Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/07/09
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
non-free image C.Nilsson (talk) 13:23, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Book cover EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyviol image Threecharlie (talk) 18:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio Dereckson (talk) 18:39, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
not working svg BloodIce (talk) 18:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: At uploader request. Dereckson (talk) 18:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
See Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/Archive 13#File:CC Mariners 2005 PSC.jpg. —LX (talk, contribs) 22:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I'm going to follow up with Mark Nolan regarding whether he claims ownership of this. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 10:12, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Very quick followup ticket:2006112210001194. The real photographer is Mark Nolan and the copyright is owned by Getty. Photographs in Australia are protected for 70 years from publication, so undelete in 2076. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 01:54, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Not sure for appropriate use Emigiorg (talk) 09:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted, prompt uploader request; no evidence of free license seen at source link. -- 02:50, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a copyright infringement. The claim of licensing under a Creative Commons license is unsubstantiated, and the image clearly contains the text "© Transport for Greater Manchester". JamesBWatson (talk) 10:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete If it were re-uploaded onto en.Wikipedia could it pass for fair use on the Manchester Metrolink page? Delusion23 (talk) 10:32, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. False license by Flickr reuser. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:52, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a non-free Internet image and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted; copyright violation. Do not upload other people's images found on the internet unless they have explicitly stated a free license; see Commons:Licensing. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a non-free Internet image and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted; copyright violation. Do not upload other people's images found on the internet unless they have explicitly stated a free license; see Commons:Licensing. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:55, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a non-free Internet image and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Copyviol Infrogmation (talk) 02:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a non-free Internet image and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:44, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted, copyviol Infrogmation (talk) 02:57, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a non-free Internet image and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:47, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Copyviol Infrogmation (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later, since it's a screenshot of a non-free website and therefore a {{Copyvio}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:48, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Copyviol Infrogmation (talk) 02:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later unless you can show that the copyright holder has approved publication under a free license or that it's in the public domain for some reason. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:49, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Image yoinked from web; no evidence of free license. Infrogmation (talk) 03:00, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Hoaxed image. The original file is File:Boxing winners at the 2010 Commonwealth Games.png (uploaded by me). Manoj Kumar was the original gold medallist but this user somehow altered the image and vandalised multiple pages on English Wikipedia related to the event and athletes. —Bill william comptonTalk 16:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Infrogmation (talk) 03:15, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Hoaxed image. The original file is File:Boxing winners at the 2010 Commonwealth Games.png (uploaded by me). Manoj Kumar was the original gold medallist but this user somehow altered the image and vandalised multiple pages on English Wikipedia related to the event and athletes. —Bill william comptonTalk 16:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted, dishonestly modified/pranked image (Apparently legitimate crop version at File:Manoj Kumar at the 2010 Commonwealth Games.png) -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:10, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Hoaxed image. The original file is File:Boxing winners at the 2010 Commonwealth Games.png (uploaded by me). Manoj Kumar was the original gold medallist but this user somehow altered the image and vandalised multiple pages on English Wikipedia related to the event and athletes. —Bill william comptonTalk 16:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted Infrogmation (talk) 03:14, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Dubious own work given other image uploads by the user. Also no EXIF. Stefan4 (talk) 01:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
I have got another one Abdulrahman95 (talk) 15:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete this unofficial flag.Pete unseth (talk) 23:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted image. Clearly watermarked. Dismas (talk) 21:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
A TinEye search confirms that this is used several other places on the web. All the user's other contribs have been copyvios, I see no good faith here. Dismas (talk) 21:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Delete agree. Boseritwik talk July 10, 2012 06:19 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 17:41, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Low resolution scan of a stamp. A much better scan is available at File:Stamps of Germany (Berlin) 1972, MiNr 425.jpg. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 22:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate replaced and deleted rubin16 (talk) 11:55, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Deepika Padukone,Ajay Jadeja,Harsha Bhogle,Gaurav Kapoor on DLF IPL's Extraaa Innings (1).jpg
[edit]File:Deepika Padukone,Ajay Jadeja,Harsha Bhogle,Gaurav Kapoor on DLF IPL's Extraaa Innings (1).jpg 188.254.230.210 00:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 14:19, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a collage of the non-free online images:
- [1] - was illegally uploaded by this user and deleted from Commons
- [2] - this is a mystification as this is an non-free image of Tashkent (Uzbekistan) but not Darkhan (Mongolia)
- [3] - non-free image
- [4] - non-free image
- [5] - non-free image
- [6] - non-free image.
Bogomolov.PL (talk) 18:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 14:21, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
SVG at File:Flag of Kach and Kahane Chai.svg Fry1989 eh? 03:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 12:40, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 05:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 05:57, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 05:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 05:58, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 05:59, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:00, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:01, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:03, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:04, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:05, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:06, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:09, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:10, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 11:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:11, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
NPA z http://www.encyklopedia.puszcza-bialowieska.eu/index.php?dzial=haslo&id=58 Tomasz Wachowski (talk) 16:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
It was not NPA, User:Zubron and Tomasz Niechoda is the same person. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Very obvious image grab from www.deportivoquito.com 178.2.55.55 20:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
I uploaded the cropped version of the image accidentally. Please delete it. Jhaankitesh (talk) 22:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 12:41, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Mostly modern stamps still under British Crown Copyright. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Found in this Tumblr post that predates the upload. Appears to be a promo photo. Ytoyoda (talk) 04:54, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Appears to be taken from a promo shot found here and elsewhere that predates this upload. Ytoyoda (talk) 04:55, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Ices2Csharp (talk) 07:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyright violation: derivative work Mormegil (talk) 08:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio : this painting is under copyright. M0tty (talk) 08:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio ? this drawing of SpiderMan is under copyright. M0tty (talk) 08:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio ? this drawing is under copyright. M0tty (talk) 08:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Looks like a private photo, so unlikely published. It says that the photographer died at least 100 years ago, but there is no evidence of this. If the photographer is anonymous and the photo is unpublished, then this is in the public domain if it was taken before 1892, but "circa 1890" is not sufficiently exact to assume this. Permission is claimed but there is no OTRS ticket and the permission looks like a Wikipedia-only permission anyway. Stefan4 (talk) 08:32, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Appears to have been here for several years. No evidence of permission. Stefan4 (talk) 08:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Too much of publicity. I dont have privacy at all Dr. Nelson Pung 08:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
© 2012 San Diego Air & Space Museum Threecharlie (talk) 09:08, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Ices2Csharp (talk) 10:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Creative work by A. Solzhenitsyn (his letter). Needs permission. PereslavlFoto (talk) 12:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This image is under Uzbekistan legal regulations, but it was uoloaded using Russian legal regulations licensing Bogomolov.PL (talk) 14:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE issue; vanity upload of user's own work - not expected to be useful on a project. See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Leovillaverde. Эlcobbola talk 15:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Bundesstraße 1 number.svg. 84.61.164.191 15:17, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Bundesstraße 2 number.svg. 84.61.164.191 15:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Another blurry video of bad quality and not given project scope. Yikrazuul (talk) 15:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Made up of copyrighted photos, the article where the image is located is being tagged for speedy deletion. -- Luke Talk 16:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Author and his/her age are unknown, original publication date is unknown, PD-old cannot be claimed. Widerborst (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Because the neanderthals didnt have blue eyes. I already updated sending other image with corrected data: (File:Homo neanderthalensis 2 cogitas3d.png). A big hug! Cicero Moraes (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No indication of free music in the audio part. Figures in video part may be copyrighted by Disney. Pristurus (talk) 17:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No permission of the artist given, derivative work. Pristurus (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
it is a copy of [7] Bogomolov.PL (talk) 18:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Doubtful authorship - promo image. Test upload - see description. Art-top (talk) 18:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
I have a better version of this Picture on my Wiki Page. EdwardMole (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Bundesstraße 3 number.svg. 84.61.164.191 20:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Superseded by File:Bundesstraße 4 number.svg. 84.61.164.191 20:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Well, the uploader says it is a donation but I have my doubts. Why in that small resolution? Is there an official write or thelike? 178.2.55.55 20:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This looks like a Photoshopped version of Windows 8's logo, except the "8" is removed and is replaced with an Arial-font "RT" awkwardly positioned, slightly off. Obviously not designed by Microsoft, and if so it does not belong on Commons. Jeffwang (talk) 20:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 太刻薄 as no permission (no permission since)
Its stated as own work and I cannot find a "foreign" sourc for it. JuTa 20:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 太刻薄 as no permission (no permission since)
Its stated as own work and I cannot find a "foreign" source for it. JuTa 20:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 太刻薄 as no permission (no permission since)
Its stated as own work and I cannot find a "foreign" source for it. JuTa 20:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:24, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Not sure if it's free because of User:Bar restorant panorama - out of scope - explicit promo Trijnsteltalk 22:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Not sure if it's free because of User:Bar restorant panorama - out of scope - explicit promo Trijnsteltalk 22:04, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Picture found on several websites, license wrong Funfood ␌ 22:16, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused personal picture. Ices2Csharp (talk) 22:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
File:Foreign Minister of the USSR Andrei Gromyko with Foreign Minister of Iraq Adnan Pachachi in Moscow.jpg
[edit]No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:14, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:23, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
No information on when and where this was first published, which is needed to support the PD claim. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:25, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Duplicate of Greek Royal Navy Division commander's flag.svg, and per Greek Fleet 1914.png, "division commander's flag" is a more appropriate name Constantine ✍ 12:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:21, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Poor quality (JPG compression artifacts), orphaned/replaced by File:BZ Logo.svg. Leyo 15:26, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:22, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
See initial discussion at User talk:Pieter Kuiper#File:National Front at London Gay Pride 2007.jpg. I have to agree that this seems to violate British copyright: there is too much focus on the "outlaw homosexual marriage" notice. Definitely not permanently installed, so FOP doesn't apply, and this doesn't look like a "work of artistic craftsmanship" anyway. Stefan4 (talk) 21:26, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, de minimis does not apply, as evidenced by the fact that it's a crop of File:National Front protesting at London Gay Pride 2007.jpg, specifically focusing on the sign. Prof. Professorson (talk) 10:35, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Comment In good faith, I wrote to the National Front on 3 July 2012, which they confirmed receipt of the same day and promised to get back to me (they also gave me a contact name and mobile phone number if it was needed urgently). If they do get back to me, I will log the reply with OTRS. In the email I asked:
- --Fæ (talk) 10:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- But if, as you say, this image hasn't been used in any NF publication, doesn't it suggest that they aren't its copyright holder? We'd need permission from whoever created it. Prof. Professorson (talk) 11:13, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- In 2007 I took the photograph from the other side of the street, I did not decide to go through the police security to ask the NF protesters in question where they got their banner from and the full names of those involved in creating it. The NF representative may be able to work that out, five years later, if they bother to reply. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- No need to be sarcastic. I just meant that the way you formulated your question to NF, it sounded like you assumed that NF was the copyright holder (you're asking them if they will release it under a free license, as opposed to asking who the copyright holder is and if they would agree to those terms). I doubt that they will be able to identify the copyright holder, but I guess it's worth a shot. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:01, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- It was not particularly sarcastic, the police probably would not have let me near the NF protesters, the protesters appeared keen to be anonymous (some keeping their heads covered), the banner was not signed or identifiable from other published material and the banner does quite clearly represent the National Front, even using the website as a reference, so the connection seems clear and the assumption reasonable to make. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 20:04, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- No need to be sarcastic. I just meant that the way you formulated your question to NF, it sounded like you assumed that NF was the copyright holder (you're asking them if they will release it under a free license, as opposed to asking who the copyright holder is and if they would agree to those terms). I doubt that they will be able to identify the copyright holder, but I guess it's worth a shot. Prof. Professorson (talk) 12:01, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- In 2007 I took the photograph from the other side of the street, I did not decide to go through the police security to ask the NF protesters in question where they got their banner from and the full names of those involved in creating it. The NF representative may be able to work that out, five years later, if they bother to reply. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:53, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- But if, as you say, this image hasn't been used in any NF publication, doesn't it suggest that they aren't its copyright holder? We'd need permission from whoever created it. Prof. Professorson (talk) 11:13, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- It is not because this image is a crop from another one than de minimis cannot apply. If the drawing is removed, the image has still a meaning, therefore the drawing is de minimis. Yann (talk) 11:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- If this drawing is removed, the image still has a meaning, but the meaning changes. The statement "outlaw homosexual marriage" is clear: this is a manifestation against homosexuality. If the drawing is removed, this just shows a manifestation for something unspecific. One could extract something from the other sign ("Barrymore go to hell"). I did a search for "Barrymore" and "homosexuality" and found the article en:Michael Barrymore: a British homosexual person who was arrested for murder two weeks before this manifestation against homosexuality in the UK. Fits perfectly, and people who do the same search as I did would thus identify the image as a manifestation against either homosexuality or murder, although you can't tell which. Of course, the image may be accompanied by an image caption explaining what kind of manifestation it is, so maybe the notice could be seen as de minimis, although I doubt it. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- I wrote removing the drawing, not the text. The text is too short to get a copyright. Yann (talk) 06:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- Anyway, it doesn't matter, your reasoning above is flawed; the idea that just because the picture would still "make sense" without the drawing means that it's de minimis is simply wrong. Let me take an example. If I take a picture of my TV with, say, Mickey Mouse displayed on it, then the picture with Mickey Mouse removed still "makes sense" (it's still a picture of my TV), but it doesn't mean that Mickey Mouse was de minimis in the first version. You have to ask yourself, "what is the main focus of the picture?". In this case, clearly (as it was even cropped to that effect), the focus is on the banner, and it is not just incidentally included. If you really think that this image is so valuable and interesting even without the banner, I guess you could re-upload a version with the drawing blurred out, and delete this one, but in my opinion it wouldn't make much sense and essentially be out of scope. Prof. Professorson (talk) 07:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- You mixed up the banner with the drawing on the banner. I agree that removing the banner won't do, but just removing the drawing would do. Yann (talk) 08:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- See also COM:L#Typographical copyright and COM:SIG#United Kingdom (is the text handwritten?). The text might also be an issue. --Stefan4 (talk) 09:08, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- No, you're missing my point. It doesn't matter that you could remove the drawing and the picture would still make sense. The drawing is there, it is copyrighted, and it's not de minimis because it's the main focus of the picture (it's actually what makes it interesting). If your arguments would hold, one could pretty much take pictures of any copyrighted material and get away with it by including some stuff around it; COM:DM explicitly says that "copyright infringement cannot be avoided by additionally including within the frame more of the setting or the surrounding area" (I encourage you to read Commons:DM#An example, it applies very well to this case). Prof. Professorson (talk) 09:17, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- See File:National Front at London Gay Pride 2007 edit.jpg to prove my point. Yann (talk) 09:26, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) You might also wish to take a look at this image which violates copyright because this image and this image both appear on the screenshot. In this case, the Swedish supreme court argued that the photos are not de minimis because the screenshot was used to illustrate how photos were used on the web site. The photos were thus significant to the image.[8] Note that this was a case about the screenshot and not a case about the website as a whole. The photos were also copyright violations on the website, but this was settled in a different lawsuit. British law could define de minimis differently, but presumably most laws use more or less the same definition.
- In this British case, the drawing is significant in that the photo focuses on the drawing and depends on it being there. As long as the drawing is there, the photo will continue to violate copyright, but you could avoid the copyright violation by removing the drawing from the photo, unless the text (typesetting/handwriting) also is an issue. --Stefan4 (talk) 09:29, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- You mixed up the banner with the drawing on the banner. I agree that removing the banner won't do, but just removing the drawing would do. Yann (talk) 08:43, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- Anyway, it doesn't matter, your reasoning above is flawed; the idea that just because the picture would still "make sense" without the drawing means that it's de minimis is simply wrong. Let me take an example. If I take a picture of my TV with, say, Mickey Mouse displayed on it, then the picture with Mickey Mouse removed still "makes sense" (it's still a picture of my TV), but it doesn't mean that Mickey Mouse was de minimis in the first version. You have to ask yourself, "what is the main focus of the picture?". In this case, clearly (as it was even cropped to that effect), the focus is on the banner, and it is not just incidentally included. If you really think that this image is so valuable and interesting even without the banner, I guess you could re-upload a version with the drawing blurred out, and delete this one, but in my opinion it wouldn't make much sense and essentially be out of scope. Prof. Professorson (talk) 07:41, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- I wrote removing the drawing, not the text. The text is too short to get a copyright. Yann (talk) 06:28, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
- If this drawing is removed, the image still has a meaning, but the meaning changes. The statement "outlaw homosexual marriage" is clear: this is a manifestation against homosexuality. If the drawing is removed, this just shows a manifestation for something unspecific. One could extract something from the other sign ("Barrymore go to hell"). I did a search for "Barrymore" and "homosexuality" and found the article en:Michael Barrymore: a British homosexual person who was arrested for murder two weeks before this manifestation against homosexuality in the UK. Fits perfectly, and people who do the same search as I did would thus identify the image as a manifestation against either homosexuality or murder, although you can't tell which. Of course, the image may be accompanied by an image caption explaining what kind of manifestation it is, so maybe the notice could be seen as de minimis, although I doubt it. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- It is not because this image is a crop from another one than de minimis cannot apply. If the drawing is removed, the image has still a meaning, therefore the drawing is de minimis. Yann (talk) 11:27, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nominater. No FOP and not de minimis. MGA73 (talk) 18:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope/spam.
- File:FindMyMatch Properties.jpg
- File:Findmymatch logo.jpg
- File:Newspaper Classified Page - releaseMyAd.png
- File:Newspaper-partners-releaseMyAd.png
- File:ReleaseMyAd Newspaper Partners.png
- File:Www-releasemyad-com.png
- File:Newspaper-text-classified-ad.jpg
- File:ReleaseMyAd - Newspaper Classifieds Simplified.jpg
- File:ReleaseMyAd Logo.jpg
Prof. Professorson (talk) 10:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Nuked all, including four others which were uploaded after you nominated all these: File:FindMyMatch Jobs.jpg, File:Fmm-wiki.png, File:Fmm-properties.png and File:Fmmjobs-wiki.png. Trijnsteltalk 22:07, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Workingfordjbobcat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Doubtful authorship - low resolution photos without exif or taken with different cameras.
- File:DJ Bobcat.jpg
- File:DJ Bobcat 5.jpeg
- File:DJ Bobcat 3.jpg
- File:DJ Bobcat 4.jpg
- File:DJ Bobcat 7.jpg
- File:DJ Bobcat 6.jpg
- File:DJ Bobcat 2.jpg
Art-top (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
I own the right and have taken all the pictures that I have posted. I have been working with DJ Bobcat for many, many, many years and don't appreciate the authorship of my work to be requested for deletion. These picture were taken with my camera(s) over the course of several years, I am a vital part in DJ Bobcat' company. I own the rights to these photos. I have also placed catergories with all of my photos uploaded earlier today.
Workingfordjbobcat (talk 8:55, 9 July 2012
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Natalia Cannes (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. One of them is used on a soon-to-be-deleted article.
Prof. Professorson (talk) 14:45, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Yep, definitely out of scope. Plus account is blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Trijnsteltalk 22:09, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Tuebimurarmis (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused private pictures, out of scope.
Prof. Professorson (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Wvk (talk) 06:14, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Amin.petgar (talk · contribs)
[edit]These are works by J. Petgar, an Iranian artist who, if I've converted calendars correctly, died in 2005 or 2006 (reported as 1384 in the Persian calendar). Per COM:L, Iranian works generally become PD 50 years after author death. Accordingly, these would become PD in 2055.
- File:نقش و نگار - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:قرآن - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:رعيت در زندان ارباب - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:رختشويان - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:منظره سرچشمه - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:وجدان در زندان - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:نهر آب و درخت - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:رشته کوه هاى البرز - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:خيرات - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:همسر برادر نقاش - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:گوشه حياط - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:گل عروس - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:پل قلهک - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:دره و سنگ - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:سلف پرتره3 - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:سلف پرتره2 - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:چايخوران - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:آسياب طوطى - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:سه گلدان نقره - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:دعا - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:بهار - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:سلف پرتره - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:حرامخواران - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:از اينجا تا ابديت- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:مکتب قرآن- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:بخشى از تابلوى جاهلى مى آيد - جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:بخشی از تابلوی جاهلی می آید- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:پوران عضدی- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:خانه نقاش- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:اشراق- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:ریاکار- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:گلدان و گیلاس- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:زن بافنده- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:قهوه خانه امیر آباد- جعفر پتگر.JPG
- File:بد زبان- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:جاهلی می آید- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:آب کرج-جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:سقا-جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:بخشی از تابلو جاهلی می آید- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:آی آدم ها- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:چهره دوشیزه خجسته- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:مادر نقاش- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:شهریار- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:پسرک فقیر- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:خودنگاره- جعفر پتگر.jpg
- File:Ghali Foroushan.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 18:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Vanity gallery of his penis with no educational purposes. Out of Project scope.
- File:My subincision 12.JPG
- File:My subincision 11.JPG
- File:My subincision 10.JPG
- File:My subincision 09.JPG
- File:My subincision 08.JPG
- File:My subincision 07.JPG
- File:My subincision 06.JPG
- File:My subincision 05.JPG
- File:My subincision 04.JPG
- File:My subincision 03.JPG
- File:My subincision 02.JPG
- File:My subincision 01.JPG
- File:My pics 016.JPG
- File:My pics 017.JPG
- File:My pics.JPG
- File:My pics 015.JPG
- File:My pics 014.JPG
- File:My pics 012.JPG
- File:My pics 013.JPG
- File:My pics 025.JPG
- File:My pics 024.JPG
- File:My pics 028.JPG
- File:My pics 019.JPG
- File:My pics 023.JPG
- File:My pics 021.JPG
- File:My pics 007.JPG
- File:My pics 049.jpg
- File:My pics 047.jpg
- File:My pics 046.jpg
- File:My pics 048.jpg
- File:My pics 043.jpg
- File:My pics 034.jpg
- File:My pics 040.jpg
- File:My pics 041.jpg
- File:My pics 039.jpg
- File:My pics 035.jpg
- File:My pics 004.jpg
- File:My pics 003.jpg
- File:My pics 011.jpg
- File:My pics 009.jpg
- File:My pics 008.jpg
- File:My pics 002.jpg
- File:My pics 001.jpg
Amitie 10g (talk) 21:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
+File:My surgery pics 038.JPG (already deleted earlier due to low quality) -- Common Good (talk) 18:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
- Weak
Keep for File:My pics 004.jpg which seems to have some possible medical illustrative potential. There may be one or two others with illustrative value that I wouldn't object to keeping if they were properly described and categorized. However the set as a whole seems poorly photographed, poorly described, and of little use, so Delete the bulk. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:47, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted a bunch of them. Kept the rest. Subincision, hypospadias and CBT are in scope. However some of these images were poorly photographed (blurry, not centered) or near dupes. -- Common Good (talk) 18:57, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:PENIS but with a twist. Most of these were previously nommed and kept on the grounds that some of them have educational value. I argue that this isn't true on the following grounds: The uploader claims that all these are own works, and from that follows that they are all self pics. These are all, or almost all, pics claiming to be depictions of hypospadias or a penile subincision. These are, honestly, mutually exclusive conditions: A person with a penile subincision has something resembling a hypospadias, though its formation is completely different. The same works in reverse. Because this uploader has labeled his images as both, we don't really know how to categorize these images. As such, there is no realistic educational use, because someone trying to make an educational use out of them will be getting deceived: Either this man has a hypospadias or he has a penile subincision. Even in the tremendously unlikely circumstance that he was born with a hypospadias that he had extended (slightly) by a penile subincision, these images are therefore useless as depictions of hypospadias, and questionable for depictions of a penile subincision.
- File:Cockplay.jpg
- File:Estmming cock.jpg
- File:Estim.jpg
- File:Hypospadias190.JPG
- File:Hypospadias641.JPG
- File:Subincision142.JPG
- File:Hypospadias187.JPG
- File:Hypospadias421.JPG
- File:Hypospadias123.JPG
- File:My subincision.JPG
- File:My pics50.JPG
- File:My pics 51.JPG
- File:My pics 0031.JPG
- File:My pics 20.JPG
- File:My subincision 10.JPG
- File:My subincision 09.JPG
- File:My subincision 02.JPG
- File:My pics 017.JPG
- File:My pics 025.JPG
- File:My pics 049.jpg
- File:My pics 040.jpg
- File:My pics 039.jpg
- File:My pics 004.jpg
- File:My pics 003.jpg
- File:My pics 002.jpg
- File:My pics 001.jpg
—/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 03:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Indeed, the uploader seems to be confused in regard to the terms. Take, for example, File:Subincision142.JPG which refers to subincision in its file name but where at the same time the description refers to hypospadias. It was sorted into the category Category:Body modification by the uploader which would be fitting for subincision but not a hypospadias. In addition, these photographs are of low quality. Some of them are horribly blurred (like File:My pics 0031.JPG), none of them displays the phenomenon well much unlike the photographs that are used in the respective articles. None of them are used anywhere. Hence, I have deleted the whole lot as nominated per COM:SCOPE and COM:PENIS in particular. --AFBorchert (talk) 21:52, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by CoolGin
[edit]Files are uploaded without date information, with incoherent sizes and EXIF tags. --Dereckson (talk) 22:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Eastlanative (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely authorship claims. It appears that uploader either does not care or does not understand what "own work" means.
—LX (talk, contribs) 22:43, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILYs (TALK) 22:27, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a blurry, unused version of the file at File:Borgnearms.jpg. Diannaa (talk) 00:33, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete – Low-quality redundant copy.—Bill william comptonTalk 04:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:47, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
This photograph from the movie "Das unsterblich Herz" (1939) is a work of stills photographer Erich Kilian. Kilian was working until 1956/57. So he is not longer than 70 years dead. More information about his works: http://www.filmportal.de/en/node/1071200 -Janericloebe (talk) 01:58, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- In the magazine itself he was not mentioned, so his identity was not revealed. Should it be clear that this is one of his works, please go ahead and delete the file. --Der Bischof mit der E-Gitarre (talk) 11:36, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Copyvio ? this drawing is under copyright. But, maybe de minimis ? M0tty (talk) 08:19, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep this one. The drawing is very small, de minimis.--Paris 16 (talk) 08:24, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:50, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
not nice Nelson 22:36, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Other Caption Nelson 22:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Other Caption PNC Nelson 22:37, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Replace Nelson 22:38, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
No Comments Dr. Nelson Pung 08:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Please explain why you want this deleted. If you do not speak English, say in your language, someone can translate. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:45, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason given for deletion . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Privacy breached Dr. Nelson Pung 08:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Datonelson (talk • contribs) 08:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
- I do not understand. This appears to be a public -- perhaps even newsworthy -- event. How can there be a breach of privacy? I note that the requester above is also the uploader. Please explain why you want your image deleted. If you have trouble with English, use another language and we will deal with it. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:36, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: As with last time, nominator has not explained the rationale, so we're not going to delete it. If you cannot speak English at a native level, you can use your native language, chances are high that we have an administrator that speaks that language. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:35, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
No Further Comments Dr. Nelson Pung 09:02, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Orphan uncategorized, apparent derivative work, no indication of in scope usefulness. -- Infrogmation (talk) 02:47, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:53, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. The copyright statement on that website does not include a release under a free Creative Commons licence. Mircea87 (talk) 09:18, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- The website clearly mentions "Material featured on this site may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission." http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=261
122.164.50.233 16:57, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- "This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Where the material is being published or issued to others, the source must be prominently acknowledged." All copyrighted material on Commons must be licensed under a free license that specifically and irrevocably allows anyone to use the material for any purpose; simply writing that "the material may be used freely by anyone" or similar isn't sufficient. --Mircea87 (talk) 17:21, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
"Material featured on this site may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Where the material is being published or issued to others, the source must be prominently acknowledged." http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=261
It is quite clear what the website says, that the material is free to be used in any format or media without any permission required. Media in this case is wiki. In any case, I'm waiting for the respective authority with deletion powers to give a final say on this.
Fighterplanes (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The key words that prevent our keeping this are "This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately" -- licenses acceptable for Commons must include the right to modify the work. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Wikimedia Commons only accepts free content—that is, images and other media files that can be used by anyone, for any purpose. The copyright statement on that website does not include a release under a free Creative Commons licence. Mircea87 (talk) 09:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
"Material featured on this site may be reproduced free of charge in any format or media without requiring specific permission. This is subject to the material being reproduced accurately and not being used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. Where the material is being published or issued to others, the source must be prominently acknowledged." http://indianairforce.nic.in/show_page.php?pg_id=261 It is quite clear what the website says, that the material is free to be used in any format or media without any permission required. Media in this case is wiki. In any case, I'm waiting for the respective authority with deletion powers to give a final say on this. 122.164.50.233 17:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. A low resolution duplicate of File:Study for the Head of Leda.jpg. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later as it's a needless (and originally very poorly described) low-resolution {{Duplicate}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
i'd like to delete my photo and re-upload it later please Tomer.shporn (talk) 13:09, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. A low resolution duplicate of File:Leonardo da vinci, Head of a girl 01.jpg. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 23:23, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete and please don't re-upload it later as it's a needless (and originally very poorly described) low-resolution {{Duplicate}}. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:57, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Leyo 15:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- The image is currently in use at w:en:Significance_analysis_of_microarrays, so I wouldn't say that it is out of scope; but this one use should be replaced by a text equivalent and then the image can be deleted. Ed (Edgar181) 17:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, you are right: Of of scope after having been replaced by text (or TeX?). --Leyo 22:01, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete now that it has been replaced. Ed (Edgar181) 19:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete now that it has been replaced. That article is a whole pile of of low-image-quality equation-images:( DMacks (talk) 05:13, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:58, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sodacan as Speedy (User image, no longer needed by said user) Sodacan (talk) 15:40, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like OK image; not a speedy. Uploader request -- why do you want it deleted? -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:04, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
- Please delete It is a user image and was meant for my user page, but is no longer needed. Sodacan (talk) 05:13, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Good photo of a bookshelf on a specific topic. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:59, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Another blurry video of bad quality and not given project scope. Yikrazuul (talk) 15:49, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I do not think this video becoming eligible for deletion, shows the Francisco Fajardo highway in Caracas, the capital of Venezuela, and I think that could be used for any item on this, and related to this. As far as quality is acceptable, judge this video as if it were a nomination for outstanding video --
George Miquilena 13:20, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_1972,_MiNr_425.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Another blurry and shaking video of bad quality and not given project scope. Yikrazuul (talk) 15:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I do not think this video becoming eligible for deletion, shows the Francisco Fajardo highway in Caracas, the capital of Venezuela, and I think that could be used for any item on this, and related to this. As far as quality is acceptable, judge this video as if it were a nomination for outstanding video -- George Miquilena 13:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Another blurry and shaking video of bad quality and not given project scope (seems to be just a private video).. Yikrazuul (talk) 15:51, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I do not think this video becoming eligible for deletion, shows Caracas, the capital of Venezuela, and I think that could be used for any item on this, and related to this. As far as quality is acceptable, judge this video as if it were a nomination for outstanding video -- George Miquilena 13:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:01, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Unused and outside of Commons:Project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 18:05, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Prof. Professorson (talk) 14:21, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Doubtful authorship, description look like as spam. Art-top (talk) 18:48, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Fanfwah as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: FOTW web-site copyright statement includes quote author and web site + "not alter in any way the images or the content of the text" + "use the material for non-commercial and non-political purposes only".|source=http://www.crwflags.com/fotw/flags/dz_fr47.html#kab. Declined speedy because, as a work from the 19th century, the design may be PD and the FOTW digital version may not be sufficiently original to generate a new copyright. Discussion is needed. Эlcobbola talk 18:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- The flag is very probably PD and the copyright on the FOTW version may be discussed, but a binary copy of it is certainly not "own work" and does not give right to use CC BY-SA 3.0. --Fanfwah (talk) 00:05, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
- Moreover, according to the source, this flag has been "captured in Kabylia" (by the French in 1854): this can make it a "flag from Kabylia", not a "flag of Kabylia", as improperly claimed in the text. --Fanfwah (talk) 06:40, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: We respect FOTW claims, as each instance of a flag has its own copyright even if the design is PD. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:09, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
après téléchargement de la carte des défauts sont apparus, décalage du texte dans certains cadres notamment Wikipedro (talk) 19:56, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Oppose L'auteur ne savait pas comment téléverser une nouvelle version du fichier. Il souhaite annuler la suppression (voir ici). --Flappiefh (talk) 21:11, 9 July 2012 (UTC)- Oppose Je suis l'auteur de la demande de suppression, il s'agit d'une erreur de ma part, je voulais simplement apporter des modifications à la carte. --Wikipedro (talk) 22:15, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: IN the future, please use {{Vk}} or {{Vd}}. It is not clear whether you oppose deletion or oppose the image. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:12, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#United States. 84.61.164.191 20:22, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. What's the problem? The sign was erected in 1975. Richard David Ramsey (talk) 21:54, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. It's a sign; not a sculpture or an artwork. Just because it was cast in metal doesn't change the function of the object. It's only reason for existence is to convey information to a reader. It does have a decorative symbol at the top but that doesn't make it a piece of art. If one were to pursue that route, it could be argued that any text was a work of art resulting from the fontographer's creation of a font.
SBaker43 (talk) 05:25, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
Kept: We tend to forget that the first subject of copyright was text -- in fact it is the only thing mentioned in the Copyright Clause of the US Constitution (Art I, Sect 8). So this image could not be kept here except for the fact that the sign was created in 1975 and there is no copyright notice. Therefore it is {{PD-US-no notice}} . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:17, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
This is an advertisement for a company. With a © character, phone number, adress, url Tangopaso (talk) 21:06, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete as Spam. --P199 (talk) 18:19, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:22, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leovillaverde (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used.
- File:V.pai.JPG
- File:1A. O Verdadeiro Pai.jpg
- File:Leo e pena.JPG
- File:Leo e marcelo.JPG
- File:Familia villaverde.JPG
- File:Léo gloucester.JPG
- File:Léo villaverde pantanal.JPG
- File:Leo Villaverde aos 10 anos.jpg
- File:Assinatura Leo Villaverde.JPG
- File:Léo Villaverde.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:40, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Leovillaverde
File:Musica e poesia e bailarina.JPG is composite of File:Musica e poesia.JPG (deleted as a copyvio) and File:Bailarina.JPG, itself nominated here. File:Bailarina.JPG has author metadata of "diegao", which is not "Leo Villaverde", apparently the uploader's name (see deleted contribs). Uploader has uploaded numerous copyvios (see, for example, File:Punk-kids-03 thumb thumb.jpg, File:23._Amor_na_natureza.jpg and deleted contribs). This pattern suggests File:Bailarina.JPG is not the uploader's work.
Эlcobbola talk 15:12, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted --Denniss (talk) 12:10, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by O campinho do brasil (talk · contribs)
[edit]After tagging File:Rx2.jpg, File:Revista campinho.jpg, File:O campinho do brasil.jpg, etc. as blatant copyvios, there is an obvious pattern that this user's uploads are derivatives of other works photoshopped to add logos, text, etc. related to the football club after which the uploader is apparently named; rather than clog the speedy category, images are nominated here as the special:nuke function would be appropriate.
- File:Zxc o campinho.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil rt.jpg
- File:O campinho re.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil bo.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil cz.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil tv.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil fd.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil fe.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil pl.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil cv1.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 111.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 33.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 22.jpg
- File:O campinho f.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil cx.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil54.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil v.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil e.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 14.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 15.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 13.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 12.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 11.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 10.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 9.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 8.jpg
- File:O campinho n.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 7.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 6.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 4.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 5.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 2.jpg
- File:Zxz.jpg
- File:Violin campinho.jpg
- File:Tv led.jpg
- File:Ruinas banner.jpg
- File:O campinho do brasil 1.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 17:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. --P199 (talk) 18:16, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:05, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicate file. Dudek1337 (talk) 15:07, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- A duplicate of which file? Robert Weemeyer (talk) 23:35, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: File:Oliver Torres (6).jpg Denniss (talk) 12:11, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
not enought : "avec l'autorisation du webmestre@circuitsderando.com" : to be cleared by OTRS plaese --MGuf (d) 09:23, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- I let you get OTRS, if you think it is important. At this time (6 years ago) i got a mail (lost because I have changed my internet provider), and it was not sure that it was a shot made by the webmestre himself. So decide what you want, because i dont want to discuss about this poor image, taken by somebody unknown. --Barbetorte (talk) 12:10, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Vu. Le clôturant décidera... mais je crains l'issue en suppression. ----MGuf (d) 13:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Peu importe. Je me fais fort d'obtenir une image de meilleure qualité de leur site avec une autorisation en bonne et due forme. C'est en toute bonne foi que j'ai publié cette photo sur Commons, et ce n'est pas dans mes habitudes de spolier les droits. C'est un peu nécessaire de le mettre dans mon anglais approximatif : It does not matter. But i am sure to get a better resolution image from their site, with their official agreement. It is with good faith that i put this image on Commons. Copyviolation is not my habitude.--Barbetorte (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Je n'ai aucun doute sur ta bonne foi, et 2006 était une ère primitive des Wikis ! Peut-être que je pourrai en faire une pareille moi-même un de ces 4. Cordialement, ----MGuf (d) 20:50, 9 July 2012 (UTC) (au passage, le chalet est bien au "Truc", mais le mont derrière est le "Vorassay", à gauche du "col de Tricot", au dessus de "Miage")
- Peu importe. Je me fais fort d'obtenir une image de meilleure qualité de leur site avec une autorisation en bonne et due forme. C'est en toute bonne foi que j'ai publié cette photo sur Commons, et ce n'est pas dans mes habitudes de spolier les droits. C'est un peu nécessaire de le mettre dans mon anglais approximatif : It does not matter. But i am sure to get a better resolution image from their site, with their official agreement. It is with good faith that i put this image on Commons. Copyviolation is not my habitude.--Barbetorte (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Vu. Le clôturant décidera... mais je crains l'issue en suppression. ----MGuf (d) 13:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have clear, explicit written/textual, tangible evidence indicating that this file is indeed freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we cannot host it on Commons FASTILY (TALK) 06:02, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Jordkula Södra Sam
[edit]Informationstafeln sind in Schweden leider nicht von der Panoramafreiheit umfasst. Eine Zustimmung des Verfassers der Informationstafeln ist nicht ersichtlich.
Robert Weemeyer (talk) 13:52, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
- Danke für den Hinweis. Nützt ja nix - dann weg damit. Please delete. --An-d (talk) 17:27, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 06:03, 14 September 2012 (UTC)