Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/03/31
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 05:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:46, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:19, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 07:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Why would this be licensed under CC-BY-SA? I see no mention about licensing on the source page, nor on the 2007 version of the page. ilaiho (talk) 11:06, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Closing, i should have used {{Npd}} instead. --ilaiho (talk) 11:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons Znppo (talk) 13:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio moogsi (blah) 15:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect license. File is not in the public domain. It is from a copyrighted website. X96lee15 (talk) 00:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 16:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Completing an incomplete DR:
- This is not wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenkvD (talk • contribs) 2013-03-30T12:56:15 (UTC)
--JuTa 02:55, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons galleries are for collections of images, articles belong in Wikipedia moogsi (blah) 16:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Should never have been copied from EN Wiki - original image was from Northern Territory Library image PH0242/0024 and used under Fair Use doctrine. Rcbutcher (talk) 13:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Deleted per uploader request. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:51, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
FüUstgSBw neu - war bereits vorhanden (doppelt) Intenso (talk) 22:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: File and talk page, because uploaders request and no license at all. JuTa 16:14, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Empty category, ans also missing the logical mothercategory Arnhemse Scheepsbouw Maatschappij. Cycn (talk) 13:49, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 10:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Correct category: Category:Train station of Llançà JT Curses (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Morning ☼ (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
cozoravete 186.6.162.121 12:13, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep No reason for deletion. -- Herby (Vienna) (talk) 20:48, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Morning ☼ (talk) 10:01, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF Julo (talk) 07:49, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Web resolution, no appropriate EXIF and only upload of the user. Possibly a copyvio. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Possibly a copyvio Julo (talk) 07:46, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation, the file is copyrighted: http://www.gov.ro/victor-viorel-ponta-prim-ministru__l1a117005.html —G. Coronades | Do you have a question? 17:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright © 2008 Guvernul Romaniei Julo (talk) 07:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
This appears to be a newspaper scan; the copyright thus does not rest with the person who uploaded the content, rather the person who snapped the original photograph. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 14:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: newspaper scan, no properlicense Julo (talk) 07:48, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
- File:Silvanastraw004.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw005.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw010.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw011.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw012.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw013.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw014.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw015.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw016.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw017.JPG
- File:Silvanastraw019.JPG
Out of scope, not yet notable poet requests deletion of photos at private reading. -- Slowking4⇔ †@1₭ 23:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:12, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
"This file is in the public domain, because facebook" seems to be going in the wrong direction about PD status. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused modern text document. Also unclear origin. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Poor quality, limited scope. Fry1989 eh? 16:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Kept: No alternatives available. INeverCry 16:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Image is said to have been shot in 2011, which is impossible, as one of the depicted died in 1997. In addition, I found the same photo posted to a presentation at http://www.payer.de/kommkulturen/kultur13412.htm, which was created in year 2001 and in which this image is sourced to http://www.pondyarchdiocese.org.in/in_photogallery.htm with the access date July 20th, 2001. As the source site is no longer available, we can't be sure about the true copyright status. The new website of the diocesis at http://www.pondicherryarchdiocese.org is labeled as "© 2013 pondicherryarchdiocese.org, All rights reserved". -- Túrelio (talk) 18:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. This image was posted to skyscrapercity.com on 28 May 2012 by emsybax (originally it was posted to radikal.ru). There is no proof of {{Own work}}. Takabeg (talk) 12:17, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This image was posted to skyscrapercity.com on 28 May 2012 by emsybax. The own work claims of User:Vita86 and User:Bravissimo21 are doubtful. Takabeg (talk) 12:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE, low resolution and most of the image is unfocussed. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
A similar image can be found on IMDb, copyvio? Egon Eagle (talk) 16:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Official county flag, no evidence of release GrapedApe (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
promotional image with low educational value Rybec (talk) 20:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete as poster Motopark (talk) 00:45, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Spanish law applicable at the time states 80 andnot 70 years pma or after publication if author unknown Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 22:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:10, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
duplicate of SVG Antemister (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
duplicate of SVG Antemister (talk) 20:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
really, I do not know what kind of flag that is. I do not know about an ethiopian flag with that proportions. It seems to a self-created, fictitious image Antemister (talk) 20:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Per the copyright term[1] of the source website, this content is not free enough and surely not free for non-commercial use, which is a requirement for all uploads to Commons. -- Túrelio (talk) 12:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:01, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The source of the image is now at [2] (click "History" under the "About Us" tab). I can see no evidence on the website indicating that this image is freely licensed under a CC license. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Jan Špáta.png. Froztbyte (talk) 22:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: Commons is no private photo album High Contrast (talk) 17:05, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Unused personal image. Érico Wouters msg 20:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Unused, lossy format, low resolution; much better versions exist. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
contiene copyright sin permiso para ser utilizado en otro sitio o de forma libre. Crowix (talk) 20:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Source & author is Lucinda Bassett, but it needs OTRS permission that Ms. Bassett agrees to release the file under the given license. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of project scope, not a relevant subject. Trijnsteltalk 19:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't think this is eligible for PD-text logo Morning ☼ (talk) 05:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
I don't think source is Flickr. I didn't find it there after searching for some time. Possible sources: soundcloud.com, reverbnation.com. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
I'm not convinced that 144Man is the author. It's the only upload of 144Man on Flickr and file is already available on soundcloud.com and reverbnation.com (personal profiles of Mary Sarah).—Bill william comptonTalk 04:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- This is the source. I put it in the license. (AT least, I thought I did!)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/94500062@N05/8603277697/in/photostream 174.45.140.146 04:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Oops, didn't realize I wasn't logged in. Again, this is the source. http://www.flickr.com/photos/94500062@N05/8603277697/in/photostream
Comment: There is a source for this photo but only 1 photo on this account. At 2,048 × 1,367 pixels, the image should contain some camera metadata on Commons but there is nothing. It appears a little irregular to me and it is safer to Delete --Leoboudv (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Looks like Commons:Flickrwashing for me: single user upload of photo existed on many other websites. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted screenshot InverseHypercube 19:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Moumou82 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: suspicious as uploader's contributions are copyvios
Converted by me to DR as the mere suspicion is insufficient for copyvio-speedy. However, the same image in somewhat higher resolution had been uploaded as File:Béni Khalled06 08.jpg in October 2008 by the same uploader. It has been deleted in early 2010 for missing source/permission, probably due to the entry "Source=travail personnel". -- Túrelio (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
imho out of scope as being 'bio' of a single-file-uploader Roland 14:35, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Afghan copyright law has been updated since the last deletion request; this is no longer public domain. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
The image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- File:Minstrel poster in Alabama town by Walker Evans.jpg
- File:Walker Evans, Minstrel poster, Alabama, 1936.jpg
- File:Show poster in Alabama town by Walker Evans.jpg
- File:Walker Evans, Posters covering a building to advertise a Downie Bros. circus, Lynchburg, South Carolina, 1936.jpg
This was first published in 1936 by a US official, that doesn't take away the derivative work nature of this photograph Vera (talk) 12:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- I assume since the photograph was taken by someone in the employ of the United States Government (which makes it public domain), you are referring to the posters in the photograph? How then do you distinguish between the rather generic posters in these photographs, say, and the poster to be seen in the lower right hand corner of this Walker Evans photograph, which is accepted as Public Domain? File:Segregated_cinema_entrance3.jpg MarmadukePercy (talk) 21:42, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- de minimis, that poster is a negligable part of the photograph, these photographs here were intended to get the posters. --Vera (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, you're probably right: the estimable Walker Evans was simply snapping these shots to rip off the wonderful visuals of the posters. Your hair-splitting is skating on thin ice. MarmadukePercy (talk) 23:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- de minimis, that poster is a negligable part of the photograph, these photographs here were intended to get the posters. --Vera (talk) 23:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- While I have a moderate contempt for folks running around looking for perfectly decent photos to delete, I would argue that in these photos the (possibly) copyrighted images are the focus of the photo, where in File:Segregated cinema entrance3.jpg the copyright image is not the focus of the photo and the principle of de minimis applies. Therefore, unless I'm missing something, the photos are indeed derivative works. – JBarta (talk) 01:19, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- The question comes down to what is the focus of the photo, the buildings, the posters, the fact the posters are covering the building on this farm (which is why the worker was taking the photo in the first place, something comparable to landlord / tenant pictures) or the single poster which is well beyond the threshold of originality. The other posters are not copyrightable, they are too simple. If the purpose was to make an image of the single lion photo, it would be a problem, if someone crops to that image it is a problem. If the other posters, all of them, plus the building they cover, and to a lesser extent the other building and the farm always remain included it is ok. I think the viewer taking the image out of it's historical context, which is something we can't control, can have an effect on what the photo appears to be intended for.
- The cropping that has been done so far seems reasonable enough, but returning it to include the sides of the film is a coin-flip. Should be templated with a no-crop warning though. I have no opinion on keep or delete for this one. Penyulap ☏ 13:40, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see any copyright notices on the posters. Are they considered as published by putting them up on a building? If not then just tag with Template:De minimis the ones that are and add a note about the ones that aren't refering to pd-us-no notice.--Canoe1967 (talk) 19:48, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I don't think de minimis applies to the pictures I nominated. --Vera (talk) 21:53, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I just noticed File:Hells Angels Mural - Southampton.jpg. Someone should put that up. What is the FOP for grafitti in the UK?
- That Hells Angels death head is definitely copyrighted. Will add speedy delete tag. – JBarta (talk) 23:30, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I just noticed File:Hells Angels Mural - Southampton.jpg. Someone should put that up. What is the FOP for grafitti in the UK?
- @1Veertje/Vera: You are correct, de minimis does not apply to the pictures you nominated. – JBarta (talk) 23:35, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Image of an unremarkable person. Out of project scope. —Bill william comptonTalk 14:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The logo has a non-free counterpart on en.wiki and should likely be deleted. Diannaa (talk) 03:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:57, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
camel is a copyvio, and image has wrong proportions Antemister (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photograph of uploader. Used as a promotional mean on the EnWiki. Out of project scope. —Bill william comptonTalk 04:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Per cut watermark obviously cropped from a larger image. Shot using a professional camera model. Somewhat questionable that it's "own work" by 1-upload-user. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:08, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, outside project scope. moogsi (blah) 23:56, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:13, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: this image has no encyclopedic value. This image might have a certain personal value High Contrast (talk) 16:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Scope is not based on "encyclopedic" value, that would be a Wikipedia policy, rather than a Commons one. Perhaps you would like to amend the deletion request?
- Keep Commons has very few images that relate to the changes (globally) in dealing with harassment of women in the military and as seen during military campaigns. The fact that there are service personnel with their careers based on addressing this need is useful for the educational purpose of illustrating the topic.
- BTW, page moved to a far more meaningful name File:Sexual Harassment-Assault Response and Prevention representatives with the 1st Air Cavalry Brigade, 1st Cavalry Division 130325-A-WD324-004.jpg. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- No, any file on Commons must be realistically useful for an educational purpose (per COM:PS). This particurarly image shows Tommica Hewlett (left) and Misty Cady - this image could be realistically educationally reasonable if it would show them e.g. at work. That they are dealing with harassment of women is only recognizable due to the image caption/description. --High Contrast (talk) 17:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Yes indeed, "useful for an educational purpose" != "must be of encyclopedic value".
- I think this is rather subjective area. They are photographed in service, at work. If they were sitting at their desks, or on the phone, rather than standing I guess you might be happier, but this is a fine distinction. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 17:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- I personally go towards Keep on grounds of precautionary principle - better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. -mattbuck (Talk) 17:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- I personally go towards
- Yes indeed, "useful for an educational purpose" != "must be of encyclopedic value".
- No, any file on Commons must be realistically useful for an educational purpose (per COM:PS). This particurarly image shows Tommica Hewlett (left) and Misty Cady - this image could be realistically educationally reasonable if it would show them e.g. at work. That they are dealing with harassment of women is only recognizable due to the image caption/description. --High Contrast (talk) 17:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep In of scope: this image has encyclopedic value on sexual harassement, in paricular on the us military. Take for example the Sexual assault in the United States military article in the en Wikipedia that as ZERO images and yet this image is in its scope. Tm (talk) 16:09, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- For the benefit of anyone researching this topic, I have added a number of recent images to Category:Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month. This includes some relevant posters from the military. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 16:35, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: In scope per discussion. PierreSelim (talk) 18:22, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Scaled down duplicate of File:V&LA Wiki 2.jpg. Froztbyte (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by SamuelFreli as duplicate (Dup) and the most recent rationale was: licate|Schutzstaffel Abzeichen.svg moogsi (blah) 15:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 22:40, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Смнительное авторство, встречается фрагмент в интернете http://www.kinokopilka.tv/people/36343-yana-troyanova, http://www.timeout.ru/person/13533/ Dogad75 (talk) 18:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This is the exact same image that was deleted after this nomination: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tamotsu miyahira.JPG. It was uploaded under a different user name. Again there is no indication this user has the rights for this image. Michitaro (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
This is an image from the same webpage from which another image has been deleted after this discussion: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Miyahira at bukan.jpg. As with that image, there is no indication that the same user has rights over that image. Michitaro (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adil fayas.tp (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:04, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Anizotropia (talk · contribs)
[edit]Lots of suspicious uploads: derivative works of modern applied artworks of unknown origin; scans of Soviet envelopes (Template:PD-RU-exempt doesn't apply) with probably copyrighted pictures.
A.Savin 22:43, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
- Why would the copyright status of official Soviet first-day covers differ from the copyright status of Soviet stamps? -- AnonMoos (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- Afaik postcards and pictures on envelopes are not PD-RU-exempt. --A.Savin 11:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- However, an official first-day cover is just as much issued by a government agency as a stamp is, and I don't see anything in the wording on that template which would lead me to believe that they have a different legal status. Please look up "First-day cover" (though the English Wikipedia article isn't too useful in this respect)... AnonMoos (talk) 13:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
- AnonMoos, You do not understand, suppression of the first day is not removed. But these images contain original autor`s work. General Post Office of USSR and not be exempted from these envelopes copyright.--Agent001 (talk) 22:27, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- I really don't understand what you're trying to say. Both a stamp and a first-day cover are official documents released publicly by agencies of the Soviet government. I don't see anything in the wording of Template:PD-RU-exempt which differentiates between the two. AnonMoos (talk) 04:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- A.Savin, изображения не соджержащие оригинальной авторской работы (например такое) можно оставить хотя-бы на основании PD-trivial, или PD-text. Ну а художественные работы или фотографии, конечно, под нож.--Agent001 (talk) 22:33, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- Да. Проглядел несколько штук в VisualFileChange. Неохота теперь вручную проверять все на предмет тривиальности, впрочем, они и так нигде не используются и полезность для проекта - сомнительная. --A.Savin 23:53, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
- В список кроме конвертов также попали провизории, они являются знаками почтовой оплаты --Butko (talk) 10:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- A.Savin, тов. AnonMoos действительно не понимает о чем речь. Почтовые марки наклеенные на художественные открытки с рисунками и фотографиями не освобождают их (открытки) от АП - вот, что ему надо втолковать. --Agent001 (talk) 16:22, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
- И ещё марки в список попали --Butko (talk) 07:54, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){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}
Kept and Deleted
- First, please do not nominate 444 images for deletion unless they are closely related. These are from different countries and have different subjects. It is very hard to discuss or close such huge requests.
- Second, please do not remove the {{Delete}} tag from images before the DR is closed -- it slows down the closing process.
- I tried to distinguish between those covers that were obviously supplied by the Post Office, and therefore have the same status as stamps, and those that may have been supplied by third parties, as is sometimes the case with first day covers. I kept the former and deleted the latter.
- I also deleted all of the Mongolian images, as none appeared to have any permission from the photographer.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:32, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Cellioviolla (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-promotional images.
moogsi (blah) 19:01, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Christophpeter (talk · contribs)
[edit]No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Italy.
- File:27th March 2013 - Sign with the announcement of Iwona Chmielewskas picture book »눈« (»Eyes«) as winner of the Bologna Ragazzi Award (Fiction) 2013 at the 50th Bologna Children´s Book Fair.JPG
- File:27th March 2013 - Entrance area of the 50th Bologna Children´s Book Fair, sign with the winners of the Bologne Ragazzi Awards 2013.JPG
_as_winner_of_the_Bologna_Ragazzi_Award_(Fiction)_2013_at_the_50th_Bologna_Children%C2%B4s_Book_Fair.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
User's own artwork. Outside project scope.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
moogsi (blah) 00:09, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gumaro1985 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unrecognisable, possibly unremarkable person. Out of project scope.
—Bill william comptonTalk 03:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HanneloreGraubner (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Modern text documents.
- File:Lyrikbändchen.pdf
- File:Benutz die Eisenbahn.pdf
- File:Auf der Haustreppe.pdf
- File:Auf dem Kammweg.pdf
- File:Alles was Wurzeln hat.pdf
- File:Achtzehn weiße Höschen.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by HanneloreGraubner (talk · contribs)
[edit]copyright violation; no permission (nor by author nor by interpreter)!
- File:Klaviersonate fuer Bettina op. 21.ogg
- File:Blaeserquartett op. 19.ogg
- File:Streichquartett op. 18.ogg
- File:Drei Liebeslieder op. 16 nach eigenen Texten.ogg
- File:Blaesertrio op. 15 für Flöte, B-Klarinette und Fagott.ogg
- File:Buschekat op. 9.2 für Sprechstimme und Klavier nach eigenen Texten.ogg
- File:Die Igelei op. 9 für Sprechstimme und Klavier.ogg
- File:Sonate für Violine und Klavier op. 8.ogg
- File:Sonata piccola capricciosa op. 5 für Altblockflöte und Klavier.ogg
- File:Klaviersonate.ogg
Martin Sg. (talk) 20:20, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. — Racconish 💬 07:03, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kelvin Estrela (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photos of uploader. No educational value.
- File:Kelvin Estrella.jpg
- File:Kelvin Estrela.jpg
- File:481331 171885609632266 1344066762 n (1).jpg
- File:Kelvin estrela.jpg
- File:Kelvin estrela da silva.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
—Bill william comptonTalk 04:10, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete Commons is no private image host --High Contrast (talk) 17:07, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mondaine1000 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Source & author is Thomas Huebner. So, OTRS permission is required from this artist to host the images.
—Bill william comptonTalk 04:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Delete them quickly! No permissons expected... see also: de.Wikipedia --1971markus (☠): ⇒ Laberkasten ... 23:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:58, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sasli Rahmat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal image, out of scope
Morning ☼ (talk) 09:44, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:59, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Stpesi2010 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Needs evidence to support the claim that User:Stpesi2010 (who has had several uploads deleted as copyright violations) is Javier Larrea). The uploader claims to be the author of the photos, but according to the metadata of all but one of the photos (and File:Quienes somos.jpg was taken with the same camera), the author is www.jlarrea.com.
- File:Implantacion.jpg
- File:Agenda Digital.jpg
- File:Infoestructuras.jpg
- File:Euskadi Red.jpg
- File:Quienes somos.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 08:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:53, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sureshmaguire (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal photographs of uploader. Out of project scope.
- File:Suresh Savage-5.JPG
- File:Suresh Savage-4.JPG
- File:Suresh Savage-3.JPG
- File:Suresh Savage-1.JPG
- File:Suresh Savage-2.JPG
- File:Suresh Savage.jpg
—Bill william comptonTalk 04:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Богуславец.jpg
- File:Рисунок12.jpg
- File:Рисунок11.jpg
- File:МКОУ СОШ №24.jpg
- File:Стелла.png
- File:Рисунок9.jpg
- File:Рисунок8.jpg
- File:Рисунок6.jpg
- File:СДК.jpg
- File:Рисунок2.jpg
- File:Почта.jpg
- File:Школа 24.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
No uses, no sources and superseded by wikicharts. Cannot find any similar charts on the relevant pages on Wikipedia or references to this data NikNaks talk - gallery - wikipedia 18:23, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Not used is not a reason for deletion. Can you point out what this has been superceded by? As far as lack of sources for the data, you can always use Template:References missing. – JBarta (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's been superseded by embedded data charts which are the preferred method of displaying data of this kind, as it says on the image's page itself. Following the trail, the source appears to be this page which doesn't contain any data corresponding to this graph. I can't see it being used anywhere, as I can't find any similar images on the relevant pages on enwiki. NikNaks talk - gallery - wikipedia 20:54, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- So this particular pie chart hasn't been superceded by anything and the data is questionable. Keep and tag with Template:References missing. – JBarta (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
If this photograph was taken before 1946, and the author is unknown, then the author may still be alive, and as a result the image is not in the public domain, sadly! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Are there any other licences, which cover governmental photographs of WW2, e.g. by moving it as fair use onto the English Wikipedia? --NearEMPTiness (talk) 18:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- I think, {{PD-Scan|1=PD-UKGov|category=}} is applicable. --NearEMPTiness (talk) 13:54, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:07, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Is the Library of the Chilean National Congress the owner of the copyright of the Bachelet political campaign? Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 22:34, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
I just revovered {{PD-USGov-NARA}} , but this is depreciated. Is there any other fitting license template? JuTa 15:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: Possibly film might be pd for some reason, but there was no source link, and I failed to find any matching media in multiple searches of NARA.gov. -- Infrogmation (talk) 23:51, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate (90 degress rotating) of File:Cobra stone.jpg. Froztbyte (talk) 18:55, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Scaled down duplicate of File:Cobra stone.jpg. Froztbyte (talk) 18:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not right licens! Josve05a (talk) 14:51, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Could you elaborate? –moogsi (blah) 11:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
 | Proposed close: Kept Appears that proper release has been provided Alanscottwalker (talk) 01:06, 2 April 2013 (UTC) ~~~~  Done Closed per proposal. |
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyright. File copied from [3] See "Photo" discussion at [4] on English Wikipedia. New User needs help with proper release from third party. Alanscottwalker (talk) 21:48, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- please advise on proper release procedure, as I have received personal correspondence from the author granting free-use permission23:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- added license information provided by photo author to file. In addition it is important to note that the photo was not copied from [5] The sky is different in that photo. This photo was sent by the author to Prairie dog yeah.
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
The source says "Sent to me personally", but the uploader provides no evidence the sender provided permission to use this photo freely. Lpdrew (talk) 23:11, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Comment There is a duplicate file: File:Ratliff.jpg --JuTa 18:29, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY (TALK) 22:05, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Image is unlikely already free. Probably shot in 1940s and protected for 70 years after the death of the photographer. Neither the uploader, who has self-licensed it, nor the source is the creator of this photo. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
The same problem with File:Bock 4.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 21:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:40, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
No educational purpose, not in use Nikkimaria (talk) 02:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, linked to from sister projects as part of inclusion in category. Strong educational purpose, used to show contributions to Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. The article Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has been added into other language Wikipedias in a total of seven (7) languages. Used in gallery at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. -- Cirt (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Please note nominator Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) recently did a drive-by-nomination in an attempt to get three (3) related images disappeared and deleted from existence:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Mohammed by Jeff Walenta.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Momomo.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Dreams-of-a-ridiculous-man.jpg
-- Cirt (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's not used in the gallery at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day, or in any of the non-English versions of that article. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:25, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep It becomes really annoying that people use “It is not currently being used by Wikipedia articles” as a reason for deletion. I suggest they go and nominate articles on Wikipedia for deletion because those articles are not currently linked from the descriptions of any images on Commons. Sinnamon (talk) 02:31, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete this crap, even when I am deliberately trying to make crap I don't come up with something so obviously unfit for any educational purpose. Fails as a fail. Sheesh, go watch some nice insect porn instead. Penyulap ☏ 07:07, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep In scope, per several wiki articles about "Everybody_Draw_Mohammed_Day". Tm (talk) 12:15, 4 April 2013 (UTC)
the Elvis article has educational value,
so the image must have educational value too right ?
Wrong, the image itself has to have the educational,
not the article on the subject. Penyulap ☏ 15:20, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
This image is an out of scope, self-published work with no educational or encyclopedic value. There are plenty of other "Everybody draw Mohammed Day" images, but this one in particular regurgitates hate from an anti-Islam website that it is also guilty of promoting by containing a written-out url. You can read more on the founder of this website here: [6]. I struggle to understand why this image has not already been deleted from Wikipedia Commons. Aetius (talk) 18:10, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Kept: It's in-used on multiple articles. Sadly, racism and Islamaphobia is real and this article is being used on Wikipedia and other projects to depict that. If one wishes to renominate this file with another policy-based rationale, they are able to do so. I will defer to other administrators to review it. Happy holidays. --Missvain (talk) 19:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
No educational purpose, not in use Nikkimaria (talk) 02:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, linked to from sister projects as part of inclusion in category. Strong educational purpose, used to show contributions to Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. The article Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has been added into other language Wikipedias in a total of seven (7) languages. Used in gallery at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. -- Cirt (talk) 20:29, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Please note nominator Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) recently did a drive-by-nomination in an attempt to get three (3) related images disappeared and deleted from existence:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Mohammed by Jeff Walenta.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Momomo.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Dreams-of-a-ridiculous-man.jpg
-- Cirt (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Unless I'm missing something, none of these images are linked from sister projects. At least the global usage tool says so. --Conti|✉ 20:45, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- They're used in galleries at various projects, which for some reason doesn't show up on the usage tools in the same way. They're also part of a category from which users can select different images for different galleries to their liking. -- Cirt (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Do you have some examples? --Conti|✉ 21:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you check, you will see that any image linked to from the "gallery" function doesn't show up in the manner you are describing, unfortunately, even if they are in use. -- Cirt (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- I believe you, I'm just trying to find out where these images are used in our sister projects. --Conti|✉ 21:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- You don't have to believe me, if you check for yourself you'll see this issue of images that are used in galleries that unfortunately don't show up as being used, even when they most certainly are. -- Cirt (talk) 03:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe we're just talking past each other here, so I'll try again: I am trying to find the galleries in which this image is used. I genuinely do not know how to do that. Since you say above that the image is used, you must know where. Therefore I asked you to link me to one of these galleries. --Conti|✉ 11:13, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- See the link, above. Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. Please notice how images used in the gallery don't always show up as used in the usage tool? -- Cirt (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Geez, I really am blind. My apologies for that. :) --Conti|✉ 17:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- No worries. Apology accepted. And thank you for that! Most appreciated! Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Geez, I really am blind. My apologies for that. :) --Conti|✉ 17:59, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- See the link, above. Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. Please notice how images used in the gallery don't always show up as used in the usage tool? -- Cirt (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe we're just talking past each other here, so I'll try again: I am trying to find the galleries in which this image is used. I genuinely do not know how to do that. Since you say above that the image is used, you must know where. Therefore I asked you to link me to one of these galleries. --Conti|✉ 11:13, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- You don't have to believe me, if you check for yourself you'll see this issue of images that are used in galleries that unfortunately don't show up as being used, even when they most certainly are. -- Cirt (talk) 03:33, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
- I believe you, I'm just trying to find out where these images are used in our sister projects. --Conti|✉ 21:52, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- If you check, you will see that any image linked to from the "gallery" function doesn't show up in the manner you are describing, unfortunately, even if they are in use. -- Cirt (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Do you have some examples? --Conti|✉ 21:04, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- They're used in galleries at various projects, which for some reason doesn't show up on the usage tools in the same way. They're also part of a category from which users can select different images for different galleries to their liking. -- Cirt (talk) 20:47, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep It becomes really annoying that people use “It is not currently being used by Wikipedia articles” as a reason for deletion. I suggest they go and nominate articles on Wikipedia for deletion because those articles are not currently linked from the descriptions of any images on Commons. Sinnamon (talk) 02:32, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete this crap, even when I am deliberately trying to make crap I don't come up with something so obviously unfit for any educational purpose. Fails as a fail. Sheesh, go watch some nice insect porn instead. Penyulap ☏ 07:08, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
No educational purpose, not in use Nikkimaria (talk) 02:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Keep, linked to from sister projects as part of inclusion in category. Strong educational purpose, used to show contributions to Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. The article Everybody Draw Mohammed Day has been added into other language Wikipedias in a total of seven (7) languages. Used in gallery at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. -- Cirt (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Please note nominator Nikkimaria (talk · contribs) recently did a drive-by-nomination in an attempt to get three (3) related images disappeared and deleted from existence:
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Mohammed by Jeff Walenta.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Momomo.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Everybody Draw Mohammed Day - Dreams-of-a-ridiculous-man.jpg
-- Cirt (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- It's not used in the gallery at Everybody Draw Mohammed Day. What other Wikipedias is it used in? None show in file usage. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:22, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Just checked the non-English versions of that article, and none include this image. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:24, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete this crap, even when I am deliberately trying to make crap I don't come up with something so obviously unfit for any educational purpose. Fails as a fail. Sheesh, go watch some nice insect porn instead. Penyulap ☏ 07:06, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: No clear consensus to delete. FASTILY 04:30, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
