This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This photo of two identifiable children, probably in a private place, has no evidence of parental consent, so it violates COM:IDENT. Previously nominated for deletion in 2007. Avenue (talk) 12:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think this photo was taken in a private place because the background, along with the design of the deck, suggests this is a back porch, not facing the road. And while it isn't a reason to delete, I notice the Flickr license has been changed to non-commercial since 2007. --Avenue (talk) 12:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Duh. Even disregarding all the obvious reasons to delete, why on earth would we not want to respect the wishes of the copyright holder on a picture that is easily replaceable (The only usages of the image are various international articles about "Dress" and "Girl")? --Conti|✉13:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To: mtbdeano []
Subject: Question about an image of yours on Wikimedia Commons
Hi Dean,
A photograph of yours from 2006 of Kylie and Jenna "Heart breakers" <http://www.flickr.com/photos/mtbdeano/135132533/>
was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons and is under review. It would be very helpful if you could let me know if you would
like the image taken off Wikimedia Commons or not (it is there under a free licence and so can be re-used for any
purpose, I note that you changed the terms on Flickr since this was uploaded to non-commercial use only).
If you don't mind the image being on Commons for public use, then It would be great if you could confirm if you have
permission from the parents or guardians from the models or happen to be a parent to one of them yourself.
You can find the image uploaded at <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Two_little_girls.jpg> and if you prefer to
email me back rather than through Flickrmail, you can contact me at [redacted]
Thanks in advance for any clarification you would like to offer.
Fae []
(Wikimedia Commons trusted user)
The Flickr account has had no uploads for over a year, however if I do get a reply, I will repost the results here in the hope they illuminate the review with some useful information. --Fæ (talk) 20:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fæ, as a former OTRS volunteer, you should know that an assertion by the photographer that they had permission is less than ideal, although I am heartened that you asked if the photographer wanted this image here. It is nice to see that perhaps some obvious reforms are finally being put into practice. By the way, you keep calling yourself a "trusted user" - what does that mean and how does one get such a title? This does not appear to be a user right. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment One of the two girls (named Kylie in the Flickr description) is the daughter of the Flickr uploader, see here (that website is given as the uploader's website in his Flickr profile). So I guess we can assume parental consent for that one if the father uploads the photo to Flickr himself. The other girl however (named Jenna in the Flickr description) seems to be a friend, see here, so we can't assume parental consent for her. The license on Flickr has been changed to a noncommercial CC license for this image, there are however numerous other images of the daughter still available under another CC license allowing commercial use—that one, for instance. --Rosenzweigτ22:44, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the Flickrmail reply I have received below, confirming this is the girl's parent and their wish to have the file removed. I have no hesitation in respecting his preference and supporting deletion and request that an administrator do this promptly. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 23:20, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Flickrmail received by Fae 29 November 2012
From: mtbdeano []
Subject: Re: Question about an image of yours on Wikimedia Commons
Thanks Fae, i am the parent of one of the girls, but not the other,
so I think it's best if you take it down.
thanks for checking!
Flickrmail sent by Fae 29 November 2012
Thank you for the clarification, this is very helpful.
I have passed on your message for the deletion request which you can check on at
<http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Two_little_girls.jpg#File:Two_little_girls.jpg>
if you are interested.
Considering the weight of opinion, I would hope this to be deleted shortly.
If there are other images of minors you are concerned about being re-used from your Flickrstream,
please do take care and consider changing the license to All Rights Reserved or the Creative Commons
licence restrictions such as No Derivatives which will help to ensure you have some control over
whether images might get manipulated by other users.
Please do contact me on [redacted] if you find any of your images on Wikimedia Commons that cause
you concern.
Thanks again,
Fae
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I cannot describe the background symbol in one phrase (actually not even in 2 or 3) and therefor don't consider it a 'simple geometric shape'. Sumurai8 (talk) 10:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Because it is only a redirect (and carry an identical file for the one it redirects to). I have manually made the redirect in all articles using the file, so the redirect is no longer needed. Danish Expert (talk) 16:21, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope. This is a user-altered photo of Mohamed Ataturk. The original exists on Commons already, and this one is used to "illustrate the clothing of a Danish Freemason." However, Ataturk was not a Freemason in Denmark. MSJapan (talk) 21:11, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
After discussion with the admin, I am renominating this file for deletion. Ataturk is an historically notable person, and I do not feel that a photoshopped picture of him is within the scope of Commons. Because the clothing has been altered, it is no longer an historically accurate.representation, and the alteration was not made for parody purposes - the original uploader altered it to show the wardrobe of a Danish Freemason, which Ataturk was not. For those reasons, I believe the file meets the out-of-scope provision of "file not legitimately in use", as it is not used anywhere, and is no longer educationally useful. MSJapan (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The image metadata says copyright Corbis, not Library of Congress as claimed in the file description. Some seemingly careful sites are crediting "Terry Cryer/Corbis"[1][2] and I think w:Terry Cryer is a plausible attribution. Cryer seems to have started this sort of photography in 1956 so it may reasonably be one of his early photos. A Library of Congress attribution is also credible but I have not found it there, particularly at http://www.loc.gov/pictures/search/?q=pete%20seeger. Corbis are certainly claiming rights to Cryer's photos[3] (including this one) though I can't see him acknowledging their involvement.[4] There is discussion at w:Talk:Pete Seeger#Top picture showing the LoC attribution is in good faith. Thincat (talk) 09:48, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The file was uploaded to Wikivoyage three years ago. Wikivoyage have only been a member of the WMF-family for a few weeks so they have not been able to use OTRS. So just like we have Commons:Grandfathered old files we should concider to do the same with files from Wikivoyage.
There is however nothing that prevent us from asking the user from Wikivoyage or the Flickr user. But I think we should do that before we speedy nominate old files. --MGA73 (talk) 06:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your comment on Sertmann's WV talk page. The content of Wikivoyage was taken from the website Wikitravel.org (which has a CC license to the text and open licenses on images). The original file was uploaded here. On the talk page, there is this message:
And I was wondering if you would allow us to use it for the Wikitravel guide on Sakhalin.
> wikitravel.org/en/Sakhalin#Culture
Under a creative commons license - CC-by-sa
> creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.zh)
Greetings from Denmark. - Stefan
Resopnse
you are welcome to use it for wikitravel guide.
Since I'm not a Commons user, I don't know exactly how you should handle this, but legally-speaking and assuming this is the verbatim email conversation, the creator didn't specifically agree to the CC license and, specifically, only OK'd the use on Wikitravel. But that's just my two cents. AHeneen (talk) 07:33, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That e-mail wouldn't be considered sufficient even if it had been sent to OTRS. Plus I have some concerns about the image itself; it's low-resolution and has a strange stripe across it in the upper third. It almost looks scanned to me. Powers (talk) 13:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I personally have no doubts that Aleut is the photographer, from looking through his account it seems perfectly legit to me. I have two messages still available in both my mail and my Flickr inbox that says respectively "it's ok" and "you are welcome to use it for wikitravel guide" - I'm happy to pass both along if neccesary, and I do specifically mention cc-by-sa in the mail I sent him, with a link to the license in his native language. But if its not sufficient its not sufficient, although I would sincerely hate loosing that image. Sertmann (talk) 13:34, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The text "you are welcome to use it for wikitravel guide" implies that the permission only is for Wikitravel. Wikivoyage and Commons are different projects. It is unclear if permission is available for those projects. It is not clear if the image is licensed under cc-by-sa-3.0 at all. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:26, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But I also have a message that doesn't mention Wikitravel,
Hi sertmann!
aleut has sent you a message on Flickr.
Subject: Re: Picture reuse
Date: 1st June, 2010
it's ok
As I mentioned previously I would never intentionally try to trick someone into releasing something as Creative Commons, which is why I linked to the terms of the license in his native language, and not just the English version. As an ex-wikitravel user given front seats to Internet Brands suit against one of our admins, I understand the cautious approach better than most, but I still think there should be limits. While I can't give anyone access to my flickr or gmail accounts, here is a screenshot of the 2nd message I received, where he doesn't mention wikitravel.
FYI, I've now sent aleut a flickrmail asking him to confirm. Hopefully I'll get a response! Otherwise, I believe Stefan could forward his original flickrmail correspondence (which should be saved in his gmail inbox?) to OTRS for review, right? --PeterTalk21:28, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I assume that you by "this state" mean Turkmenistan, so you're probably right. I helped a Flickr user upload this image to commons, he might have asked for permission, although not likely, I will check with him --Kim Bach (talk) 00:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The use of PD-Netherlands seems a bit strange to me as these photos were taken in Denmark. {{PD-Denmark50}} applies in the country of origin, and regarding publication history, according to [5] they were part of the report a G. Zarauw wrote on the excavation in 1898, so it seems likely {{PD-1923}} applies as well. Peter Alberti (talk) 13:01, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and just to clarify my previous comment: I haven't found any solid evidence that the report actually was published back then, however, I consider it somewhat unlikely that it wasn't. Peter Alberti (talk) 18:30, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Schon erl. Ich sehe nun das Problem, dass er hier nachweisen muss, dass die Rechteinhaber der Veröffentlichung, unter der jew. Lizenz durch einen Dritten zugestimmt haben. Warten wir mal ab. --Nolispanmo13:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Please correct the Flag of Albania with the proper version. The proper version should have the same eagle as the Coat of Arms. Note the difference between CoA and the current flag od Albania. --Euriditi (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
CoA of Albania has the right eagle.
Flag of Albania. The eagle has some problems with stylization. Note the part at the mouth and the crest.
Okay, so if I've got this right, there are two things Ilbiochimico sees as wrong with the SVG flag:
The mouths of the eagle are not well drawn.
It is not (might not be?) the correct colour.
The first is clearly valid -- the SVG looks like it was automatically vectorised and a poor job was done of the mouths. (The eyes also look slightly misplaced, and the tail ought to have three clear points, as in the PNG flag.) These are easily fixed; indeed, as Euriditi points out, the SVG coat of arms already has a superior vectorisation of the eagle. I think I'll go fix this myself.
As for the second complaint, there are two candidates here:
RGB #CC1100, as per LEO33 - Sofokli's recent edits to both of the SVG files.
Both users cite the same law as supporting their choice of colour. Reading it for myself, the flag is specified in a "BKVZ" colour format (0%, 100%, 100%, 0%). This looks like it's an Albanian abbreviation for CMYK. A simple conversion to RGB gives Ilbiochimico's colour, but simple might not be best.
On the other hand, nowhere is there support for LEO33 - Sofokli's claim that #CC1100 is officially recommended. But it should be noted that none of the copies of Act 8926 I can find are complete! Shtojca [appendix] 1 has the official statement of the flag's colour, but there's supposedly a shtojca 4 that does the same for the coat of arms (see neni [article] 7). The copy LEO33 - Sofokli linked to has only two appendices; the copy Ilbiochimico uploaded here has three; the copy from the Official Publications Centre of the Albanian government has none. It's possible, if unlikely, that the missing fourth appendix has the information in question.
If we look at the website of the Albanian parliament, we see that photos of actual flags don't really match either shade, and you could argue over which one they're closer to. But the coat of arms at the top is objectively closer to Ilbiochimico's saturated red, so I say we go with that. (I'm choosing to ignore conflicting images from other Albanian government sites, like the Ministry of Foreign Affairs!)
Both of these issues are readily fixed on the SVG version and do not require a new file in PNG format. Therefore, I say delete, and fix SVG version's flaws. -- Perey (talk) 06:06, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The darker red comes from the "Album des pavillons nationaux et des marques distinctives" 2000 version where the suggested colors are Pantone 186 C. As with this book, while it is a great resource, a lot of times the colors are not accurate (either guessing Pantone shades or applying Pantone shades to flags that legally do not use Pantone). So moving over the CMYK colors is what should be done. I do have a flag from Albania and it is a darker shade of red then what the CMYK colors state, but I have to look at it again. However, as I told Ilbiochimico, there is another key legislation about the Albanian flag we should look at to not only get the construction details but also see what they say about colors. However, what is certain so far is the ratio of the flag is 5x7 (1x1.4 in the law). User:Zscout370(Return fire)17:57, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As for incomplete legislation, the only solution is to get the Fletoret Zyrtare (Official Gazette) Nr. 48 of 2002 and Fletoret Zyrtare Nr. 58 of 2003. http://www.qpz.gov.al/botime/botimetf.htm has almost all of these Gazettes online but the two key ones that we need are 404 according to that site. Anyone who speaks Albanian needs to get a hold a them so we can get the full documents without anything missing. User:Zscout370(Return fire)19:14, 9 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
User claims to have created all these images and to have permission to release them in the public domain. It seems unlikely to me that he would have permission to release the cover art into the public domain.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
No Freedom of Panorama in New Caledonia 2012-11-29
I am under the impression that Commons has consistantly considered ships to be technical works rather than works of art. That being said, the question is interesting, but it would then rather concern Category:Naval ships of France rather than New Caledonia. I wonder whether French ships photographed in international waters or in the national waters of FoP countries would then better fall under French FoP rules or under those of the third party country. Rama (talk) 09:54, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm no copyright expert, but to my layman's mind it's would seem reasonable that it it comes under the Freedom of Panorama concept:
(a) Its undoubtedly a created/designed object that had a designer and the design has copyright protection.
(b) Its been photographed in New Caledonia.
But you might be have a point regarding the technical/artistic point. From a very quick read of this, that distinction may apply. To me it seems an impossible and meaningless distinction. I think this old boiler is a thing of beauty but someone else might consider it a purely technical object and of no artistic merit at all -and who knows how the French Judiciary view or decide these things.
I agree it might have implications for other ships photographed in French territories.
I think that French ships photographed in international waters or in foreign territories that allow FoP would be ok to host on wiki commons.Sun Ladder (talk) 11:42, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, a French ship is itself French territory, so French law could apply to it itself; unless the relevant legal framework is that of the ship, plane or land from which the photograph was taken, in which case we could have to check for photographs taken from non-FoP vehicles. Rama (talk) 21:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Very interesting. I didn't know that. I 'm not really sure what would apply in that case. My guess is the law of the territory that the photographer took the photo from. Sun Ladder (talk) 12:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This list appears to group a large panel of items which are barely related to each other and can not be processed as a whole. As you admit being no copyright specialist (which is the least we can say after reading some of your statements), I kindly ask you to file one distinct request for each file and give an ad hoc motivation for each particular case, author and year of death being a very strict minimum. inisheer (talk) 22:33, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The reason they are all listed here together is because they are all buildings [or structures etc] taken on New Caledonia. Unfortunately France and New Caledonia have a really crap (IMHO) copyright law that pretty much forbids photography of buildings. See this for more.
Sorry, I know it's a real pain in the a** but it's not my or Wikimedia Common's fault. Its the French Government's fault.
I think its reasonable to post them here as a group, so I won't be re-listing them individually. If you want you can comment on individual images as Rama has done for File:BATRAL05.jpg above.
I not 100% sure what you mean when you ask for an author, and year of death as a minimum. I think that you are asking me to give the architect and the architect's year of death for each deletion request? It's not for me to provide that info. The obligation is for the photographer to provide proof that the images are compatible with French copyright law.Sun Ladder (talk) 12:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It has to be original to be protected by the french law of intelectual property also known as 'droit d'auteur' (author's right) which is not copyright, technically speaking, it is a mere equivalent... Designs are protected, but for a short time, which means it would be ok here..... 19:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
This is unique. I've never seen such a slanted-roofed building with castellations on it. Just cause its in a naive, rustic, minimalist style doesn't mean its not eligible for copyright protection.Sun Ladder (talk) 17:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:BATRAL05.jpg military ships are not eligible to copyright: the originality of the form is due to the function and the constraint assumed for operations.
I disagree on deminimis. The photo is of the Airport as the photo title says. If the deletion reason was because of the golf cart I'd agree on deminimis, but its not. Just cause there is some asphalt in the foreground doesn't mean deminimis.Sun Ladder (talk) 17:47, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The building are in background, there are not so original from what we can see in the photograph.... same rationale as other, french case law ('terreau plaza') could be applied here. According to the description the subject is the campus, not the (possibly) protected building... Esby (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
building in background, the plaza is at the center of the image, can be considered as DM as such, besides 'court des terreaux' case law can be applied here... Esby (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see a fence, some part of a building, some part of another one. Again, I fail to see the originality of the building in this photo that would make the building protected... Esby (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The building are kinda looking unoriginal and normal... the fact there is a building does not make it protected under french law. It needs to be original... Esby (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
File:Monumentbourail.JPG should be deleted like every monuments, BUT we don't know when it was built and who was the architect...
Deleted: Kept the ship -- ships are utilitarian and do not have copyright. The image with the building blanked out is not a copyvio, but is also not useful for any purpose. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:03, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
All of these are copyvios, by sockpuppet of blocked User:PeggyCummins. There are many more of these accounts... It would probably be a good idea to search for images taken in the 40's with cc tags.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
After identifying 4 more uploads by this user as copyvio (grabbed from different panoramio-accounts etc., totalizing now 8 copyvios) I noticed that several files are tagged with watermark "Thiago-e", and some not. Why? This is quite inconsistent. Is "Thiago-e" = "Joaosalmazo" (João Salmazo)? I doubt. This was already questioned in Commons:Deletion requests/File:Avenida29.jpg. IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material (small/inconsistent resolutions, missing exif etc.) so these ones can't be believed either. BTW, similar behaviour in ptwiki as user copy&pasted the whole copyrighted "History" from prefecture site into the ptwiki-article regarding a Brazilian municipality, combined with his fresh uploaded files... Obs: I tagged only the files originally uploaded with watermark "thiago-e". There are still some files for which I certainly would not hold my breath, so feel free to eventual delete all the rest....
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Apparently the recording rights were ignored when considering the copyright state. All files say something like “recorded 2004”, and have the music/lyrics authors specified as the authors (with corresponding license tags). The ensemble apparently appeared in the 20th century.
I don’t think they can be official documents (like laws or court decisions). E.g. a state anthem, I think, is a symbol, not an official document. --AVRS (talk) 17:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted: Music has many copyrights -- the music, the arrangement, the lyrics, and, in some places, the performance. Without information on all of these, we can't keep these. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:29, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
It is used at Petersberg (at de.wp). But the author-information given is wrong. At named "de:Kraus Fandor" sale-box, the company was established in 1910 and produced until 1938. So the uploader isn't the author, and the picture is probably a copyright-violation. Delete. --Quedel (talk) 14:29, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Not a representative picture of "Fully Erect and Engorged Penis". This is not a Full Erected Penis. It's a fake view. Full erected penis doesn't need "cock ring" and fingers to keep it straight ... This is only narcissism. > DR asked. Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...)04:23, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and also because I believe high quality free alternatives must exist. I am not inclined to go hunting through Commons, but I would be very surprised if there is anything uniquely valuable about this particular photo. -Pete F (talk) 15:08, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
copyvio "Alle Bilder sind Eigentum der Carl Edelmann GmbH. Die Carl Edelmann GmbH besitzt die Rechte an den verwendeten Bildern. Bilder Dritter werden nur nach Genehmigung der jeweiligen Copyright - Inhaber verwendet." de:Benutzer:Carl EdelmannNolispanmo11:28, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Keep You seem to misunderstand the concept of Share Alike license: "If you alter, transform, or build upon this work, you may distribute the resulting work only under the same or similar license to this one." Slavistično društvo Slovenije as a material copyright owner released this book cover under cc-by-sa/3.0. See here and here. It would be wrong for the publisher to release this book cover with any other license.— M♦Zaplotnikmy contributions17:48, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I see the CC license has been given only for the photo on the first page (right side of the image - photo by Lanfra; see File:Mlada_žanjica.jpg). The back side of the book (left side of the image) has not been freely licensed. If you are of the opinion that the left side has also been CC licensed, please provide the relevant quote stating so. --Eleassar(t/p)11:41, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You obviously understand nothing about the book design. There are no "first page" and "last page". You have front cover, back cover and a binding ("back" of the book). But when designer makes a book cover, all three parts are one picture which is called book cover. And this particular book cover is derivative work, the resulting work of free CC image alteration (see quotation above). Therefore "cc-by-sa" applies. Part of Lanfra's photo is used on the back cover as well. M♦Zaplotnikmy contributions08:44, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not a derivative work. It's just an inset of a CC image into a copyrighted book cover. For example, this image (with a bicycler) is also used in it and it's nowhere marked as CC. Its creator did not publish it under the CC license. There must be evidence that all elements have been published with the CC license to make the book cover a free work. --Eleassar(t/p)09:13, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
COM:CRT#The Philippines says that the copyright term for applied arts is 25 years since creation whereas the copyright term for artistic works is life+50 years. Does a cathedral count as applied art or as an artistic work? --Stefan4 (talk) 22:37, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Comment What is clear is that there is an absence of any case law with regard to FOP in the Philippines rather than any case law defining restrictions on public photography. In these situations I would much rather be responding to positive requests for removal by copyright holders rather than work on assumptions. --Fæ (talk) 14:39, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Could administrators please consider starting to automatically remove further DR's from this blocked user, rather than letting this well known sockpuppeteer continue to make Commons a hostile environment for good faith contributors? He can raise requests on his talk page for consideration, that should be enough, unless he wants to put in a serious unblock request (though I suspect a sock track record over such a long time would need some explaining).
Comment The pre-2008 rules on FOP in Russia apply as this photograph was taken in 2007. What matters here is when the building was created (is it a 1950s design?) and if the architect is known, if and when they died, as the 70 rule applies; as I understand it. This hardly seems urgent, so some facts would be useful to pin down for this DR to be meaningful, and potentially to apply to similar photographs. --Fæ (talk) 23:42, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ignoring sockpuppetry issues, the deletion rationale looks valid. It looks as if this could easily be a recent building (although I can't find any year of construction). The entire former Soviet Union has non-commercial FOP, so I'd assume that this is something inherited from Soviet law and that the pre-2008 Russian copyright law also claims that there only is non-commercial FOP. Also, if a country switches from having no FOP to having FOP (or vice versa), I'm not sure if pre-change photos should be treated using the new law or using the old law. --Stefan4 (talk)
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The image is still at WTS. I assume that we'll have to start moving lots of those KeepLocal images to individual projects at some point. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Previously deleted (see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Chest CT scan with lung metastatis 3.jpg) and then undeleted for an invalid reason. These need to be deleted again, unless someone can show that the images are free in both the United States and the United Kingdom. These images show the skill and labour of the photographer, so they are clearly copyrighted in the source country, the United Kingdom.
Keep The original images are not photographs and there was no photographer. The images are computer-generated and non-creative being automatically derived as a means of presenting the data measured using w:computed tomography. If any photography was ever involved it was merely to make non-creative copies of the original non-copyrightable flat images. Thincat (talk) 11:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I can confirm no photography was ever involved in the sense that Thincat talks about. These images were taken of me by someone paid by me (via my insurance company). The only creative step was me holding still for long enough. If you think otherwise, explain who has a copyright interest in them (and has made a creative contribution) and why. Also, there is no need to "show that the images are free in both the United States and the United Kingdom". That separate test is not applied to any other Wikipedia content. If something is free in the country where it was created, it's free. (Not-relevant exception: discussions of things falling out of copyright term.) -- gerv (talk) 21:20, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Works have to be free in both the country of origin and in the United States. There does not seem to be any rule of the shorter term for threshold of originality situations. See for example the Swedish Mini Maglite case, where a utilitarian object from the United States was found to be protected by copyright in Sweden, although utilitarian objects are ineligible for copyright in the United States.
Regardless of how the doctor created the images, they are depictions of you and their creation required skill and labour, which is how originality is defined in the United Kingdom. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:39, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the "sweat of the brow" doctrine. This is not so, at least since a March 2012 ECJ ruling: Threshold_of_originality.
Incidentally, which doctor do you think owns the copyright? My consultant who ordered the images? The radiographer who took them? -- gerv (talk) 15:13, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The one who took the images and set up the equipment, whoever that is. Or more likely, since this is presumably a work for hire, the employer of the person who set up the equipment (i.e. Royal Brompton Hospital). With or without the ECJ ruling, the British threshold of originality is very low. Compare with this case which is about a work which is presumably even less complex than the images in this deletion request. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If we are invoking "work for hire", then why is it not the insurance company who paid for the scan? Or the patient whose premiums paid for the insurance? -- gerv (talk) 15:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever. The task is not to identify the copyright holder, but to find out whether there is a copyright holder in the first place. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You did not create these images. Thus, you are not the copyright holder. The copyright holder is either the person who operated the equipment at the hospital, or a legal person. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:32, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
But just above, you were saying that it's entirely possible for the copyright to be held by someone who did not create the images. Therefore, your logic in your first two sentences is flawed. The rest is merely a restatement of your position, not an argument. -- gerv (talk) 23:07, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, British law says that the original copyright holder either is the person who created the images or a legal person (i.e. a different person). You are not a legal person, so you are not the original copyright holder. No evidence has been presented that the copyright has been transferred to you from someone else. Also, you are not the person who pays for the doctor's salary. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is going round in circles. I uploaded the images, and assert I have a right to do so. Normally, that's enough for Wikipedia. It should be in this case too. -- gerv (talk) 11:53, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have not provided any evidence that you are the copyright holder or that you have permission from the copyright holder to upload the image. Also, you have not taken the image, so it is highly unlikely that you would be the copyright holder. See COM:EVIDENCE: it is the responsibility of the uploader to prove that the file is permitted here. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:03, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Unless you can tell me who (in your view) the copyright holder is, then just saying "it's not you" is not helpful. -- gerv (talk) 13:12, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you did not create the image, and you are not the employer of the person who created the image, so you are not the copyright holder. Without permission from the copyright holder, the image has to be deleted. If the copyright holder can't be identified, then the image has to be deleted, but normally it should be possible to identify the copyright holder by reading the employment terms for the person who created the image. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Duh. Even disregarding all the obvious reasons to delete, why on earth would we not want to respect the wishes of the copyright holder on a picture that is easily replaceable (The only usages of the image are various international articles about "Dress" and "Girl")? --Conti|✉ 13:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
Comment Flickrmail sent today:
Keep - de minimis Julo (talk) 22:50, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
CoA of Albania has the right eagle.
Flag of Albania. The eagle has some problems with stylization. Note the part at the mouth and the crest.
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Michael_Gregor.jpg){kind=link}
..png){kind=link}
,_Somalia.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Michael_Gregor.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Michael_Gregor.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Michael_Gregor.jpg){kind=link}
,_Michael_Gregor.jpg){kind=link}
..png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
..png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Somalia.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Somalia.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
,_Somalia.jpg){kind=link}
,_Somalia.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[6]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Albanian_Italian_biometric_Passport.JPG){kind=link}
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Albania.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Question How old is this? There is no year indicated at en:Lapu-Lapu shrine, but en:File:MactanShrineBack.jpg is dated 1941. Is that when the statue was made? --Stefan4 (talk) 19:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
