Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/01/22
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
File missing evidence of permission 2222hancock (talk) 15:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedied as file is missing permission and as uploader has requested deletion on day of upload. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Image has a website URL watermark. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 00:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 20:50, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 00:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 01:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 01:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 01:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. We have many better quality images about triangle Morning ☼ (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. We have many better quality images about triangle Julo (talk) 21:59, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 05:49, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:55, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:01, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:56, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 20:56, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
This image was posted to Flickr on October 26, 2012, there - on April 23, 2012. Low resolution. Without EXIF. Copyvio. See also. Clarissy. 08:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Delete Per nom.--Rapsar (talk) 18:40, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedied after found to be sourced to Flickr-washing account. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Delete copy. Nexcoyotl (talk) 16:16, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept: PD-Art Yann (talk) 19:53, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Borrar copia. Nexcoyotl (talk) 01:33, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY (TALK) 22:17, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Private content, out of project scope. GeorgHH • talk 12:51, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:02, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Missing evidence of permission 2222hancock (talk) 13:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Unused user pic, single upload of user. COM:PS -- moogsi(blah) 13:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:03, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Uploader request. This file was used to test technical issues. Liangent (talk) 14:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:05, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
just unused link Petrus Adamus (talk) 18:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Morning Sunshine. Yann (talk) 21:09, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:18, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 19:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 19:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 19:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Image of a not notable person. GeorgHH • talk 20:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
unused redirect Rzuwig► 20:48, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 21:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:24, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
It appears to be a screenshot of a television programme. Jespinos (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Looks like an interview for a television program. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 23:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Bad quality, out of focus Capmo (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:59, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 07:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:00, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
copyright Google street view Thierry Yven (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete : Bad quality, copyvio Dreoven (talk) 06:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 09:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 10:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:02, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Private image. Out of scope. GeorgHH • talk 12:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:03, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Crudely drawn and anatomically inaccurate, there is no use for this image anywhere, so it is out of scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Inaccurate, homemade drawing, no educational value, not used, thus out of Commons Scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:04, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Inaccurate, homemade drawing, no educational value, not used, thus out of Commons Scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Inaccurate, homemade drawing, no educational value, not used, thus out of Commons Scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:05, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Low-res photoshop output from serial copyright violator, no evidence of being the users own work Holyoke, mass (talk) 13:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1975(not free until 2055) Kippelboy (talk) 17:07, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by INeverCry. Yann (talk) 15:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Image from www.harvardartmuseums.org, appears to be contrary to terms of use (Section 2) -- moogsi(blah) 00:08, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:10, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This album was first published in 2006: w:Clara Rockmore. The photograph appears to be circa 1940-1960, but if it was unpublished, then according to Commons:Hirtle Chart, it is copyrighted until 120 years after creation, or somewhere between 2060-2080 by the measurement I just provided. I do not see any proof this image was published previously and had fallen into the public domain for lack of following copyright formalities. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
It doesn´t look as a self work; low resolution, no EXIF data. It probably has been extracted from the Internet. Banfield - Amenazas aquí 01:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Yep. Agreed. Add the fact that it's the only upload of this user. 99% that we don't have permission to use this image. SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Crop from a portfolio shot / publicity photo. And not even a good crop, they cut out some of his glorious hair --moogsi(blah) 12:41, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:11, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. The score is PD. But I think its performance is not PD. At least there is no proof of it. Takabeg (talk) 02:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Hard to tell. We'd need to ask author how he obtained the recording before passing any judgment. SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:11, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Original file is aerial-Lab.jpg from MIT Lincoln Lab news, with no evidence of free-use permissions. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:04, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:01, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Apparent copyright violation. -Pete F (talk) 18:52, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Horribly incorrect geometries all over the place! Creator blindly converted a poorly-drawn (but standard form) File:Acetorfina.jpg to 3d without regard for the basics of actual structural meaning...the alkene is not actually trans in the ring. DMacks (talk) 05:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect geometry. en:nitroprusside is octahedral with linear Fe–X#Y ligands, not an asymmetric blob. See File:Sodium-nitroprusside-xtal-3D-balls-A.png. DMacks (talk) 05:30, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Atomic collisions, bonds passing through other bonds, severely non-planar carbonyls, etc. DMacks (talk) 05:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Photograph of modern statue in the U.S. (so no FOP exemption for sculptures). No indication of the artist or age of the statue to ascertain its copyright status for sure, but judging from the w:Sam Mills article, it seems likely to be post 1997, making it still copyrighted. VernoWhitney (talk) 06:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 06:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Historical photo, most probably not PD-US Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 08:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Does not seem to be author's own work! Tito Dutta (Send me a message) 08:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete: Regardless of the image's copyright status, one has to question its usefulness, in that you can't actually see any of the people depicted --moogsi(blah) 09:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Comment: If this is from an Indian newspaper in the 30s, then there's a probability it was published anonymously and is now PD (60 years from the date of publication for anonymous works) --moogsi(blah) 09:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete even if - it clearly requires proper scanning. Cause that's simply out of focus, something that looks to be completely unrelated to the newspaper quality. SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Bad duplicate of File:Acetorphine.png. Leyo 08:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, and also bad in its own right (blurry, faint lines). DMacks (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Official product photo, found on many websites. Funfood ␌ 09:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Poor quality, better alternatives in Category:Biphenyl. Leyo 09:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:17, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Poor quality, many better alternatives in Category:Benzene. Leyo 09:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Its only apparent distinction is being 1KB, which isn't true (WP says 2K) and we have File:Benzene ring.png that *is* 1K:) DMacks (talk) 13:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:17, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Poor quality, many better alternatives in Category:Benzene. Leyo 09:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:18, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. Martin H. (talk) 10:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This is a building in the Philippines, and it looks recent. It belongs to a chain of shopping malls, w:Robinsons Malls, which was founded in 1997, so it is possible that the building was built in 1997 or later. 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. Stefan4 (talk) 10:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 11:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Non-free stock photo. Not created by an employee of the US Federal Government. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/copyrightpolicy.htm clearly states that some of the content on the site is non-free and that the editor should always be contacted before using content from the site. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:09, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:18, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Non-free stock photo from Getty Images. Not created by an employee of the US Federal Government. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/copyrightpolicy.htm clearly states that some of the content on the site is non-free and that the editor should always be contacted before using content from the site. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
The model, according to copyright law, is a sculpture. 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. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- The associated book has been deleted after a deletion discussion.
- The graphics seem to be incorrectly described.
--Mjchael (talk) 12:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete, seems to have been poorly thought through from the beginning, serves no purpose in its current form... AnonMoos (talk) 14:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Created by Lovell and Libby Langstroth according to http://cordellbank.noaa.gov/environment/lingcod_lg.html. I can't find any evidence to support the claim that they were employed by the US Federal Government. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/copyrightpolicy.htm clearly states that some of the content on the site is non-free and that the editor should always be contacted before using content from the site. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Wildly inaccurate, and is not used anywhere. Out of Commons scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This is not the actual logo of the Bangkok BRT, and therefore does not have the potential to serve any illustrative purpose and is out of Commons' scope. Paul_012 (talk) 13:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
this image is not in the public domain in the United States because it was published after 1941 and therefore was not in the public domain in its home country India on the URAA date January 1, 1996; can be undeleted in 2043 Hekerui (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:23, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
there is no evidence this image is in the public domain in the United States because the only information available is that it was created before 1947 and it is therefore not clear whether this was in the public domain in its home country India on the URAA date January 1, 1996; can be undeleted in 2042 Hekerui (talk) 14:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
there is no evidence this image is in the public domain in the United States because the only information available is that it was created before 1948 and it is therefore not clear whether this was in the public domain in its home country India on the URAA date January 1, 1996; can be undeleted in 2043 Hekerui (talk) 14:05, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
this image is a derivative work of the copyrighted work at http://www.vishwamohanbhatt.in/images/gallery_new/large/06.jpg Hekerui (talk) 14:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
the image is a derivative work of a photograph found at http://www.theindiadaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/abdul-kalam.jpg Hekerui (talk) 14:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I have no copyright, OTRS from author. Svajcr (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
I think this logo does not qualify for the simple text logo category, it involves creative design, the "M" is also not standard typeface Teemeah (talk) 14:57, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
COM:DW: Copyrighted work of art, not PD-old (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dosan_Park says it was built in 1973) and FOP of South Korea seems to be unfree to me. Forrester 09:20, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Keep Free enough according to COM:FOP#Korea (South). /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 12:15, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_015.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){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}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
_015.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_015.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_015.jpg){kind=link}
_015.jpg){kind=link}
- I doubt that. [[ Forrester ]] 12:16, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Kept. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 14:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Previously kept, although it's not clear why it was kept. s:ko:대한민국 저작권법 제35조 says that you may reproduce "artworks et cetera" (미술저작물등), but it also says that this right does not apply if you intend to sell the reproductions (판매의 목적으로 복제하다). I assume that the uploader didn't violate Korean law when taking his photo or when uploading it to Commons (since the uploader probably didn't intend to sell anything), but I would assume that you can't use this photo on a book cover if you plan to sell copies of the book. One could discuss what works "et cetera" (등) includes, but this is clearly an artwork. Stefan4 (talk) 14:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete COM:FOP#Korea (South) is marked as "not OK". Teofilo (talk) 18:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Question Why did the bot move this to the archive? This deletion request has clearly not ended yet. --Stefan4 (talk) 09:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This is not standard typeface, but creative typeface, therefore copyright might apply. Teemeah (talk) 14:58, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Not standard typface Teemeah (talk) 15:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1943 (not free until 2023) Kippelboy (talk) 15:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: There is no publication or creation date given (and I have been unable to find one by via Google), we cannot determine when this should be undeleted, as the US copyright may have been restored by the URAA. According to the source page, this was part of the collection at the Centre Cultural Terrassa in 2012, so some enterprising editor could write to them for more information, but until then I'm setting the undeletion date to 2039 in case the artist painted it in the last year of his life. —holly {chat} 00:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1943 (not free until 2023) Kippelboy (talk) 15:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Aquesta imatge la vaig treure d'un llibre de la biblioteca de la facultat de geografia i historia de la Universitat de Barcelona. La vaig fer jo amb el meu propi iphone. No entenc perquè no puc penjar-la a la viquipedia.
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect geometry: en:benzene is planar, not H tilted up and down DMacks (talk) 15:27, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Violates COM:FOP#Korea (South). Stefan4 (talk) 15:29, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Korean law permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." There is no selling of copies here and so no breach of the law. Mztourist (talk) 10:55, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Violates COM:FOP#Korea (South). Stefan4 (talk) 15:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Korean law permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." There is no selling of copies here and so no breach of the law. Mztourist (talk) 10:54, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Violates COM:FOP#Korea (South). Stefan4 (talk) 15:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- clearly no breach of the "for sale" provision of Korean law 86.97.174.127 10:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Violates COM:FOP#Korea (South). Stefan4 (talk) 15:32, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Korean law permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." There is no selling of copies here and so no breach of the law. Mztourist (talk) 10:59, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect geometry: en:benzene is planar, not H tilted up and down DMacks (talk) 15:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
SVG bugs: left-side bond is uneven thickness and/or only renders as solid black hexagon. File:Benzol.svg seems viable DMacks (talk) 15:44, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:22, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Statue of ko:최규식 (경찰관) who was shot down by North Korean forces in Seoul on 21 January 1968 (see w:Blue House Raid). The sign on the statue is dated exactly one year later (21 January 1969), so I would assume that this is when the statue was erected. 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. Stefan4 (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Korean law permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." There is no selling of copies here and so no breach of the law. Mztourist (talk) 11:01, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
This is a sign in the United Kingdom. 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. Stefan4 (talk) 15:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Near-dup of File:Benzene both.svg but the left diagram has the π circle opaque, which does not add meaning and interferes with use on any bg except white DMacks (talk) 16:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- No problem, delete. --Jue (talk) 16:46, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1975 (not free until 2065) Kippelboy (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1975 (not free until 2065) Kippelboy (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted Artist (under Spanish Law) who died in 1975 (not free until 2065) Kippelboy (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:23, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
seems to be copyrighted? McZusatz (talk) 18:56, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Nope, this image is available for use under Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0: http://www.flickr.com/photos/daleswater/8404333473/in/photostream
- Ok, thank you for the link. But non-commercial is not allowed on commons. --McZusatz (talk) 22:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect per File talk:Sodium Stibogluconate.png. The alternative (File:SodiumStibogluconate.png) gives the impression as if Na+ were bound covalently, which is not the case. Leyo 19:23, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- No objections to deletion then. – Quadell (talk) 12:16, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Pretty sure this is a copyvio. No metadata. Uploades January 2013 but Google Image search shows results from years ago. Raymond 19:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Pretty sure this is a copyvio. No metadata. Uploades January 2013 but Google Image search shows results from years ago. Raymond 19:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
The background map is a screenshot of the 1:500.000 map that can be seen here: http://www.naravovarstveni-atlas.si/ISN2KJ/profile.aspx?id=NV@ZRSVN Eleassar (t/p) 21:53, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Per User:NNW,[1] the map "uses a scan, some lines or names were added. The black names in File:Kras v Sloveniji.jpg are added quite amateurish compared to the rest of the map. That indicates that the uploader didn't make it completely on his own." Eleassar (t/p) 21:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Per User:NNW,[2] "the file description of File:Territorio-Libero-di-Trieste final 3.JPG names the scan: "Atlante del TCI - 1947". If Commons:Copyright rules by territory - full#Italy is correct this file has to be deleted, too, because maps that were published in 1947 are still copyrighted." --Eleassar (t/p) 22:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Later found and deleted:
--Eleassar (t/p) 14:59, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
A redrawn map of http://www.bergalbum.de/uebersichtskarte_ostalpen.htm Eleassar (t/p) 22:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Related to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Steiner Alpen.png. Even though I am against deletion (the original map is merely a template), I propose to merge the two requests
and add the following files to it:
- File:Bayrische_Voralpen.png
- File:Berchtesgadener_Alpen.png
- File:Bergamasker_Alpen.png
- File:Bernina_Alpen.png
- File:Brent_Gruppe.png
- File:Chiemgauer_Alpen.png
- File:Dolomiti.png
- File:Dolomiten.png
- File:Fleimstaler_Alpen.png
- File:Gailtaler_Alpen.png
- File:Gardasee_Berge.png
- File:Goldberggruppe.png
- File:Granatspitzgruppe.png
- File:Julische_Alpen.png
- File:Lavantaler_Alpen.png
- File:Lechquellengebirge.png
- File:Livigno_Alpen.png
- File:Loferer_und_Leoganger_Steinberger.png
- File:Muerzsteger_Alpen.png
- File:Nonsberggruppe.png
- File:Ortler_Alpen.png
- File:Ostalpen-kaisergebirge.PNG
- File:Ostalpen-loferer+leoganger-Steinberge.PNG
- File:Ostalpen-loferer+leoganger-Steinberge02.PNG
- File:Ostalpen-salzburger-schieferalpen.PNG
- File:Platta_Gruppe.png
- File:Plessur_Alpen.png
- File:Radstaedter_Tauern.png
- File:Raetikon.png
- File:Rax-Schneeberg.png
- File:Riesenferner_Gruppe.png
- File:Rieserfernergruppe.png
- File:Rofan.png
- File:Rottenmanner_und_Woelzer_Tauern.png
- File:Samnaun.png
- File:Sarntaler_Alpen.png
- File:Schladminger_Tauern.png
- File:Seckauer_Tauern.png
- File:Sesvennagruppe.png
- File:Silvretta.png
- File:Sobretta.png
- File:Stubaier_Alpen.png
- File:Suedliche_Karnische_Alpen.png
- File:Tauern.png
- File:Totes_Gebirge.png
- File:Tuernitzer_Alpen.png
- File:Tuxer_Alpen.png
- File:Verwall.png
- File:Villgratner_Berge.png
- File:Vizentiner_Alpen.png
- File:Ybbstaler_Alpen.png
- File:Zillertaler_Alpen.png
They all are based on the same picture. --Miha (talk) 21:43, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
- The proposal is based on this comment, where a user who is a cartographer recognised it as a copyvio. I have no objection to the deletion of all the listed files, but as they're numerous, I have planned to nominate them after and if the discussion at this proposal leads to a delete. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:13, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Although it's newer than this image, a higher resolution image of J.J. Güemes can be found in here (see the image here). The site is a semi-official site, hardly to believe using a picture taken from the internet to illustrate one of the speakers of a entrepreneurs congress. Moreover, the business school Güemes works for shows a lower resolution version of the same image (see here). Honestly, I can't believe a single-shot account uploads a valid picture, especially considering that it has no exif information Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 22:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete No exif info, only contribution of this author, everything indicates copyright violation. SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:25, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Mountains of Tyrol
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
From some porn show, serves no realistic educational purpose without cropping/anonymizing. 68.173.113.106 19:56, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Photo of a pornstar who has articles on 5 different wikipedias. No reason for deletion. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:26, 28 July 2012 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
edqffqfffffffffffffffffffqds 197.29.131.195 22:47, 21 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept -mattbuck (Talk) 00:18, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Lucinda Harmony
[edit]- File:Jen Martinez, Lucinda Harmony at Ron Jeremy's Birthday Party 1.jpg
- File:Jen Martinez, Lucinda Harmony at Ron Jeremy's Birthday Party 2.jpg
- File:Keith Jardine, Jen Martinez, Lucinda Harmony at Ron Jeremy's Birthday Party 1.jpg
- File:Keith Jardine, Jen Martinez, Lucinda Harmony, Cindy Sutherland at Ron Jeremy's Birthday Party 1.jpg
- File:Lucinda Harmony at Ron Jeremy's Birthday Party 1.jpg
I am Lucinda Harmony pictured in these images. I never gave any photographers at that event to post or distribute my images online. I'm creating an conscious living online presence and want to control my image by deleting these pictures that I no longer believe in. 98.151.228.149 04:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Outside scope, she will probably never have a Wikipedia entry or otherwise meet the inclusion criteria. -Nard (Hablemonos)(Let's talk) 04:54, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: SSubject is not notable, therefore images are out of scope. Not that we do not generally delete images at the subject's request and that in the USA the subject's consent is not required under these circumstances. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- File:Cours Albert 1er Paris.jpg
- File:Komitas - Paris.jpg
- File:Komitas Monument Armenia.jpg
- File:Memorial to Komitas and victims of Armenian Genocide in Paris on Jardin D'Erevan.jpg
- File:Statue de Komitas, buste..JPG
- File:Statue de Komitas.JPG
Copyvio per Commons:Freedom of panorama#France. Takabeg (talk) 05:17, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
For File:Cours Albert 1er Paris.jpg the problem is fixed ! - Siren-Com (talk) 11:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep all Again, this is obviously an impolite Azeri attack. All of the above are Armenian-related. Why should the images be deleted? Serouj (talk) 04:45, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Calm down please. I'm not an Azeri. I'm interested not only in Commons:Freedom of panorama#Armenia, but also Commons:Freedom of panorama#Azerbaijan etc... You cannot legitimate copyright violations with your ethnocentric invalid argument. Thank you. Takabeg (talk) 05:30, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep File:Cours Albert 1er Paris.jpg. General view, the statue is de minimis here. Yann (talk) 14:58, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Kept one per Yann, the rest all infringe on the sculptor's copyright. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bill Mehalus (talk · contribs)
[edit]per Commons:Deletion requests/File:A triangle.jpg, out of scope
Morning ☼ (talk) 05:35, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:14, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Raffamayfair ribeiro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Private picture of user, out of project scope. Also the files "Prestação..." have a different author name in the EXIF, this files have been uploaded here with wrong information.
- File:Prestação de Contas Danilo (30).jpg
- File:Prestação de Contas Danilo (21) - Copy.jpg
- File:Prestação de Contas Danilo (21).jpg
- File:NIK 1062.jpg
- File:Diplomação Danilo (5).jpg
- File:Diplomação Danilo (11).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_Copy.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}
Martin H. (talk) 05:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Margarethe Weigel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content.
Martin H. (talk) 06:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by PabloJeerez (talk · contribs)
[edit]Private picture of user, out of project scope.
- File:Pabloo Jerez.jpg
- File:Pablo Jerez DJ y Productor.jpg
- File:Pablo Jerez dj.jpg
- File:Pablo Jerez.jpg
Martin H. (talk) 06:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:01, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
This uploader cannot be trusted. He never gives an online flickr source so that one can check the flickr license and he uploads many copyright violations with unfree licenses. Here, he lists 3 different authors for this image (twiga swala, Saulo Alvarado & upydsevilla). It is best to delete this image as soon as possible…before Commons faces legal action by the real copyright owner. Leoboudv (talk) 09:41, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment If anything like that happens - shouldn't we be taking an action against user rather then individual image? And then remove all his contributions basing on proven record of copyright infringements? SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:19, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: We should take action based on images that he sources from flickr or to other authors. The problem is the images which he claims are his own work may be his own work since they have the same camera model--Sony Ericsson ST18i like this: File:Palacio arzobispal de sevilla.JPG, File:Seville-cathedral2012.JPG, File:Giralda norte.JPG or File:Catedral desde Av.Constitucion.JPG. I check them and it looks like...all the 'own work' images were taken in September 2012 by the uploader and the rest are copyvios. In the end, the closing Admin should look at the uploader's other images to see if he agrees with this assessment. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:08, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gunnex as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Mass copyvios by User:Baiker1998 per COM:CB#Internet images Yann (talk) 11:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- This is probably old enough. Yann (talk) 11:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: It is indeed old enough, but we already have it in two versions and this one is a screen shot, stretched horizontally . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Per the same reason as Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Slovenia in World War I: no reliable source indicating that the work was originally published anonymously more than 70 years ago or that the creator had died before 1945.
- File:17. pehotni polkj.jpg
- File:17th Regiment of Ljubljana-bikes.jpg
- File:Divaca 1915.jpg
- File:IR 17-Soca.jpg
- File:IR 17.jpg
- File:Judenburg 1916 (2).jpg
- File:Judenburg 1917-18.jpg
- File:Kranjski Janezi.jpg
- File:Mezzocorona.jpg
- File:Military cemetery IR 17 .jpg
- File:Monument IR 17.jpg
- File:Shooting on an Italian airplane over Mte Chiesa.jpg
- File:Soldiers of 17th regiment of Ljubljana.jpg
- File:Val d assa.jpg
- File:Vojaki 17. polka.jpg
- File:Wardroom on Mte Chiesa.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Eleassar (t/p) 13:10, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:20, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. FunkMonk (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
- Keep relatively cute drawing that could be useful on userpages, in books, etc. even if it is obviously cartoony. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:42, 10 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion. MBisanz talk 23:29, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Inaccurate, homemade drawing, no educational value, not used anywhere since last discussion, thus out of Commons Scope. FunkMonk (talk) 13:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Delete per COM:SCOPE#Examples artwork without obvious educational use Teofilo (talk) 13:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Keep as I said earlier, I think this drawing could be useful in the context of wikibooks or elsewhere (though it is currently unused). I could imagine it as an analogy for something threatening, illustrating fears of children, etc... Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- I personally think it's unlikely to ever happen, and that it's too crude. A better alternative could easily be made. FunkMonk (talk) 15:40, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as above. Yann (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete sorry, but if wiki is suppose to be serious then we cannot include pictures like that SkywalkerPL (talk) 09:21, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:21, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mohammed VI of Morocco
[edit]This is a MAP (en:Agence Maghreb Arab Presse) picture, as mentioned on the bottom right corner of File:King_Mohamed_VI_inaugurating.jpg. There is no evidence that this picture was ever released as a free picture.
Teofilo (talk) 13:20, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:22, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Licensing states that the holder of the work allows the use. But the website given as source doesn't state that. Instead it says in German "Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Jegliche Vervielfältigung oder Weiterverbreitung als Ganzes oder in Teilen bedarf der schriftlichen Zustimmung." - "All rights reserved. Copying and redistribution as a whole or in parts needs written approval". Kowesto (talk) 13:45, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:14, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Unless this image can be proven to have been published in 1936 or earlier, it is still copyrighted in the USA and can't be used here. Stifle (talk) 13:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- Keep PD-India. I suggest that Stifle hunt down som American copyright violations - there are plenty. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 14:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's definitely public domain in the source country,
and as for the relevancy of it being pre-1936 or pre-1949, there is discussion here and here because the federal law governing this was struck down (and federal laws are either valid or not everywhere). Hekerui (talk) 14:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)However, unless the federal court case is decided for the plaintiffs by the highest judicial authority it attains then the image is possibly unfree in the U.S. Hekerui (talk) 01:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)- No, they aren't. Even when a federal court rules, it is not binding on federal courts in other circuits, and they can rule a different way. Furthermore, they've ruled, but they haven't said whether the law is struck down or is merely invalid as applied, which would only apply to reliance parties, which we aren't.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:45, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
- Keep Keep for now and add {{Not-PD-US-URAA}}. Sv1xv (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
- It's there, but for some reason the template is automatically apart from the other. Hekerui (talk) 18:54, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Kept, per Sv1xv & Prosfilaes. Kameraad Pjotr 19:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
there is no evidence this image is in the public domain in the United States because the only information available is that it was created before 1950 and it is therefore not clear whether this was in the public domain in its home country India on the URAA date January 1, 1996; can be undeleted in 2045 Hekerui (talk) 13:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
same as "Cloister Bebenhausen garden.jpg" 89.182.200.214 14:25, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Identical. both old, but this one is much more widely used, so it is easier to keep this one and delete the other. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:37, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Ato Boldon Stadium Couva.jpg
- File:UTT Pt. Lisas.jpg
- File:HFC Couva.jpg
- File:Point Lisas Plant.jpg
- File:Couva Road.jpg
- File:Brechin Castle Couva.jpg
- File:Carli Bay.jpg
- File:Couva Main Road.jpg
- File:National Cricket Centre Couva.jpg
- File:Rienzi Complex.jpg
- File:Couva health facility.jpg
- File:Inshan Ali Park Couva.jpg
- File:Couva Anglica Church.jpg
- File:Claxton Bay and Point Lisas Panorama.jpg
- File:Couva Aerial.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:55, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
Uploader claims that although this Flickr account is blacklisted for some reason, this particular account is an official Flickr account of a well recognized website -> http://www.isaf.nato.int/ ,and cannot find any other version of this Pic out of Flickr. Sreejith K (talk) 16:16, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know why this Flickr-account has been black-listed. However, if this image would not be authentic and not correctly licensed, we would have to assume that the Flickr-user has forged the EXIF data, which state "(U.S. Army photo/Sgt. April Campbell)(Released)". --Túrelio (talk) 08:50, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per http://www.flickr.com/photos/isafmedia/6989906919/ this is a US military image taken by a US military employee on duty. As such it is in the public domain. Although there have been problems with some image from this flickr stream, it does not mean that anything published there is not true High Contrast (talk) 17:26, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Superfluous, all Clivias are orange accept some rare cultivars. Uleli (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
Kept: There is nothing in our ruels that precludes a gallery on almost any subject. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:05, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Goyo y marcos (talk · contribs)
[edit]Obviously copyrighted work, should not be on commons
- File:TIMAGEN WIKI ASICS.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI UMBRO.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI REEBOK.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI PUMA.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI NIKE.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI LOTTO.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI JOMA.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI KAPPA.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI FILA.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI ADIDAS.jpg
- File:IMAGEN WIKI BILLABONG.jpg
Wiki13 talk 18:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Wpedzich. Yann (talk) 15:09, 26 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rajeev chaudhary (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
Jespinos (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:17, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Karlaangelica (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:Miss ArtBella 2011.JPG
- File:Miss ArtBella 2011.jpg
- File:Miss ArtBella Preteen 2011.jpg
- File:Miss ArtBella Teen 2011.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 19:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Watermark, dubious own work, no permission. Yann (talk) 21:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by VidasDeCanntantes (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:Gustavo Moisés Páez Reyes.jpg
- File:Moisespaezlogo.jpg
- File:Moises Paez.jpg
- File:Moisés Páez.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Supernik456 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Image collection of a non notable Person. Out of scope.
GeorgHH • talk 20:39, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Also watermark with (c). Yann (talk) 21:23, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Steiner Alpen.png
The model, according to copyright law, is a sculpture. 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. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:38, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Comment. I'd say, based on [3][4], that exact or almost exact models are not copyrightable (the viaduct is in the public domain). --Eleassar (t/p) 12:47, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Vi%C5%A1nja_Gora_snail_monument.jpg){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Denniss/Archive_6#File:Vi.C5.A1nja_Gora_snail_monument.jpg){kind=link}
- On the other hand, per Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Models, this image and the snail sculpture should both be deleted. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:17, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 05:29, 31 January 2013 (UTC)
doppelte Datei Nadalo (talk) 11:37, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Question Duplicate to what? . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 18:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- {{answer}Duplicate toFile:Nacktwanderung im Harz 2.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nadalo (talk • contribs) 17:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Kept the subject, deleted the other, which was much smaller . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:49, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Celje
[edit]Modern apartment buildings; no FOP in Slovenia (see COM:FOP#Slovenia).
- File:Celje Nova vas 002 2011-06-24 06.26.24.jpg
- File:Celje Nova vas 003 2011-06-24 06.27.06.jpg
- File:Celje Nova vas 004 2011-06-24 06.26.58.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 01:18, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. No copyright violation. Road and parking lot, buildings in the background. -- PhJ (talk) 20:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept: as per PhJ. Yann (talk) 12:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Celje
[edit]I'm renominating the above three files. Unlike what has been stated, the apartment buildings are well visible and copyrighted, whereas the car park is obscured and unimportant (de minimis). The images may be compared to File:BS3Ljubljana.jpg, which was made in the same manner and has been deleted.
- File:Celje Nova vas 002 2011-06-24 06.26.24.jpg
- File:Celje Nova vas 003 2011-06-24 06.27.06.jpg
- File:Celje Nova vas 004 2011-06-24 06.26.58.jpg
Eleassar (t/p) 16:02, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep all three are clearly photos of a wider area rather then a specific building. (but maybe you'll get lucky and Jim will close this DR too, so why not try again)--Sporti (talk) 16:15, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- What wider area? All the wider area is occupied by the apartment blocks. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- The wider area with bus stop, road, sidewalk, grass and car park. --Sporti (talk) 16:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. It was surely the grass that the uploader was interested in. Or the bus stop. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- No, it was the whole composition, rather than a single part (I know this is very hard to understand). --Sporti (talk) 16:28, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- I believe that it is very hard to understand for you, because you seem to miss it. What I wanted to say is that although it's true that the bus stop, the grass, and the sidewalk are there, the main recurring theme on all three images are the apartment blocks, which are copyrighted and not de minimis. ---Eleassar (t/p) 16:36, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. It was surely the grass that the uploader was interested in. Or the bus stop. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:26, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- The wider area with bus stop, road, sidewalk, grass and car park. --Sporti (talk) 16:24, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- What wider area? All the wider area is occupied by the apartment blocks. --Eleassar (t/p) 16:21, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep as above. I also believe than renominating the images a few hours after the DR was closed without any new valid reason is abusive. Yann (talk) 21:08, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- I believe that your closures as keep, when it is clear a file should be deleted (like here or here-where it should be deleted per COM:COA), are abusive. --Eleassar (t/p) 23:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Don't you have better arguments than mimicking what I say? It does not show a capacity to analyse a complex copyright situation. You should refrain from opening and commenting on DRs unless you understand that. Admins have better things to do than taking care of your DRs. Yann (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- I also find this comment of yours arrogant and abusive. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep calm. --Miha (talk) 14:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Judged by the message by Yann and the message on meta by you, I'm actually the only calm person here. I suggest that you two do some work instead of posting flaming messages. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:11, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I also find this comment of yours arrogant and abusive. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:13, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- Don't you have better arguments than mimicking what I say? It does not show a capacity to analyse a complex copyright situation. You should refrain from opening and commenting on DRs unless you understand that. Admins have better things to do than taking care of your DRs. Yann (talk) 10:37, 24 January 2013 (UTC)
- I believe that your closures as keep, when it is clear a file should be deleted (like here or here-where it should be deleted per COM:COA), are abusive. --Eleassar (t/p) 23:21, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep per others. No matter, whether it is de minimis or not, this is an example of a generic arhitecture, see also my argument here and lengthier general comment on these DR. --Miha (talk) 14:32, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- See also the comment here, which I personally find more solidly based and argumented than your flaming messages on meta. Can you provide a source for the claim that this is generic architecture? It certainly doesn't look like that. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:52, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, I can. Try searching Google Images for "bloki" (Slovene for block of flats) or "stanovanjsko naselje" (housing estate/appartment complex) and you will see that they are all almost the same. I don't know here you've been living but this kind of arhitecture is generic, widely spread and common in the past few decades. --Miha (talk) 15:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry, but your original research doesn't satisfy me. The buildings listed here look pretty different. As to your comment, I've been living in Slovenia for all my life, so I pretty much know which architecture here is generic and which not. You'll have to try harder. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:39, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Since Sporti thinks he knows how I would close these -- he or she is right -- I'll leave these for someone else to close. Two things are clear. If we cropped the buildings out of these we'd have a mass of low tech asphalt paving, so any argument that buildings are not central is specious. In fact, most of us would prefer them if most of the asphalt were cropped out. Second, the Slovenian copyright law is much more explicit about the copyright on architecture than any other that I know well, so we must assume that it was the intention of the Slovenian legislators to protect all
- "works of architecture such as sketches, plans, and built structures in the field of architecture, urban planning, and landscape architecture;".
- These buildings would certainly be protected in the USA; I can see no reason why they would not be protected in Slovenia, given the more comprehensive law there. France is the only country that we know of that withholds copyright from very simple architecture. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:02, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think France is the only place where there is a threshold for architecture. On the opposite, I think that there is a threshold everywhere, and it is certainly higher in countries where there us no FOP, for obviously practical reasons. Yann (talk) 21:17, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
- Hmmm, there is also something called cultural frame of refference. This type of buildings might seem unfamiliar to you, which might result in percieving it as something original - and therefore suitable for a copyright protection. But in fact it is not so rare here - there is in fact a very similar complex in Trzin and Škofljica (unfortunately I don't recall the street name) and in Ljubljana (for example Celovski dvori). @Eleassar: try with "stanovanjski bloki", apparently we get different results based on my current location. --Miha (talk) 21:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- "Stanovanjski bloki" are very diverse too; see here. For comparison, "Celovški dvori".[5] --Eleassar (t/p) 21:06, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
Kept - no protectable design/artwork. The image shown as example for deletion could be seen as showing something creative/protectable if you see the arangement of all buildings but hardly if you only see one of them.. --Denniss (talk) 03:23, 7 February 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Celje
[edit]No evidence the depicted works would be free per Commons:Copyright rules by territory#Slovenia.
- File:Celje (8626257821).jpg
- File:Celje (8626258687).jpg
- File:Celje (8626331793).jpg
- File:Celje (8626376349).jpg
- File:Celje (8626390197).jpg
- File:Celje (8626398901).jpg
- File:Celje (8626444595).jpg
- File:Celje (8626448853).jpg
- File:Celje (8626450557).jpg
- File:Celje (8626451225).jpg
- File:Celje (8626462511).jpg
- File:Celje (8626463423).jpg
- File:Celje (8626476559).jpg
- File:Celje (8626477541).jpg
- File:Celje (8626486963).jpg
- File:Celje (8626498655).jpg
- File:Celje (8626499683).jpg
- File:Celje (8626500753).jpg
- File:Celje (8626504605).jpg
- File:Celje (8626506301).jpg
- File:Celje (8626507211).jpg
- File:Celje (8626509687).jpg
- File:Celje (8626510471).jpg
- File:Celje (8626512817).jpg
- File:Celje (8626516115).jpg
- File:Celje (8626522365).jpg
- File:Celje (8626530287).jpg
- File:Celje (8626532623).jpg
- File:Celje (8626534661).jpg
- File:Celje (8627368428).jpg
- File:Celje (8627369462).jpg
- File:Celje (8627422582).jpg
- File:Celje (8627458452).jpg
- File:Celje (8627461978).jpg
- File:Celje (8627467266).jpg
- File:Celje (8627471076).jpg
- File:Celje (8627485904).jpg
- File:Celje (8627491320).jpg
- File:Celje (8627492210).jpg
- File:Celje (8627499866).jpg
- File:Celje (8627504748).jpg
- File:Celje (8627551094).jpg
- File:Celje (8627552000).jpg
- File:Celje (8627554398).jpg
- File:Celje (8627555228).jpg
- File:Celje (8627574672).jpg
- File:Celje (8627587894).jpg
- File:Celje (8627588640).jpg
- File:Celje (8627592938).jpg
- File:Celje (8627595980).jpg
- File:Celje (8627597114).jpg
- File:Celje (8627598032).jpg
- File:Celje (8627598804).jpg
- File:Celje (8627600552).jpg
- File:Celje (8627605024).jpg
- File:Celje (8627614448).jpg
- File:Celje (8627620254).jpg
- File:Celje (8627621032).jpg
- File:Celje (8627622674).jpg
- File:Celje (8627623300).jpg
- File:Celje (8627624046).jpg
- File:Celje (8627628566).jpg
- File:Celje (8627634698).jpg
- File:Celje (8627638082).jpg
- File:Celje (8627639890).jpg
- File:Celje (8627644250).jpg
.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&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&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&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&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&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&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&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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Eleassar (t/p) 06:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- File:Celje (8626504605).jpg – what is copyrighted here?
- The aerial photograph on the left side of the image. --Eleassar (t/p) 06:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
- File:Celje (8626506301).jpg – what is here protected with copyright? The drawings on wall are made imitating very old buildings.
- Yes, however the imitation is an individual creative work and as such copyrighted. --Eleassar (t/p) 06:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
- File:Celje (8627458452).jpg shows a very old window, its copyright is expired.
- The stained glasses of Celje Cathedral have been created by Stane Kregar (d. 1973).[6] --Eleassar (t/p) 06:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
- File:Celje (8627587894).jpg – nothing copyrightable here.
- The design of advertisements is copyrightable. --Eleassar (t/p) 06:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
- File:Celje (8627634698).jpg consists advertising for concerts of Lehar, Paganini and Strauss. They are all long dead, their copyrights are expired. Taivo (talk) 19:46, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
- I read the years 1956 and 2009 on these posters, which are creative works by themselves. --Eleassar (t/p) 06:33, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Deleted. These files cannot be freely licensed. -FASTILY 19:39, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
El departamento de Áncash no tiene bandera. Además esta bandera es la de Caraz. Ondando (talk) 04:00, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 01:20, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Derivative work of the packaging. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:43, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- ??? There are hundreds of packaging images on wiki commons. If you haven't noticed. Why would my be deleted? Right after winning the Quality Image badge? SkywalkerPL (talk) 08:31, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Because it might be a copyright violation. I'm not sure if it is, the packaging might be ineligible. As for other packaging, it depends on the complexity, etc, and more importantly, whether anyone has noticed it. So yes, I nominated this because I saw it at QIC. If I'd seen it anywhere else I would have nominated it, because I believe the copyright status to be dubious. This is how Commons works. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:12, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Not a copyright violation. Not more then hundreds of other images of the films, memory cards, tapes, cartridges, etc. SkywalkerPL (talk) 11:22, 23 January 2013 (UTC)
- Added {{trademarked}} to ensure it's fine with licensing. (also: see the category related to this template - it contains loads of pictures that raise the same concerns as mattbuck had) SkywalkerPL (talk) 21:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
- ps. When does it end? The voting on deletion request? SkywalkerPL (talk) 21:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Seems like PD simple to me FASTILY (TALK) 20:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
