Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/03/16
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_(8191200447).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
This one is confusing. There are two throwaway accounts involved, Kikijaco and Jack-Gobe. Both accounts uploaded variouos images of the same series (look at the file history of File:Fellation-auto.jpg), implying they are the same person. And yet Jack nominated a picture uploaded by Kikijaco for deletion at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Autofellatio-Kiki42.jpg and got it deleted (Could an admin have a look and confirm that the deleted image is one from the same set?). So, something odd is going on, and probably involves the uploader and/or person in question not wanting the pictures here. Given that there is no EXIF data, the images are unused, and most importantly there is a clearly identifiable person in these images with no clear consent given, I suggest to resolve this mess by simply deleting the images. Conti|✉ 20:01, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
personne reconnaissable Kikijaco 09:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 23:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
_(8191200447).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(8191200447).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file were put in Category:French FOP cases/pending, with the edit summary No FoP in France.. It depicts the indoor of the Centre Pompidou, with a art contemporain plane inside. Dereckson (talk) 23:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
_(8191200447).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Deleting as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
_(8191200447).jpg){kind=link}
_(8191200447).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Likely a reupload of the same Flickr import deleted through Commons:Deletion requests/File:Le centre Georges Pompidou (Paris) (8191200447).jpg. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 01:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
_(8191200447).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Wdwd (talk) 09:53, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
superseded: File:North_Takoma_mapa.png McZusatz (talk) 09:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
badjpeg superseded: File:North_Takoma_mapa.png McZusatz (talk) 09:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: already deleted —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
superseded: File:North_Takoma_mapa.png McZusatz (talk) 09:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Volcan-etna.jpg Dems021 (talk) 22:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted —MarcoAurelio (talk) 15:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
The background looks awfully complex. Compare with this where it was enough to draw a border around the logo to make it copyrightable. Stefan4 (talk) 23:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep. Just simple text.--Alrofficial (talk) 04:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- The background is not text. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:47, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy delete: copyright violation (Gradient in Text, 3D-effect, flare, background, ...) McZusatz (talk) 19:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
This is the self-portrait of a Commons user that is no longer used. Fúlviodiz!-fiz! 20:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request the deletion of an unused image. Béria Lima msg 20:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted violation and currently unused 68.38.60.219 19:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted violation and currently unused 68.38.60.219 19:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
unused and required for renaming File:KdoStratAufkl_GE_CoA.svg to File:KdoStratAufkl.svg Flor!an (talk) 15:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination deleted via speedy deletion. Now reused from other file. --Flor!an (talk) 16:30, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Morning ☼ (talk) 04:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Likely not the uploader's own work - likely some image from the internet which was edited by the uploader. As one can see there are no valid EXIF information High Contrast (talk) 21:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
While it's true (and obvious) that the image has been edited, it is in fact the uploader's very own work. The uploader has no idea about what EXIF-information is, sorry about that.Jushne (talk) 17:21, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete Fuzzy and incompetently edited. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Dear Delicious carbuncle,
why do you want the uploaded image to be deleted? fuzzy and incompetently edited is hardly a very good reason why an upload should be deleted. My upload is not breaching any copyright laws, as it's my own work. Besides the quality is just fine, this site don't need it bigger. So It does not make sense to delete it. I also noticed you removed from two articles, your given reasons were: Rm image which does not depict "hale tail" as defined in article and Rm copyvio and unecessary image additions. Regarding the Whale tail article, the uploaded image does in fact fit the definition of a whale tail. A whale tail is the upper section of the thong which depicts the tail of a whale, and the uploaded image does depict the tail of a whale. Regarding the second article Thong (clothing), I do not understand why you say it's unnecessary image additions. IT was very necessary, the gallery showed different designs and forms of thongs, except an actual thong which was what my image corrected on.
Jushne (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, fuzzy and incompetently edited is a very good reason for deleting the image. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, that's not a very good reason, because as I said the quality is good enough, do you want it in Full HD or something? The image has better quality than many others uploaded on Commons. and u didn't answer to my reply about you (wrongly) removing the pictures from the two articles mentioned in my earlier commentJushne (talk) 20:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete I am unconcerned whose work it is. That can be asserted, proved if necessary. The image is simply of insufficient quality to remain. Perhaps the original uploader can replace it with an image which is in sharp focus, with good image attributes, and also prove ownership of copyright. Meanwhile this version should go. Timtrent (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Hi again, it's was the camera's fault it's not super sharp, but i think the image quality is sufficient. Jushne (talk) 06:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 04:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
No indication that this is the uploader's own work, web resolution, no date or any other information that could help us verify its Public Domainness. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, only text contribution. Jespinos (talk) 00:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyrightable logo with no evidence that the organisation in question has released rights to the logo. Meanwhile, the organisation is a group of seven thoroughly average people; even if we could prove licensing, it wouldn't be likely to be used anywhere on WMF projects — en:Geek Fest Clan has been deleted for insignificance, for example, and it's not going to have better chances of existence on other projects. Finally, as a logo, it's not going to get used by third parties. Not useful on WMF + not useful elsewhere = out of scope. Nyttend (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 00:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 00:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 00:55, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused self-promotion file. Jespinos (talk) 01:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, only text contribution. Jespinos (talk) 01:27, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 01:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no fop in us FunkMonk (talk) 01:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 01:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I checked the extended metadata and it says this image is from http://www.goodfon.ru Is this image free for Commons? Can an Administrator comment. Leoboudv (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you know Russian you can read "free wallpaper" description in the website, in addition there is no "All rights reserved" tag, at least I couldn't find. I added the website's address to the summary section of photo, I guess it's a fair use. Thank you Soroush90gh (talk) 06:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Free as in free of charge, not free as in freely licensed. Under the Berne convention, all creative works are protected by copyright. No copyright notice or "all rights reserved" statement is needed. It's obvious that this Flickr user is just grabbing files from all kinds of sources (e.g. news agency photos) and slapping unauthorised licenses on them. Delete. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Free as in free of charge, not free as in freely licensed. Under the Berne convention, all creative works are protected by copyright. No copyright notice or "all rights reserved" statement is needed. It's obvious that this Flickr user is just grabbing files from all kinds of sources (e.g. news agency photos) and slapping unauthorised licenses on them.
- Delete Free is too ambiguous term and not necessarily means license compatible with Commons:Licensing. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete unfortunately. Its not your fault. The flickr account uploader just takes images from other sites here and here but they were also taken by other authors. This is a flickrwashing account...where the flickr account owner did not take the images on his own account. --Leoboudv (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Comment: This is the only free (own work) picture of this lake on flickr. It is not the best photo unfortunately but may be better than nothing. --Leoboudv (talk) 19:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Dear friends, I've uploaded a new photo, it's not the only photo any more, and I checked that Russian site, and after reading your ideas, I changed my opinion, it should be deleted though it was a great photo. Soroush90gh (talk) 10:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 02:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 02:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, no valid EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 02:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 02:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Obsolete. Orphaned. Replaced by SVG version. nagualdesign (talk) 03:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
I am the sole author and placed it originally in Wikipedia userspace. It's purpose and title is tied to the Wikipedia userspace and does not seem to have a purpose outside of that. It should be an uncontested deletion Jorfer (talk) 03:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Promotional image used for the same purpose on Spanish Wikipedia. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Promotional image with no educational value. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Promotional image used for the same purpose on the English Wikipedia. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Promotional image of an unremarkable person. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Does not appear to meet Commons scope (per COM:SCOPE#Non-allowable reasons for PDF and DjVu formats): text essay in PDF format, of no apparent applicability to any Wikimedia project Closeapple (talk) 05:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Por errores en la subida del archivo Stinsky (talk) 05:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Accidentally uploaded onto Commons Rockhead126 (talk) 06:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Copyvio, see w:File:MayorDwightJones.jpg where it is also up for deletion. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
CD label, image with c-right Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 08:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
CD label, image with c-right Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 08:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
CD label, image with c-right Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 08:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
CD label, image with c-right Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 08:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
logo with c-right Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 08:06, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal file. Outside Commons:Project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Likely non-free logo, out of scope. Savhñ 09:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This is not own work. it might be {{PD-old}}. JuTa 10:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Keep I have corrected the image file and added a stronger license {{PD-RusEmpire}} instead of {{PD-old-70}}. Materialscientist (talk) 11:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC)- Keep I think this is PD in the source country and the US --moogsi (blah) 23:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
personal artwork, not used Avron (talk) 11:42, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
personal artwork, not used Avron (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
The source/license and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. Btw, no related uploads by user, so these files, if they are in Commons, may coming from other authors. See also en:Template:Photomontage which allows to construct a montage for cities etc. locally, avoiding the procedure of providing relevant source/license and author information. Gunnex (talk) 12:06, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Apparently a license-fail of source: Licensed in Commons with {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} (why?) but on source from 11.2009 states: "El contenido de nuestro portal de noticias se publica apegado a la licencia de Creative Commons." = (+/-) The content of our news portal is published under attached Creative Commons license. But the "attached" link (= http://www.creativecommons.mx/licencias) does not specify the type of CC-license. Or did I miss something? Commons needs a not by NC and/or ND restricted CC-license so the copyright status is unclear. Per nearest available archive of poblanerias.com it seems that they changed their licence policy in 2009 to CC "whatever", as in 04.2009 it was "Todos los derechos reservados". Btw, the file is cropped, the original size can be founded here (= .jpg (a source from 2010, without exif). Info: this is the only file using poblanerias.com as source. Gunnex (talk) 14:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- It is highly unlikely that the source poblanerias.com is the creator of the photo. The tool tip of the photo says "Foto: Especial" wich sounds like they not created it and not care where it realy comes from. --Martin H. (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:09, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Logoet er kun til brug på Wikipedia. - The logo is only to wikipedia. not good enough licens 80.161.143.239 14:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Logoet er til brug på wikipedia (Wikimedia Commons og Wikipedia) Det må også bruges som reklame i aviser bare der står hvad Hedegaard Foods er. Logoet bruges til artiklerne omkring Hedegaard Foods på Dansk, Tysk, Svensk og Finsk wikipedia --Søren1997 (talk) 14:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Behold {{PD-textlogo}} --Stefan4 (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Behold enig med Stefan4 --Søren1997 (talk) 15:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Logoet er erstattet af File:Hedegaard logo.png. --Søren1997 (talk // contributions) 16:50, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Kept: in use, no reason for deletion. --Krd 06:22, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sorenhk as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: The logo is replaced File:Hedegaard logo.png.
- Old (2013) upload, still in use on WikiData, so not a valid speedy. Legitimately superseded by the PNG, however. Revent (talk) 21:20, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - The logo is now no longer in use on WikiData. The emblem is the wrong color. Therefore I got in 2014 forwarded the logo with the right color with and want this "fake logo" is deleted. The right logo can be seen here File:Hedegaard logo.png. Sincerely --Sorenhk (talk // contributions) 21:32, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Does indeed appear to be the wrong color, per the other version and what is used on their website. I'm fine with a delete and redirect since it's in error. Revent (talk) 21:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: superseded by File:Hedegaard logo.png. --P 1 9 9 ✉ 17:47, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 15:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 15:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 15:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 15:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. Martin H. (talk) 15:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. Martin H. (talk) 16:55, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
File created as advertisement. Astrinko (talk) 14:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 15:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 04:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
The monument depicted here, built in 1874, was destroyed in 1944, so this photo simply cannot have been taken in 2011 by the uploader as claimed. In the absence of important information about the photographer and the year of creation (of the photograph), it also cannot be assumed that the image is in the public domain. Rosenzweig τ 17:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
According to http://www.f1online.pro/en/image-details/130226.html this is stock photography not created by the National Health Institute but content "contributed or licensed by private individuals, companies, or organizations that may be protected by U.S. and foreign copyright laws" as described in http://nihseniorhealth.gov/copyright.html. Martin H. (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
According to http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-6493749-sadness.php this is stock photography, not created by "Healthfinder.gov", PD-USGov not applies. Martin H. (talk) 17:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Stock photography, not created by Healthfinder.gov. See http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-54864931/stock-photo-unhappy-male-teenage-student-sitting-outside-on-college-steps.html?src=477F94C6-8E61-11E2-8373-4BBFACE6966E-1-0, also 1; 2; 3 files from the same set. Martin H. (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 18:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyvio (picture taken from the Facebook profile of this woman) Remi Mathis (talk) 18:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Marcel Mettenhoven is dead in 1979. Copyright violation. 90.44.105.118 18:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Marcel Mettenhoven is dead in 1979. Copyright violation. 90.44.105.118 18:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Marcel Mettenhoven is dead in 1979. Copyright violation. 90.44.105.118 18:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Most likely a crop from unknown source. Gunnex (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation Mitte27 (talk) 04:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - Photo: Omar Ramírez Salas. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:48, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
according text, advertisment for a punk rock group? Small size image, the only one upload of the user. I don't believe it is own work Avron (talk) 19:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
There is no evidence that the copyright on this composition was allowed to expire. This song was not used for only one film; it had been used for other black-and-white Mickey Mouse cartoons before "The Mad Doctor." Just like Mickey Mouse himself is copyrighted despite appearing in two films that ended up becoming PD, so it should be assumed that this composition remains under copyright despite the fact that one of the films that used it has fallen into the public domain. This should be deleted as derivative work. ― SethAllen623 (talk) 20:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:17, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
This does not look like own work. JuTa 20:55, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Private shnaphot. Out of scope. JuTa 20:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of date, hence out of scope. Rodhullandemu (talk) 22:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Closer please see this. Rodhullandemu (talk) 02:06, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
COM:CB#Product packaging Stefan4 (talk) 22:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unused. Out of scope. Stefan4 (talk) 22:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Probably from a commercial news source. For example, it was used by BBC in smaller resolution one year and a half before it was uploaded to Wikipedia. Stefan4 (talk) 23:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 23:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
In total, EXIT metadatas include the name of at least three authors. The images are likely not own work.
- File:Luxury Logo 111.jpg
- File:Certificate.jpg
- File:Chetchicov.jpg
- File:Aisina.JPG
- File:Press Wall.jpg
- File:Jazz band.jpg
- File:Crown 2.jpg
- File:Crown by FM.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 00:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Andrés Bujardón (talk · contribs)
[edit]Possible copyvios or out of scope.
- File:- Andrés Bujardón -.jpg
- File:AKIYALLA.jpg
- File:QUERIDISIMOS INTELECTUALES.jpg
- File:Andrés Bujardón.jpg
- File:CIUDAD OCULTA.jpg
- File:(EN)TERRADOS.png
TERRADOS.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 00:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Littlemisstrainwreck (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal collages, which apparently also include copyvios images.
Jespinos (talk) 00:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder of the images.
- File:Faghas.jpg
- File:Ihji.jpg
- File:Lkjhgfd.jpg
- File:20091013154353-premio.jpg
- File:Skfasg.jpg
- File:Noel-Schajris-300x175.jpg
- File:TIMES SQUARE.jpg
- File:Extraños en la noche.jpg
- File:File 233.jpg
- File:Alfombra roja.jpg
- File:Sin Bandera.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 00:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by FaranAhmad (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
Jespinos (talk) 00:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Original research, own work — S t a r u s – ¡Dímelo! – 01:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Keep -- This is harmless. However clarify in the description that this is a personal work not related to the real coat of arms.Hektor (talk) 13:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: While I agree in principle with Hektor, it is actually in use at WP:VI as the authentic COA. That's a danger. I also think it is disrespectful of the Pope (note that I am not a Catholic). . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:25, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jareknomak (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 01:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Facusanguineti (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low resolution, missing EXIF. The images are likely not own work.
Jespinos (talk) 01:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ChrisNate2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]The images appear to be screenshots of a television programme.
Jespinos (talk) 01:54, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, missing EXIF. The images are likely not own work.
- File:Alysson Jean Gonino.png
- File:Alice Greczyn.jpg
- File:Alexandra Chando.jpg
- File:Tammin Sursok.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 02:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:23, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal images.
Jespinos (talk) 02:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:22, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Portrait officiel de Steven Blaney.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
duplication of File:World War I Tank - Masterton, New Zealand - April 2009.jpg Eddaido (talk) 09:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
that is an old logo Haseebtirur (talk) 09:22, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep If the institute is notable, old logos are not obsolete. They are just historic documents, and might be as valuable as current ones.--Pere prlpz (talk) 16:06, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:christine woitzik wikipedia.jpg
After today identifying today around 20 uploads as copyvio (grabbed from different panoramio-/flickr-accounts, etc.) it´s difficult to believe that these files would be own work: IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material (small/inconsistent resolutions, missing exif) so these ones (per COM:PRP) can't be believed either. File:UCA san ignacio misiones.jpg + File:Ruta 4 pilar paraguay.jpg are (per upload date) surrounded by already identified copyvios. For the remaining files, 3 different digicams in use. Excluding here the recent uploads taken with Nokia 603, which is most likely his mobile digicam.
- File:Ruinas de San Cosme y Damian.JPG
- File:Iglesia de Yabebyry Misiones Paraguay.JPG
- File:Reloj solar san ignacio misiones paraguay.JPG
- File:UCA san ignacio misiones.jpg
- File:Ruta 4 pilar paraguay.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 10:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
I would like to know why you deleted all those pictures I uploaded. All of those pics were taken by me. I mean, I live in that city, San Ignacio, why would I took pics from the other accounts. If you could please make them appear again. Hope to hear from you soon. --I.AM.LATIN (talk) 13:37, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of Songhachwisaengdo.jpg. This should have been dealt with a rename(6). Sorry for this error. Pldx1 (talk) 11:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Davidpaddy (talk · contribs)
[edit]No evidence uploader is the copyright holder of the images.
- File:Hero 2005.jpg
- File:DISNEY Q FAMILY MASTERMIND.jpg
- File:HeroHungamaMay30 TAM reports.jpg
- File:Herohungama2007.jpg
- File:Snapshot 1 (27-01-2013 10-00).png
- File:Newpowershero.png
- File:Vicky aur Vetaal.png
- File:Hero official.jpg
- File:Hero ring.jpg
- File:Hero Bhakti hi shakti hai logo.jpg
- File:Hero farida.jpg
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 14:44, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:06, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leonel Tobares (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:En Kasa.jpg
- File:En La Joda.jpg
- File:En casa.jpg
- File:En el cole.jpg
- File:Boludiando.jpg
- File:Dee Traje.jpg
- File:De Traje.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 15:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Punkyxpatin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:20, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Uselessly doubling content Gerbis (talk) 15:24, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- see Commons:Galleries for the use of galleries. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 15:46, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Galleries allow captions, selection, and sorting, which makes them better than cats. They are always in scope . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 01:14, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Krassotkin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Too complete images of copyrighted OS. I don't think it can be considered de minimis.
- File:Presentation of Samsung Galaxy S4 (2013-03-14) 05.jpg
- File:Presentation of Samsung Galaxy S4 (2013-03-14) 06.jpg
- File:Presentation of Samsung Galaxy S4 (2013-03-14) 02.jpg
_05.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_06.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
— Ralgis [mantis Religiosa] — 15:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment 1. The operating system of the Galaxy S4 is Google's Android (Apache License 2.0; f.e. see Category:Android screenshots from different vendors and customs, and more...) with Samsung's TouchWiz custom of GUI (f.e. see Category:TouchWiz). See also our practice: Category:Samsung Galaxy Y, Category:Samsung Galaxy Note II, Category:Samsung Galaxy W, Category:Samsung Galaxy R, Category:Samsung Galaxy Note N7000, Category:Samsung Galaxy Mini, Category:Samsung Galaxy Ace, Category:Samsung Galaxy S, Category:Galaxy Nexus, Category:Samsung GT-I5800 Galaxy 3, Category:Samsung Galaxy S III mini I8190 and more and more with and without categorization. --sasha (krassotkin) 19:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment 2. Mail.ru Group (source and licensee for these photos) is the core of Digital Sky Technologies. It isn't a private person or a company without lawyers. --sasha (krassotkin) 19:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: The images have a clear CC-BY license. Operating systems -- as software -- have a copyright, but screen images produced by the OS must be considered on a case by case basis. In this case, while it is possible that one or more of the icons shown might have a copyright, they are alll de minimis -- not essential to the photo. The text does not have a copyright as it is too short. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Django unleashed 2013 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
This is my own work
[edit]Both of the file that i have uploaded are photos of very influential people. I have ask permission for the picture to be used in wikipedia. and they agreed that I can say it is my own work. Do not worry, it is not copyrighted. Please do not delete them. It is very hard for me to convince the rightful owner to let me use the picture in wikipedia. They agree for me to use it. Thank you. God Bless Django unleashed 2013 (talk) 07:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Advertisement. No evidence of permission.
- File:PG Rock Fit Jeans.jpg
- File:ACE GOODBYES.jpg
- File:Peter Golding ACE GOODBYES LIST OF CELEBRITY CLIENTS.png
- File:Peter Golding Rock Fit Jeans.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/File:Anna Pingina.jpg
Files uploaded by Josef Adam (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras.
- File:Aura-Photographie.jpg
- File:Aura-Papa.jpg
- File:Bremsen unten.JPG
- File:Bild in Badehose.jpg
- File:Seychellen.JPG
- File:Bild von der Seeseite.JPG
- File:Bild vom Ost.JPG
- File:Bild Gerät.jpg
- File:Villa PAX West.JPG
- File:Beratung Balkon.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
doubling content Gerbis (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Please read COM:Galleries and stop nominating legitimate galleries for deletion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
doubling content Gerbis (talk) 16:01, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
doubling content Gerbis (talk) 16:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Creator templates provide very useful information in a structured form -- they are always in Scope. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
This image was not created by the CIA or the U.S. federal government, it appears to be made by Afghanistan. Officer (talk) 16:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
This image was not created by the CIA or the U.S. federal government, it appears to be made by Afghanistan. Officer (talk) 16:14, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:05, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
This image was created by Maj. Patrick Simo, a member of the French army. The US military license only applies to images created by members of the U.S. military. Officer (talk) 16:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
COM:DW of multiple images whose copyright status is unknown Morning ☼ (talk) 16:33, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep:All these images are some of the innocent Taiwanese people who killed by Chinese military in February-March 1947. That's why their pictures (of course were taken earlier before that time) are displayed in a museum. In addition, the 50-year period of copyrights (according to Taiwan's law) also has expired even if we consider it.--Wildcursive (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep It's a nice tribute --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 16:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Unfortunately, the fifty year rule applies after public release of the images, not their creation. Therefore, in order to keep these, we must show that they were all publicly released before 1962. There's no evidence of that. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:10, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Leonardo Caporale (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. File:Corte de boleta (ejemplo).JPG (showing covers of 2011 magazines/political propaganda pamphlets) is a high res image - IMHO - out Commons:De minimis-scope.
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gunnex (talk) 17:08, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:13, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Olimpoaurinegro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos of some kind. May be in public domain but relevant info must be provided.
- File:Basquet lnb olimpo.jpg
- File:Jorge Ledo.jpg
- File:Roberto Carminatti.jpg
- File:Entrada vieja olimpo.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:14, 6 October 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 13 October 2012 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Olimpoaurinegro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Previously published (14.01.2013, but lower res) via http://pagina95.com/2013/01/14/olimpo-volvio-a-ganar-un-amistoso-en-mar-del-plata/ (© 2013 Copyright Página 95. TODOS los derechos reservados.) = http://pagina95.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/olimpo2-615x346.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 17:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. File:Bani dese el aire.jpg most likely grabbed somewhere from Facebook --> http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=97946039&postcount=744 (03.12.2012, 10:34 PM) = http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash4/483566_4455727225298_1803563795_n.jpg (obs.: the feature "last modified" does not work for images hosted via Facebook: they are always last modified: 01.01.2010). File:Virgen de Regla.jpg is quite similar to http://ecoportaldominicano.com/culturadominicana/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2097:virgen-de-regla-la-patrona-del-pueblo&catid=62:patronales&Itemid=84 (2009, Ecoportal Dominicano ©2009. Todos los derechos reservados, .jpg). The rest of uploads by this user were copyvios from different Panoramio-accounts and 1 logo with unknown copyright status.
Gunnex (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:17, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Don Francisco (television host) from MedlinePlus
[edit]According to the EXIF data this files are created by "Juan Manuel Garcia Studio,inc". This are not works 'prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties', so PD-USGov not applies. The files are taken from an Medline Plus Medical Encyclopedia article. but according to their copyright info ONLY the text of the articles is public domain. Illustrations, logos, and photos are explicitely described as copyrighted.
- File:Don Francisco.png
- File:Donfrancisco1.jpg
- File:Donfrancisco2 NIH.jpg
- File:Donfrancisco3 NIH.jpg
- File:DonFranciso1 crop.jpg
Martin H. (talk) 18:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation. User:Plamenski attributes the author of several similar maps to be Plamen Gueorguiev at http://www.zelas.co.uk, but uses an incorrect license and no record of permission for use. Vladsinger (talk) 18:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Source site has explicit copyright notice. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
accidential double version of the File:Objektivplatine II.jpg, please delete file Frank Gosebruch (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
accidential double version of the File:Nikon F2 High-Speed.jpg Frank Gosebruch (talk) 18:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
unneccessary bad version of the File:Nikon SP.jpg, no links, not needed anymore--K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 18:49, 16 March 2013 (UTC) K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 18:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not the same file, no reason to delete. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by K0_7zQY0oyqcz
[edit]
- File:Nikon rangefinder d.jpg
- File:Sekonic.jpg
- File:Accessory rangefinder.jpg
- File:Kompendium.JPG
- File:Mamiya RB67 Pro SD.png
- File:Ricoh TLS 401 black SLR.png
- File:Finder F4 view.jpg
- File:R.B. Graflex Series B.JPEG
- File:Graflex RB viewfinder.jpg
- File:Contaflex Super B B&W.JPG
- File:Contarex I.jpg
- File:Nikon SP.jpg
- File:Nikon F with Fisheye and Finder.JPG
- File:Nikon F2 MF-1.JPG
- File:Canon 7 II.jpg
- File:Nikon F eyelevel.png
- File:Nikon F5 35-70.JPG
- File:Nikonos III.jpg
- File:Nikon S macro.JPG
- File:Nikon F4S 35-70.JPG
- File:Linhof Technika III (5x7in - 13x18cm) short.JPG
- File:Nikon ring light SR2 b.png
- File:Nikon ring light SR2.png
- File:Nikon Medical-Nikkor.png
- File:Nikon S2 flash.png
- File:Bulb (photography).jpg
- File:Doppelkondensor.JPG
- File:Maskenbänder.JPG
- File:Negativbühne.JPG
- File:Negativbühne eingebaut.JPG
- File:Agfa Variomat C.JPG
- File:Farbmischkopf Agfa Varioscop (ca. 1954).JPG
- File:Farbmischkopf Dunco Modell II 66 C.JPG
- File:Vergrößerungsgerät für Analogfotografie (Agfa Varioscop 60).JPG
- File:Filmkamera.JPG
- File:Filmmagazin.JPG
- File:Cristo3.jpg
- File:Cristo5.jpg
- File:Verstellbarer Umlaufverschluß (Ciné-Kodak Spezial II).JPG
- File:Rotfilter am Vergrößerungsgerät.JPG
- File:Zwei Dunkelkammerleuchten - links für b&w, rechts für Color-Arbeiten.JPG
- File:Korn-Feineinsteller im Fotolabor.JPG
- File:Maskenbänder - Vergrößerungsgerät.JPG
- File:Linhof Technika III (5x7in - 13x18cm).JPG
- File:Linhof Technika III (5x7in - 13x18cm) long.JPG
- File:S-mount lens connector.JPG
- File:Canon hansa.jpg
- File:Vergroesserungsobjektiv.JPG
- File:Photographer 70ies with Linhof Technika III.jpg
- File:Ground glass - Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5" (about 1942).jpg
- File:Graflex Speed Graphic (Military version) a.JPG
- File:Graflex Speed Graphic (Military version) b.JPG
- File:Graflex Speed Graphic (Military version) c.JPG
- File:Graflex Speed Graphic (Military version - type C-3).JPG
- File:Linhof Technika III (13x18cm) - double extended.JPG
- .... you know what, just go to here and every file you see there should be on this list. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
_short.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}
_long.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_a.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_b.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_c.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_double_extended.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Copyright holder of the pictures is Martin Emmert. I got no permission to use the picture for Wikimedia or Wikipedia. I immediately want this picture to be erased!- K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 17:59, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- OK, let me get this straight...
- In March 2013, you ask for File:Nikon rangefinder d.jpg to be deleted as a duplicate. The deletion was declined, as it was not in fact a duplicate.
- In October 2013, you request its deletion as being an unnecessary version of File:Nikon SP.jpg, except you failed to get the syntax right so it never showed.
- Today, you suddenly claim it was an accidental upload and a copyright violation. And similarly for all your other files.
- So, we have three different reasons as to why it should be deleted - unnecessary, accidental upload and copyright violation. I'd be willing to believe this was an accident, except for the previous DR which made no mention of the matter. Copyright violation... ok, first off, who is this Martin Emmert person - no obvious ghits for the name, and no google image hits for this photo. If it is in fact a copyvio, then you uploaded it less than a day after it was taken, which seems dubious at best. If we are to delete this, then I fully suggest that all other images by K0_7zQY0oyqcz, as, judging by the way they are suddenly claiming every upload is a copyvio, they cannot be trusted to release images under a free licence. Frankly what I see here is a user who, annoyed at being told they cannot have a photo they don't like deleted, is now throwing all their toys out of the pram, and doing anything they can to see their photos deleted. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- I want to be deleted ALL my files, because they are actually all the ONLY work of Martin Emmert, personal information redacted. He didn't provide any rights to me to share these files on Wikimedia or Wikipedia. I uploaded all these pictures for years accidentially (as I know now). He just made all these pictures for my homepage, but I unfortunately used them illegally for wikimedia. Today I already got deleted three files from some of your friends because of alleged copyright problems. Now I don't want to have any more problems with all this wikimedia/wikipedia copyright problems. And I also would prefer to find someone to talk in German about this topic; Mr. Emmert doesn't speak English at all. So please erase now ALL the uploaded pictures under my account, they are ALL copyright violated!!!-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- What I see here is a 'mighty' administrator who, annoyed at being told by the uploader to erase a bad picture (that even wasn't used by anyone or any article!). On the other hand you just delete - without any warnings - (legal) pictures from articles that have been a hard work for weeks of searching, writing and recherche. This is actually an excellent way to frustrate members of the Wikipedia completely and to ensure that they give up finally - Success, so good bye!-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 21:08, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- I want to be deleted ALL my files, because they are actually all the ONLY work of Martin Emmert, personal information redacted. He didn't provide any rights to me to share these files on Wikimedia or Wikipedia. I uploaded all these pictures for years accidentially (as I know now). He just made all these pictures for my homepage, but I unfortunately used them illegally for wikimedia. Today I already got deleted three files from some of your friends because of alleged copyright problems. Now I don't want to have any more problems with all this wikimedia/wikipedia copyright problems. And I also would prefer to find someone to talk in German about this topic; Mr. Emmert doesn't speak English at all. So please erase now ALL the uploaded pictures under my account, they are ALL copyright violated!!!-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 18:40, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- @mattbuck: What about AGF? I know K0_7zQY0oyqcz for years of discussions in usenet and I believe, he can be trusted. The files should be deleted immediately to avoid legal problems. -- Smial (talk) 21:54, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- Smial, when a user tries to have an image deleted for various reasons, then suddenly says it's a copyvio, yes I get suspicious. While clear copyvios should be deleted, given several of these images have been around for over a year a few days of discussion will not hurt. -mattbuck (Talk) 23:16, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- @K0_7zQY0oyqcz: Please be patient, deletion requests at commons sometimes need some time. -- Smial (talk) 21:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - unreliable statements by upload, apparently in an attempt to revoke the release - Jcb (talk) 22:52, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- K0_7zQY0oyqcz, what evidence have you got to show whose files these are?... --Gryllida 23:20, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- ##The following were copied from Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bulb (photography).jpg. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:33, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Question: can you provide a bit more detail; did Martin Emmert take the picture? How/why did you characterize it as your own work? Where did you get the images you are now saying are someone else's? You had asserted on your user page (which you recently blanked) that these were "self-photographed". What that a lie, or are you just changing your mind about contributing them to commons? Dicklyon (talk) 20:29, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Note: there are a whole bunch of images in this same state of change of mind. Can we somehow combine their nominations and discuss in one place? Dicklyon (talk) 20:42, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- I want to be deleted ALL my files, because they are actually all the ONLY work of Martin Emmert, redacted He didn't provide any rights to me to share these files on Wikimedia or Wikipedia. I uploaded all these pictures accidentially (as I know now). He just made all these pictures for my homepage, but I unfortunately used them illegally for wikimedia. Today I already got deleted three files from some of your friends because of alleged copyright problems. Now I don't want to have any more problems with all this wikimedia/wikipedia copyright problems. User:Jcb decided (arrogantly) to block my speedy of the File:Nikon rangefinder d.jpg. I can't erase this picture by myself now. So please erase now ALL the uploaded pictures under my account, they are ALL copyright violated!!! If more information is neccessary (I don't think so) I also would prefer at least to find someone to talk in German about this topic; Mr. Emmert also doesn't speak English at all.-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 21:23, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- Ich denke, wir können die Diskussion hier auch auf Deutsch führen. Was Dickylon wissen wollte: Wie kamst du dazu, diese Bilder als deine eigenen auszugeben - nicht nur beim Hochladen, sondern auch bis vor Kurzem auf deiner Benutzerseite? War das eine Lüge, oder möchtest du sie einfach nicht mehr auf Commons sehen? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 22:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- Hi Robert, ja genau, Ich hab ganz arg gelogen und würde jetzt gerne abschließend so schnell wie möglich das Thema Wikipedia/Wikimedia beenden. Dazu habe ich jetzt alles gesagt und bitte höflich um komplette Löschung aus rechtlichen Gründen (auch um Schaden von der Wikimedia abzuwenden, nicht wahr?)-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 22:30, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
- The trouble is that the license you granted cannot normally be revoked, unless we determine that there is a copyright violation. Your saying so is not enough. Probably someone who understands the OTRS system can contact the Martin Emmert, auf Deutsch, and ask him to provide evidence of ownership. Normally takedown requests need to come from the copyright owner. Dicklyon (talk) 10:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I provided all neccessary information and contact information to contact Martin Emmert. He is more than 70 years old, doesn't speak English and you just removed the contact information but don't provide any contact email adress to contact you. he is no member of any wiki and doesn't know much about computers. Now you consequently claim that I am a lyer and redo all my edits and declare it as vandalism. I don't have any other chance but to edit the files BECAUSE THEY DON'T BELONG TO ME!!! Do you understand that? AND THEY DON'T BELONG TO ANY WIKI. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? DO YOU DECIDE WHAT'S YOURS AND WHAT'S MARTIN'S PROPERTY? I think you are not different from every other commercial company and now show your real face. You just want to keep something that doesn't belong to you for free and now looking for any reason just to keep it illegally - booooh!-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 10:35, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I think this is what you need: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:OTRS. which says:
- The trouble is that the license you granted cannot normally be revoked, unless we determine that there is a copyright violation. Your saying so is not enough. Probably someone who understands the OTRS system can contact the Martin Emmert, auf Deutsch, and ask him to provide evidence of ownership. Normally takedown requests need to come from the copyright owner. Dicklyon (talk) 10:04, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I am the copyright owner and my image is being hosted on Commons without permission.
- Send us an e-mail (to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) with as much information as possible, such as who you are and where the document was published previously.
- (also says it may take a while, like 15 days). He would need to list the images to be taken down; you can prepare the list for him. Dicklyon (talk) 10:12, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- I will tell him, but he won't understand it...-K0_7zQY0oyqcz (talk) 10:38, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- If these weren't taken by you, why did you upload them in the first place, and why is it suddenly now important that they be removed? -mattbuck (Talk) 10:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - File:Photographer 70ies with Linhof Technika III.jpg shows a photographer, who appears to in fact be K0_7zQY0oyqcz. -mattbuck (Talk) 10:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Judging from de:Benutzer Diskussion:kjunix#„Datei:Teufel - Logo.jpg“ konvertieren this user tries to get all his own images deleted using false/fake claims of an authorship by someone else. BTW at AN/U the acclaimed author was said to be 70+ years old so the image above may show someone else. --Denniss (talk) 11:14, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- It did look like the photo he provided. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:39, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Restoring of the removed usage will be needed. Jcb (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep. in my opinion User:K0_7zQY0oyqcz try to revoke own work (pictures here on commons and parts of articles on de.wp). He also try to "delete" complete articles on de.wp, for example: de:Maske (Bildbearbeitung).--Wdwd (talk) 13:31, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep IMO seems to be a misguided attempt to revoke own work! Jacopo Werther iγ∂ψ=mψ 14:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Info ticket:2014020910006751 relates to this deletion request. Should appropriate evidence be provided on OTRS, then this DR will be updated with an explanation of what has been verified for the closing admin. --Fæ (talk) 15:37, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- This ticket seems to come from uploader himself. Jcb (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- As you are involved in this case it would be better if you avoided publicly speculating on emails related to this ticket. If I have any information to support discussion in this DR, or for the attention of the closer, my comments will be based on verified facts. --Fæ (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- The fact I based myself on was stored as a note in the ticket. Jcb (talk) 20:52, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- As you are involved in this case it would be better if you avoided publicly speculating on emails related to this ticket. If I have any information to support discussion in this DR, or for the attention of the closer, my comments will be based on verified facts. --Fæ (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- This ticket seems to come from uploader himself. Jcb (talk) 19:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Info User F.G. has a new alias. To me this looks like Frank wants to clean his name of the Wikipedia. Btw similar images like File:Cristo3.jpg and File:Cristo5.jpg you can find in the profile of someone called "Frank G." at www.fotocommunity.de --Cepheiden (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Too many pictures are taken with a digital still camera and uploaded to commons just a few minutes after. If F. G. isn't really the photographer he should provide a much better story why he uploaded quite a lot fresh taken pictures of a 70+ person without any permission over a time frame of more than 2 years and always name himself as the source/copyright holder.--Cepheiden (talk) 18:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Speedily deleted as copyright violations per ticket:2014020910008697. We received background informations about this incident which appear to be sufficiently plausible to delete the whole lot per COM:PRP. These informations address also some of the unanswered questions above. In addition, I performed background checks that did not reveal anything which is in conflict to the informations given to us. However, I cannot disclose anything of this for privacy reasons. --AFBorchert (talk) 20:54, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
I am the owner and the uploader of this photograph. I have replaced it with Werner_Erhard_2.jpg. All links to this photograph (on English Wikipedia and on Swedish Wikipedia) have been updated to reflect my change. This photograph is no longer linked anywhere on Wikipedia. Please delete it ASAP. Thank You. Laurenceplatt (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, File:Werner Erhard 2.jpg is a totally different picture from File:Werner Erhard.jpg. -- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per Cirt -- we often keep more than one image of a person. "Unused on WMF" does not mean that it is not in use elsewhere . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:26, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
I am the owner and the uploader of this photograph. I have replaced it with Werner_Erhard_2.jpg. All links to this photograph (on English Wikipedia and on Swedish Wikipedia) have been updated to reflect my change. This photograph is no longer linked anywhere on Wikipedia. Please delete it ASAP. Thank You. Laurenceplatt (talk) 19:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, File:Werner Erhard 2.jpg is a totally different picture from File:Werner Erhard.jpg. -- Cirt (talk) 00:04, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Per Cirt -- we often keep more than one image of a person. "Unused on WMF" does not mean that it is not in use elsewhere . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:26, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
No scope, we have SVGs of the Spanish flag. Fry1989 eh? 19:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:26, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Looks like a photo of a 3D thing, so I'm not sure if {{PD-ineligible}} really applies. Stefan4 (talk) 19:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: 3D is not the issue here -- in order to keep this, we need to know that the distinctive Chevrolet logo is PD. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
No scope. Fry1989 eh? 20:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Are any of the following in scope?
- File:Flag-map of Greater Finland.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Argentina.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Armenia.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Hungary.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Somalia.svg
- File:Flag map of Greater South Africa.png
- File:Flag-map of the Greater Netherlands.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Nepal.svg
- File:Flag-map of the Greater Philippines.svg
- File:Flag map of Greater Romania.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Slovenia.svg
- File:Flag-map of Greater Croatia.svg
- If so, what distinguishes them from the nominated image? —Psychonaut (talk) 17:10, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think any of them have scope. What's your point? Fry1989 eh? 19:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "have scope". Do you mean "are in scope"? —Psychonaut (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- The two are the same thing. They have no SCOPE. Fry1989 eh? 20:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you say so, but I find it strange that policy you cite doesn't use the term in the same way you do. It says that Commons has a scope, and that the individual media files it hosts are or are not in that scope. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
- The two are the same thing. They have no SCOPE. Fry1989 eh? 20:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by "have scope". Do you mean "are in scope"? —Psychonaut (talk) 20:13, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think any of them have scope. What's your point? Fry1989 eh? 19:20, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep The image serves to illustrate irredentist claims over Greater Syria and is in scope on that basis. Such flag-maps are common nationalist propaganda—one sees them all the time on posters, lapel pins, etc. As hinted at above, there are dozens already on Wikipedia and/or Commons, many of which are in use to illustrate nationalist claims. See Category:Irredentism and Category:SVG maps incorporating flags - Irredentist. I suspect this nomination isn't really about scope but more about User:Fry1989's ongoing dispute with the uploader. Fry1989 himself has uploaded many similar images such as File:Flag map of Greater Romania.svg and File:Flag map of Greater Italy.svg. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:30, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
- I was asked personally to make those two, and they have historical context where Italy and Romania actually controlled the lands shown in the map. These irredentist claimant maps are sketchy at best. Fry1989 eh? 16:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
No reason was given for the keep and this map is historically anachronistic. The flag shown did not even exist until the 1950s. Unlike the two maps listed that I uploaded, this does not have historical context. It is a fiction. Fry1989 eh? 15:49, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Nearly all irredentist maps are historically anachronistic, as they reflect expansionist aspirations which may never have been realized in the past, or which may have been realized but never together at the same time in history. This is doubly true of flag-maps, since national flags rarely remain constant across history. Applying your criteria consistently would eliminate the vast majority of irredentist maps on Commons, whether or not they contain flags, and therefore deprive Wikimedia projects of a considerable amount of educationally useful material. (I should point out that, contrary to your claim, your own flag-map of Italy is just as fictional and ahistorical as this one; the flag it depicts also never flew over the entire territory shown.) —Psychonaut (talk) 17:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- A version of that flag did, all it's missing is the Savoy arms so it's easily fixed. This is different, this flag didn't exist over any of the lands shown in the map in any form. Honestly I think most of these irredentist maps should be deleted, they're nonsense, but we're focusing on this one right now. If you want the others to go, nominate them yourself, don't try and use the fact I haven't nominated them as a reason for this one to stay. The criteria is different from map to map. I think you're more interested in obfuscating this issue by bringing up other stuff, then in dealing with the validity of this map and whether or not it should be here. Fry1989 eh? 17:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not citing the fact that others similar maps haven't been nominated as a reason for this one to stay. I'm saying that the issues you are complaining about are inherent to such maps, but this doesn't affect their educational usefulness, as demonstrated by their inclusion on many Wikimedia projects. Irredentist maps illustrate nationalist aspirations, not historical realities, and therefore are almost always fictional in some sense. (And as an aside, you're still wrong about your own map. The Italian tricolor, with or without the Savoy arms, never flew over Malta.) —Psychonaut (talk) 18:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Something that can me removed or fixed, it's still irrelevant to this map, this issue. You are trying to obfuscate, because your points aren't strong enough for this map. Tell me, why should it stay? Why should any of them stay? Fry1989 eh? 18:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I just did, twice (and once more in the previous deletion discussion above). If you haven't been able to identify my argument, that's OK; I trust the administrator closing this discussion will. —Psychonaut (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Not to my satisfaction, obviously, or else I wouldn't be asking you for another reason. Commons isn't the place for political aspirations, least of all anachronistic ones. Italy at one time controlled Libya, Tunisia, and the Balkans, under the green-white-red tricolour (with or without the Savoy arms), so it has a very clear historical context which is why I agreed to create it when it was requested of me. Syria has never controlled the lands shown in this map, least of all under the flag shown, It has no historical context. That's a very big difference between the two. Fry1989 eh? 18:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Also Syria Controled places in this map , Like Lebanon , Hatay , Diar Bekr and all the places in the map of Turkey , Mousle , Palestine , Jordan and Sinaa, this Picture is mixed with The SSNP Syria Greater Map , With the True Levant Before WWI
- Not to my satisfaction, obviously, or else I wouldn't be asking you for another reason. Commons isn't the place for political aspirations, least of all anachronistic ones. Italy at one time controlled Libya, Tunisia, and the Balkans, under the green-white-red tricolour (with or without the Savoy arms), so it has a very clear historical context which is why I agreed to create it when it was requested of me. Syria has never controlled the lands shown in this map, least of all under the flag shown, It has no historical context. That's a very big difference between the two. Fry1989 eh? 18:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I just did, twice (and once more in the previous deletion discussion above). If you haven't been able to identify my argument, that's OK; I trust the administrator closing this discussion will. —Psychonaut (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Something that can me removed or fixed, it's still irrelevant to this map, this issue. You are trying to obfuscate, because your points aren't strong enough for this map. Tell me, why should it stay? Why should any of them stay? Fry1989 eh? 18:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- I'm not citing the fact that others similar maps haven't been nominated as a reason for this one to stay. I'm saying that the issues you are complaining about are inherent to such maps, but this doesn't affect their educational usefulness, as demonstrated by their inclusion on many Wikimedia projects. Irredentist maps illustrate nationalist aspirations, not historical realities, and therefore are almost always fictional in some sense. (And as an aside, you're still wrong about your own map. The Italian tricolor, with or without the Savoy arms, never flew over Malta.) —Psychonaut (talk) 18:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- A version of that flag did, all it's missing is the Savoy arms so it's easily fixed. This is different, this flag didn't exist over any of the lands shown in the map in any form. Honestly I think most of these irredentist maps should be deleted, they're nonsense, but we're focusing on this one right now. If you want the others to go, nominate them yourself, don't try and use the fact I haven't nominated them as a reason for this one to stay. The criteria is different from map to map. I think you're more interested in obfuscating this issue by bringing up other stuff, then in dealing with the validity of this map and whether or not it should be here. Fry1989 eh? 17:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
178.61.35.103 18:09, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
if you didn't want to delete my pictures, you are trying delete what exactly i wanted to delete about syria, i think you are now retaliation.GhiathArodaki (talk) 17:59, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep In scope as it can be used in Syria and irredentism subjects. Tm (talk) 20:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Irridentist maps are in scope (and it's quite a fascinating subject as well). It doesn't seem to properly attribute the sources used however. It also seems to mix the French Mandate and Antun Saadeh's and the SSNP's greater Syria, without clearly mentioning it. If the file is kept, I think these issues should be addressed. Lemmens, Tom (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete unless proper sourcing is provided for the map. Without sourcing of some kind, it doesn't have any educational value. Rd232 (talk) 14:15, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- The source appears to be the Syrian Social Nationalist Party's map of Greater Syria, though the borders around the Persian Gulf are a bit off. This could conceivably be fixed through means other than deletion. Though I agree with the need for sourcing I should also point out that the vast majority of user-contributed maps on Commons, irredentist or otherwise, are not sourced at all. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- the vast majority of user-contributed maps on Commons, irredentist or otherwise, are not sourced at all - yes, it's a common problem with user-generated maps. All unsourced maps should be chucked out unless there's some case-specific reason not to. Rd232 (talk) 15:22, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
- The source appears to be the Syrian Social Nationalist Party's map of Greater Syria, though the borders around the Persian Gulf are a bit off. This could conceivably be fixed through means other than deletion. Though I agree with the need for sourcing I should also point out that the vast majority of user-contributed maps on Commons, irredentist or otherwise, are not sourced at all. —Psychonaut (talk) 15:14, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Rd232 said it best -FASTILY (TALK) 21:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Why did OTRS ever confirm permission for use of this image?!?!? It depicts characters that are protected by copyright!!! These kinds of images are NOT eligible to be used on Commons. SethAllen623 (talk) 20:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's not a derivative work of the characters (are they still copyrighted?), the main object of the image is the aircraft. --Denniss (talk) 20:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- The artworks on the aircraft are derivative work of the characters Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Sylvester the Cat, Tweety Bird, and Marvin the Martian, whose designs are copyrighted by Warner Brothers. If you don't want this image deleted and OTRS accepted it despite the aircraft's use of copyrighted character artworks, then maybe removing the infringing artworks would be a better alternative... --Seth Allen (discussion/contributions, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 15:07 U.T.C.
- Irrelevant. It only becomes a derivative work if you crop out/zoom onto the figures, other use is de minimis. --Denniss (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- WHAT!!!? The derivative images on this aircraft are a de minimis case!? And this image isn't even being used in articles on Wikipedia!!! Now I'm withdrawing this nomination! I'd rather close this discussion as Keep than allow it to continue any further.--Seth Allen (discussion/contributions, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 22:58 U.T.C.
- Irrelevant. It only becomes a derivative work if you crop out/zoom onto the figures, other use is de minimis. --Denniss (talk) 16:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- The artworks on the aircraft are derivative work of the characters Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, Sylvester the Cat, Tweety Bird, and Marvin the Martian, whose designs are copyrighted by Warner Brothers. If you don't want this image deleted and OTRS accepted it despite the aircraft's use of copyrighted character artworks, then maybe removing the infringing artworks would be a better alternative... --Seth Allen (discussion/contributions, Tuesday, March 19, 2013, 15:07 U.T.C.
Deleted: Two reasons to delete -- first, I do not think that de minimis applies here as the Warner Brothers characters are prominent on the aircraft. Second, the OTRS permission is for wikipedia and wikimedia -- it says nothing about wider use. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Only this image from his dog is his own work. The rest, unlikely. 10+ files already identified today as copyvio. File:Juventud2001.jpg may come from http://cajuventuduu.blog.terra.com.ar/2008/03/ = http://cajuventuduu.blog.terra.com.ar/files/2009/06/juventus.jpg (both: connect problems). IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material (missing exif etc.) so this one can't be believed either.
Gunnex (talk) 20:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- + File:Gente de Montecaseros.jpg, eventually grabbed somewhere from Facebook = https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-ash3/165777_130447303688246_4374865_n.jpg
- Gunnex (talk) 20:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering +5 today detected copyvios, User talk:Franco L (tons of copyvios) + block log.
- File:Daniel Garro.jpg
- File:Sarmiento juventud de Tilisarao.jpg
- File:Estadio Juan Gilberto Funes.jpg
- File:CS Estudiantes.jpg
- File:Hector Odicino - Pedro Benoza.jpg
- File:El Coliseo albiverde.jpg
- File:Debut Argentino B.jpg
- File:Omar "indio" Gallardo.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 10:36, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 08:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
Non-free logos (also are above COM:TOO).
--XXN, 17:09, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The current license is not applicable since all photographs in Germany are automatically copyrighted. For the image to be in the public domain, the author would have to be dead since 1943, so 1948 as the year of creation doesn't work for PD-old either. De728631 (talk) 21:16, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Hallo De728631, meine Stellungnahme zur Begründung deines Löschungsantrages:
Nach §2 Abs.1 Z.5 des geltenden deutschen Urheberrechtsgesetzes - UrhG - sind Lichtbildwerke geschützt. Aber es gibt Ausnahmen -
Ich habe mich beim Hochladen dieses Fotos einer Firmung vom 5.10.1948 auf §50 Berichterstattung über Tagesereignisse gestützt. Durch beidseitiges Zuschneiden vor dem Hochladen habe ich den Kardinal etwas hervorgehoben.
Insbesondere ist aber zu berücksichtigen, dass nach §72 Abs.3 das Recht nach §2 bereits "fünfzig Jahre nach der Herstellung ... " erlischt.
Ich hoffe damit deine Bedenken zerstreut zu haben.--Rollroboter (talk) 20:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Die Frist von 50 Jahren für Fotografien war mir neu. Allerdings besteht dann immer noch das Problem der URAA, wodurch Werke in den USA automatisch geschützt wurden, die am 1. Januar 1996 auch im Urheberland noch unter Schutz standen. Wenn das Bild also 1948 entstanden ist und veröffentlicht wurde, hat es laut dieser Tabelle eine Schutzfrist von 95 Jahren in den USA, und kann hier nicht hochgeladen werden. Und die Sache mit der Tagesberichterstattung bezieht sich ausdrücklich nur auf die Wiedergabe in Medien wie Runkfunk, Film und Presse zum Zwecke eben jener aktuellen Berichterstattung, aber es bedeutet nicht, dass solche Werke automatisch ihren Schutz verlieren und hinterher für andere Zwecke frei verwendet werden dürfen. De728631 (talk) 22:42, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
- Zum URAA kann ich nicht Stellung nehmen.
Das Foto habe ich hochgeladen, um es im Artikel "Michael von Faulhaber" der deutschen Wikipedia zu verwenden. Nach §72 UrhG ist die Schutzfrist Ende 1999 abgelaufen. Eine Publikation in einem ausländischen Medium ist von mir nicht beabsichtigt. Man könnte daher das Foto direkt in die deutsche Wikipedia hochladen. Dort wird aber geraten, in Commons hochzuladen (daher das ganze Schlamassel). - Oder ist eine entsprechende Lizenzeinschränkung möglich?--Rollroboter (talk) 22:10, 18 March 2013 (UTC)- Die Vorlage Bild-PD-alt hat einen ausdrücklichen Hinweis, daß man solche Bilder bitte nicht einfach nach Commons übertragen möchte, also sollte das Bild besser dort hochgeladen werden. De728631 (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Demnach habe ich also einen Fehler gemacht. Wie soll ich weiter vorgehen?--Rollroboter (talk) 20:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keine Sorge. Ich würde vorschlagen, dass du die Datei lokal bei de.wiki mit der o.g. Lizenz hochlädst. Du könntest auch gleich auf der Diskussionseite der Bilddatei bei de.wiki einen entsprechenden Hinweis auf die URAA und auf diese Diskussion anbringen, damit andere Benutzer wissen, worum es geht. Und die "globale" Kopie hier auf Commons wird dann wohl über diesen Antrag gelöscht. De728631 (talk) 16:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
- Demnach habe ich also einen Fehler gemacht. Wie soll ich weiter vorgehen?--Rollroboter (talk) 20:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Die Vorlage Bild-PD-alt hat einen ausdrücklichen Hinweis, daß man solche Bilder bitte nicht einfach nach Commons übertragen möchte, also sollte das Bild besser dort hochgeladen werden. De728631 (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
- Zum URAA kann ich nicht Stellung nehmen.
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Frank Treak (talk · contribs)
[edit]Thank you for your contributions. The images seem to be from OSM, so they are not copyright violations. However they are in the JPEG format ({{BadJPEG}}, PNG is preferred). Furthermore they are not used on any articles neither are they categorized. In this state they seem not be useful for commons or wiki and do not meet com:scope.
- File:Проспект князя Володимира (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Комсомольський бульвар (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Ярослава Мудрого (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Шевченка (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Таращанська (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Славіна (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Першотравнева (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Павліченка (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Офіцерська (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Олеся Гончара (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Митрофанова (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Логінова (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Леся Курбаса (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Лісова (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Леваневського (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Київська (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Зелена (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Гординського (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Голубина (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Гагаріна (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Бульвар 50-річчя Перемоги (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Водопійна (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Вернадського (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Вулиця Богдана Хмельницького (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Бульвар 1-го Травня (Біла Церква, Київська обл.).jpg
- File:Проспект князя Володимира (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Комсомольський бульвар (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Ярослава Мудрого (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Шевченка (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Таращанська (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Славіна (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Першотравнева (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Павліченка (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Офіцерська (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Олеся Гончара (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Митрофанова (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Логінова (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Лісова (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Леся Курбаса (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Леваневського (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Київська (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Зелена (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Голубина (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Гординського (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Гагаріна (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Вернадського (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Водопійна (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Бульвар 50-річчя Перемоги (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Вулиця Богдана Хмельницького (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Бульвар 1-го Травня (Біла Церква).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}
McZusatz (talk) 21:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Bad file format and out of Common's scope. --Leoboudv (talk) 07:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Frank Treak (talk · contribs)
[edit]Modern architecture located in en:Bila Tserkva, a city in central Ukraine: Unfortunately {{NoFoP-Ukraine}}. Nominating only the - IMHO - obvious files. There might be some other FOP-related images. File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 2.jpg eventually borderline as sun reflections cover most of the architectural elements. File:Льодова арена (Біла Церква).jpg is a sports arena opened in 2012.
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- File:Бульвар 50 років Перемоги (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:2-й Партизанський провулок (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 4.jpg
- File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 3.jpg
- File:ТЦ Королева (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 2.jpg
- File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 1.jpg
- File:Свічка (Біла Церква) 3.jpg
- File:Свічка (Біла Церква) 2.jpg
- File:Свічка (Біла Церква) 1.jpg
- File:Вулиця Гординського (Біла Церква)5.jpg
- File:Вулиця Гординського (Біла Церква)6.jpg
- File:Вулиця Гординського (Біла Церква)1.jpg
- File:Льодова арена (Біла Церква).jpg
- File:Бульвар 50-річчя Перемоги 35а Центр моди Королева.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
5.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
6.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Gunnex (talk) 18:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
- Delete All, including File:ТРЦ Гермес (Біла Церква) 2.jpg show enough copyrighted architecture to be non-free. --Eleassar (t/p) 17:20, 4 September 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:22, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soyjosephmelendez (talk · contribs)
[edit]The last remaining file (all other uploads by user = copyvios): Unlikely to be own work + IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material so this one can't be believed either.
Gunnex (talk) 21:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Uh oh Uh Oh Again (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope. Misleading file descriptions. No licensing (some of them doubtfully says "own work"). Enough doubts to believe that the pictured people in those private places have given their consent too.
—MarcoAurelio (talk) 22:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted and user blocked as sock Denniss (talk) 03:21, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Airports in Ghana
[edit]These photos show an airport in Ghana. 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.
- File:Takoradi Airport (Sekondi-Takoradi Airport), Ghana.jpg
- File:Takoradi Airport (Sekondi-Takoradi Airport).jpg
,_Ghana.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 22:52, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 23:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Wikijunkie as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: PD Albania exempt didn't match with Logos of sport clubs ... so license is wrong and this is a copyvio Mono 23:27, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Source site has explicit copyright. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:41, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Kari P Hojgaard nov09.jpg Colin (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- I prefer keeping the new file with EXIF data. /Ö 13:41, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Agree but other one was in-use so I wasn't sure what to do. If that can be easily fixed then the newer one is better. Colin (talk) 13:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Just tag the not-as-good one with {{Duplicate}}, with the name of the better file. A redirect would be tidied up by a bot which ensures that reliant projects get fresh links to the new file. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: but deleted and redirected the other one. JuTa 07:18, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Hogni Hoydal Nov09 (2).jpg Colin (talk) 13:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Note, I possibly nominated this the wrong way round. The older one is in-use but the newer one has EXIF data and better description and specific licence and working source url. Colin (talk) 13:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, that seems the case. File:Hogni Hoydal Nov09 (2).jpg appears to have been altered from the original, possibly being brightened, and more critically lost its EXIF data. I have marked this file as the duplicate. A redirect will sort out off-wiki links. I think this DR can be closed on that basis. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:03, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Issue resolved; Nov09 version is now a redirect Эlcobbola talk 16:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
Doppeltes Bild und Format ist zu klein Prussia (talk) 11:45, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:15, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
