Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/07/01
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
No evidence of permission given by person whose face is used, apparently uploaded for mischievous use on the English Wikipedia, no obvious encyclopedic value. RobertG (talk) 05:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 10:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 10:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
No evidence of permission given by person whose face is used, apparently uploaded for mischievous use on the English Wikipedia, no obvious encyclopedic value. RobertG (talk) 05:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 10:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
This file hasn't his proper name. Thanks for deletion. Ambre Troizat (talk) 11:22, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- The proper name is "La Pointe-à-Pitre Guadeloupe, Lacour T2, p84-85.jpg". J'ai essayé mais ce fut une erreur ! --Ambre Troizat (talk) 11:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- I renammed the picture. Kyro (talk) 13:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept; file renaming is not a deletion issue. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Attack page JohnCD (talk) 13:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom so speedy - thanks Herby talk thyme 13:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:33, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:40, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:34, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 11:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:35, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 11:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:36, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 11:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Speedy delete please. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:37, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Private image. unused. GeorgHH • talk 13:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Private image. unused. GeorgHH • talk 13:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
No educational value; pig Spanish description obviously for mocking purposes Moray An Par (talk) 15:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:41, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, single upload from user Funfood ␌ 19:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:42, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused user picture. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 19:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, single upload from user Funfood ␌ 23:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:44, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture, single upload from user Funfood ␌ 23:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:45, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a copyright work of art by a living painter. There is no evidence that the uploader has permission to reproduce it. DAJF (talk) 15:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- There is a related ticket on OTRS: ticket:2012070110004566, send by a reliable user who usually is very careful in getting permission. Trijnsteltalk 12:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: I know noticed a second email with more clarification, so I added the permission to both file pages. Trijnsteltalk 12:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a copyright work of art by a living painter. There is no evidence that the uploader has permission to reproduce it. DAJF (talk) 15:11, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- There is a related ticket on OTRS: ticket:2012070110004566, send by a reliable user who usually is very careful in getting permission. Trijnsteltalk 12:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: I know noticed a second email with more clarification, so I added the permission to both file pages. Trijnsteltalk 12:40, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The images and the subcategory were moved to Category:Überlingen mid-air collision. 77.58.255.212 19:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused categories and these kind of non-file pages must be deleted through {{Speedy}} Amitie 10g (talk) 00:29, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 07:52, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Per Commons:Advertisement. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Sreejith K (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
File:US Navy 080629-N-7730P-009 Armed Forces of the Philippines, Chief of Staff, Gen. Alexander B. Yano shares a handshake with Lt.j.g. Eduardo Vargas. Gen. Yano flew aboard USS Ronald Reagan (CVN 76).jpg
[edit]This file was uploaded without the express written or verbal consent of the service members captured in the photograph. The service members would like the image deleted in order to protect their privacy. Yaluga (talk) 18:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Oppose This photo is still on navy.mil. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 23:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No license problem here, for the other problem get the image removed from the US navy servers first. Denniss (talk) 07:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- In recognition of the objection, I at least added Template:personality rights to the image. Wnt (talk) 05:10, 5 July 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.
I found out that this logo is not free and could be only used with a permission from the owner of the logo. JuventiniFan (talk) 04:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep- NO, it doesn't apply here.JuventiniFan (talk) 15:28, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Then Delete. Amitie 10g (talk) 22:43, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Then
Deleted: Copyvio Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
I found out that this logo is not free and could be only used with a permission from the owner of the logo. JuventiniFan (talk) 10:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
I found out that this logo is not free and could be only used with a permission from the owner of the logo. JuventiniFan (talk) 10:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Lymantria (talk) 06:53, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
unused personal pic, low quality AtelierMonpli (talk) 10:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:27, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Uncategorized, unused schemes and tables with unknown destination - out of project scope. Maybe promo. Art-top (talk) 10:37, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Also:
- File:Ventajas y desventjas.GIF
- File:Bloques consecutivos CASE.GIF
- All files by User:Malvjm. --Art-top (talk) 10:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:29, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused image of an user. GeorgHH • talk 13:26, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:33, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Private image. unused. GeorgHH • talk 13:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:34, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
and File:Sakawat in tepantor Film City Mymenshing 2008.jpg. Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:37, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
personal subpage Dzlinker (talk) 16:42, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per Author's request George Chernilevsky talk 08:38, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
Out of scope; orphan doodle cartoon of person with no indication of notability; vanity or private joke? Infrogmation (talk) 17:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
I see no educational value in this picture and think it is out of scope. Eusebius (talk) 17:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:43, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
a person of no notability. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 22:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:44, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
image used only by a page deleted off fr.wiki => out of scope DS (talk) 22:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
image used only in an article deleted off fr.wiki for being spam => outside project scope DS (talk) 22:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:45, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted non-free operating-system interface elements and software logos are not de minimis. AnonMoos (talk) 16:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- @Uploader: Is that sooo hard to learn? --Saibo (Δ∇) 16:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- If that is not deleted - it should be renamed since the title is misleading. It may be some technical failure or whatever - but maybe simply another attempt to get attention (the uploader used the two highest ranked names in those old stats for his uploads)... Have moved the other. --Saibo (Δ∇) 17:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom 99of9 (talk) 13:19, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Published at in June 2005 already at http://members.tripod.com/editorial_home01.mx/0402.htm. I doubt own work. Also this photo is significantly smaller than files uploaded by same uploader the same time, for example File:Museo Historia Mexicana Monterrey.jpg, this is a web thumbnail taken from the web. Martin H. (talk) 22:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
- Violacion de derechos de autor. 201.102.231.92 09:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Published elsewhere previously. Please use Commons:OTRS procedure for republication of content. Dereckson (talk) 18:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I will replace it with another figure. Gregor.kovacic.ilb (talk) 20:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Don't open a Deletion request of your own files. You can upload a new version of your file with the same name. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . JuTa 21:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I will replace this figure with another one. Gregor.kovacic.ilb (talk) 20:00, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Don't open a Deletion request of your own files. You can upload a new version of your file with the same name. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:23, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as no permission JuTa 22:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
File:101222 Entente de Setif raise UNAF Winners' Cup تتويج وفاق سطيف بكأس اتحاد شمال إفريقيا للأبطال الفائزة L’Entente de Sétif décroche la Coupe des Vainqueurs de Coupe de l’UNAF.jpg
[edit]duplicate file Dzlinker (talk) 10:50, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: information copied and redirected to the other file. Trijnsteltalk 16:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Very likely copyright violation given the uploader's history. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Shortexxx and all other files uploaded since. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation High Contrast (talk) 13:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
other reasons Rispermannen (talk) 14:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete the fucking picture, i own the rights and want it to be terminated! Rispermannen (talk) 12:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted / Uploader requested. --Fanghong (talk) 01:33, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Restored - freely licensed image, in scope and we have no image from this view. Free licenses are not revocable. --Denniss (talk) 17:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
The uploader's authorship claims weren't true for their other two uploads, so it seems unlikely that they're true for this one. —LX (talk, contribs) 00:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
 | Proposed close: per nom. -missing metadata & relatively small resolution for this type of photo. Rillke(q?) 12:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC) ~~~~  Done Closed per proposal. |
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
PD claim is unsupported and patently invalid. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (talk) 12:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete no source even given. Hekerui (talk) 17:01, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- Comment. H.P. Lovecraft died in 1937, which is over 70 years ago, the license given by the uploader. The w:H.P. Lovecraft article captions it as taken in 1934. I'd bet even money the photo comes from one of his books. Question: would Lovecraft have held copyright over the image if it were taken for one of his books as a work for hire, even if it were taken by someone else? If so, then it should be PD-life+70 no matter what. If not... who knows? Wnt (talk) 05:02, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete: No explanation of what a source of "Howard" or an author of "Lovecraft" on a picture of Lovecraft might mean. Probable U.S. work and U.S. publication, after 1922, with no evidence of copyright expiration. No evidence shown that H.P. Lovecraft was the copyright owner of this work. Even if he was, no evidence of first publication before 1923, first publication after 2002, or failure to meet 1923–1989 copyright requirements. This photograph could have been taken as late as 1937; and could have been first published at any time between its creation and when a modified version of it appears at HPLovecraft-1.jpg (October 2009) via [1]. It is, of course, doubtful that a TypePad blog was the first publication for this photo. Roughly speaking, U.S. photographs taken between 1923 and 1937, and known to be published as of 2009, are still under copyright (in 2012) unless:
- the photograph appeared in or as a pre-1978 work, with the permission of the copyright holder, and without a copyright notice; or
- the copyright was not renewed for works in which this photograph appears before 1963 with the permission of the copyright holder; or
- it remained unpublished until 2003, and the author (or possibly "creator" as work-for-hire?) was a known person (not corporate/anonymous), and the author (or possibly "creator" as work-for-hire) died before 1942 (70 years before 2012).
- No evidence that this is from an out-of-copyright source. (For that matter: no evidence that the uploader understands what "author" or "source" even means; see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:H. P. Lovecraft.jpg.) --Closeapple (talk) 04:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:46, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
No copyright Petchsira (talk) 13:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Q-rieux as Speedy (inutile ) Yann (talk) 16:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 09:45, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Commons:Nudity. Those images does not add value to the collection in Category:Human penis. Mys 721tx (talk) 01:33, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete Delete per COM:PENIS. – JBarta (talk) 07:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. While human sexual anatomy is within project scope, Commons already has a plethora of media illustrative of the human penis, and has no need of nor desire for poorly photographed vanity "this is what my dick looks like" own penis snapshots. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:31, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Emmymonster (talk · contribs)
[edit]Those files uploaded by this user are taken by different kinds of cameras, I doubt those are really his own works. Mys 721tx (talk) 04:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. JuTa 19:32, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vladislav Sheremeta (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: Commons is no private photo album
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta with friend.jpg
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta Smile.png
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta Photo.JPG
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta Photoshoot.png
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta Fail.jpg
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta Summer Photoshoot.jpg
High Contrast (talk) 08:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 18:32, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Vladislav Sheremeta (talk · contribs)
[edit]Outside of COM:SCOPE. Personal files of user without other useful contribution except self-promotion.
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta 2013 Photoshoot.jpg
- File:Обложка микстейпа Интруха Sheremeta.png
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta New Picture.JPG
- File:Vladislav Sheremeta.png
Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope Natuur12 (talk) 11:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Audubon Parkway sign.jpg Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Logo for a band whose article has been deleted: w:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Night Stalker Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Logo for an organization whose article is now deleted: w:National Street Hockey League Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:09, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Logo for page which has been deleted: w:User:Nsgaeverine/NO SIR GIFTS Magog the Ogre (talk) 09:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Clearly a derivative work / reproduction. Copyright status of original unclear. Lymantria (talk) 09:52, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Doubtful own work. Clearly not from stated date in 2012. Lymantria (talk) 10:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Book cover being PD-old seems a bit dubious. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused, uncategorized, unknown destination - out of project scope. Low resolution, maybe cover - doubtful authorship. Art-top (talk) 10:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Also:
- File:12th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:11th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:10th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:9th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:8th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:7th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:6th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:5th Law of karma.JPG
- File:4th Law of Karma.JPG
- File:3rd Law of Karma.JPG
- File:2nd Law of Karma.jpg
- File:1st Law of Karma.JPG
- File:Man's Divine Energy-Symbol.jpg (maybe logo without permission)
- All files uploaded by User:Savatark. --Art-top (talk) 10:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like those images people tend to share on Facebook: Take a (more or less) wise saying, add a random "beautiful" image you found on the web and post it to appear wise/deep/whatever. (Mmmh, that probably sounds cynical ;-) I didn't check them all, but the first one is probably taken from this website, so chances are good that the other ones are copyvios too. Plus out of scope, unused etc. → Delete --El Grafo (talk) 13:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Apoyo el borrado, esas imágenes están fuera del alcance del proyecto, no sirven para nada, y pueden infringir derechos de autor. --
George Miquilena 20:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Hello everybody
- That's right , all these photos must be deleted. I didn't consider the copy right violation.
- Thanks. Savatark (talk) 08:17, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
![124 File:"Sidekick for hire" graffiti.jpg](#File:"Sidekick_for_hire"_graffiti.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:57, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused, uncategorized family tree of unknown person. Out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 10:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Probably copyrighted scan image, can be found on various sites. Smooth_O (talk) 11:10, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No evidence of permission. Painting was created c.1930 and so could not have been published before 1923. No claim or evidence that the copyright was not renewed. Matters not addressed in previous discussion. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (talk) 11:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Poster for a band whose article was deleted as non-notable: w:The No Smoking Band Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Collage of copyrighted photos:
- top-left: http://primariahd.ro/fisiere/albume/47/mare/a0069.jpg
- top-right: http://primariahd.ro/fisiere/albume/124/mare/galerie_hunedoara_noaptea3.jpg / http://candear.deviantart.com/gallery/#/dlc9c0
- bottom-left: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/5374802
- bottom-right: (unknown)
Razvan Socol (talk) 12:30, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
According PD-AR-Photo at leass 45 years old must be the photo for may publishing here. I can't find it in the source provided Ezarateesteban 13:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Doubtfulliy own work, authorship not clear Funfood ␌ 13:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Source is an architectural firm website -- no evidence of permission Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Source is an architectural firm website -- no evidence of permission Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
source site has explicit (c) -- no evidence of permission Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
source site has explicit (c) -- no evidence of permission Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
no sign of permission, and not sure it is in scope Zolo (talk) 13:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
habe es versehentlich geladen und weiss nicht, wie ich es wieder entfernenkann 87.176.104.165 15:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
An unused and a self-published photograph. Insufficient dimension and resolution to be of much, if any, use. Possibly without and outside of the Project's scope. -- KC9TV (talk) 16:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This ``image`` is out of the Commons project scope because it is of such a bad quality that it is not usable for encyclopedic purposes. It is of extreme low image resolution, is extremely blurry and unsharp - details and typical details of the vehicle are not recognizable 178.2.63.121 16:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Polarlys as no permission. The only thing here that seems to be copyrightable is the ornamental drawing, and I'm not sure whether it is perhaps old enough to be PD-old. Perhaps someone else knows. Rosenzweig τ 16:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
not a valid license – Maky « talk » 17:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Japan. 84.61.164.191 19:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unidentified screenshot, license wrong Funfood ␌ 20:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use is now File:ESC 1992 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version now in use is File:ESC 2006 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Per Commons:Advertisement. §§AnimeshKulkarni (talk) 20:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use is now File:ESC 1998 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use is now at File:ESC 2005 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version now at File:ESC 1991 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version now is use is File:ESC 1993 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Redundant file. New version in use at File:ESC 1994 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use is File:ESC 1995 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use at File:ESC 1996 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use can be found at File:ESC 1997 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
File has been superseded by "Lucid Logo 2012.png" Jim Morris (talk) 20:57, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use is File:ESC 1999 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 20:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version in use File:ESC 2004 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 21:02, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version at File:ESC 2003 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 21:04, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version at File:ESC 2002 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 21:05, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version at File:ESC 2001 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 21:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Obsolete map. New version at File:ESC 2000 Map.svg Wesley☀Mouse 21:08, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:14, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Japan. 84.61.164.191 21:12, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- （Written in Japanese） 被写体は2010年高文祭のマスコットキャラクター、ハニアの「着ぐるみ」です。コモンズ上で着ぐるみ画像は数多くアップロードされており、それが削除されていないことから、権利上の問題はないと判断しアップロードした次第です。--Sanjo (talk) 13:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 23:25, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Images marked "no restrictions" on the Library and Archives Canada website are not freely licensed; inconsistent with other copyright notices on the LAC site, and the LAC has confirmed that such images are not freely licensed (see Category:Images from Library and Archives Canada for reference to past discussions) Skeezix1000 (talk) 21:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Claimed to be self portraits - doubtful at least at File:Robert S. Prattico1.jpg. In addition, both (especially File:Robert S. Prattico.jpg) are out of scope as personal, low q. photos. See HD discussion → previously in use at en:Robert_S._Prattico (speedied).
Saibo (Δ∇) 14:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio: 714 results in TinEye Art-top (talk) 10:34, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete – Obvious copyright violation. Should have been tagged with {{Copyvio}}.—Bill william comptonTalk 05:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Comment looks like the ordianry copyvio to me. Let me know if this image is somehow freely licenced then I can undelete it! --D-Kuru (talk) 22:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted by D-Kuru: copyvio - fair use
Unidentified image, possibly a copyright violation of the drawing, possibly also a copyright violation of the character itself. Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, {{Copyvio}}: http://gundam.wikia.com/wiki/NRX-044_Prototype_Asshimar_TR-3_(Kehaar) —LX (talk, contribs) 11:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted by D-Kuru: copyvio - fair use
This file is a lower quality version of coat of arms of Indonesia. Moreover, it is not widely used anymore, being replaced by File:Coat of Arms of Indonesia Garuda Pancasila.svg. -iNu- (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep None of the above is a reason to delete the file, just one to not use it. It does no harm staying where it is. In any case although it is an inferior copy to the other file this does not mean that it is a poorly drawn file, it isn't. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 21:14, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Per Fred the Oyster, usage is never a factor in deletions. It seems that the rule concerning superseded files apply here. Sodacan (talk) 09:38, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep There are also differences between the two files, regardless of the shading and other beautification elements. On this version for deletion, there is wheat right next to the olive branch on the lower-white shield. On the one being used widely, there are cotton bulbs replacing the wheat. User:Zscout370 (Return fire) 04:42, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, obviously. Fry1989 eh? 03:16, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: usage is not a reason and is different from other version PumpkinSky talk 11:11, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fromentel nicolas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 21:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
duplicate of file:Cinco artistas em Sintra 01.jpg -- Tuválkin ✉ 01:17, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep - The two files are of the same painting, but are two different versions. I've removed the 'duplicate' tag from this file description page and would suggest closing this DR. – JBarta (talk) 07:25, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- You removed the tag? With discussion entries = 1, that one being yousself? Why, you must be a an admin, always pontificating that we must assume good faith and welcome noobies and such. But when stuff needs to be discussed you have you big guns and you’re not afraid to use them. Going to threaten me with suspension if I remove your removing, aren’t you?… -- Tuválkin ✉ 10:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Relax chief. I removed the duplicate tag because the images were not duplicates. That tag was mis-applied. Your deletion request on the other hand is still open... for the moment. And while we're at it, I'm not an admin and I don't pontificate. I've been accused of being many dreadful things, but pontificator isn't among them. – JBarta (talk) 11:47, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Okay, sorry for the snark. -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep keep. they are very different files tetraktys (talk) 08:22, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete They are different files alright: One’s crappy the other’s good. -- Tuválkin ✉ 10:36, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- There are many instances on Commons of multiple versions of the same painting. And invariably some versions are better than others. Of these two the inferior one is not so inferior that it needs to be deleted. – JBarta (talk) 11:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Fair enough. However, each image page should contain a link to the other, and their categorization should be kept identical (except for one being included in Category:Lower quality images of identical paintings…?) -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep Not different files; using "duplicate" tag was completely inappropriate. There are many instances on Commons of multiple versions of the same painting; often some versions are better than others in some ways, but inferior in others. There is no need to delete this version, at lower total resolution but greater contrast. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Marking these as duplicates is «completely inappropriate» — those are mighty words. Uploading LOLcats to Commons, that’s to be met with glee and joy and a carefully worded pat on the back. But when a user casually noticed two images of the same subject are not even linked together and acts on it, it is time for stern faces and menacing phrasings.
- Lets see, now: These images are here in Commons as representations of bidimensional media (that’s even why these are PD — the original painter is pinning for the fjords for more than 70 years and photographers’ copyright is not acknowledged when «mere labor» is envolved). Except for a handful of samples intended to illustrate the techniques of flat faithful photography, all these depictions of paintings are meant as being the painting itself (the case could even be made for having one such depiction for each original). And as such, these two are duplicates.
- That’s was in my mind when I tagged the lesser quality image as a duplicate of the other. But I “got schooled” by these astute Wikimedia Commoners” — oh so experinced that they misuse the vote page sections and mix votes and comments as if this was a fanfic forum.
Kept: per consensus and they aren't the same image Ezarateesteban 20:55, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
No indication this high school's logo has been released under the Free Art License. Blurpeace 03:24, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep - Pretty solidly PD-textlogo. Altered license accordingly. – JBarta (talk) 07:35, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not sure I'm so comfortable with classing the minimalist atom-hyphen as a simple shape. Are there any precedents? Blurpeace 00:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Review COM:TO. Key consideration is originality. – JBarta (talk) 10:15, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
Keep the letters as such are not eligible for copyright. And the form in the middle looke like a drawing of the Bohr model. I don't know why we need highschool logos but I wouldn't delete it for copyright reasons. --D-Kuru (talk) 22:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: per consensus and PD-textlogo Ezarateesteban 21:02, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused, uncategorized screenshot without original authors permission. Art-top (talk) 10:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete I don't know what this OS should be but it looks a little bit like a cover of Mac OS X. I searched for "02 OS" on Google but I did not find anything. I just did not delete it yet because It is - maybe (don't really think so, but: maxbe) Open Source or licenced under a free licence. Since the whole thing looks like the typical OS copyvio screenshot I go with the delete button. --D-Kuru (talk) 22:23, 27 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom Ezarateesteban 21:23, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Google Earth Sinopitt (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- It's got a NASA tag on it, but the Google Earth link clearly credits the data to "Imagery ©2012 Cnes/Spot Image, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Map data ©2012 AutoNavi", not to NASA. Delete. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 17:53, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:39, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
There is absolutely no evidence for ``PD-USGov-Military-Army``! In the contrary: in the image is a valid source information readable which says ``PRINTED BY MILITARY SURVEY (UK)``! No US work then. My deletion request countrs also for the derivative work 178.2.63.121 16:54, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not really familiar with the markings and terminology used for this kind of map, but there is at least some signs indicating that it's a US work. The statement in the bottom left reads "Prepared and published by the Defense Mapping Agency Topographic Center, Washington, D.C. Compiled December 1972" in black text and "UTM Grid (WGS 84 Spheroid) added by Military Survey (UK) September 1994" in purple. On the right, it states: "Printed by Military Survey (UK) 11/94/941203M" in purple and "Reprinted by NIMA 03-01" in black. I'm not sure, but I think that might mean it's a US map created by DMATC in 1972, which the UK Military Survey added a coordinate grid to in 1994 (which would not be eligible for copyright protection), and which was then reprinted by NIMA. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:46, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: It appears that this is a 1972 DMA (now called NIMA) map -- there is no evidence that any updates have been made. As LX says, neither the addition of a grid or the act of printing would give a new UK copyright to this PD work. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Map doesn't link to any trustworthy external reference Dzlinker (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- That's not a valid reason. Even if it is a highly partisan view or personal observation, it still could have educational use. (I did not pay attention even to what country it was before saying this) You could ask about its validity on the talk page, or, if you have evidence that contradicts the map, you could add mention of that to the annotation page, or even request a change of name based on your information. Wnt (talk) 05:14, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Not a valid reason : in this case refnecs should be added to Wiki pages, but that does not justify the deletion of the file. --Omar-Toons (talk) 14:21, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:47, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
The audio file is incomplete. Someone rudely cut the message off at the end. Interlude65 (talk) 20:07, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep: No valid reason for delete a file uploaded in 2009 and used in many articles at en:Wikipedia and es:Wikipedia. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:18, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- There have been some terrible bugs in Commons playback - try using a free w:download manager to see if you get a longer version that way. I've had Free Download Manager recover from over 30 errors during download of a single video from Commons. (True, I thought that was fixed...) Anyway, half a loaf is better than none. (Note: I did not listen to the file to make this comment, because I don't think the specific content matters to answer this) Wnt (talk) 05:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. I do recall that the very end of the last word in the statement is cut off (not by me or by Commons; it came that way from the National Weather Service in Dodge City, Kansas), but I see no reason that it should be deleted because of that. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 13:49, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
This photo contains a copyrighted image printed on the hardware. Due to the high image resolution ```de minimis`` cannot apply 178.2.55.213 21:21, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Comment "Due to the high image resolution" o.O
Do you really want to say that File:Virgin America airplane interior.jpg and File:Louvre at night centered.jpg wouldn't be de minis if they would be higher resoluted and my image would be a de mini if it had eg. 50% of it's original size?
You can consider a copyrighted work in an image as de minimis if the copyrighted image "is entirely incidental to the overall subject-matter of the photograph".
Moreover:
1)"A useful test may be to ask whether the photograph would be as good or as useful if the poster were to be masked out." Well, yes. It's about the graphics card and not the of the woman or the logo as such.
2)"If the existence of the poster makes the image more attractive, more usable, or liable to cause more than insignificant economic damage to the copyright owner [...]" more attractive: No; more usable: No; causing an economic damage to the copyright owner: No (The artist gets (I guess) payed by Sapphire and therefore s/he does not really care about that image in terms of an "economic damage" It's more than likely that the artist sold the copyright to Sapphire anyway.
--D-Kuru (talk) 09:14, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: THe high resolution argument never applies. We can keep an image that has a small copyrighted portion that might be a problem if everything else is cropped out, otherwise it would be hard to take high resolution images of many streets.
In this case, however, the image of the woman is not at all de minimis even at this size, so this image infringes. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:51, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Undeleted: I removed the image from the video card / used the existing colours to paint over it. The copyrighted part is no longer a part of the image. --D-Kuru (talk) 15:20, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
Commons already has a far superior image of this building - File:NSF building.jpg -– JBarta (talk) 02:13, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Would also include the following as sub-standard (and unlikely to ever be used in lieu of the original) derivatives of File:NSF building.jpg.
– JBarta (talk) 02:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Weak Keep While I don't understand why it was considered appropriate to create the multiple numbered derivative versions of one file, there's nothing wrong with Commons having multiple photos (some better than others) of notable in scope buildings. I have created a category for this building. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:42, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- The numbered derivatives were clumsy attempts to remove perspective distortion. In a case like this, reducing the vertical perspective (distortion) results in a more natural looking image while eliminating the vertical perspective entirely results in a most un-natural looking image. I'd suggest that the three are not really derivatives, but are mistakes (with respect and apologies to the authors) and can be safely deleted. – JBarta (talk) 03:17, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: GIF deleted: too small to be useful. Others kept. Yann (talk) 11:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
This file is a lower quality version of coat of arms of Indonesia. Moreover, it is not widely used anymore, being replaced by File:Coat of Arms of Indonesia Garuda Pancasila.svg. -iNu- (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per [2] Fry1989 eh? 03:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Coat_of_Arms_of_Indonesia.svg){kind=link}
Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
This file is a lower quality version of coat of arms of Indonesia. Moreover, it is not widely used anymore, being replaced by File:Coat of Arms of Indonesia Garuda Pancasila.svg. -iNu- (talk) 16:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per [3] Fry1989 eh? 03:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Audubon Parkway sign.jpg Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:23, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete This has been superceded by File:Mountain Parkway.svg here on commons for public domain purposes and en:File:Mountain Parkway fair use.svg on en.wp in the correct colors for the infobox. (The PD versions lack the "Unbridled Spirit" logo, and at 20px, you'd never know the difference.) Deletion of this should be non-controversial and readily done. Imzadi 1979 → 09:24, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per Imzadi Ezarateesteban 21:03, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Photograph of identifiable people; not an encyclopedic image of the ship. Niagara (talk) 15:55, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- I added a derivative image File:The Norwegian Star visits Newfoundland -ab.jpg Geo Swan (talk) 16:58, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom, the derivative file may be kept, it isn't full visible the baby Ezarateesteban 21:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Muhandes as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Photo of a newspaper, no evidence of permission
- This is no picture from newspaper, rather a display at a fair. Used on en:wp. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 12:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC).
- The same issues apply, though. What is the permission for the work? Regardless of whether it was a display or a photo, it is still copyrighted by someone. Unless you're saying that you made the display? --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:02, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- This is no picture from newspaper, rather a display at a fair. Used on en:wp. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 12:56, 1 July 2012 (UTC).
Deleted: Copyrighted work Léna (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Borac Banja Luka (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, watermarks. Historical photos may be in public domain but relevant info must be provided.
- File:Stadion Arena Banjaluka.jpg
- File:Borac Banja Luka.jpg
- File:Tim Borca 1926.jpg
- File:Ilija Miljus najbolji trener u istoriji.jpg
- File:Ekipa Borca iz 1972.jpg
- File:Dokument o osnivanju 1926.jpg
- File:Zaric i raspudic sa peharom PL.jpg
- File:Zaric i Raspudic sa peharom PL 2011.jpg
- File:Slavisa bozicic2.jpg
- File:Radmilo-sipovac.jpg
- File:Milorad bilbija.jpg
- File:Darko-Ljubojevic4.jpg
- File:Borac2.jpg
- File:Osvajaci kupa.jpg
- File:Novi stadion borca.jpg
- File:Stadion iz vazduha.jpg
- File:Vulturesi 80te borac proleter 1989 300 ljudi.jpg
- File:Trofej Mitropa kup.jpg
- File:Trofej kupa Jugoslavije.jpg
- File:Prvaci kupa jugoslavije.jpg
- File:Lesinari2.jpg
- File:Kup pobjednika kupova Borac-Anderleht.jpg
- File:Kup Jugoslavije.jpg
- File:KLQwM.jpg
- File:Cc2be99f7ecc4b3b4262356cd6e65d33.jpg
- File:1011 borac-zeljeznicar 15.jpg
- File:1011 borac-sarajevo 18.jpg
- File:1011 borac-lozana 3.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zrinjski 15.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 32 (1).jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 32.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 26.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 25.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 19.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 18.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 13.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 10.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicarkup 9.jpg
- File:0910 borac-zeljeznicar 15.jpg
- File:0910 borac-sarajevo 12.jpg
- File:0910 borac-olimpik 2.jpg
- File:0809 borac-zvijezda 13.jpg
- File:0809 borac-zeljeznicar 18.jpg
- File:0809 borac-modrica 12.jpg
- File:0809 borac-modrica 5.jpg
- File:Boracmakabi.jpg
- File:8cee3b6d18fa12f9236c45236c38d810.jpg
- File:7c78ce3f0c9a026a88ab9e32f835591c.jpg
- File:02 docek-igraca sa kupa.jpg
- File:02 borac-r prjedor-95.jpg
- File:Novi stadion.jpg
- File:Otvaranje stadiona clanak.jpg
- File:Borac-zrinjski.jpg
- File:Qualifications for Yugoslav First League, FC Borac Banja Luka - Split, 1970 1970.jpg
- File:Navijaci Lesinari.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Motopark (talk) 16:37, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- I`ve put all sources and authors knowed. regards --Borac Banja Luka (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
All sources and authors are knowed ect ect. For me its also ok. --Nado158 (talk) 09:38, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
- I looked at a random sampling of them - they were all from sites with prominent copyright notices and no licenses that I could detect (relying on Google Translate). Unless we are shown a license and/or PD rationales for specific files, I'm afraid I have to say Delete. --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:43, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete All images are most probably copyrighted (images from lesinari1987.net are copyrighted as website notice "© Лешинари Бања Лука 2003–2012"), except, i think this one File:Borac Banja Luka.jpg which is taken with mobile phone as stated by uploader. --Smooth_O (talk) 08:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: most -- kept one, per discussion. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Logos uploaded by Sakawat crsc (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: unused text-only logos of company with questionable notability.
- File:ANEX Gallerie 02.jpg
- File:ANEX Gallerie 03.jpg
- File:ANEX logo.jpg
- File:ANEX group Logo.jpg
- File:Sakawat Anex hossain 2012-03-16.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 08:36, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Sakawat crsc
Likely spam.
Art-top (talk) 07:55, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
- And also nominated questionable benefit image with doubtful authorship (low resolution, no exif).
- File:Friend for sakas.jpg
- --Art-top (talk) 07:57, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Not in use out of scope Ezarateesteban 21:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
I find it quite unlikely that this image is the own creation of the uploader. It was scanned out from a book or something like that. But this doesn't make the uploader the copyright holder to say ``I created it and I release it under this licnse`` 178.2.63.121 16:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. –BruTe Talk 19:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per above. — G.G. 04:24, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- The persom died in 1905, so it might be qualify for {{PD-RusEmpire}}. I can see the photo and more others her. Do you know which book it is? Geagea (talk) 23:49, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 21:15, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Muhandes as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Photo of a newspaper, no evidence of permission.
- This is no picture from newspaper, rather a display at a fair. Used on en:wp. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC).
- The same issues apply, though. What is the permission for the work? Regardless of whether it was a display or a photo, it is still copyrighted by someone. Unless you're saying that you made the display? --Philosopher Let us reason together. 21:01, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- This is no picture from newspaper, rather a display at a fair. Used on en:wp. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 12:59, 1 July 2012 (UTC).
- Delete Photograph of a copyrighted poster, therefore copyrighted. —SpacemanSpiff 10:37, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. INeverCry 17:25, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
This is a derivative work, and there is no freedom of panorama in the US. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
![08:49, 1 July 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/07/01#c-Magog_the_Ogre-2012-07-01T08:49:00.000Z-File:"Sidekick_for_hire"_graffiti.jpg){kind=link}
- Agree Infrogmation... AnonMoos (talk) 19:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- I believe we've had cases where a copyright holder of graffiti pursued a claim... it was either against Wikimedia or against someone else. Am I right? Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- If it's illegally-placed graffiti, then such a lawsuit would be like suing somebody for stealing your marijuana -- it would have poor chances of success in the U.S. legal system. Maybe you're thinking of "gallery graffiti", or officially-sanctioned murals, or someone suing a graffiti artist for violating copyrights? -- AnonMoos (talk) 01:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- See also fr:Wikipédia:Legifer/mars 2012#Image de graffiti et ADAGP and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Miss tic enfile art mur jnl.jpg. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Comment File was nominated as violation of US law, and this ruling is per French law. 1)Where was this image photographed? 2)Does Commons need to the above ruling mean Commons needs to revise the Graffiti guidelines, eg to exclude France? -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:05, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- See also fr:Wikipédia:Legifer/mars 2012#Image de graffiti et ADAGP and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Miss tic enfile art mur jnl.jpg. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:56, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- If it's illegally-placed graffiti, then such a lawsuit would be like suing somebody for stealing your marijuana -- it would have poor chances of success in the U.S. legal system. Maybe you're thinking of "gallery graffiti", or officially-sanctioned murals, or someone suing a graffiti artist for violating copyrights? -- AnonMoos (talk) 01:15, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- I believe we've had cases where a copyright holder of graffiti pursued a claim... it was either against Wikimedia or against someone else. Am I right? Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:03, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
- Agree Infrogmation... AnonMoos (talk) 19:43, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Keep? FASTILY (TALK) 05:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
![05:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/07/01#c-Fastily-2012-09-14T05:52:00.000Z-File:"Sidekick_for_hire"_graffiti.jpg){kind=link}
Doubtful authorship - images can be found via the Internet (for example, throught TinEye). Art-top (talk) 10:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Also:
- File:Toshiro Mifune in WW2.jpg
- File:Toshiro Mifune in Venice.jpg
- All files uploaded by User:Kuriama789. --Art-top (talk) 10:29, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Isn't File:Toshiro Mifune in WW2.jpg likely to be PD-Japan-oldphoto as its meant to date back to World War 2?Nigel Ish (talk) 10:15, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
- Maybe. But the correct source is still not specified. --Art-top (talk) 10:50, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 05:52, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Clearly a reproduction. Copyright status of original work unclear. Lymantria (talk) 09:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- that's pd-old. --Insider (talk) 07:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: {{PD-RusEmpire}} . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:11, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Clearly a derivative work / reproduction. Copyright status of original unclear. Lymantria (talk) 10:01, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- that's pd-old. --Insider (talk) 07:13, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: {{PD-RusEmpire}} . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 21:13, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
Загрузивший указал, что это собственная работа, но это утверждение вызывает сомнение в подлинности. Не у каждого дома имеется аппаратура позволяющая снимать крупно объекты, находящиеся на огромных расстояниях от Земли Skeptikus One (talk) 04:18, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Это скриншот из программы Celestia, что вполне допускается (см. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Celestia) -- BIT1982 (talk) 08:32, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- В таком случае это необходимо было прописать в описании. Например, как это сделано здесь. --Skeptikus One (talk) 09:39, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
- Я написал в описании, что это скриншот из Celestia, теперь всё в порядке? --Svinets 20:38, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: screenshot of Celestia Blacklake (talk) 05:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
