio Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:53, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Too small, no use, out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:52, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:52, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
No valid licence. ~ Guillaume2303 (talk) 12:40, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Missing license since 13 April Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:54, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Because is backwards and there is another one in the correct way: IslaCristinaCiudadRD.jpg~ Fanattiq (talk) 12:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: DR started by uploader, out of scope due to rotational issues since proper was uploaded under another title Courcelles 23:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Cslava2003 (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC) Upload by mistake, duplicate Cslava2003 (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request russavia (talk) 07:14, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Мне не понятно, какую лицензию по нему оформить, если это изображение не имеет авторства, защищенного в установленном порядке~ Novoalex2008 (talk) 14:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: copyio / uploader request russavia (talk) 07:15, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
and other uploads by Whattheday (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. ~ EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:36, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as per nomination, COM:PRP applies, especially as couple of photos found elsewhere on the net russavia (talk) 07:23, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
© ... Probably not under CC-by-sa ~ Kyro (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: doubtful licencing. COM:PRP applies russavia (talk) 20:59, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Отпала необходимость в использовании этого фото для размещения в статье Википедии о председателе исполкома ~ Novoalex2008 (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence of permission / uploader request russavia (talk) 06:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Probable copyright violation. Please see: http://edotzherjunot.blogspot.it/2012/04/gue-gak-rela-wenda-dan-devi-keluar-dari.html and http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/301825_378535408835582_228375507184907_1194634_635095859_n.jpg Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 17:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 21:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Image without licence. Mr. Antensteiner is a teacher and of no public interest whatoever. ~ Eingangskontrolle (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio russavia (talk) 06:32, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Отпала необходимость в использовании этого фото для размещения в статье Википедии о председателе исполкома ~ Novoalex2008 (talk) 19:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence of permission / uploader request russavia (talk) 06:34, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 141.84.69.20 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Videogames screenshot.--141.84.69.20 19:56, 22 April 2012 (UTC) Mys 721tx (talk) 19:53, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Here's my doubts and thus I undeleted this file for a DR.
- Total Annihilation is not a free software.
- The uploader claims the images of those units are his own designs.
- This images shows the images generated by TA's engine.
- This images does not show TA's interface.
- -Mys 721tx (talk) 19:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: no evidence of permission/copyright status russavia (talk) 06:33, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:03, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:05, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:35, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:06, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:08, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:09, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Liliana-60 (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope also missing license Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Liliana-60 (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
non-free photo by Associated Press [2] --~ Robot Monk (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Morning Sunshine (talk) 03:55, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
out of scope ~ Robot Monk (talk) 22:46, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 05:07, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:18, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:40, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:21, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:41, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:22, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:42, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:23, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:43, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
image only use is to promote uploader's garage band = out of scope DS (talk) 14:29, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
image only use is to promote uploader's garage band = out of scope DS (talk) 14:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:44, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Seems out of scope - Private Picture with no further use? ~ Grunpfnul (talk) 19:02, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:46, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:47, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:47, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:10, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:48, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:49, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:50, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
out of scope Liliana-60 (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
Very dubious uploads: low resolution, EXIF either missing or with different camera models. Some other files by same uploader are obviously taken from various websites without permission.
- File:Georgij rpsc Jegorjevsk.jpg
- File:X 57613e85.jpg
- File:Fotoego02 big.jpg
- File:Fotoego03 big.jpg
- File:Jегорjевск.jpg
- File:Crkva Svetog G.jpg
- File:Aleksadr Nevskij sobor.jpg
- File:Monastirj2.jpg
- File:Monastirj.jpg
- File:Soborradovitci1.jpg
- File:Soborradovitci.jpg
A.Savin 23:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:PRP applies russavia (talk) 21:02, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
All heraldic bucket shop images uploaded by User:Carpediem6655
[edit]- File:Acevedo Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Acosta Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Aguilar Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Aguirre Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Almonte Coat of Arms.png
- File:Alvarado Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Alvarez Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Amor Coat of Arms.png
- File:Aponte Coat of Arms.png
- File:Arroyo Coat of Arms.png
- File:Ayala Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Berrios Coat of Arms.png
- File:Blanco Coat of Arms.png
- File:Borges Coat of Arms.png
- File:Botello Coat of Arms.png
- File:Caban Coat of Arms.png
- File:Cabrera Coat of Arms.png
- File:Camacho Coat of Arms.png
- File:Campos Coat of Arms.png
- File:Canales Coat of Arms.png
- File:Cardenas Coat of Arms.png
- File:Cardona Coat of Arms.png
- File:Garcia Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Garza Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Gomez Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Gonzalez Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Hernandez Coat of Arms (Mantled).png
- File:Salazar Caoat of Arms (Mantled).png
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
These are products of the heraldic "bucket shop" site namegameshop.com and so would appear to be of quite dubious educational, factual, or historical value. Furthermore, User:Carpediem6655 has provided no evidence that these image files have been released under a free license... AnonMoos (talk) 14:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: deleting purely under copyright violation criteria russavia (talk) 20:21, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
I would consider these files out of scope. The format of the file is also extremely impractical.
- File:8.1.2 exam Us Goverment.pdf
- File:7.3.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:7.2.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:4.3.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:7.5.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:7.4.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:6.3.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:7.1.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:6.2.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:6.4.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:5.4.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:5.5.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:6.1.4 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:5.3.4 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:5.2.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:5.1.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:4.2.4 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:4.4.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:4.1.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.6.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.2.7 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.5.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.4.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.3.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:2.5.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:2.2.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:3.1.3 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:2.4.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:2.3.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:1.4.2 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:1.3.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:2.1.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:1.2.5 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:1.1.6 Us Goverment.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.1.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 6.1.3.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.3.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.1.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.5.2 cst.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.3.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.2.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.2.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.2.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 5.1.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.5.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.4.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.2.7.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.3.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.3.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.3.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.2.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.5.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.2.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 4.1.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.4.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.3.7.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.3.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.3.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.2.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.2.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.1.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 3.2.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.5.2 cst.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.4.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.2.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.3.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.3.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.2.7.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.3.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.1.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 2.2.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.5.2 cst.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.4.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.3.7.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.2.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.3.2.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.3.4.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.2.6.pdf
- File:English 4 sem 2 1.2.4.pdf
- File:Us history 1.4.2.pdf
- File:Us history 1.3.3.pdf
- File:Us history 1.1.4.pdf
- File:Us history 1.2.4.pdf
- File:English 5.3.7.pdf
- File:English 5.1.2.pdf
- File:English 5.4.6.pdf
- File:English 6.1.2 exam.pdf
- File:English 5.3.4.pdf
- File:English 5.3.2.pdf
- File:English 5.2.4.pdf
- File:English 5.2.2.pdf
- File:English 5.2.6.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.3.4.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.5.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.3.6.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.4.6.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.1.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.3.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.2.7.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.2.4.pdf
- File:Ingles 4.2.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.5.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.3.7.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.4.6.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.3.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.2.6.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.3.4.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.2.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.1.2.pdf
- File:Ingles 3.2.4.pdf
Vera (talk) 15:12, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: There doesn't appear to be any foreseeable use on projects. We aren't a webhost for such things either. russavia (talk) 20:33, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, syllabus/lecture might not be free content anyway.
- File:Práctica 4.pdf
- File:Método de integración Monte Carlo.pdf
- File:Prueba de la ji cuadrada.pdf
- File:Generación de números pseudoaleatorios. Generadores congruenciales.pdf
- File:Conductores, semiconductores y aislantes.pdf
- File:Polimeros por condensación.pdf
- File:Grafeno.pdf
- File:Electroquímica.pdf
- File:Informe de metales y aleaciones.pdf
- File:Crimen organizado en México.pdf
- File:Gabriel Francisco Ramos(2).jpg
- File:Gabriel Francisco Ramos (1).jpg
- File:Gabriel Francisco Ramos.jpg
- File:Gabriel Francisco Ramos UNAM.pdf
- File:Fisica III U4 (corriente).pdf
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 10:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio/Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:55, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
out of scope
Hedwig in Washington (MAIL?) 11:01, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Morning Sunshine (talk) 11:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
No own work & missing permission Zorbedit (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:40, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
No apparent purpose Cerebellum (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
unused transparent gif, duplicate of other images like File:Empty.gif, no value in keeping this one Liliana-60 (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 10:51, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
TV-logo screenshot Buzatti (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
- Delete Deletion requested by uploader assuming good faith. It is a copyrighted screenshot. --V.Riullop (talk) 07:48, 4 May 2010 (UTC)
can't be PD-old, and doesn't look like it's simple enough for PD-textlogo either Liliana-60 (talk) 21:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
No valid source provided that would be able to show that the author of this image is dead since 70 years High Contrast (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 15:32, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
Is {{PD-textlogo}} applicable in this case or do we need to get a permission? Leyo 08:34, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 11:42, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
The image is of low resolution and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 14:32, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 10:29, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
and other uploads by Browneyespercy (talk · contribs). Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. ~ EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:57, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 12:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
The image is of low resolution and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 18:27, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 12:28, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
The image is of low resolution and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 19:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 11:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
The image is of low resolution and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 19:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 11:45, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Probably out of scope: a black square with some words on it. Unclear what it is supposed to be used for. Categorised as "album covers" but google:"we+multiply"+album gives no useful hits. Likely below the threshold of originality, so {{subst:nld}} doesn't seem to apply. Stefan4 (talk) 21:35, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 12:34, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
No FOP in Iran. Americophile 16:17, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
It's either PD-text, making the current licensing invalid, or non-free, because of the picture in the background. I'm leaning toward the second -- if it were just the first, I wouldn't have nominated it for deletion. ~ SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 20:08, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Wrong permission. The Author, Mahmoud Farshchian, is still alive! Americophile 16:13, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- hi, but in this size, I think , there isn't any problem. Mostafa8026 (talk) 11:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- but if you want to remove it, there isn't any problem also.Mostafa8026 (talk) 11:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The size is irrelevant -- a copyvio is a copyvio, whatever the size. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:07, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - computer game history. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:10, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not every unknown computer game is notable. Ices2Csharp (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- See en:The Oregon Trail (video game). Do not assume that you have heard of everything that is notable. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Even if 'Organ Trail' = 'Oregon Trail', I don't think this file is usefull for the article. Ices2Csharp (talk) 13:58, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- See en:The Oregon Trail (video game). Do not assume that you have heard of everything that is notable. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:32, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Not every unknown computer game is notable. Ices2Csharp (talk) 21:22, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: The game has been in print in various versions for 40 years -- surely screenshots are in scope. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:06, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Mis-tagged as own work. Should be deleted. I do not remember the password to this Soulboost account (and am unsure why it isn't effectively merged into my current one), but hopefully this shows that I long ago made the Soulboost to Soulbust switch on a project I'm more active on. This is not my own work and I mistakenly tagged it as such over 11 years ago. Please delete for it being a, I suppose, copyright violation. Soulbust (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Question What element is copyrighted per COM:TOO US? Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:05, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Unsure if it passes COM:TOO US or not, but it is a game screenshot that is erroneously tagged as own work. Again, I uploaded this on an old account and am just requesting deletion in good faith. Soulbust (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Keep And I am saying in good faith that it is useful and should be kept and renamed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:10, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: previously pinged you on the related file, but just so it's on this discussion too: I am requesting a courtesy deletion of this file. Thank you again. Soulboost (talk) 02:09, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't delete files on this wiki; I just express opinions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- Ah okay. Fair enough. Soulbust (talk) 04:08, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- I don't delete files on this wiki; I just express opinions. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, incorrect license, actual status uncertain. Note: This is NOT from "Oregon Trail" game ("in print in various versions for 40 years") but from a less famous parody "Organ Trail" (not a typo). Not used. --Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 01:24, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 16:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Screenshot of an old game "Organ Trail". Should be in public domain due to simplicity. --Robot Monk (talk) 22:04, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:04, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Mis-tagged as own work. Should be deleted. I do not remember the password to this Soulboost account (and am unsure why it isn't effectively merged into my current one), but hopefully this shows that I long ago made the Soulboost to Soulbust switch on a project I'm more active on. This is not my own work and I mistakenly tagged it as such over 11 years ago. Please delete for it being a, I suppose, copyright violation. Soulbust (talk) 04:46, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Comment Kept due to simplicity in 2012. What changed in 11 years? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:06, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Nothing changed. I requested deletion back then, and would like to request deletion now. Even if there is no issue with the file, why wouldn't we be able to honor a self-nom? Soulbust (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Didn't previously self-request deletion actually. I was mistaken saying that, sorry. But I am requesting now in good faith.. Soulbust (talk) 15:51, 20 May 2023 (UTC)- Scratch that, I did request that, although not formally or in proper procedure. I was also just able to retrieve the password for the old Soulboost account, so if needed I can confirm the self-nomination request for deletion over on that account. Thanks for any help. Soulbust (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Nothing changed. I requested deletion back then, and would like to request deletion now. Even if there is no issue with the file, why wouldn't we be able to honor a self-nom? Soulbust (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- Keep You can request a courtesy deletion, but I think this image is useful and not copyrightable and should be kept. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: Well yes, that is what I did by nominating this for deletion. I logged into the account I uploaded this from to I suppose explicitly request a courtesy deletion of this file, as well as this one in good faith. Although I'm doing that by voicing that sentiment here as I don't know if there's another process/tag to do so. If we had to keep these files, I would ask for at least a courtesy deletion of the latter file. Both files are extremely similar so I think we don't need both. But again, I am explicitly requesting a courtesy deletion of both. Thanks for the help and best wishes. Soulboost (talk) 02:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Sorry, but your rationale is that you want to delete this because you "suppose that it is a copyright violation". We decided in 2012 that the image is not copyrightable, and you acknowledge that nothing has changed since then, so your rationale can't be true. I lean against honouring the request for courtesy deletion, mainly because no valid reason is given, and also because of the age of the file; see Commons:Courtesy deletions for when such a request is likely to be honoured, and when it is not. Renerpho (talk) 05:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
- Delete: Forget that previous comment. I should have looked at the history of the file that Soulbust has linked in their previous comment. We have deleted the nearly identical File:Organ_Trail_Size_Up_the_Situation_Menu.PNG last week;[3] so we should probably delete this one, too. I am tagging Infrogmation, who deleted that one. Renerpho (talk) 06:00, 10 October 2023 (UTC)
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Organ_Trail_Size_Up_the_Situation_Menu.PNG){kind=link}
Deleted: Courtesy deletion. —holly {chat} 21:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
CC license is completely bogus -- this image is either PD or a copyright violation. ~ AnonMoos (talk) 18:51, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- The library released the item from their collection under a CC license, similar to any other of the hundreds of items on Commons owned by libaries, or by the Prelinger archive etc. See http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Johnny_Cash_PSA_06-00564.jpg, or http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tourists_or_walkers_at_Glendalough,_Co._Wicklow_with_the_Round_Tower_and_St._Kevins_Oratory.jpg or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Arrival_of_the_Orange_Blossom_Special_train-_Plant_City,_Florida.jpg or one from Prelinger :http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dr_George_S_Benson_other_view.jpg The copyright on the last one is probably owned by the university, but Prelinger has one of only a few copies, and they've chosen to release it under a PD dedication. I don't see how this case is any different.
- Ok, those were released into the public domain, but it's the same idea. Libraries own an item in their collection, and choose to share it with a Creative Commons or a public domain dedication. Might be the only copy available of the item, or their might be others somewhere, this copy was given to be shared by the public. Oaktree b (talk) 02:00, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- As I explained previously on your talk page, the library can only release it under a CC license if it actually owns the copyright. It's extremely hard to believe that the Japanese ministry of propaganda transferred or assigned copyright on this leaflet to a Canadian library, and certainly no evidence for this has been presented. Furthermore, according to Commons policies and legal interpretations, the mere act of mechanically or faithfully scanning in a 2D image into digital form does not create any new copyright. Therefore a CC license does not appear to make too much sense. AnonMoos (talk) 02:41, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Seems clearly {{PD-Japan}}; museum putting a CC license on their scan is irrelevant to underlying copyright. -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Besides my annoyance when uploaders do not bother cleaning up the image description fields when uploading images from Flickr (so, according to the image description, this leaflet was created in 2012 by some library employee in Toronto), I agree that the image was actually published no later than 1945, and I agree with Infrogmation that {{PD-Japan}} applies. Given that the URAA date for Japan is January 1, 1996, the image is just barely public domain in the U.S. as well. If kept, I would delete the cc-by-2.0 template (as I think it is agreed that it isn't up to the University of Toronto to release it under a Creative Commons license) and would add {{PD-1996|Japan|January 1, 1996|Image was public domain in Japan prior to the URAA date}}. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 17:24, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- Just to add, AnonMoos is completely correct. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:42, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
- No, the image was created in Toronto in 2012, if you read the description, the leaflet itself was between 1939-1945. Whatever, not my problem (see below). Oaktree b (talk) 03:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- You appear to have completed missed the point, as well as the function of the information template and Commons' copyright rules. And describing images, and properly tagging them, is your problem. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- No, the image was created in Toronto in 2012, if you read the description, the leaflet itself was between 1939-1945. Whatever, not my problem (see below). Oaktree b (talk) 03:39, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I just find it annoying that editors don't bother to correct it in the first place. The time it takes to tag the file as a copyvio could be spent correcting it, and it wouldn't hang around for months waiting for someone to close the discussion. I pretty much know it's going to need to be corrected, but I've adopted the attitude that others seem to have, that it's not their problem, someone else will fix it. What's important is that the image is used in an article, if people can't be bothered to fix it, it's not my problem. This was uploaded in April, it's almost July now. Somebody fix it.
Also see this image, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Warning_Proclamation_babala.jpg, uploaded at the same time as this one. Wasn't tagged, no one even bothered to look at it. Same idea, Japanese Government propaganda. Fix that one too, or stop randomly picking files to tag as copyvio. Oaktree b (talk) 03:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Whatever, dude -- it's your responsibility as image uploader to upload with the correct tag. I don't understand Japanese copyright law (nor do I claim to), but I do very clearly understand what can be covered by a CC-BY-SA license and what can't be, and your pointless legally-incorrect pontifications combined with your lack of personal responsibility add up to an attitude which has rubbed me the wrong way since the beginning... AnonMoos (talk) 04:41, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Oaktree, your attitude is disappointing and unhelpful. Moreover, your position is incoherent. You're mad because your images are identified as potential copyvios, but you don't seem to think you have any responsibility for ensuring that they are properly described or tagged in the first place (which would largely avoid copyvio nominations). You post a note to your user page ("If you think a file is wrong, fix it! You see something wrong, fix it! Don't put a sign on it and run away, hoping others will do it!"), which is ironic given that seem to expect others to routinely come behind you to ensure that your uploads are properly described, tagged and categorized. And I am not sure how pointing to another example of how you did a poor job with your upload somehow justifies the poor job you did here. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 12:58, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- I didn't know any better at the time. I understand now, but I refuse to fix it simply to make a point. Fix the tag, or delete the file, all the same to me at this point. Oaktree b (talk) 13:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I must admit that I look at my early uploads and sometimes cringe. In terms of this image, though, it was fixed some time ago. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- I should correct myself -- most of it was fixed. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:27, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I must admit that I look at my early uploads and sometimes cringe. In terms of this image, though, it was fixed some time ago. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:11, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:04, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
not sure what this is, but it's definitely not own work Liliana-60 (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Reply
It is my own work. Please do not delete it. Anyway, it is a statement for conservation of a site in Málaga (Spain) against projects that want to build artificially in a urban beach. So is a contribution about Environmental Impact Assessment, conservationism, social engagement and participation. It is in spanish. --Feministo (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Aside from the question of who owns the copyright, as a rule PDF text file are out of scope. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:01, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
The source is dead, so there is no way to confirm that the photographer died at least 70 years ago. The man on the photo died in 1939, but the photographer may have died later. US copyright status also unknown. Stefan4 (talk) 22:24, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep published on the cover of a 1958 book by Jessie Taft. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Book publication is irrelevant. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:00, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal pictures.
- File:ประวัติ20.PNG
- File:ประวัติ19.PNG
- File:ประวัติ18.PNG
- File:ประวัติ17.PNG
- File:ประวัติ16.PNG
- File:ประวัติ15.PNG
- File:ประวัติ14.PNG
- File:ประวัติ13.PNG
- File:ประวัติ12.PNG
- File:ประวัติ11.PNG
- File:ประวัติ10.PNG
- File:ประวัติ9.PNG
- File:ประวัติ8.PNG
- File:ประวัติ7.PNG
- File:ประวัติ6.PNG
- File:ประวัติ5.PNG
- File:ประวัติ4.PNG
- File:ประวัติ3.PNG
- File:ประวัติ2.PNG
Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:26, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- delete 1,2,7,11 as private
- and keep the others – they illustrate the robotic competition UBU Robocon 2008. --Robot Monk (talk) 21:30, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: some, kept some per Robot Monk . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
in public domain in Madagascar, but not in US - copyright violation Sreejith K (talk) 07:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - should be PD in the US too. Anyway, who cares? /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Who cares isn't a good logic, but I see no reason to believe this should be deleted. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 12:34, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Can you please tell us why this would not be PD in the US? I will close this accordingly once firm opinion is given. russavia (talk) 18:52, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Looks like DW. Image was originally uploaded to Ukrainian Wikipedia, according the description there it is art reproduction. Anatoliy (talk) 11:44, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep This is an original work. It is an art-processed image, made on the basis of the photographs, which was provided to me by Mrs. Fischer-Slysh during her lifetime. --Pavlo1 (talk) 12:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- The question is who is the author of this photo. It was obviously taken before 2011-06-03 as it was published here back in October 2002. At the very least the real author has to be mentioned if he has really provided a permission to reproduce this photo, as it was not Pavlo1 who has taken this photo, he only photoshopped it — NickK (talk) 11:51, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
- Who is the author of prototype? Unknown photo service point. Moreover, very low quality. Formally, this is {{PD-trivial}}. Unfortunately, Mrs. Fischer-Slysh will not be able to indicate the authorship of this. She died in February. --Pavlo1 (talk) 21:12, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
- May be believed this is a prototype image. Permission of OTRS is here: id=2012043010000743. --Pavlo1 (talk) 11:13, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept: got permission via OTRS FASTILY (TALK) 22:26, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
File is of dubious encyclopedic value and unused as of 18 Apr 2012 (it no longer appears on wikipedia:OFWGKTA). ~ Burpen (talk) 14:15, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The description, before being deleted on the English Wikipedia article OFWGKTA asid "Microphones destroyed by OFWGKTA" and the original description on commons, before of being deleted said "destroyed by OFWGKTA a T in the park", so it is in the scope of this band and also of microphones. Not showned by deletion requester how this file is out of scope. Tm (talk) 17:58, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
- The file is indeed within the scope of the band, but what educational purpose did this have in OFWGKTA? Note that prior to deletion of the the photo from the article (see this revision), no mention of the photo was made within the article, so there was no context other than the caption. OFWGKTA did perform at T in the Park 2011; perhaps content could be added regarding their performance to provide context for the image. If OFWGKTA is well-known for destroying microphones in general (as Pete Townsend was known for destroying guitars) then a section explaining that, and accompanied by the image, could be added. Likewise, there doesn't seem to be any content at Microphone regarding damage to microphones. This image could also be educational in the context of Instrument destruction. -Burpen (talk) 14:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
porque me da miedo de bloquear la imagen Murillo Perú (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Kept: no entiendo la razon del borrado, no es valida Ezarateesteban 14:06, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
190.43.3.98 20:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC) me equivoque 190.43.3.98 20:25, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
Kept No valid reason for deletion. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 22:36, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
ya no pertenece fernando (talk) 04:09, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: invalid deletion reason, but missing permission anyway. --Jcb (talk) 09:32, 3 March 2017 (UTC)