Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2012/10/11
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
no me gusta la foto Josema2 (talk) 00:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/14951912 Darwin Ahoy! 04:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
photo without permissionas, metadata shows Photographer:AERONATION Copyright:AERONATION ZTUDIO 太刻薄 (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio (already deleted) Darwin Ahoy! 04:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
This file should be removed from the Verbascum blattaria page, as it has been misidentified. The short pedicles, pubescent stem, and white hairs on the filaments certainly place this individual plant in Verbascum virgatum, not V. blattaria. Since this is a common identification error, the photo should be changed on the page to help limit confusion. 134.114.18.254 03:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- That's an argument for renaming the file, not deleting it... AnonMoos (talk) 08:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No argument made for deletion. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:53, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Need permission from Johannes Kolfhaus. In provided source image is copied from Commons (see file talk page), so we cannot recognize it as permission. Anatoliy (talk) 13:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- The author has now sent an email to OTRS confirming permission. --DominikPeters (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- The OTRS Team has recieved the ticket, and will make the needed modifications to the images, license. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept, Per approving the OTRS Ticket number 2012101110010801. Clarkcj12 (talk) 18:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
This 10-year-old child should not be posting pictures of himself on the Internet. Prolific sockpuppetteer - see en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abhay Gupta Varanasi. Unused and out of scope. Deletion reason shamelessly borrowed from editor's other images up for deletion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope for commons / used in vandalism and self-promotion by a minor / minor-uploaded and thus de-facto unlicensed Alison ❤ 06:22, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Blurry scanned text, possible copvio, single upload from user and out of COM:PS. Funfood ␌ 06:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope Julo (talk) 20:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in France Léna (talk) 07:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Leoboudv as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: A question: is this really 'own work' by the flickr source? There is no camera metadata. INeverCry 19:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Flickrwashing (ie copyvio) PierreSelim (talk) 06:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
out of scope INeverCry 00:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 00:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:15, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 00:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
non-commercial use only. Original file was en:File:Leo II dwarf galaxy.jpg (already deleted) ChongDae (talk) 02:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
The license under which it was uploaded to Korean wikipeadia was: Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported license
which means
You are free: to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work to Remix — to adapt the work to make commercial use of the work Under the following conditions: Attribution — You must attribute the work in the manner specified by the author or licensor (but not in any way that suggests that they endorse you or your use of the work). With the understanding that: Waiver — Any of the above conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder. Public Domain — Where the work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license. Other Rights — In no way are any of the following rights affected by the license: Your fair dealing or fair use rights, or other applicable copyright exceptions and limitations; The author's moral rights; Rights other persons may have either in the work itself or in how the work is used, such as publicity or privacy rights. Notice — For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the license terms of this work. The best way to do this is with a link to this web page.
So they say also commercial use would be allowed under some circumstances. Doesn't wikipedia fulfill these? I used a bot script to upload it to commons believing that wikipedia/wikimedia use doesn't violate that license.
--AdAstraPerScientiam (talk) 00:00, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Comment Every CC-BY license is perfectly fine on Commons. But image is lacking some information. -- 178.190.42.87 09:13, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm relieved to hear that. In regard to description or categories I will be able to deliver an adequate statement. But only Oppertunity or the mentioned creator Friendlystar may deliver the source of that beautiful picture of the dwarf galaxy Leo II. It was uploaded by Oppertunity to Korean wikipedia with the information:
Description = Leo II | Source = Wikipedia - Leo II Dwarf Galaxy () | Date = 2008.6.12 | created = Friendlystar
--AdAstraPerScientiam (talk) 21:13, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:17, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:18, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:19, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:20, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 02:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:21, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:22, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:25, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:26, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 03:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
out of scope: selfie not in use Imedeiros (talk) 05:14, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:30, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Unneeded low-resolution GIF with incorrect proportions and licensing problems (since uploader said "This work may be freely distributed without alterations"). Better SVG is available... AnonMoos (talk) 03:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: unused poor dupliacate George Chernilevsky talk 20:28, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted poster Morning Sunshine (talk) 04:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Bórrenla, es una violación a derechos de autor. Lo siento. Pero, ¿podría recortarse la imagen y subir sólo donde aparecen los tickets? serviría en Wikipedia. Hasta luego. No Future For You (talk) 21:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Delete The flickr account owner does not own the copyright over this image. --Leoboudv (talk) 05:22, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
poster or dvd cover Ebaychatter0 (talk) 04:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Commons is not a place to advertise. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Doubtfully own work - No EXIF, low res, and only upload by this user Darwin Ahoy! 05:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Web resolution. No EXIF. Possible copyright violation. Sreejith K (talk) 06:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
File is not free Wertuose (talk) 06:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Per http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=80585499#File:Branover-at-work.png and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Branover-at-work.png ; seems likely to be a magazine copyvio despite permission from the secretary of the person in the picture. Prosfilaes (talk) 06:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete The OTRS ticket tells a different story from that which was told the first time around with this image. The Professor's secretary starts by saying that she is writing it in the Professor's name, using the first person for him. It then goes on to claim that "I" (presumably the Professor) created the image. Since he is the subject of the image, that cannot be correct. I think this is simply a misguided and over-zealous attempt to keep an image. As Prosfilaes says, it looks like a scan from a printed source -- the offset screen is visible at high magnification. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Well Jim, I did the check, but now reading what you wrote I'll take a look again, because it is not without reason. Analyzing best the picture, it do not really seem to be an original file. I'll look again, then I cancel the ticket. The senders it's relationed with a science journal; I'll contact then again. Thanks.+PrinceWilly 14:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete As Didn't receive any reply from the sender, it must be eliminated. Let's get attention for future queues form this user. +PrinceWilly 16:43, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment - If I well recall, in another discussion about this matter, a letter by the professor secretary was presented where she offered to arrange for other images in case the copyright of these ones was not accepted by us. I suggest going that route, instead of trying to keep the questionable ones at all costs.-- Darwin Ahoy! 17:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 08:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Unused private photo - out of project scope. Art-top (talk) 08:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
partly "stolen" from File:Neivanocturna.jpg. (Not mentioning the author and licence) McZusatz (talk) 09:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Copyrio per Commons:Freedom of panorama#Azerbaijan. See also Category:Azerbaijani FOP cases.
- File:Axmedbekov.jpg
- File:Bahram gur01.jpg
- File:Baku museum.jpg
- File:Baku7.jpg
- File:Gadjibekovmonument.JPG
- File:Heydaraliyevmonument.JPG
- File:Heykelbaki.JPG
- File:Kapitan 2290.jpg
- File:Liberated woman statue Baku.jpg
- File:Liberated woman statue in Baku.jpg
- File:Muzikant 1021.jpg
- File:Natavan 1082.jpg
- File:Natavan 1918.jpg
- File:Natavan-1.JPG
- File:Nezami Monument in Baku at Night.JPG
- File:Nizami Merge1208.jpg
- File:Nizami monument in Baku.jpg
- File:Pamytanik nizami baku.JPG
- File:Pushkin at Baku.jpg
- File:Shaumyan Baku.JPG
- File:Skeyter.JPG
- File:SV100098.jpg
- File:Нариманов 1646.jpg
- File:Джафар Джаббарлы.jpg
- File:Нариманов 1633.jpg
- File:Памятник 2288.jpg
- File:Памятник Шаха Исмаила.jpg
- File:Сабирбаку.JPG
- File:Самед вургун.jpg
- File:Babek 1927.jpg
- File:Dede Korkut.jpg
- File:DQNAJ.JPG
- File:Huseyn Javid Home-Museum at Nakhchivan (poets statue).jpg
- File:Monument of Jalil Mamedkulizadeh at Nakhchivan.jpg
- File:Nakhchivan Aliev Museum.JPG
- File:Nakhichevan03.JPG
- File:MireliGashqay.jpg
- File:02252bust.jpg
- File:02252nizami.jpg
- File:02252артисты.jpg
- File:02252хачмаз.jpg
- File:Azimzademonument.JPG
- File:Baku(azerbaijan) old city2 monument of vahid poet2.jpg
- File:GYDHeydarAliyev.JPG
- File:Hajibeyov 1079.jpg
- File:Hazi Ahad oglu Aslanov bust.jpg
- File:HuseynovHuseynbala.JPG
- File:Həzi Aslanovun abidəsi.jpg
- File:Aslanov Grave.jpg
- File:Tagiyevhome.jpg
- File:Vahid.jpg
- File:Бюль бюль 1087.jpg
- File:Bulbul 1914.jpg
- File:Lambaranskiy 1671.jpg
- File:Emin Sabitoglu.jpg
- File:Landau Baku-cropped.JPG
- File:Landau Baku.JPG
- File:Mamedquluzade 2225.jpg
- File:Гаджибеков 983.jpg
- File:Изображение Adil.jpg
- File:Памятная доска на доме где жил Вагиф Мустафазаде.jpg
- File:Памятная доска1042.jpg
- File:Baku(azerbaijan) old city2 monument of vahid poet.jpg
- File:Fizuli monument.jpg
- File:Ziya Bünyadovun Mezari.jpg
- File:Beylagan 2666.jpg
- File:Statue of girl with swan in Ganja.jpg
- File:Ganja city.jpg
- File:CCNAJ1.JPG
- File:Home-museum of Jamshid Nakhchivansky.jpg
- File:Lermontov house 2.JPG
- File:125bextitar.jpg
- File:Sirvan Aliyev Monument.jpg
- File:Zaqatala-PotemkinMonument.jpg
- File:Mushfiq Memorial Baku.jpg
- File:125bextitar.jpg
- File:Guba mass grave site discovered in 2007,Azerbaijan.jpg
- File:Plaque of Hasan Aliyev in Ganja.jpg
- File:Nizami Ganjavi Main Statue.jpg
- File:Monument of Ajami Nakhchivani in front of Momine Khatun mausoleum.jpg
- File:Kur 046.jpg
- File:NAJshehid.JPG
- File:Ajami Nakhchivani.jpg
- File:World War II memorial in Lenkoran.jpg
- File:Heydar Aliyev monument Lenkoran.jpg
- File:Kusary Great Patriotic War Memorial.JPG
- File:Plaque of Hasan Aliyev in Ganja.jpg
- File:Beylagan 2597.jpg
- File:Sorge monument.jpg
- File:Zorge.JPG
- File:Aliyevler ailesi e-citizen.jpg
- File:Alley of Honor - Aliyev family.JPG
- File:Alley of Honor - Rashid Behbudov.JPG
- File:BabaBabazade.JPG
- File:Ebulfez Elcibey e-citizen.jpg
- File:Fexri Xiyaban Heyder Aliyev e-citizen.jpg
- File:Ismayil Shixli e-citizen.jpg
- File:Xelil Rza e-citizen.jpg
- File:Heyder Aliyev e-citizen.jpg
- File:Suleyman Rustem e-citizen.jpg
- File:GAA NAJ.jpg
- File:Ajami Nakhchivani.jpg
- File:Nizami ganjavi.jpg
Takabeg (talk) 09:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom.--Rapsar (talk) 15:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason given for deletion. INeverCry 02:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sonsaz as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.popwarnersb.com/enews/bike_popwarner_sm.jpg Sreejith K (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep PD-textlogo, ineligible for copyright in the USA. Fma12 (talk) 12:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete The logo is plagiarized directly from another website. Sonsaz (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Plagiarized ? The logo is reproduced, that is not the same than "plagiarized". Your point of view is wrong, if I tagged the logo as "ineligible for copyright", as a pure text logotype, there can't be a plagiarism. Fma12 (talk) 00:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sonsaz as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.lancastsport.com/sources/root/teszt/uj/reusch_logo.jpg Sreejith K (talk) 10:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Extremely simple to be copyrighted, the same as other German logos such as Adidas or Volkswagen that are uploaded here as PD-textlogos, Fma12 (talk) 12:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete The logo is plagiarized directly from another website. Sonsaz (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Plagiarized ? The logo is reproduced, that is not the same to "plagiarized". Your point of view is wrong, if I tagged the logo as "ineligible for copyright", as a pure text logotype, there can't be a plagiarism. I think you should read the PD-textlogo tag and what it says. Fma12 (talk) 23:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Yes. The image is a modification of the image of the other website that you linked. Sonsaz (talk) 23:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment If you refers to Wikipedia, I cited this as the primary source, of course. I had uploaded the logo to WP some time ago, and then I moved it to Commons as a PD-textlogo. Fma12 (talk) 00:08, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Aa1bb2cc3dd4ee5 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: www.soho.or.at/glbt is under cc-by-nc-sa, no special license for this logo stated|source=http://www.soho.or.at/glbt/ Sreejith K (talk) 10:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-textlogo}}. This would probably pass even in the US, but definitely in Germany. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:04, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sonsaz as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://spongercity.com/covers/pony_logo.jpg Sreejith K (talk) 10:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep I think this is too simple to be copyrighted. Fma12 (talk) 12:56, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete The logo is plagiarized directly from another website. Sonsaz (talk) 23:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Plagiarized ? The logo is reproduced, that is not the same to "plagiarized". Your point of view is wrong, if I tagged the logo as "ineligible for copyright", as a pure text logotype, there can't be a plagiarism. Fma12 (talk) 23:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment Yes, the image is copied from the website you linked. Sonsaz (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment The image is "reproduced", not copied so there is no copyright claim where the file is tagged as "PD-textlogo" as I did. The website is the source where the image was taken to upload it to Commons, as simple as that. Fma12 (talk) 00:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Is this perhaps a screenshot? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of free license as claimed. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:06, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No Fop in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The main subject is the Louvre itself, and the triangles only serve as framing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. There is no proof that the uploader is the original creator of the file. Rapsar (talk) 11:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. According to http://sverigesradio.se/, "Foto: Besir Kavak". There is no proof of {{Own work}}. Takabeg (talk) 12:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom.--Rapsar (talk) 09:03, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
poor quality InnaIna (talk) 13:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The OOF is intentional. It's a style of photography that some people like. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
The copyright was restored by URAA: the photo was taken after 1945. Stefan4 (talk) 13:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
The image is of low resolution and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 15:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Support I agree a per nominated. --Clarkcj12 (talk) 17:03, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Not used advertisement. Unlikely to be notable. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:DW. This looks like a photo of a TV or a photo. Also the quality is very low and it seems to be unused. Rillke(q?) 16:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Nonsense, out of project scope. ■ MMXX talk 17:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This is neither an official work as claimed nor is it a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. A portrait photograph like this is protected for 70 years pma, so a photo from 1961 cannot be in the PD. Rosenzweig τ 17:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This photo is neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild". The author is not named, so we must assume that (s)he died well after 1941 and the photo is still protected. Rosenzweig τ 17:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This image is neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild". Since it is from 1910, it can presumably be uploaded to the German wikipedia with the license tag Bild-PD-alt-100. Rosenzweig τ 17:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
This image is neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild". Since it is from 1910, it can presumably be uploaded to the German wikipedia with the license tag Bild-PD-alt-100. Rosenzweig τ 17:45, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like flickrwashing, big file with EXIF here: http://www.originsgamefair.com/Portals/origins/2011%20Timothy%20Zahn%20pic.jpg Funfood ␌ 17:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
1944 photo which is neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild", not old enough to assume it is PD-old anyway. Rosenzweig τ 18:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
1927 US photo, certainly neither a German official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" (as claimed). Perhaps PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:28, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
1950 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete With photos, we have to be cautious about "no notice" as the notice might appear elsewhere, but it could have been cropped off. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:53, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:36, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
1933 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete There is obviously a copyright sign on it. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:57, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Some kind of plaque or signboard, but not part of any "statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment" and thus not a German official work as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither official work nor simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Also affected: File:Benckendorffsches Grabmal in der Grabkapelle, vor 1960.jpg. --Rosenzweig τ 18:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:37, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Scanned from a book. Not part of any "statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment" and thus not a German official work as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed.# Rosenzweig τ 18:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
File:Städtisches Lapidarium Stuttgart, Wilhelm Speidel und Gustav Wais vor dem Portal der Großen Mühle in Berg.jpg
[edit]Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:40, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:42, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:14, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:43, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:44, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:19, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hoax. This is a non encyclopedic story, made up by User:Hetgeheimvandekempen Narayan (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:46, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hoax. This is a non encyclopedic story, made up by User:Hetgeheimvandekempen Narayan (talk) 19:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hoax. This is a non encyclopedic story, made up by User:Hetgeheimvandekempen Narayan (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hoax. This is a non encyclopedic story, made up by User:Hetgeheimvandekempen Narayan (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Hoax. This is a non encyclopedic story, made up by User:Hetgeheimvandekempen Narayan (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Out of COM:PS and "no public use" in description. Funfood ␌ 20:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Source given appears to be wrong, see file talk page. Not enough information then to assume the image is really PD-old. Rosenzweig τ 20:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Source seems wrong indeed. I checked Historischer Verein Heilbronn, Neuntes Heft, Bericht aus den Jahren 1906–1909, Heilbronn 1909 (most likely the source mentioned) for the questionable photo, but couldn't find it there. The uploader may correct the image source please.Schmelzle (talk) 14:25, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Private image, out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 20:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Acetic acid group black.png: incorrect and unused. Leyo 20:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted: please send the permission to OTRS Ciell (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted: please send the permission to OTRS Ciell (talk) 20:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Copyrighted cover of a book. Copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Possible Flickr washing according to this DR. Rapsar (talk) 21:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Really low quality good faith WLM upload. It's almost undiscernable what it is. IMHO, not useful for the projects. Sarah (talk) 22:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
The lighting is copyrighted ComputerHotline (talk) 10:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
cette image a été réalisé avec mon Nokia E5.00 à la journée portes ouvertes du 29 septembre 2012 organisée par la mairie de viry-chation.
Kept: No copyright on light. Yann (talk) 04:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:20, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Not architecture, no copyright. Yann (talk) 04:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: There are copyrighted works. Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: DW of the posters. Yann (talk) 04:40, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
May be a copyrighted work ComputerHotline (talk) 11:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The fact that this work “may be copyrighted” is not enough to decide its deletion. More, it's indicated on the card under the icon that it was made in 1838. It's quite certain that the author is dead enough. Pymouss Let’s talk - 12:20, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per Pymouss. Yann (talk) 04:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Overwritten file. The original revision by User:Lord of Darkness is unsourced and unlicesed and needs to be deleted. Stefan4 (talk) 12:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Version version deleted. Others kept. Yann (talk) 05:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Cause i am the owner of this file and i want it to be deleted. Pkm95 (talk) 15:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 05:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
It's a "recent" building. Copyright owner are probably alive or dead no 70 years ago ComputerHotline (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete L'architecte est Robert Danis (1879-1949). Yann (talk) 05:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The church is not public domain until 2020 (70 years p.m.a) PierreSelim (talk) 06:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
It's a "recent" building. Copyright owner are probably alive or dead no 70 years ago ComputerHotline (talk) 17:54, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete L'architecte est Robert Danis (1879-1949). Yann (talk) 05:25, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The church is not public domain until 2020 (70 years p.m.a) PierreSelim (talk) 06:21, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
1937 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:30, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. It may have appeared in magazines with copyright notices, but precedent has held that advertisements have separate copyrights and as long as there's no notice on the ad itself, we're fine. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:48, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
File:Weltausstellung New York 1939-1940, Speisekarte des Ballentine Three Ring Inn mit Plan, 01.jpg
[edit]1939 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
1939 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
1924 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. It does have a photo in it, but this appears to be the entire postcard. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:53, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:30, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
1923 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. From looking at the eBay product description, this appears to be the entire print, so there is no copyright notice on it. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:55, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
1935 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. It may have appeared in newspapers with copyright notices, but precedent has held that advertisements have separate copyrights and as long as there's no notice on the ad itself, we're fine. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:56, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as per KoH. Yann (talk) 05:32, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France INeverCry 19:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. Note: Transferred to enwiki under fair use. If other projects need a low-res version to comply with their fair-use guidelines, you can download it from w:File:Pointe de Penhir.jpg rather than having to do the resizing yourself. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:17, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Monument was built in 1949 and cannot be PD. Architect died in 1971 (I couldn't find the date of death of the sculptors) PierreSelim (talk) 06:54, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France INeverCry 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:16, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Monument was built in 1949 and cannot be PD. Architect died in 1971 (I couldn't find the date of death of the sculptors) PierreSelim (talk) 06:54, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France INeverCry 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No FOP PierreSelim (talk) 06:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France INeverCry 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:15, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: No FOP PierreSelim (talk) 06:56, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France INeverCry 19:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Please consider that the subject is the Richelieu Pavilion of the Louvre, NOT the Pyramid (see photo title). Only a very small part of the Pyramid appears.
I have seen this on Wikimedia:
Case law traditionally admits an exception if the copyrighted artwork is "accessory compared to the main represented or handled subject" (CA Paris, 27 octobre 1992, Antenne 2 c/ société Spadem, « la représentation d'une œuvre située dans un lieu public n'est licite que lorsqu'elle est accessoire par rapport au sujet principal représenté ou traité »).
It obviously applies to my case.
D. Robert (Blue 439)
- Keep per Blue 439. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:03, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per Blue 439 --Havang(nl) (talk) 10:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete COM:FOP#France has to be read to the end: "case law states that the said artwork must not be intentionally included as an element of the setting" (CA Versailles, 26 janvier 1998). Obviously here the pyramid is included intentionally, and used as part of the composition. If the subject here was the Pavillon Richelieu, the picture was to be shot outside of the pyramid. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:41, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Jastrow PierreSelim (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France INeverCry 19:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:DM. The pyramid only occupies a portion of the top corner. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:05, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Probably De minimis PierreSelim (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This building is copyrighted. There isn't freedom of panorama in France. INeverCry 19:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The picture is an original artistic view of lines in a building that has been copyrighted for its architecture, but the picture does not copy the building nor its architecture: without the legend, one should not have recognized the building.--Havang(nl) (talk) 10:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivative work of both architectural work and artistic work. Droit d'auteur applies here. PierreSelim (talk) 06:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 221.20 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: uploader's request INeverCry 19:47, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - possible copyvio as a derivative work of a non-free image. A large and straight shot of a symbol mark which contains an illustration of a mildly personified squirrel. (See the logo of http://kitamikanko.jp/index.html.) I believe this is sophisticated enough to meet the threshold of originality. If it were a picture of the whole body of a train, and the mark were a small part of it, it could have been regarded as de minimis, but my impression is that it is too significant. --whym (talk) 20:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivative work of an unfree image. PierreSelim (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dottormospa as Speedy (Speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: richiesta da parte dell'interessata (Eng:deletion requested on behalf of the subject) INeverCry 19:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - I'm the user that has uploaded the file. The Italian actress (Claudia Potenza) has requested the cancellation of the photo. I agree the request. --Dottormospa (talk) 22:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 05:38, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was uploaded my me and it is my CV. This file does not contain correct informations and I wish to replace it. Kindly delete it. 128.120.224.96 21:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 05:41, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sonsaz as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Logo with author. Copyright. IMHO PD-Text, so a Keep from me. Funfood ␌ 23:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Sonsaz has been nominating for deletion all the files I uploaded ... He does not seem to understand what "PD-textlogo" states. Otherwise, all the logos categorized here should have been deleted long time ago. Fma12 (talk) 23:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 05:42, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ANGELUS as Speedy (Speedy) and the most recent rationale was: uploader requested deletion of useless file. Uploaders request after more than half a year is no reason for a speedy deletion. The image is usable, Keep from me. Funfood ␌ 23:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: per Funfood PierreSelim (talk) 06:26, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: The pyramid is a copyrighted work PierreSelim (talk) 06:14, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Depiction of a copyrighted building; no FoP in France. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Depiction of copyrighted buildings; no freedom of panorama in France. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:47, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France Sreejith K (talk) 13:16, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in this case. It's too bad, this is a very nice image. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:25, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Move to en-wiki, where photos like this should be OK (they are not considered derivative works in U.S. law, but in France they are -- see Commons:Freedom of panorama#France -- and so the photo could be an issue in certain commercial contexts there.) Use the en:Template:FoP-USonly tag. Carl Lindberg (talk) 14:46, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Jim: the Pyramid is a copyrighted building; there's no freedom of panorama in France. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:55, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France INeverCry 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Work is in the public domain since 2006: sculptor Honoré Sausse died in 1936. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 13:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France INeverCry 19:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyrighted building by architect Pei (still alive). No freedom of panorama in France. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:00, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France / Pas de liberté de panorama en France. INeverCry 19:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyrighted building by architect Pei (still alive). No freedom of panorama in France. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:04, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Tokumeigakarinoaoshima as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Uploader's request INeverCry 19:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep License is irrevocable and after more than a year an upload in error seems doubtful. -- 178.190.42.87 09:54, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: per comment above Morning Sunshine (talk) 14:07, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Bogowan as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: This file is a picture of a current Ciena Corporation product and reveals proprietary intellectual property and other details of Ciena's 100G solution that are trade secrets. This image and the product it depicts is owned and copyrighted by Ciena Corporation..
Converted by me to regular DR, as this might need some discussion. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept The corporation retains rights to their patented intellectual property; this 2009 photograph by the uploader of a piece of hardware does not change that. -- Infrogmation (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
This image, copyrighted by Ciena Corporation, is not publically available and shows proprietary information about the product. Scheerj (talk) 20:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment User:James38 states they are the photographer (and has stated they are a former employee of Nortel). What is the reason to state that the uploader's claim to be the photographer is false? -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:22, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
Ciena Corporation received the copyright for this picture under an October 9,2009 Asset Sale Agreement whereby Nortel transferred all the intellectual property rights related to the OME 6500 family of products to Ciena. At the time the picture was taken, James38 was an employee of Nortel and as such the copyright was owned by Nortel and transferred to Ciena Corporation under the Asset Sale Agreement. James 38 was not given permission to use the picture of the OME 6500 100G Module and as such, this picture is in violation of Ciena's copyright rights. As owner of all intellectual property rights to the OME 6500 100G Module, Ciena hereby requests that this pircute be removed from your site immediately. JoanAdair (talk) 15:03, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
- Keep On 2009.04.28 this file was uploaded here and released under CC-BY-SA-3.0 and GFDL 1.2, both are non-revokable free licences compatible with Commons's project scope and policies. If your organisation has received copyright for these images after the fact, it means that you are allowed to release them under other licences, but you cannot stop distribution under already released ones. Thank you for your time. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 03:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think you're a bit confused about how copyright release works. :-) Uploading something here alone does not release copyright to it. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- But it licences it under a free licence if you apply the template. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 04:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think you're a bit confused about how copyright release works. :-) Uploading something here alone does not release copyright to it. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
James38 never owned the copyright to the picture and did not have permission to release the photograph under ANY license. This picture contains trade secrets that belong to Ciena Corporation, and Ciena Corporation, as owners of the copyright to this picture, hereby requests that the picture be deleted immediately.JoanAdair (talk)
- If this is true, please follow COM:OTRS to prove that you are who you say you are and the file will be deleted. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 04:20, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- Confirmed OTRS 2013052010011989 Ronhjones (Talk) 00:35, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted, Ronhjones (Talk) 00:38, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
May be a copyrighted work ComputerHotline (talk) 11:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Comment and may be not… The stone doesn't seems to bears the personality of its author. VIGNERON (talk) 10:23, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: 1905 work. Sculptor, Elisa Bloch, born 1848 -- death date unknown, but likely before 1942. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:03, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Seems to be empty or corrupt. Leyo 20:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Some offline pdf processors can display it, but it's obviously not portable (technically, the file contains a broken xref table) and we do have File:IPMP 2.svg as viable high-resolution replacement by same author. DMacks (talk) 04:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. Damaged file that appears to have been uploaded in error and then replaced. Ed (Edgar181) 12:55, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
This image contains errors. It can be replaced with an SVG that contains correct information: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Scopolamin-Biosynthesis.svg Sav vas (talk) 06:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Already exist : File:Blason_famille_fr_Aubin_de_Blanpré.svg , which is the correct syntax for coat of arms files, same author.
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
It's a recent work : may be copyrighted ComputerHotline (talk) 11:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: It's a copyrighted work Sreejith K (talk) 11:21, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:38, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Philippines. 84.61.148.212 11:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Is Bonnierforlagen reaaly the author of this work? It is stated that Richard Ryan holds the copyright of this picture. Stigfinnare (talk) 12:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:39, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
en:Abdullah Öcalan#Capture and trial suggests that this Cypriot passport might have been made by Turkey instead of the United States. Stefan4 (talk) 14:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1936 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1935 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:32, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1926 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [1]. Yann (talk) 15:16, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
1923 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1923 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:33, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [2]. Yann (talk) 04:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
ca. 1954 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:36, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
ca. 1923 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [3]. Yann (talk) 04:33, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
1935 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1935 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
1933 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
ca. 1954 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
ca. 1948 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:04, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Neither an official work nor a simple "Lichtbild" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 19:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Not an official work as claimed, not old enough to assume PD-old. Rosenzweig τ 19:08, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ComputerHotline as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: No FoP in France INeverCry 19:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Mistake upload Firat56 (talk) 19:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:42, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Compare nearly identical File:Craigcloudcult.jpg which is in use. This one seems to be superflous then. JuTa 20:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
possible screenshot from "2012 The Book Club - Dirty Jobs" - possible not "OWN" work of AlexTheTank A5b (talk) 10:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
Subject image unlikely to be the photographer in posed photograph. If deleted, please salt the page name, too many uploads and deletions to this generic name. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 21:03, 30 May 2020 (UTC)
Low resolution, several better versions in Category:Purine. Leyo 20:29, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:43, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Current version i completlwithout source. Previous version uploaded by a different user shows a different person and looks like copied from a website. JuTa 22:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:44, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
PNG version of File:India Kerala location map.svg NNW (talk) 14:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- not proper Lijujose (talk) 03:56, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:47, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Also nominating File:MeiLogo.jpg, File:Mei2000.jpg, File:Dmplogo2.jpg, and File:MythWurks Corporation Company Logo.png; all except the last one are rightly tagged as PD-ineligible, but the last is clearly complex enough for copyright; it's also subject to deletion because there's no proof that the company agreed to license it. All of these are logos of a minor company whose en:wp article has been deleted twice. Logos are quite unlikely to be used except to represent the companies that use them, and given the repeated deletion of its en:wp article, these images are all out of scope. Nyttend (talk) 12:24, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 02:03, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ppeltriaux (talk · contribs)
[edit]Related enwp article deleted. Out of COM:PS.
Funfood ␌ 06:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:29, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Romulo1000 (talk · contribs)
[edit]More low quality penis stuff, out of scope
Darwin Ahoy! 07:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Delete - I must agree, low quality. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:10, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:30, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PersianGlamDr (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low resolution professional photos without original exif, some of them marked as copyvio. Doubtful authorship.
- File:Adam Lambert and Tommy Joe Ratliff at the "Marylanders for Marriage Equality" Fundraise.jpg
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff at the Ste Agathe en Feux Festival.jpg
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff in Glam Nation Tour.jpg
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff at Finland X Factor’s the "Chaos Tube".jpg
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff at iHeartRadio Theater.jpg
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff NOH8 Campaign Photo.jpg
- File:Adam Lambert and Tommy Joe Ratliff at Jay Leno Show.jpg
- File:Adam Lambert and Tommy Joe Ratliff at American Idol.png
- File:Tommy Joe Ratliff and his Fender.jpg
Art-top (talk) 08:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvios. INeverCry 19:01, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ferdinandbayu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused private images - out of project scope.
Art-top (talk) 08:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
The author of the sculpture of France Prešeren and the reliefs at it (sl:Ivan Zajec) died in 1952, which is less than 70 years ago. This makes these images non-free for commercial use (see COM:FOP#Slovenia), which means they're ineligible for Commons.
- File:France Prešeren Denkmal.JPG
- File:France Prešeren statue.jpg
- File:France Prešeren.JPG
- File:France Prešern statue in 1928.jpg
- File:FranciskacChurch-Ljubljana.JPG
- File:Ljubljana Franciscan church.jpg
- File:Odkritje Prešernovega spomenika v Ljubljani leta 1905 (2).jpg
- File:Odkritje Prešernovega spomenika v Ljubljani leta 1905 (3).jpg
- File:Odkritje Prešernovega spomenika v Ljubljani leta 1905.jpg
- File:Preseren z muzo.jpg
- File:PresernovTrg-Ljubljana.JPG
- File:Prešeren.JPG
- File:Prešeren statue at night.jpg
- File:Prešernov spomenik 1928.jpg
- File:Prešernov spomenik med 1900 in 1910.jpg
- File:Ribič, Prešeren Statue, Ljubljana.jpg - undelete in 2023
- File:SLO-Ljubljana47.JPG
- File:Slovo.jpg - undelete in 2023
- File:Stetue of France Preseren.JPG
- File:VidGajsek - novoletni Presernov trg VIII.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 09:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:16, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Per COM:Anonymous works, "reliable sources must be found that prove it [the image] was originally published anonymously." They're missing.
- File:1912 Ljubljana postcard - the Stritar Street.jpg
- File:Gradnja Tromostovja 1931-32.jpg
- File:Slavnost pred odkritjem Prešernovega spomenika na Marijinem trgu leta 1905.jpg - with this image, I doubt that the photographer was indeed Ivan Kotar, because per this article (pg. 78), he died in 1903, and the celebration took place in September 1905. It would not be the first time that I've spotted a mistake in dLib.
Eleassar (t/p) 15:31, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
- Keep, same as here --Sporti (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- What exactly from this text makes you think these three images are free? For the first one, Flickr is no source; for the second one, some images from this collection were published anonymously, others were not. One cannot be certain that this one was published anonymously; and for the last one, the author is evidently incorrect (or what?). --Eleassar (t/p) 11:39, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- I
I withdraw my nomination the deletion proposal for the second image. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:35, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- I
- Comment Regarding the first image (1910s postcard); no author credit on the cards was very common (though there were some exceptions). Probably correct to call it anon work, though what was on the back of the card would have to be seen to be certain. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:11, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Withdrawn. Yann (talk) 14:58, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Later found and deleted:
- File:Spomenik Francu Prešernu 1907..jpg
- File:Franciscan church of the Annunciation (8555890080).jpg
- File:Ljubljana 7.jpg
--Eleassar (t/p) 21:27, 4 June 2013 (UTC)
- File:France Preseren.jpg
- File:France Prešeren - spomenik.jpg
- File:SPOMENIK FRANCETU PREŠERNU V LJ.jpg
--TadejM (t/p) 00:04, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- File:PREŠERNOV SPOMENIK.jpg
- File:SPOMENIK FRANCETU PREŠERNU.jpg
- File:PREŠERNOV SPOMENIK V LJUBLJANI.jpg
--TadejM (t/p) 13:33, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
Files in Category:Lojze Dolinar
[edit]sl:Lojze Dolinar died in 1970, which is less than 70 years ago. This makes his works and their reproductions (photos etc.) non-free for commercial use (see COM:FOP#Slovenia), therefore ineligible for Commons.
- File:Burger IlirskeProvinceTrgFrRevoluSpomenik02.jpg
- File:Davorin Jenko 1.JPG
- File:Dolinar portret Tita.jpg
- File:Dolinar spomenik revolucije delavska stavka 1959-61.jpg
- File:Dolinar spomenik revolucije2.jpg
- File:Dolinar Spomenik revoluciji woman.jpg
- File:Doprsni kip Davorina Jenka na Žalah.jpg
- File:L.Dolinar.Boj.Iz prvega upora 1954 bron.jpg
- File:Lojze Dolinar 1915-25.jpg
- File:Lojze Dolinar pri izdelavi kipa po modelu Rihardu Jakopiču 1915-25.jpg
- File:Spomenik 1. svetovne vojne (Kranjski Janez) - Polje - Lojze Dolinar 1.jpg
- File:Spomenik 1. svetovne vojne (Kranjski Janez) - Polje - Lojze Dolinar 2.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 10:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:18, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Later found and deleted:
- File:Osnutek za načrtovani spomenik kralja Petra I. Karađorđevića 1931.jpg
- File:Kip-IpavecBenjamin.JPG
- File:Presernov gaj 4.jpg
--Eleassar (t/p) 14:04, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
- Files in Category:Lojze Dolinar
Per COM:Anonymous works, "reliable sources must be found that prove it [the image] was originally published anonymously." These photos don't have them and they're not old enough to be able to say that the author almost surely died before 1945.
- File:Lojze Dolinar 1930s.jpg
- File:Posmrtna maska Ivana Cankarja.jpg
- File:Razstavni odbor umetniške razstave.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 14:29, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
- Keep the author is unknown per dlib, so its date + 70 years => PD. --Sporti (talk) 11:21, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Per [4]: "If it is in the process of clearing the copyright status found out that a certain work is orphan, it is not allowed to publish it in dLib." [V kolikor se v postopku razčiščevanja pravic izkaže, da je določeno delo osirotelo, ga na portalu dLib ni dovoljeno objaviti.] I have no information to doubt this. Perhaps their author was anonymous or only has not been credited. In any case, it seems that the files are free. --Eleassar (t/p) 20:17, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Withdrawn Yann (talk) 14:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Rudolf Maister
[edit]The authors of the following public works died later than 1945 (or they're still living), which makes them ineligible for Commons (see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:Burger RudolfMaister.jpg - undelete in 2079
- File:Doprsni kip Rudolfa Maistra.JPG - undelete in 2019
- File:Obeležje na rojstni hiši Rudolfa Maistra.jpg - undelete in 2023
- File:Rudolf Maister monument in Kamnik.jpg - undelete in 2067
- File:Rudolf Maister statue in Ljubljana.jpg - undelete in 2079
- File:Rudolf Maister statue in Ljutomer (2).jpg - still living
- File:Rudolf Maister statue in Ljutomer.jpg - still living
- File:Rudolf Maister statue in Maribor.jpg - still living
- File:Rudolf Maister.JPG - still living
- File:Spomenik Rudolfu Maistru.JPG - still living
Eleassar (t/p) 11:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:19, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Jakov Brdar
[edit]These files are ineligible for Commons, because the author of these sculptors is still living (sl:Jakov Brdar, 1949-), and freedom of panorama in Slovenia is limited only to non-commercial purposes (see COM:FOP#SLO).
Eleassar (t/p) 11:27, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Additionally, File:Koper - Statue 1.jpg, which I haven't found a source for, but judging by the sculpture itself is most probably work of Jakov Brdar. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:53, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, here's the proof.[5] --Eleassar (t/p) 21:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Additional, uncategorised by sculptor and later found files depicting work of Jakov Brdar:
- File:Statue at Butchers Bridge.jpg
- File:Statue at Butchers Bridge (2).jpg
- File:Statue at Butchers Bridge (3).jpg
- File:Mesarski most-Ljubljana.TIF
- File:Mesarski most - Prometej.JPG
- File:1.4.13 2 Ljubljana 01 (8610079057).jpg
- File:Ljubljana-sculptures.JPG
- File:Dobrovo - Gradnik-Denkmal.jpg
- File:GradnikAlojz-Dobrovo.jpg
--Eleassar (t/p) 21:27, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
--TadejM (t/p) 15:41, 28 October 2022 (UTC)
A 2010 work of Boris Volk and Miha Volk (not free for commercial use, see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:Ljubljana Botanic Garden - buildings.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Botanic Garden - tropical greenhouse.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 12:12, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:23, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ljubljana Central Market
[edit]Work of Jože Plečnik (1872-1956); not free for commercial use (see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:Central Market, Ljubljana (1).jpg
- File:Central Market, Ljubljana.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Central Market 2010 bird eye.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Central Market 2010.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Central Market 2011.jpg
- File:Ljubljana central market and Ljubljanica (2).jpg
- File:Ljubljana central market and Ljubljanica.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Central Market view.jpg
- File:Ljubljana central market.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Ljubljanica 3.JPG
- File:Ljubljana Plečnik Market. Window.JPG
- File:Ljubljana2011 13.jpg
- File:Ljubljanica and Plečniks Central Market.jpg
- File:Ljubljanica in tržnica.JPG
- File:Lublana 199.jpg
- File:Lublana 203.jpg
- File:Nuns at Ljubljana Central Market 2012.jpg
- File:Plecnik Trznice.jpg
- File:Plečnikove tržnice pred dograditvijo 1940.jpg
- File:Pogled proti Lj. tržnici.jpg
- File:Tržnica Ljubljana Plečnik mala.JPG
Eleassar (t/p) 12:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- The subject of File:Ljubljana Central Market 2010 bird eye.jpg is the whole market, the Plečnik designed market building is de minimis, as it represents only ca.5% of the image and architectural detail is mostly obscured by trees. --ELEKHHT 22:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- In the nomination you must have meant not free for commercial use, not "not free for non-commercial use". --ELEKHHT 22:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks (I've corrected this). I'm not sure about 'de minimis'; the arcades are an integral part of the market, which means they're not just there but have been taken intentionally. They're in the centre of the image. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- The intention was not to reproduce the architecture, but the location. --ELEKHHT 08:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Ok, let's keep it then. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- The intention was not to reproduce the architecture, but the location. --ELEKHHT 08:58, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks (I've corrected this). I'm not sure about 'de minimis'; the arcades are an integral part of the market, which means they're not just there but have been taken intentionally. They're in the centre of the image. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:02, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep at least File:Ljubljana Central Market 2010 bird eye.jpg and File:Nuns at Ljubljana Central Market 2012.jpg. Yann (talk) 05:12, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'm not for keeping this image with nuns, because there were other similar images deleted in the past.[6][7] --Eleassar (t/p) 07:51, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: I've deleted them all, including the birdseye -- while the market is only a part of the image, it is the central part, clearly visible -- without it, the image is only rooftops. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 14:07, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Later found and deleted:
--Eleassar (t/p) 13:09, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
These also reported by User:Eleassar and delete by me:
Files in Category:Ljubljana Central Market
[edit]Work by Jože Plečnik (d. 1957); per COM:FOP#Slovenia, not free for Commons until 2028.
- File:Le marché central ( Ljubljana) (9399589099).jpg
- File:Le marché central ( Ljubljana) (9402359806).jpg
- File:Le marché central ( Ljubljana) (9402374146).jpg
- File:Le marché central et la rivière Ljubljanica ( Ljubljana) (9402312579).jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 09:05, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 00:41, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ljubljana Central Market
[edit]Outside the scope of Commons. This modern architecture is copyrighted to J. Plečnik (d. 1957). See COM:FOP#Slovenia.
- File:Liubliana 06.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (32910241984).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (32910244394).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (32940193663).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (33368585390).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (33596888972).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (33753136115).jpg
- File:Ljubljana Old Town, Slovenia (Old Camera) (33753165315).jpg
- File:Ljubljana, Slovenia - panoramio (12).jpg
- File:Ljubljanska tržnica - panoramio.jpg
- File:Market - pijaca - panoramio.jpg
- File:Markthallen, Ljubljana.jpg
- File:Pogled na tržnico in Stolno cerkev - panoramio.jpg
- File:Río Ljubljanica y mercado central, Liubliana, Eslovenia, 2017-04-14, DD 15-17 HDR.jpg
- File:Río Ljubljanica y mercado central, Liubliana, Eslovenia, 2017-04-14, DD 20-22 HDR.jpg
- File:Río Ljubljanica y mercado central, Liubliana, Eslovenia, 2017-04-14, DD 23-25 HDR.jpg
- File:Río Ljubljanica y mercado central, Liubliana, Eslovenia, 2017-04-14, DD 29-31 HDR.jpg
- File:Tržnica - panoramio (2).jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 19:31, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 16:38, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
Images for self-promotion only. Not a notable person.
- File:Lawrence Onuzulike Lurrenz 3.jpg
- File:Lawrence Onuzulike Lurrenz 2.jpg
- File:Lawrence Onuzulike Lurrenz.jpg
GeorgHH • talk 12:52, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:24, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Two superseded images
[edit]Low quality, inappropriate file types, superseded by File:Bilderwunsch.png and File:Bilderwunsch.png.
Leyo 12:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- I agree the deletion. --Presse03 (talk) 11:04, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 20:41, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Saeed reporter (talk · contribs)
[edit]See en:Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2012 October 2#File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar in Afghanistan.jpg. The files were uploaded here almost immediately after they were deleted on Wikipedia, using an account created today. The administrators' noticeboard link has been archived. See en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive240#Hidden pictures! for that.
- File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar in Afghanistan.jpg
- File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar in Afghanistan (3).JPG
- File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar in Afghanistan (4).JPG
- File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar in Afghanistan (2).JPG
- File:Mostafa Mohammad-Najjar and Hamid Karzai.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 13:18, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:25, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
DELETED
- File:Birkenfeld Württemberg Luftbild von Westen.jpg - taken from a CC-BY-NC source http://www.pfenz.de/wiki/Datei:Birkenfeld1.jpg
- +3 others previously deleted for lack of sourcing
FIXED
- File:Corniglia Italien.jpg, File:Valle Verzasca Staumauer.jpg PD-author claim for what appears to be a CC-by-Sa source
A few files are (probably) OK, but most of the remaining files look dodgy, especially given other mistakes - too wide range of cameras:
- File:Golden Nanga Parbat.jpg - Powershot S1
- File:Parthenon von SW.jpg - Kodak ?? (scanner?)
- File:Dublin bei Nacht.jpg - Sony DSC V3
- File:Drumset.jpg - Sony DSC P10 - May 2004
- File:Drum Sticks.jpg C5050Z
- File:Okarina.jpg - Nikon E950
- File:Kandersteg See.jpg - Sony cybershot - 28 Aug 2004
- File:Juodkrante Uebersicht.jpg - Nikon E2000 - map photo
- File:Tormod Pranger.jpg - Nikon E2000 - photo of user, "photographed by a friend"
- File:Kurenkreuze Nida.jpg - no metadata; http://www.reisepfarrer.de/baltikum-ii-kurische-nehrung/ looks like a source, but dates don't match and file there is smaller
- File:Geschlossener Muschelkopfhoerer.jpg - no metadata
Rd232 (talk) 14:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Per uncontested DR. MBisanz talk 02:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mozammel feni (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mozammel feni (talk · contribs)
[edit]None of this is likely "own work": all inconsistent qualities and sizes, majority without EXIF data, and some are clearly DW.
- File:Fenicollege.jpg
- File:AK Azad Chowdhury.jpeg
- File:Shamsur Nahar Mahmud.jpg
- File:মুহাম্মদ মোশাররফ হোসেন.JPG
- File:এরশাদ মজুমদার.gif
- File:FENI COLLEGE.jpg
- File:Dr. Inamul Huq.jpg
- File:Gias kamal chowdhury.jpg
- File:Jafar imam.jpg
- File:Abdul Awal Mintoo.jpg
- File:Feni Soccer Club.jpg
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 15:56, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:พระรูป.jpg
- File:พระเทพวรเวที.gif
- File:กำแพงประตูร้อยปี.jpg
- File:อยุธยาวิทยาลัยพาโน.jpg
- File:มหาวิน.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:19, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:10, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:เข็มกรรมการนร..jpg
- File:สระอยว.jpg
- File:ชอปช่างยนต์บนอาคาร๘.jpg
- File:สิริมงคลานันท์.jpg
- File:ห้องในหลวง.jpg
- File:หอพระจวน.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by TheBalance (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:26, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Deano.leno (talk · contribs)
[edit]What new could be added to Category:Human penis?
- File:A dorsal view of a circumcised penis.jpg
- File:Distinctive brown ring scar using the Gomco clamp method.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Stadedereims93 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Agassa.jpg
- File:Liebus.jpg
- File:Antoine Devaux.jpg
- File:Ca B.jpg
- File:Florent ghisolfi 2012.jpg
- File:621020 336257756460242 1304096002 o.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:27, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hein waschefort (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras.
- File:De doorns Colour scape.jpg
- File:Sable antelope.jpg
- File:Warm colours.jpg
- File:Yellow-billed hornbill.jpg
- File:A big world.jpg
- File:Africas is bleeding.jpg
- File:Waitressing.jpg
- File:Union Buildings and flowers.jpg
- File:Ugandan charcoal shop-hein.jpg
- File:Aggressive young crockodile.jpg
- File:Youngsters and graffiti.jpg
- File:Church star trail.jpg
- File:Lioness at kill.jpg
- File:Buffalo-portrait.jpg
- File:Little egret fishing Like Victoria.jpg
- File:Cheetah chase.jpg
- File:Breede rivier.jpg
- File:Flying butterfly.jpg
- File:Executive landing.jpg
- File:Africa safari sunset.jpg
- File:Ndebele women-1.jpg
- File:Zulu dancers.jpg
- File:Richtersveld desert succulents.jpg
- File:Kimberley hole.jpg
- File:Quiver tree forest.jpg
- File:Headgear at Kimberley.jpg
- File:Pied kingfisher killing fish.jpg
- File:Kill the fish.jpg
- File:Yellowtail anemone.jpg
- File:Angel at masiva.jpg
- File:Easy ride.jpg
- File:Displaced san people.jpg
- File:Rhino poaching.jpg
- File:White rhino and young.jpg
- File:INKHATA BAY LAKE MALAWI 2.jpg
- File:Club mykanos-1.jpg
- File:Bontebok in fynbos.jpg
- File:Redeyed dove.jpg
- File:Hippo breaking water.jpg
- File:Gannet comming in.jpg
- File:1 Union Buildings gardens- Pretoria - South Africa.jpg
- File:1 Aspect of Union Buildings - Pretoria - South Africa.jpg
- File:1 War memorial - Pretoria - South Africa.jpg
- File:1 War memorial - Union Buildings tower- Pretoria - South Africa.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Did not check all, but some seems to be legit.
--NJR_ZA (talk) 16:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- See http://heinwaschefort.com/. This seems to be a bona fide donation of images by a professional photographer from his portfolio. The reasons given for the deletion request, "inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras", are all easily explained by cropping, editing, or taking the images over a long period. Zaian (talk) 11:43, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep per Zaian. -- 178.190.42.87 09:36, 14 October 2012 (UTC)
Hein Washefort's response Deletion request of Hein Waschefort files I 'Hein Waschefort' Reached out to EugeneZelenko with the following message on his page: "I do not know how to reach Wikimedia otherwise, should this message be picked up in your virtual world please forward it to the appropriate person/computer or cyborg A request for deletion of my photos were made by some stupid person/computer or cyborg. All photos on this page - http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Hein_waschefort - were taken by me over many years, some with analog cameras, I thought it a good gesture to upload photos regularly which I no longer use (I appreciate Wikipedia and thought it a way to contribute) but since you seem to have stupid people knowing little of me or my photography being insulting by suggesting that I did not take the photos I uploaded you are welcome to delete all of them it will really make no difference to me!" EugeneZelenko replied: "For example, File:Cheetah_chase.jpg could be found on other site. If you have web site please add information about licensing there and add link to images on Commons. Please refrain from insulting other users of Commons. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:01, 14 October 2012 (UTC)" My Answer to him was: "You seem to be the ignorant person requesting deletion of my work, using ignorant in this linguistic term is not insulting but the statement of a fact. There are literally thousands of my images on the net Google my name and see for yourself, had this been a legal matter I could supply the cheetah chase RAW file, the photo was taken at the Lion and Rhino park near Johannesburg and the cheetah is the same one which raced against Brain Habana the famous rugby player of South Africa, however I do not expect you to know this. With your POOR POLICING you have embarrassed me since wherever my images appear on Wikimedia the request for deletion pops up questioning me as the photographer and even suggest fraudulent actions by me, so please excuse me for thinking that you are irresponsible and stupid!" Further more I would like to ad that I have been a photographer in the international arena for more than 30 years and am of good standing, actions like that of EugeneZelenko within Wikimedia compromise my professional life and work and should surely be frowned upon PS: I have searched the web and could not find a remotely similar image to my "cheetah chase" that does not link my photo directly to me. I there for emphatically state that Mr EugeneZelenko is not telling the truth, even in his weak defense of suggesting deletion of my images.
- Keep Files are legit. Can we close this deletion request? --NJR_ZA (talk) 10:09, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 05:18, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marilli.milaya (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ashikalishaikh (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used.
- File:Ashik Ali Shaikh In An Exibition In Mumbai.jpg
- File:In office an occasion of Professional Day Meeting.jpg
- File:Ashik Ali Shaikh An Exibition In Mumbai.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Looks like collection of advertisement, not own work.
- File:FSI B 5000 Shaker.jpg
- File:KTL-48D shaker.jpg
- File:Weir height.jpg
- File:Two deck shaker.jpg
- File:Three deck shaker.jpg
- File:Tensioning screen.jpg
- File:Shale shaker on the rig.jpg
- File:Shaker design rus.jpg
- File:Shaker motion types.jpg
- File:Shaker design eng.jpg
- File:Russian shaker sv1lm.jpg
- File:Pretensioned screen.jpg
- File:One deck shaker.jpg
- File:Mongoose pt shaker.jpg
- File:Flc 503 shaker.jpg
- File:Cobra shaker.jpg
- File:Chinese shaker haihua cq-2.jpg
- File:Bem650 shaker.jpg
- File:Api tag.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:03, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Nguyenduy1411 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photoalbum. Not used.
- File:Hop lop 2012.jpg
- File:Dam cuoi thanh.jpg
- File:Hop lop c6c3.jpg
- File:Dao dua lua.jpg
- File:Famtrip ben tre.jpg
- File:Hoc mon sai gon.jpg
- File:Con phung ben tre.jpg
- File:Quy tan.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 19.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 18.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 20.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 17.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 16.jpg
- File:Thanh quy 15.png
- File:Thanh quy 14.png
- File:Thanh quy 13.png
- File:Thanh quy 12.png
- File:Kenlnguyen4.png
- File:Thanh quy 9.png
- File:Thanh quy 11.png
- File:Thanh quy 10.png
- File:Thanh quy 8.png
- File:Thanh quy 7.png
- File:Thanh quy 6.png
- File:Thanh quy 5.png
- File:Thanh quy 4.png
- File:Thanh quy 3.png
- File:Kenlnguyen5.png
- File:Kenlnguyen2.png
- File:Kenlnguyen3.png
- File:Kenlnguyen.png
- File:Kenlnguyen1.png
- File:Kenl4.png
- File:Kenl3.png
- File:Kenl2.png
- File:Kenl1.png
- File:Nguyen thanh quy 2.png
- File:Kenl.png
- File:Nguyen thanh quy1.png
- File:Nguyen thanh quy.png
- File:Nguyen duy.png
- File:Thanh quy.png
- File:Cau rach mieu.jpg
- File:Ben tre 1.jpg
- File:Ben tre1.jpg
- File:Famtrip.jpg
- File:Lu hanh ben tre.jpg
- File:Con phung.jpg
- File:Ben tre.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Stojan Batič
[edit]Work of the still living sculptor en:Stojan Batič (born 1925). Per COM:FOP#Slovenia freely available for non-commercial use only, therefore not eligible for Commons.
- File:BloudekStanko.JPG
- File:Bust of Majda Vrhovnik 1922-1945 in Ljubljana Slovenia.JPG
- File:Spomenik Borisu Kidricu-Maribor.JPG
Eleassar (t/p) 16:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- I have no objection to deletion of the image of the bust of Majda Vrhovnik. Doremo (talk) 18:41, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Adding File:Triglav-Denkmal.jpg to be able to get undeleted in future. --JuTa 07:48, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Later found (and deleted per the same rationale):
- File:Kotlje-Voranc.JPG
- File:Onemele puške, Titov trg, Velenje.jpg
- File:ZlatorogBohinj.jpg
- File:Zlatorog bohinj.jpg
- File:Zlatorog - detail.jpg
- File:KocijancicBoris1.jpg
- File:Bista Lidije Šentjurc, Hrastnik.jpg
- File:Oedipus; S. Batič, 1997, Ljubljana.jpg
- File:3.4.13 1 Bohinj Jezero 18 (8617812522).jpg
Files in Category:Albert Eitel
[edit]Those images are tagged as German official works and claimed to be simple "Lichtbilder" (which are protected 50 years from creation), but they are neither. They are not old enough to assume they are PD-old anyway, so should be deleted unless authors are named and it is found that specific images are indeed not protected anymore.
- File:Albert Eitel, Porträtfoto, 02.jpg
- File:Albert Eitel, Porträtfoto, 03.jpg
- File:Albert Eitel, Porträtfoto, 04.jpg
- File:Albert Eitel, Porträtfoto, 05.jpg
- File:Architektonische Rundschau 1910, Tafel 68.jpg
- File:Architektur 1906.1, Tafel 11.jpg
- File:Architektur 1906.1, Tafel 12.jpg
- File:Architektur 1911.1, Tafel 67.jpg
- File:Bauformen 1907.1, Seite 165.jpg
- File:Bauformen 1909.1, Seite 134.jpg
- File:Bauformen 1909.1, Seite 135.jpg
- File:Bauhütte 1913.1, Seite 466.jpg
- File:Bauhütte 1914.1, Seite 102.1.jpg
- File:Bautechnische 1907.1, Beilage Nr. 1, Seite 1.2.jpg
- File:Bautechnische 1907.1, Seite 28.jpg
- File:Bauzeitung 1916.1, Seite 21.jpg
- File:Bauzeitung 1916.1, Seite 22.jpg
- File:Bongartz 1982.1, Seite 152.jpg
- File:Breig 2004.1, Seite 366a.jpg
- File:Breig 2004.1, Seite 445.jpg
- File:Breuer 1990.1, Bild 14.jpg
- File:Breuer 1990.1, Bild 2.jpg
- File:Die Architektur des XX. Jahrhunderts 1906, Tafel 10.jpg
- File:Eisenlohr 1903.1, 006.jpg
- File:Eisenlohr 1903.1, 058.jpg
- File:Eisenlohr 1903.1, 079.jpg
- File:Eisenlohr 1910.1, 048.jpg
- File:Gradl 1906.1, Seite 95.jpg
- File:Gradl 1908.1, Seite 174.jpg
- File:Haenel 1908.1, 111.jpg
- File:Haenel 1908.1, 112+.jpg
- File:Haenel 1908.1, Tafel nach Seite 112.jpg
- File:Haenel 1909.1, Seite 138.jpg
- File:Haenel 1909.1, Seite 174.jpg
- File:Haeuselman 1916.1, Seite 140.jpg
- File:Hans Eitel, Porträtfoto, 01.jpg
- File:Heißenbüttel 1979.1, Seite 185.1.jpg
- File:Heißenbüttel 1979.1, Seite 185.2.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 156.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 157.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 162.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 168.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 176.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 180.jpg
- File:Klopfer 1910.1, Seite 183.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 11.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 21.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 28.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 29.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 3.jpg
- File:Kunst 1925.1, Seite 32.jpg
- File:Kunst 1928.1, Seite 249.jpg
- File:Kunst 1928.1, Seite 256.jpg
- File:Kunst 1928.1, Seite 257.jpg
- File:Kunst 1928.1, Seite 258.1.jpg
- File:Kunst 1928.1, Seite 258.2.jpg
- File:L. 1927.1, Seite 258.jpg
- File:L. 1927.1, Seite 265.jpg
- File:L. 1927.1, Tafel vor Seite 255.jpg
- File:Lambert & Stahl 1910.1, 076.jpg
- File:Lambert & Stahl 1910.1, 077.jpg
- File:Muthesius 1925.1, Seite 84.1.jpg
- File:Muthesius 1925.1, Seite 84.2.jpg
- File:Neudeutsche 1914.1, Seite 499.jpg
- File:Otto K. Eitel, 01.jpg
- File:Papierfabrik Scheufelen, Verwaltungsgebäude, 01.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 11.2.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 17.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 18.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 22.1.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 25.1.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 34.2.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 35.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 36.1.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 37.1.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 37.2.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 4.2.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 5.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 7.jpg
- File:Pfleiderer 1929.1, Tafel 9.1.jpg
- File:Plarre 2001.1, Seite 64.jpg
- File:Plarre 2001.1, Seite 65.jpg
- File:Rundschau 1909.1, Tafel 71.jpg
- File:Scholter 1903.1, Seite 28.jpg
- File:Stuttgart, Hindenburgbau, 02.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 35.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 37.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 39.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 41.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 45.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 56.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Seite 57.jpg
- File:Wittko 1916.1, Tafel 9.jpg
- File:Zell 1905.1, Seite 38.1.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 18:23, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
- Undeleted four from 1903 as PD-old-assumed. Abzeronow (talk) 20:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:Lapidarium in Stuttgart
[edit]Those images are tagged as German official works and simple "Lichtbild", but they are neither.
- File:Wais 1951, 217.jpg
- File:Wais 1951, 225.jpg
- File:Wais 1951, 236.jpg
- File:Wais 1951.2, Bild 1.jpg
- File:Wais 1951.2, Bild 2.jpg
- File:Wais 1951.2, Bild 3.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 09.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 10.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 11.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 12.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 13.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 14.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 15.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 16.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 17.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 18.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 19.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 20.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 21.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 22.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 23.jpg
- File:Wais 1954.1, 24.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 034.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 035.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 074.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 079.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 080.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 085.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 086.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 090.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 092.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 093.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 094.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 095.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 097.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 098.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 099.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 100.jpg
- File:Wais 1956.1, 101.jpg
- File:Wais 1959, 009.jpg
Rosenzweig τ 19:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:39, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Janko Premrl
[edit]No proof that the author of these works had died before 1945, as requested by COM:FOP#Slovenia.
- File:Janko Premrl – Vojko.jpg
- File:Janko Premrl.jpg - no proof that the author is truly unknown
- File:Koper - Statue of Janko Premrl - Vojko.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 20:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:48, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monuments in Koper
[edit]These works were erected in 2010 [11] and are not free for commercial use; nominated per COM:FOP#Slovenia.
Eleassar (t/p) 22:00, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 02:49, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Later deleted:
Files uploaded by Jovanciccomposer (talk · contribs)
[edit]Looks like collection of promo/fan photos, not own work.
- File:Veliki bozicni koncert djordje jovancic.jpg
- File:Koncert i promocija djela djordje jovancic.jpg
- File:Etnomjuzikl toplik - djordje jovancic.jpg
- File:Djordje-jovancic-pozadina-landing - Copy.jpg
- File:Draw-slavianski-bazaar-vitebsk-20120713-12.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:57, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Perhelion (talk) 10:10, 4 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: No reason for deletion. Yann (talk) 15:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
This is an old ancient rest of the german graphics workshop that nobody has ever used again and will need. Replaced by File:Krefeld wappen alt.png and File:Wappen Krefeld 1.png Perhelion (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:57, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nickfale1 as Copyvio (copyvio) INeverCry 19:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - No reason to believe it is a copyvio.-- Darwin Ahoy! 05:09, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Nickfale1 as Copyvio (copyvio) INeverCry 19:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep - No reason to believe it is a copyvio.-- Darwin Ahoy! 05:13, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ahonc as no source (no source since). As he did not provide any reasoning and the fact that the image is heavily used, I prefer a deletion request that allows discussion. Leyo 08:48, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
It looks like not own work. There is common procedure to prove that image is own work: author should upload image in higher (original) resolution.--Anatoliy (talk) 09:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- It says own work and http://www.tineye.com/search/8dbbe201bc4192edc3978f17f100959ecdf68875/?sort=size&order=desc does not find any higher resolution of the image elsewhere. Matt (talk) 14:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)
- Uploader asserted "I, Scott DeWire, own this picture. I took it myself." when he uploaded it to en.wp. That seems on its face like a pretty clear assertion of source and license ownership/ability to release. He also uploaded en:File:RJLefkowitz.gif and asserted some website as the source and en:File:Lefkowitz2.JPG without asserting source, so he knows the difference between claiming ownership with plausible terminology vs confusing the mere possession of a download with actual sourcing and ownership of the license. DMacks (talk) 08:12, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
- Or its a process of learning that claiming ownership is the only way to have this photo in Wikipedia. The file en:File:Lefkowitz2.JPG was uploaded 6 April 2010 19:16 and deleted minutes later, the file File:Lefkowitz3.jpg was uploaded 19:46. Why would someone who has self-created photos first upload a copyvio? --Martin H. (talk) 06:16, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Somebody might ask http://www.science.gouv.fr/fr/actualites/bdd/res/4748/prix-nobel-de-chimie-2012/ from where they have stolen taken their copy of this same image. However, it seems that even a Google-Images-search confined to years 2009-2010 doesn't yield any other source. --Túrelio (talk) 09:25, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Kept: In cases like this, we have to weigh all the factors. Against the "own work" claim is the previous copyvio upload of the user, but in support of it is the relatively low quality of the picture (it does not look like a downsampled DSLR photo, but merely a cell phone snapshot). However, the absence of any prior publication is the big takeaway here. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 09:51, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
Flickrwashing -- the image is OK, but it is a DW of the art. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 10:42, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Appears to be her own art. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:07, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept. Looking at the source Flickr stream, the Flickr user (who describes their occupation as "artist") seems to be uploading images of some of their own artwork under free license. Artists can license their own artwork as they see fit. (Was there some other issue? If so it was not explained here. Also, pardon my ignorance, if the person shown in the artwork is notable, some sort of info or category relevant to that should be added to the image page.) -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:50, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
I'm taking the liberty of reopening this. If, in fact, it is Sarah Kristen's own work, then it is probably out of scope. We do not generally keep personal art from non-notable artists, and Kristen doesn't get any hits on the first page of Google. . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 13:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Note: I think this is really a new deletion request; the earlier one was for reason of copyright infringement, this is for out of project scope. The deletion request had already been removed from the image page; if you want to relist I suggest you add it back. However a from a web search the person depicted appears to be en:T.O.P_(entertainer), a singer with articles in a dozen Wikipedias. Free licensed art by non-famous artists can be in project scope if it shows something that is within project scope. I've added the singer cat to the image, and Keep -- Infrogmation (talk) 16:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've retagged it. It seemed to me that if we decide to keep something that was thought to be a DW, but instead turns out to be personal art, then the scope question might have been considered in the original keep decision. I also don't agree that a piece of art from an unknown artist is in scope just because it depicts a notable subject. Commons:Fan_art is very clear about this issue:
- "Commons is not a free web host, and we cannot accept collections of original art whose purpose is merely to showcase the talents of the artist (unless the artist is a notable figure in which case we will host them)." . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:44, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, I found this image from Flickr and uploaded it because I originally wanted to add it to en:T.O.P_(entertainer), I personally think its a suitable image for that article, possibly to illustrate the singer's fan popularity Keep -A1candidate (talk) 07:02, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Kept: It is in use on en.wikipedia, so in scope. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 01:30, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
Согласно данному итогу ВП:КОИ, опросы организации "Суть времени" не являются авторитетными, а значит и не носят никакой энкцилопедической ценности Antonu (talk) 12:57, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
"I, the copyright holder of this work" - impossible, it has the seal of the Chinese copyright authority department on it. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs 13:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep under {{PD-PRC-exempt}} as a "document of legislative, administrative and judicial nature." -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:19, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- It still doesn't have a source though. A Tineye search and Google reverse image search reveals nothing. Per policy, we need to know where this image is coming from. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs 06:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- See COM:SOURCE. We don't necessarily have to have an explicit source given as long as the information currently available is sufficient to confirm the license. Here, we have a Chinese governmental work (which is PD) which appears to be scanned mechanically (and hence there is no new copyright on the reproduction). This is enough to label the image as PD. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:43, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- It still doesn't have a source though. A Tineye search and Google reverse image search reveals nothing. Per policy, we need to know where this image is coming from. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs 06:36, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Erected in 1955,[12] therefore not eligible for Commons; see COM:FOP#Slovenia. Eleassar (t/p) 17:57, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- If I understand correctly, the provision applies to the date of death of the author/creator/designer of the work, and not the date that it was erected or installed. If it can be clearly established that the author/creator/designer of the work died after 1945, then I have no objection to deletion. Doremo (talk) 18:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- The problem is that the plaque was erected in 1955, which means that the author was most probably still alive then and the burden of proof regarding the copyright is on the uploader. --Eleassar (t/p) 18:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- If the legal principle is that the death of the author/creator/designer is the criterion, then such a date is the basis for any decision. It is possible that the author/creator/designer was alive in 1945, It is also possible that he or she was not, or possible that the work is anonymous or of unknown origin. These are all possible hypotheses. I don't think that "most probably" is a solid legal basis, and date of erection/installation is not cited as a criterion at COM:FOP#Slovenia or in the material cited there. As for burden of proof, I believe the principle of Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat is applicable here. Doremo (talk) 01:27, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Even if the work is anonymous or of unknown origin, it's still not public domain per Slovenian copyright act (1955 - first publication +70+1 (starting the 1 January of the year after the publication) = 2026; in any case, this has to be based on reliable sources stating so). Otherwise, the "presumption of innocence" does not apply here; see Commons:Burden of proof. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- I did not see erection/installation as a criterion at COM:FOP#Slovenia. If erection/installation + 70 years is a legal criterion, then that also encompasses this image (regardless of failure to establish the year of death of the creator/designer). Doremo (talk) 08:21, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- I see it in the linked text (Article 61: "Avtorska pravica na anonimnih in psevdonimnih delih traja 70 let po zakoniti objavi dela.") This should probably be made explicit at COM:FOP#Slovenia and should also explicitly refer to design, creation, composition, erection, unveiling, and release (author and publishing only apply to print works). Doremo (talk) 08:25, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've added a line to COM:FOP#Slovenia. I don't want to make the section any longer than really necessary and don't want to write things not in the Slovenian copyright act, which uses only the noun 'objava', as far as I can remember. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:59, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- If objava encompasses erection/installation/unveiling/etc. then it should be made clear that these actions are also covered by the Slovenian copyright act (because publication, like author, is limited to print media). If objava does not encompass erection/installation/unveiling/etc. then the Slovenian legal provision only covers print media (and not statues, architecture, plaques, etc.). As COM:FOP#Slovenia currently reads, the "
OK
Not OK" part and the 1945 provision in the lede only apply to written works. The U.S. and UK sections at COM:FOP make explicit reference to installation, display, etc. Doremo (talk) 10:25, 12 October 2012 (UTC) - I'll try clarifying it now for English readers. Please review my changes to see if they are accurate because I haven't taken the time to study the legislation, OK? Doremo (talk) 10:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- If objava encompasses erection/installation/unveiling/etc. then it should be made clear that these actions are also covered by the Slovenian copyright act (because publication, like author, is limited to print media). If objava does not encompass erection/installation/unveiling/etc. then the Slovenian legal provision only covers print media (and not statues, architecture, plaques, etc.). As COM:FOP#Slovenia currently reads, the "
- Please, refer to Articles 3 and 5 of the Slovenian copyright act,[13] defining "objava" and what counts among author's works. Feel free to improve COM:FOP#Slovenia, provided that your edits follow reliable sources. I'll review your changes then. --Eleassar (t/p) 10:32, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you. The act clearly refers to public accessibility and to all creators of various works, not only "publication" and "authors". I've made some minor changes that should make the text clearer. Doremo (talk) 10:50, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've reviewed the changes and corrected some minor mistakes. Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- Even if the work is anonymous or of unknown origin, it's still not public domain per Slovenian copyright act (1955 - first publication +70+1 (starting the 1 January of the year after the publication) = 2026; in any case, this has to be based on reliable sources stating so). Otherwise, the "presumption of innocence" does not apply here; see Commons:Burden of proof. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:11, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- If the legal principle is that the death of the author/creator/designer is the criterion, then such a date is the basis for any decision. It is possible that the author/creator/designer was alive in 1945, It is also possible that he or she was not, or possible that the work is anonymous or of unknown origin. These are all possible hypotheses. I don't think that "most probably" is a solid legal basis, and date of erection/installation is not cited as a criterion at COM:FOP#Slovenia or in the material cited there. As for burden of proof, I believe the principle of Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat is applicable here. Doremo (talk) 01:27, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- The problem is that the plaque was erected in 1955, which means that the author was most probably still alive then and the burden of proof regarding the copyright is on the uploader. --Eleassar (t/p) 18:59, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
I have no objection to deletion of this image from Commons. Doremo (talk) 17:07, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:55, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
1933 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- The full book is available at archive.org: [14]. There is a copyright notice on page 2:
Copyright 1932-1933 by The Cuneo Press, Inc. C.F.C.-114.
- So {{PD-US-no notice}} is not an option. --El Grafo (talk) 11:47, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
1934 US work. Could be PD-US of some kind (not registered, not renewed etc.), but this has to be proven. Rosenzweig τ 18:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep as {{PD-US-no notice}}, which is a lot easier to establish than non-registration. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- The whole book is Copyright 1934 by The Cuneo Press, Inc. (see full version here), so "no notice" is not an option. However they claim, that there was no evidence of copyright renewal found in Stanford Copyright Renewal Database. Is that enough for us to keep it? --El Grafo (talk) 11:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:57, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
If the photograph was taken in 1972 then it could not possibly have been published in 1963 or earlier as claimed in the license tag, so the renewal or lack thereof is irrelevant. All that matters is whether it was published with or without notice. VernoWhitney (talk) 23:22, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- copyright notice [15]; photo published [16]. will go back to SI and upload only after clarification. photographer has a website, but no email. Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 18:12, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)
Files in Category:Biotechnical faculty Ljubljana
[edit]This architecture was created after 1945, which makes it ineligible for Commons (see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:BF LJ - biology side.jpg
- File:BF LJ - building1.jpg
- File:BF LJ - HQ.jpg
- File:BF LJ - zivilstvo.jpg
- File:Odd za biologijo - Glinscica.jpg
- File:Odd za biologijo - vhod.jpg
- File:Odd za biologijo - vhod1.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 11:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep File:BF LJ - building1.jpg and File:Odd za biologijo - Glinscica.jpg as showing little or no copyrightable features, Delete the rest. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:12, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- I could live with the first image kept. The second image (File:Odd za biologijo - Glinscica.jpg) should be cropped to not show the building. Judging by the file name and description, the intent of the uploader was to photo the building - therefore not 'de minimis' as it currently stands. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- The intent of the author was to photograph the building's location, hence the name. Building is obviously de minimis here, as only a tiny part of the architecture is clearly visible, and it occupies a very small part of the picture. No need to go to extremes in interpreting rules. — Yerpo Eh? 12:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- It's hard to believe this building to be 'de minimis'. It meets all the criteria at Commons:De minimis#Guidelines: referenced in the description, referenced in the title, used to illustrate the building, categorised in relation to the building, similar uploads of other buildings of the faculty. If you wish to keep this image I'd propose that it is cropped; it will still be much usable. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
- The intent of the author was to photograph the building's location, hence the name. Building is obviously de minimis here, as only a tiny part of the architecture is clearly visible, and it occupies a very small part of the picture. No need to go to extremes in interpreting rules. — Yerpo Eh? 12:17, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- I could live with the first image kept. The second image (File:Odd za biologijo - Glinscica.jpg) should be cropped to not show the building. Judging by the file name and description, the intent of the uploader was to photo the building - therefore not 'de minimis' as it currently stands. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:14, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
![33 File:Valentina Vorgos, haciendo el video "Roying en de Dep".jpg](#File:Valentina_Vorgos,_haciendo_el_video_"Roying_en_de_Dep".jpg){kind=link}
_Official_Logo.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![03:07, 11 October 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/10/11#c-Érico_Júnior_Wouters-2012-10-11T03:07:00.000Z-File:Valentina_Vorgos,_haciendo_el_video_"Roying_en_de_Dep".jpg){kind=link}
![20:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2012/10/11#c-George_Chernilevsky-2012-10-17T20:24:00.000Z-File:Valentina_Vorgos,_haciendo_el_video_"Roying_en_de_Dep".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_old_city2_monument_of_vahid_poet2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_old_city2_monument_of_vahid_poet.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Official_Logo.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Official_Logo.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_Official_Logo.png){kind=link}
_Official_Logo.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
![[1]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=630901000#File:Bismarck_Hotel,_Chicago,_01.jpg){kind=link}
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests&oldid=339705035#File:Marigold_Gardens,_Chicago,_02.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Polje_-_Lojze_Dolinar_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Polje_-_Lojze_Dolinar_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
![[6]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Studentske_demonstracije_v_Ljubljani_1.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(9399589099).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(9402359806).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(9402374146).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(9402312579).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(32910241984).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(32910244394).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(32940193663).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(33368585390).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(33596888972).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(33753136115).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(33753165315).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- I'd appreciate if you judged the content rather than my intentions which you can only speculate about. Again, only a tiny part of the architecture is clearly visible, and it occupies a very small part of the picture which makes is obvious that landscape is the main subject here (of which the building is a part), not the building. The criteria you quoted are merely guidelines (useful, for example, if the author is not around) and the photo falls easily under examples #3 or #5 of those guidelines. It's not the building's relative size that is problematic - the composition is such that it would make the cropped image almost useless (i.e. less than half would remain if cropped horizontally, and ratio would be quite odd if cropped vertically). I could live with a slight crop to make architecture even less discernible (see right), but cropping it out entirely would be ridiculous. — Yerpo Eh? 06:54, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- I think I stopped from speculating about your intentions after you had clarified them yourself. I just pointed out that the image met the guideline criteria, which is even more evident, when you state that it would be unusable with the building entirely cropped out. I could agree though to cropping only the leftmost part of the building and the lamp, but the line would then go just through the white car. Would this be acceptable to you? --Eleassar (t/p) 08:09, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- Example #3 in the guidelines would also be useless if you cropped the copyrighted work out, so this is completely besides the point. As for cropping my photo even more, I believe that it would be of no practical benefit whatsoever in legal terms, so I'm against it. We need a third opinion. — Yerpo Eh? 08:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- It would be great if someone provides it, but to not complicate things unnecessarily I think the crop you've proposed is a good correction too. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:44, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- OK, I uploaded a cropped version. — Yerpo Eh? 09:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- I've adjusted the description (feel free to edit it further). It seems that the image ratio would be better if you cropped a bit of the sky or of the bottom part of the image. The previously uploaded versions should be deleted. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:32, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
- I would also keep File:BF LJ - zivilstvo.jpg which does not show any original architectural feature. Yann (talk) 04:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- Agree. --Eleassar (t/p) 19:36, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: 4 deleted, 3 kept per discussion. INeverCry 19:58, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
As far as I have been informed at the OTRS noticeboard, the received letter does not include the statement that the copyright is held by the Bank of Slovenia and that the bank allows for anything else than the reproduction of euro banknotes according to the general provisions required by the ECB, which makes this template redundant to {{Money-EU}}. In fact, as stated here, the ticket says nothing about the copyright status at all. --Eleassar (t/p) 17:35, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: I've checked the ticket and it does not give anything beyond a reference to http://www.ecb.int/bc/reproduction/html/index.sl.html (copy at archive.org linked), nowadays to be found here (English language version here). Hence, we have nothing which goes beyond {{Money-EU}}. In particular, no statement is given for past currencies of Slovenia (i.e. the Slovenian tolar) nor any statement about the copyright status of coins. Hence, the template is seriously misleading. --AFBorchert (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Dragon bridge (Ljubljana)
[edit]Work of Jurij Zaninović (Giorgio Zaninovich; 1876-1946); not free for commercial use until 2017 (see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:Cesarja Franca Jožefa - Jubilejni most (sedaj Zmajski most) 1902.jpg
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana (2).jpg
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana (3).jpg
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana sign.jpg
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana.jpg
- File:Dragon bridge, Ljubljana, in 1900.jpg
- File:Dragon bridge, Ljubljana, in 1904.jpg
- File:Dragon Bridge, Ljubljana.jpg
- File:Laibach - Jubiläumsbrücke.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Drachenbrücke 03.jpg
- File:Ljubljana Dragon Bridge snow.JPG
- File:Regulacija Ljubljanice pri Zmajskem mostu 1908-35.jpg
- File:Zmajski most in Jugoslovanska tiskarna 1925.jpg
- File:Zmajski most in letnica.jpg
- File:Zmajski most.JPG
_1902.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Eleassar (t/p) 12:25, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Keep:
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana (2).jpg - Despite the name, the bridge is not the main subject of the photo.
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana sign.jpg - There's not any reason to delete this one. This is a 1901 bronze plaque which doubtfully was the work of an architect, if it is copyrightable at all.
- File:Dragon bridge, Ljubljana, in 1900.jpg - Panoramic view where the bridge is clearly de minimis. The bridge properly said can hardly be seen. All we see is the road and some balcony fittings at a distance.
- File:Laibach - Jubiläumsbrücke.jpg - This one can be cropped to make the bridge de minimis, and it will still be very useful. Some of the other old photos where the bridge is not de minimis can also be kept that way.
- File:Regulacija Ljubljanice pri Zmajskem mostu 1908-35.jpg - Main subject of the photo is clearly the river, not the bridge, which is second plan and not centered.
- File:Zmajski most in Jugoslovanska tiskarna 1925.jpg - May be kept cropped, leaving the panoramic of the city.
- File:Zmajski most.JPG - Looks like an obvious case of de minimis, we can hardly see the bridge arch in the photo.
-- Darwin Ahoy! 23:34, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. Here is my opinion regarding the individual images that you've listed:
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana (2).jpg: It seems that the lamps are in the focus and the image would be less usable without the element of the bridge, therefore not 'de minimis'. I've rotated the image so that it is horizontal now (and partly cropped to not have black borders).
- File:Dragon bridge in Ljubljana sign.jpg: The plaque as well as the wall behind it seems to me to pass the threshold of originality, and the author of the plaque should be proven to be someone else than the architect and to have died before 1945.
- File:Regulacija Ljubljanice pri Zmajskem mostu 1908-35.jpg: The bridge is an essential element of the photo.
- File:Zmajski most.JPG: I can't agree. The bridge with its sculptures and fences is in the focus of the interest of the photographer.
- Thanks for your comments. Here is my opinion regarding the individual images that you've listed:
- For others, I agree with your comment. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:29, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
- There is another problem with File:Laibach - Jubiläumsbrücke.jpg: the author is listed as anonymous, but there is no source to verify this is indeed so and it is possible that less than 70 years have passed since his death.
- I've uploaded a cropped version of File:Zmajski most in Jugoslovanska tiskarna 1925.jpg to File:Jugoslovanska tiskarna IS 30. avgusta 1925 cropped.jpg so that the elements of the bridge are de minimis, therefore the first one may be deleted (until 2017). --Eleassar (t/p) 08:46, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
- The problem with File:Zmajski most in Jugoslovanska tiskarna 1925.jpg is that the building 'Jugoslovanska tiskarna' was built according to the plans by Alois Cantonini (most probably), but I have not been able to find his birth and death years. I'm therefore proposing the deletion of both File:Zmajski most in Jugoslovanska tiskarna 1925.jpg and File:Jugoslovanska tiskarna IS 30. avgusta 1925 cropped.jpg, per COM:EVIDENCE. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
- For File:Dragon bridge, Ljubljana, in 1900.jpg, I suggest deletion, because there is no proof that the image was originally published anonymously, as demanded by COM:Anonymous works, or that the author died before 1945. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:55, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Kept some, deleted others FASTILY (TALK) 10:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)