Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/04/26
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
.jpg){kind=link}
![11 File:Arenicola marina "lug worm".JPG](#File:Arenicola_marina_"lug_worm".JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![99 File:"... Não me diga..." (2112169849).jpg](#File:"..._Não_me_diga..."_(2112169849).jpg){kind=link}
Twitter bird is copyrighted, OTRS claim is not validated. Fry1989 eh? 02:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I tagged it for speedy deletion. --Atlantima (talk) 23:17, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: The Twitter bird logo has been deleted many times as copyrighted. –moogsi (blah) 00:04, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
There is no FOP in Tunisia, and there is no de minimis in this photography, as the photo of Ben Ali is clearly the subject. russavia (talk) 07:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I am fine with your de minimis argument. However, stating there is no FOP in Tunisia contradicts Commons:FOP#Tunisia. Moumou82 (talk) 15:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawing the nomination. FOP is ok in Tunisia, my apologies. russavia (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
De foto is eigenlijk onbruikbaar omdat het schip is wazig afgebeeld. トトト (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Deleted as part of upload cleanup russavia (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
No permission. Jcb (talk) 18:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- What do you mean "no permission"? This is my own work. --Anna.i.krylov (talk) 19:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- So you are the author of the postcard? In that case, could you send an email from a q-chem.com address to permissions-commons
wikimedia.org in which you state that you agree to release this image to CC-BY-SA 3.0? Please mention the filename in the email. Jcb (talk) 20:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- So you are the author of the postcard? In that case, could you send an email from a q-chem.com address to permissions-commons
Kept: This can be kept here for now, and we will apply normal COM:OTRS procedures to it russavia (talk) 14:26, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Commons:Fop#Bosnia_and_Herzegovina Bosnia H. don't have FOP Alan Lorenzo (talk) 00:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete No FOP for modern 3D art in Bosnia. The artist must be dead at least 70 years before the art becomes copyright free but this artwork dates to 1997. --Leoboudv (talk) 04:48, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:23, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
unused logo of a blog –moogsi (blah) 00:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Jcb (talk) 01:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Pure advertising. Unless the site itself becomes notable, which is highly unlikely, this has no use.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Jcb (talk) 01:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Pure advertising. Unless the site itself becomes notable, which is highly unlikely, this has no use.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Jcb (talk) 01:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Pure advertising. Unless the site itself becomes notable, which is highly unlikely, this has no use.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Jcb (talk) 01:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Blurry, not a good illustration. Unused. –moogsi (blah) 01:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
![01:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/04/26#c-Moogsi-2013-04-26T01:33:00.000Z-File:Arenicola_marina_"lug_worm".JPG){kind=link}
- Delete Agree with OP, there are many better photos in Category:Arenicola marina--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:38, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
![00:24, 3 May 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/04/26#c-INeverCry-2013-05-03T00:24:00.000Z-File:Arenicola_marina_"lug_worm".JPG){kind=link}
Professional photograph that has been in print and online publications (this image for example). If not delete as COPYVIO, then delete as self-promotional... the "Miss Universe" artwork and website address watermarks are unnecessary. Senator2029 01:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Almost certainly a copyvio, at minimum, OTRS permission if actually own work. (Uploader, claiming to be the subject, has only one other upload, which I have now nominated.)--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per above. -Pete F (talk) 17:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Scope? Fry1989 eh? 01:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete I do not know, how to use this image. And, really, it is not used. Taivo (talk) 14:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Joke picture, used in a speedily deleted article en:Ameristralia. Delete. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 17:33, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
logo / label spam. article submission declined 4x on enwiki. no notability Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete if the intended use is on an en.wiki article, better to go with fair use. --Sphilbrick (talk) 14:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no educational purpose SamuelFreli (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete Not used, bad quality. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 14:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete I can't believe that cat images are so thin on the ground at Commons that this would be needed--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted medal (only designed in 1988). In the source image it is de minimis, but this one is zoomed in. German FOP would not have covered it as it was not a permanent fixture. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Agree with OP. Acceptable in source image, but not when cropped. In en:wikipedia:Charlemagne Prize, we be better off with a better quality fair use, if no licensed image can be found or arranged. There's a better image here which could be used as fair use, or better yet, someone could try to get proper permission.--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:00, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution, no exif data, own work is doubtful russavia (talk) 06:12, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused and superseded by better-quality File:South Africa Flag 1910-1912.svg (and File:Flag of South Africa (1910-1912).png if we really need a raster version). Alkari (?), 26 April 2013, 06:13 UTC 06:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 00:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Part of spam activity. Brand labels without real need. Not in use. Bilderling (talk) 07:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete In scope, very useful. But without OTRS this is probably a copyvio. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The words "Artist's Rendition" suggest that this is a copyright violation of something made by the construction company. Also, a cropped copy of the image appeared here before being uploaded to Commons. Stefan4 (talk) 07:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Speedy Delete; now marked as such. Blatant copyright violation of this site. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Also here and the server seems to think that the file was uploaded there in 2010-08-02 (based on the server's "Last-Modified" HTTP header), which is prior to the upload to Commons. Stefan4 (talk) 07:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 08:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 08:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Previously published via http://www.metalplanaltina.com/2012/08/planaltina-comemora-153-anos-de-idade.html (2012, Copyright © Metal Planaltina - Brothers of Metal. All rights reserved.) = http://www.alo.com.br/userfiles/images/Pedra%20Fundamental.jpg or http://www.alo.com.br/userfiles/images/Pedra%20Fundamental%281%29.jpg (smaller res). http://www.alo.com.br is a Brazilian news portal and newspaper. Gunnex (talk) 08:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. Contains not self-created photos and illustrations. Martin H. (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 08:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 09:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. Martin H. (talk) 09:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Erreur sur la licence Bildoj (talk) 09:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused photo. Interesting, but useless without description. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Actually, all her other contributions are deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, very bad quality. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete worthless--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:03, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Violaciones de derechos de autor. Copyright infringement. teleмanίa (discusión) 11:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete Not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Violación de derechos de autor (Copyright violation) teleмanίa (discusión) 11:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete Not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 13:30, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Violación de derechos de autor (Copyright violation) teleмanίa (discusión) 11:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete Not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 13:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Screenshot from Festpedia site main page. The site is non-notable (no mention in English wikipedia). Also, the file is not used and too blurry for educational value. Taivo (talk) 12:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Bad unusable photo, doesn't show building nor useful for palm trees. There are several good photos already of Bacolod City Hall (such as File:Bacolod City Hall Building.jpg). P199 (talk) 12:49, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, too small for educational value. This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Insufficient copyright information. Does not specify where the image came from. This user has uploaded this image with missing or deceitful copyright claims before, and I believe they are doing it again now Richard BB (talk) 13:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 13:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unsure if the 1940 tube map is PD yet. If not, then this would be a derivative work. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:43, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No FOP for 2D works in the UK. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:58, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Creator's comment: I can't really argue with that. The map looks to date from between 1984 (when services when Harrow & Wealdstone became the terminus) and 1990 when the Hammersmith & City line became separately identified from the Metropolitan line (see Paddington). The patch in the bottom left is probably covering a note about H&W only being served by peak trains, suggesting the earlier part of the range, so 1984 itself is most likely. Thryduulf (talk) 18:02, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FOP for 2D works in the UK. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Thanks for spotting this, Holloway's stuff is rather mixed on copyright. I think our convention on London Underground graphics is to be cautious, so even though the creative content here is low, it is probably sufficient to fall under the precautionary principle. --Fæ (talk) 14:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- You'll love the other 10 LU DRs I filed today then. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Derivative work of the modern tube map, which is not PD. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No FOP for 2D works in the UK. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- creator's comment: I can't really argue with that. The map cannot be older than 1990 as the Hammersmith & City line wasn't separately identified before. then. Thryduulf (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Derivative work of the tube map. -mattbuck (Talk) 14:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
out of scope: Powerpoint PDF slides McZusatz (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 14:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 14:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
broken duplicate of File:Inspiration Mars Banner Graphic jpeg.jpg McZusatz (talk) 14:16, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Personal photo. No educational. Not useful. Alan Lorenzo (talk) 14:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence that this is in the public domain for any reason. Stefan4 (talk) 15:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
There is no Freedom of Panorama in the United States for artworks. Although this logo appears to be installed on a building, the art itself must not be reproduced. De728631 (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I thought this was ok, but you're certainly better informed than I am. With that said, I'm fine with this image being deleted. Thanks a lot for your administrative work here, which I highly appreciate. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely own work, as a less cropped version of this image was posted already in 2010 here. -- Túrelio (talk) 16:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder. Jespinos (talk) 16:56, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
copyrighted file. Taken from http://forum.ge/?f=30&showtopic=34026959&hl=ანხელის%20საიდუმლო&st=1170 or other sites. Older file on the other site. Jmvkrecords ⚜ Intra Talk 17:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
It appears to be a film/TV series screenshot. Jespinos (talk) 18:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - I've used VLC media player and I can attest that screenshots taken by that program have this filename format.--Atlantima (talk) 23:25, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 18:18, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder. Jespinos (talk) 18:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution and missing EXIF. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 18:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No permission. Jcb (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:35, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No permission. Jcb (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:37, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:37, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, no permission. Jcb (talk) 18:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 19:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Not compatible license. Available at http://fernandomendez1.wordpress.com/ Bestiasonica (talk) 20:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, outside project scope. –moogsi (blah) 20:30, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
unused, out of scope Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
As this is a screenshot of copyrighted software, unless the user Mmesamesa (talk · contribs) owns the copyright to the software, then they have no right to publish it as CC. I'm not convinced that the user is the copyright owner of the software. (The software company's website is http://www.floridaprobe.com) I am also proposing File:MainTabs.jpg for deletion by the same rationale. Atlantima (talk) 21:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 21:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
It appears to be a screenshot from a video interview. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 21:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused and superseded by better-quality File:Royal Standard of England (1406-1603).svg. Alkari (?), 26 April 2013, 22:15 UTC 22:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder. Jespinos (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
This quality is rubbish, I'll upload a higher res png tomorrow Rcsprinter123 (talk) 22:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Possible copyvio or out of scope. Jespinos (talk) 22:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, outside project scope. –moogsi (blah) 23:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
~20 other files by this user were copyvios, no reason to think this one isn't. –moogsi (blah) 23:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Low resolution and PNG format. Unlikely to be own work. Jespinos (talk) 23:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, not used. russavia (talk) 23:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 23:38, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused self-promotional image. Jespinos (talk) 23:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
I think it si copyrighted Badbuu1000 (talk) 13:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: As the author is listed as "Chandamama India Ltd", with a 1952 date, the 'anonymous' tag is wrong and the image is still in copyright MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Does not appear to serve any educational purpose. The uploader seems to have uploaded it solely for use on his user page on two projects. Safiel (talk) 15:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: See Scope: " by custom the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page of another project is allowed." MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:36, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I'm trying to think of a scope for this, but I can't think of one, so perhaps we either we delete it, or someone come up with some scope for it. russavia (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
![18:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/04/26#c-Russavia-2013-04-26T18:05:00.000Z-File:"..._Não_me_diga..."_(2112169849).jpg){kind=link}
Maybe crop out the left side, centering the little old lady? It would still be unbalanced, but at least would have some meaning. Keeping it like this with half a guy at the left is useless. (Or is there a cat for explamples of bad photography?) -- Tuválkin ✉ 19:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
![19:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/04/26#c-Tuvalkin-2013-04-26T19:39:00.000Z-File:"..._Não_me_diga..."_(2112169849).jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Actually, not a bad quality photograph, with an appropriate crop. Certainly of potential use MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
![06:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/04/26#c-MichaelMaggs-2013-05-03T06:38:00.000Z-File:"..._Não_me_diga..."_(2112169849).jpg){kind=link}
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
No COM:FOP in France for buildings.
- File:Firework Eurodisney 20 years (7000059854).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle Disney resort Paris (7149462253).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle Disney resort Paris (7149465795).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle Disney resort Paris (7149470141).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle Disney resort Paris (7149474803).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle Disney resort Paris (Explored) (7149477867).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}
_(7149477867).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
russavia (talk) 21:11, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No FOP in France
- File:Castell Eurodisney.JPG
- File:Castle 310315.jpg
- File:Disneyland - France - panoramio.jpg
- File:Disneyland Paris (19110667798).jpg
- File:Disneyland Park (Paris) - panoramio - 7777777kz (1).jpg
- File:Disneyland Park (Paris) - panoramio - 7777777kz.jpg
- File:Euro Disney Fireworks (2).jpg
- File:Musketeers in Disneyland.jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle (11759633024).jpg
- File:Sleeping Beauty Castle (9743232040).jpg
- File:Statuette de La Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h34 (10774).jpg
- File:Vitrail - Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h28 (10769).jpg
- File:Vitrail - Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h29 (10771).jpg
- File:Vitrail - Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h29 (10772).jpg
- File:Vitrail - Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h31 (10773).jpg
- File:Vitrail - Belle au bois dormant - 20150803 13h32 (10774).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_panoramio_-_7777777kz_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_panoramio_-_7777777kz.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}
Elisfkc (talk) 21:42, 7 December 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 19:51, 14 December 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Svalbard Global Seed Vault
[edit]The original source page (http://web.archive.org/web/20090220002339/http://croptrust.org/main/arctic.php) for the images only states "These photos are provided free of charge provided photo credit information is included. Also, more images of the vault and Svalbard are available under the section below "More Svalbard Images"", which is rather vague. But also, the images is available on flickr under cc-by-nc-sa (for example http://www.flickr.com/photos/croptrust/3851518425/in/photostream). I would assume this is the license author meant in the beginning, and thus makes them non-compliant with commons rules.
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault aerial view during late construction.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault cooling systems.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault main entrance 1.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault main entrance 2.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault opening tunnel.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault shipment.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault storage chamber with seed boxes 1.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault storage chamber with seed boxes 2.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault tunnel toward vaults.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault-ES.jpg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault-fr.svg
- File:Svalbard Global Seed Vault.jpg
- File:Svalbard vault mountain cutaway.jpg
→AzaToth 18:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files of User:Marcis Liors Skadmanis
[edit]Here are all files uploaded by user Marcis Liors Skadmanis:
They are all unused files and too small to have any educational value. His other contributions are also deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Anshul chauhan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images. Out of scope.
- File:Anshul chauhan designer.jpg
- File:Anshul chauhan (artist & designer).gif
- File:Anshul chauhan ( artist & designer ).gif
- File:P190711 19.09.jpg
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Commons is no storage for homework
- File:Bracelet problem.pdf
- File:F(1,6,n).pdf
- File:F(1,3,n).pdf
- File:F(1,5,n).pdf
- File:Bileklik Problemi (Bracelet Problem).pdf
- File:Bracelet Problem (Bileklik problemi).pdf
Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:26, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep Before immediately deleting, may be worth asking the editors at en:wikipedia:Necklace (combinatorics) if the images are of any use.--Sphilbrick (talk) 14:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)- Delete Files are not categorized or in any way prepared for use in Wikimedia projects. Though it is possible they could be put to use for educational purposes, there is no clear path to doing so. Also, PDF format is not likely to be very useful for Wikimedia's purposes. -Pete F (talk) 17:07, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Inappropriate use of pdf format. Commons:Project scope states that "Although PDF and DjVu file formats are permitted, they are expected to be used only in appropriate cases. There should be some reason for the choice of format that is in line with Commons' aims" MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:17, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Complete Control Management (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused files with no apparent use foreseeable
russavia (talk) 23:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Frexcompany (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gleeking98 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:Yubiel Dominguez23.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez22.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez20.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez19.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez18.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez16.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez17.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez15.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez14.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez11.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez13.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez12.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez10.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez9.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez8.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez7.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez6.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez4.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez5.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez2.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez3.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez1.JPG
- File:Yubiel Dominguez.JPG
Jespinos (talk) 23:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Greg mancina (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low resolutions and missing EXIF. The images are likely not own work.
- File:Randy Awrey 35 NMU 1975 National Champions.jpg
- File:Randy Awrey SVSU Head Coach.jpg
- File:Randy Awrey Defensive Coordinator Northern Michigan University.jpg
- File:Randy Awrey Saginaw Valley Head Head Football Coach.jpeg
- File:Randy Awrey.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jacknoxville1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-promotion only account.
- File:Jack & Los Five.jpg
- File:J.E.T.I.Z..jpg
- File:Christian Velazquéz Jack.jpg
- File:Circus Fire.jpg
- File:Felix Betanzos Conductor De Radio Patito HD.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 18:48, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Avión Melilla Airline Aeropuerto.jpg
- File:Avión Melilla Airlines.jpg
- File:Melilla pesquera.jpg
- File:Cuevas del Conventico.jpg
- File:Melilla nocturna.jpg
- File:Hospital del Rey Melilla.jpg
- File:Edificio Melul.jpg
- File:La Reconquista.jpg
- File:Puerto melillense.jpg
- File:Port de Melilla.jpg
- File:Cala Melilla.jpg
- File:Melilla la vieja.jpg
- File:Melilla.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:06, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely own work. All photos are various resolutions, including some fairly small, and missing EXIF. The uploader has uploaded many other copyright violations (see talk). Based on their username, they might work at Melilla Airport (MLN), however they still are likely not the photographer of these photos.
Some photos can be found on the internet without a free license prior to being uploaded here, though at lower resolutions: File:Melilla Airport platform.jpg at [1] credited to the airport, File:Landing at Melilla airport.jpg at [2], File:Melilla Airport stairs.jpg at [3].
If the uploader is the photographer or copyright holder, please contact COM:VRT to provide appropriate permission.
- File:Melilla Airport facade.jpg
- File:Melilla Airport platform.jpg
- File:Melilla Airport stairs.jpg
- File:Melilla airport hall.jpg
Consigned (talk) 22:13, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: user has not responded to requests to provide additional verification. --Bastique ☎ appelez-moi! 00:22, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Low resolutions and missing EXIF. The images are likely not own work.
Jespinos (talk) 16:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Malek 1990 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images. Out of scope.
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Monica y Bryan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Mere text contributions using some not self-created illustrations. Out of scope per Commons:Licensing and Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content.
- File:Diapositiva6.GIF
- File:Diapositiva5.GIF
- File:Diapositiva4.GIF
- File:Diapositiva13.GIF
- File:Diapositiva12.GIF
- File:Diapositiva integracion.GIF
Martin H. (talk) 09:33, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal images.
Jespinos (talk) 23:15, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Omaranabulsi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
| Full list of files |
|---|
* File:258A9403.jpg
|
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Comment not sure about these. I can imagine that some, for example File:258A0343.jpg this might have some value. However, what's the difference between that image and File:Nairobi - Wikipedia Zero - 258A0343.jpg. Is it the same image, with a better title. Is this list being considered for deletion because the better titled images now exist? If all have been uploaded with a better tile, then delete all these, then let's discuss the better titled images, some of which are useful, but the uploader should have been more discriminating, not simply uploading every image.
- Some of these images may be useful for this Wikipedia Zero page but no need to upload dozens.--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:58, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. INeverCry 00:46, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Omaranabulsi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons:Derivative works from billboard.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Paulamacke (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Rappervilrotta66.jpg
- File:Edueedinael.JPG
- File:Edevalediego.JPG
- File:Swingdacohab.jpg
- File:Osmeninosdacohab.jpg
- File:Golzinho.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:09, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal images.
- File:Julio Galiano reporteando.JPG
- File:Jules 2012.jpg
- File:Julio Galiano.jpg
- File:Julio Galiano en Clase.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 23:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Samir Tila-zadə (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder of the images.
- File:President Obama's Final Inaugural Staff Ball Eli's Cheesecake.jpg
- File:The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.jpg
- File:Disney World's 25th Birthday.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 22:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Yanilatina (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope, unused personal images. Non-notable singer.
Jespinos (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
No evidence uploader is the copyright holder of the images.
- File:Ali akalthmey.jpg
- File:Dfghjkl.jpg
- File:Chiryan 1.jpg
- File:محمد الكنهل ( ممثل ).jpg
- File:صفي الرحمن المباركفوري.jpg
- File:محمد بن شايخ.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 16:44, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
wegen der jugend 89.0.94.191 07:34, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep This is not a valid reason. Das ist nicht gut Grund. Taivo (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep Wegen der jugend. Das ist nicht gut Grund. Also public place, publicly known porographic actresses, image in scope, and if you dont like it dont look at it, as i have to ask as the IP got to this image as all 14 categories, only 1 is not related to nudity, erotic or pornographic content, and being that this Ip speaks german and that the porographic actresses are german i really would like to know how he managed to finf this image. Tm (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Not educationally useful Fixpol (talk) 13:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep How do you reckon that? It's a clear & focused shot showing an erotic dance. Certainly could be useful for some purpose - presumably university level. Tabercil (talk) 16:54, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
- Keep Clearly in scope, previously kept. Also nominator (or moral cursader?) is blocked for 1 day for mass nominating this type of files with spurious reasons. Tm (talk) 21:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:15, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Copy of Boda de belbachir1.JPG Kmeleon59 (talk) 14:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of Valino.jpg Kmeleon59 (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate of Franco1.JPG Kmeleon59 (talk) 14:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:20, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
This 'diploma' is a joke. A nice one, but still misleading. I was sceptical about the typography, but now that I've read it, it's clear: it meantions "Fetze Alsvanouds" of the Dutch television program nl:Het Klokhuis (Latinized as Horologii Domus). Pbech (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
BLP violation Kevin Gorman (talk) 20:20, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Unclear date of signature. If this is from 1969 or earlier, it runs afoul of Commons:When to use the PD-signature tag#United Kingdom. If it is later, Switzerland probably has laxer threshold of originality laws. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 10:21, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't think the Flickr uploader holds the license - it's still on sale at Gettyimages.com as a rights managed image. Ytoyoda (talk) 17:50, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: It indeed looks strange. I sent an email to the flickr uploader to ask to clarify. Maybe he is only selling the high resolution version on Getty and released the low resolution version on flickr under CC-SA-BY? Optimale (talk) 08:33, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright too uncertain to keep this, without more information MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:20, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Files on User:LariCamargo
[edit]These files are uploaded by user LariCamargo:
- File:Big Bactus Brasil.jpg
- File:Esther Lira.jpg
- File:Gabriel Ferrão.jpg
- File:Larissa Camargo.jpg
- File:Luana Pereira.jpg
They are all unused files and they seem to be shots from some Brazilian TV show. She has uploaded 4 more files, all about the same show, but they are used in Portuguese wikipedia on pt:Geração bactus. This article has very dubious quality and license "own work" seems also dubious, therefore I list them also:
- File:Bactus com Harlem shake.jpg
- File:Geração Bactus.jpg
- File:Rodinha do Acampamento.jpg
- File:Team Bactus.jpg (this one is not for deletion).
The last one is pure text logo and as such ineligible for copyright, so does not need deletion. Taivo (talk) 11:28, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: None of these appear to be own work, as claimed. Leaving the last as it is below the threshold for copyright protection. MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:16, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 颐园新居 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: 请求删除原因:与其他文件完全重复File:Minsk stern.JPG质量更好
Converted by me to DR, as this is not a full duplicate of File:Minsk stern.JPG. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 11:06, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
The uploader is himself in the pic. This is most likely to be a government work of which the uploader has a physical copy. At any rate, no clear information about the author/copyright holder. No EXIF data present. Since the image was taken only in 2000s, it's too early for it to be a PD. Not used in article namespaces on any of the projects. Rahul Bott (talk) 06:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Comment the file is in use en:User:Prakash Kumar Meher and en:Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prakash Meher. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC).
- Yes, but that article request has been denied for want of notability. And, this is not an own work which can be used in Userspace. This is most likely a govt. work. Rahul Bott (talk) 05:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Note: There are additional arguments on the image talk page. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 06:49, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Delete The comments above and those on the file's talk page indicate significant concerns that the uploader is not the copyright owner. We should delete on the precautionary principle. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 11:17, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Question On my Facebook profile, I've posted a pic of me taking a university gold medal from a union minister in India. The pic was taken from my camera by my friend. Am I not the copyright holder of the pic? Of course, the picture is not placed anywhere on Commons. Hindustanilanguage (talk) 12:08, 4 May 2013 (UTC).
HL, the uploader nowhere says that the pic was taken by some of his friend. May be he might claim that now. To me, it looks more like a government work of which the uploader has a physical copy. Notice that there is no metadata. Also just a note that most of the other files uploaded by user have been deleted.
Another aside that we might also need an OTRS confirmation for this user himself, as he is a notable personality who has an en.wiki page. Rahul Bott (talk) 15:37, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 23:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Violación de derechos de autor (Copyright violation) teleмanίa (discusión) 11:29, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for my bad english: I request someone to delete this file the same way others where deleted. Those deleted files are:
- Antena_3.png
- Logo-Antena-3.png
- Logo_Antena_3_1990_2.png
- Logo_Antena_3_1992.png
- Logo_Antena_3.svg
- Antena3D.png
- A3Canarias.png
- Antena3logo2009.jpg
- Antena_3_logo_20_años.jpg
Thanks. Albertojuanse (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete Not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 13:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
Delete per Taivo. --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Donperfectodewiki
[edit]
Did you realise this file is just geometric figures? --Donperfectodewiki (talk) 13:57, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
- I'll say the same that I said in the Wikipedia:
- In Spanish:
- "¿Me está usted diciendo que una figura compuesta por un sector circular de unos 120º de apertura que no tiene por centro el propio centro de la circunferencia coronado por dos mitades de un ovoide achatado y puntiagudo; todo ello coloreado con un degradado de cierto tono de naranja a otro es una figura simple?"
- In English:
- "Are you saying that a shape composed of a circular sector of about 120 º degrees of openness that its center is not the circle center topped by two halves of a sharppened and flattened ovoid, all colored with a gradient of certain tone of orange to another is a simple figure?."
- I still think this. Saludos. Albertojuanse (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep English: Effectively {{Pd-shape}} aplies here.Español: Efectivamente {{Pd-shape}} aplica aquí.Amitie 10g (talk) 00:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 23:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:15, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:01, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
where is permission of http://www.bgspotters.net/pictures/pic.php?subm=3&oprt=2&form_PicId=24401 ? 85.237.211.190 10:19, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep In bgspotters site it is written under photo, that uploader Lzdimitar is author and copyright owner. What other permission is needed? I would say: the license is correct. Taivo (talk) 13:22, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
If uploader and author of the photo are not the same person, the author Lzdimitar must have released the photo under a licence which is being accepted by Wikimedia Commons, for example a Creative Commons licence. This licence must have been written on the source page of the photo or transferred to Wikimedia Commons on a different way (see OTRS). 85.237.212.90 17:39, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
- Uploader and author are obviously the same person, they have the same username. And if you suggest to release the file under Creative Commons license, then the file is released under Creative Commons license. Nothing wrong here. Taivo (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Getty Images photos from the TechCrunch Flickr account
[edit]- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 II.jpg
- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 IV.jpg
- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 III.jpg
- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 III.jpg
- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 II (crop).jpg
- File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 I.jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
All the above images are listed on Getty Images as rights-managed, for sale photos. I don't think TechCrunch can release these photos as their own. --Ytoyoda (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- My understanding is that these were work-for-hire: "Photo by Paul Zimmerman/Getty Images for TechCrunch/AOL", and TechCrunch uploaded the images on their Flickr page, releasing their images CC-BY. Here's a more recent addition to their account, and I'm assuming with the upcoming Disrupt 2013, they'll have more photos from there. Am I misinterpreting the finer points of photo licensing maybe? – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 19:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- I figured that work-for-hire was a possibility, but Getty Images seems to treat these photos like regular, rights-manged, not-released photos, with pricing based on usage, etc. It could be work for hire, or it could be that whoever manages the TechCrunch Flickr account is using their default license setting regardless of source. --Ytoyoda (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- In that case, maybe I should get in touch with TechCrunch. They could very well be uploading images and not even be aware of what they're doing in terms of licensing. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- I've emailed them through their Flickr account. That's the most I can do without tangling things up by emailing other TechCrunch addresses for the moment. If they can't provide an answer, then the images here should probably be removed. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:14, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- In that case, maybe I should get in touch with TechCrunch. They could very well be uploading images and not even be aware of what they're doing in terms of licensing. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 00:07, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- I figured that work-for-hire was a possibility, but Getty Images seems to treat these photos like regular, rights-manged, not-released photos, with pricing based on usage, etc. It could be work for hire, or it could be that whoever manages the TechCrunch Flickr account is using their default license setting regardless of source. --Ytoyoda (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I think this would make a suitable replacement: http://www.flickr.com/photos/novecentino/3100605031/
- Thanks, and File:Marissa Mayer at LeWeb 2008 conference in Paris.jpg could work too. Ytoyoda (talk) 01:21, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
- No word from TechCrunch; and no sense in treading confusing waters. I've replaced all uses of File:Marissa Mayer at TechCrunch 2012 II (crop).jpg with File:Marissa Mayer, 2011 Interview (crop).jpg. Hope that works for a suitable replacement, even if temporary. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 07:54, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Recent upload with the same problem: File:Adam Cheyer.jpg. --Túrelio (talk) 14:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have clear, explicit written/textual, tangible evidence indicating that these files are indeed freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we cannot host them on Commons FASTILY 23:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [4]. Yann (talk) 05:28, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Getty Images photos from the TechCrunch Flickr account 2
[edit]per above These images indicate a potential Getty copyright in the EXIF data and therefore there is an unclear copyright status. While I hate to have to delete all these images it is better if we are consistent and delete all images that have this issue.
List of files
|
|---|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(cropped1).jpg){kind=link}
--Majora (talk) 18:17, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Getty copyright means shit. In one of the closed DRs above @Ytoyoda: said "Getty Images seems to treat these photos like regular, rights-manged, not-released photos, with pricing based on usage". Yeah, they do that. They also manage the rights for stuff from the Middle Ages. That's what I mean when I say Getty copyright means shit. - Alexis Jazz 20:05, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Here you have it: Have Getty Images photographers and videographers capture the news, entertainment, sports, or corporate events you need covered.
- That's probably what TechCrunch did. Part of the contract is highly likely that Getty also gets a right to sell the images. (to people who either don't want to attribute (CC-BY) TechCrunch or -they must be banking on this- are unaware of the TechCrunch Flickr account) Also, it is better if we are consistent and undelete all images from TechCrunch. - Alexis Jazz 20:38, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment go back and reread Commons:How Alamy is stealing your images, and w:Carol M. Highsmith#Getty Images/Alamy lawsuit. what makes you think Getty has any creditility? why do you persist in sanctifying exif, that can be edited, or wrong, or fraudulent? perfect case for deletion before curation. stop right now, or i will start a DRV, and the evidence against Getty will be ugly. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 21:43, 12 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Slowking4: DO IT!! - Alexis Jazz 03:17, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment This is weird. I'm now even more glad @SLV100: has consolidated all these DRs. Majora (who started this DR) advocated keeping many of these pointing to Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2015/07#Techcrunch vs Getty Images. @Ruthven: agreed with that. @Jcb: didn't and deleted the images from some DRs arguing "I am not convinced by the DR mentioned by Majora". - Alexis Jazz 03:15, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment @Jonatan Svensson Glad: (comment from a previous DR) "That's one of the reason, the other is the EXIF stating that the copyright owner is "2015 Getty Images" and "Steve Jennings". Prior community consensus (link above) is to treat these as being copyrighted by Getty, and not TechCrunch. But I'd love if that consensus could change/other evidence would be found."
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/general-atmosphere-at-the-techcrunch-10th-annual-crunchies-news-photo/634111438
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/general-atmosphere-signage-at-the-techcrunch-9th-annual-news-photo/509153338
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/atmosphere-at-the-techcrunch-8th-annual-crunchies-awards-at-news-photo/462854194
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/drew-houston-of-dropbox-and-kyle-russell-of-techcrunch-news-photo/462854168
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/brian-pokorny-of-sv-angel-and-john-biggs-of-techcrunch-news-photo/462854138
- https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/roelof-botha-of-sequoia-capital-and-matt-burns-of-news-photo/462854096
- COM:DW. Wait, our admins can't delete images on gettyimages.com. But all that is somehow © Getty.
- I hope this can be the final nail to put in the coffin of this DR:
- Have Getty Images photographers and videographers capture the news, entertainment, sports, or corporate events you need covered. Expertise to secure the rights you need.
- Excellent, Getty took care of it. What else do we need to know? - Alexis Jazz 04:46, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- Your rabid insistence on this matter is starting to get a little old. There has already been two UDRs trying to get these images restored. They have failed. There has already been numerous attempts to contact TechCrunch for verification. Multiple people have tried. Multiple people have failed. OTRS is involved. They have failed. Saying that I commented in a previous DR saying keep and now I created this one is irrelevant. All your other points are irrelevant. And this nonsense with the consolation of DRs has made a massive mess of things and violated copyright in its own way. There is a reason we have categories for DRs. --Majora (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Majora: SLV100 didn't violate any copyright. I actually spoke with a jurist about this a while back. When you copy a limited amount of content within or between wikis (with Creative Commons), attribution in the edit summary would be sufficient. If you copy whole articles you may want/have to link/attribute seperately. In this case all the messages in those DRs are signed, so there's your attribution.
- The Getty copyright may not even strictly be incorrect, but it changes nothing. TechCrunch aquires services from Getty. Those services include "Expertise to secure the rights you need". Getty sends them some photographers. Either people who work for Getty or freelancers, that doesn't even matter. TechCrunch has published these photos on their Flickr account for years, so the rights experts from Getty can't realistically claim they were not aware of that. They also must have asked TechCrunch about their usage plans on social media, otherwise they would be incredibly bad rights experts. On top of that, Getty/PicScout actively searches the internet for violations of their copyright. (and they are extremely good at finding even the smallest detail, even if that example was actually a DW) So one way or another, we can expect Getty to be aware of the way TechCrunch uses the images and they continue to take assignments from TechCrunch.
- The copyright claim for "2016 Getty Images" doesn't have to be wrong. They almost certainly made sure the individual photographers wouldn't be the copyright holders. So we may well have to attribute Getty/photographer for Creative Commons, but we can reasonably assume the rights experts from Getty looked into it before taking any assignment from TechCrunch. So really, there simply isn't any issue. And what exactly do we want from TechCrunch anyway? OTRS? (which, really, wouldn't make any difference in this case if we don't trust them) I can fully understand them if they don't want to get into that. It may make sense to us, but it makes no sense to them in any way. They released the photos, exactly because they don't want to send everyone on the internet individual permits. I would ignore people asking for that as well. - Alexis Jazz 09:28, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Your rabid insistence on this matter is starting to get a little old. There has already been two UDRs trying to get these images restored. They have failed. There has already been numerous attempts to contact TechCrunch for verification. Multiple people have tried. Multiple people have failed. OTRS is involved. They have failed. Saying that I commented in a previous DR saying keep and now I created this one is irrelevant. All your other points are irrelevant. And this nonsense with the consolation of DRs has made a massive mess of things and violated copyright in its own way. There is a reason we have categories for DRs. --Majora (talk) 17:27, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Brian Ach, one of the photographers involved here, lists himself on LinkedIn as a freelance photographer with Getty Images. Knowing this, the EXIF data that states Brian Ach is the photographer and Getty Images is the copyright holder would appear to accurately represent the situation. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 22:00, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, If TechCrunch doesn't answer, may be the photographer will? I am writing to him. Hold on the DR for a while. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:46, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Yann: I have a better idea. The photographer most likely does not hold any copyrights, it's basically a given that Getty makes them hand that over when they employ/hire them. We need to contact Getty and/or PicScout and say we (don't mention Wikimedia or Commons) want to use TechCrunch images from the TechCrunch Flickr stream on our website. We should voice our concerns because the same photos are found as "rights managed" on Getty and ask if we need to buy a license. (the latter is vital, otherwise they may not be interested in responding at all)
- Three possible answers I can think of:
- They say it's okay and we can use the images from the Flickr stream. We undelete everything, case closed.
- They don't respond at all. Unlikely, but if this happens we will keep nagging them until they do.
- They say the Flickr stream is a violation. We will delete all the TechCrunch images as the doubt has been cleared. But also, this will require them to protect their copyright, DMCA Flickr, lose TechCrunch as a customer and I will do everything within my power to make sure this shitstorm will get as much coverage as possible. Let's hope it won't come to that.
- The only issue here is this: if I contact Getty and they say the license on Flickr is legitimate, will Commons believe me since I'm not an OTRS volunteer? - Alexis Jazz 09:28, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, sure. If you get an answer from Getty, please forward that to OTRS, that would be the ultimate proof. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Yann: are you absolutely sure? I have suggested something similar in another case in the past and was told it wouldn't be good enough. ("However, having you confirm their identity is not sufficient, because a long time ago we used to take people's word for such things but this proved too easy a method for people to get away with copyright violation.") A forwarded mail could technically be altered (you can just type over it after clicking forward, it doesn't take a genius) so it really comes down to Commons trusting me not to alter it in that case. To be clear: I won't. It would be stupid and I have nothing to gain from it. I hereby also promise I won't hold their response back if they say the Flickr stream is in violation. I will forward it just the same. If that happens we need to delete them anyway as there would be a high likelihood of our users getting approached for settlements. If you really are sure such a forwarded mail will be sufficient and @Green Giant: isn't going to contest the forwarded communication I'll get to work. - Alexis Jazz 13:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: Add OTRS in copy to your message to Getty, and ask them to reply to all. Hopefully they will do it that way. Yes, it depends obviously of who forwards the mail, when a direct answer is not possible. I will have a look at the case you mention. I didn't see it before. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Yann: Their contact form won't allow that. How about I create a new mail address for this and I send the login details for the mail account to you when I get a reply? (you can share it with OTRS if needed, just be careful the account doesn't get locked because that may happen if everybody tries to log into it at the same time) - Alexis Jazz 15:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- That's an issue to be discussed on the OTRS board: Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard#Forwarded emails. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Yann: Their contact form won't allow that. How about I create a new mail address for this and I send the login details for the mail account to you when I get a reply? (you can share it with OTRS if needed, just be careful the account doesn't get locked because that may happen if everybody tries to log into it at the same time) - Alexis Jazz 15:01, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Alexis Jazz: Add OTRS in copy to your message to Getty, and ask them to reply to all. Hopefully they will do it that way. Yes, it depends obviously of who forwards the mail, when a direct answer is not possible. I will have a look at the case you mention. I didn't see it before. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Yann: are you absolutely sure? I have suggested something similar in another case in the past and was told it wouldn't be good enough. ("However, having you confirm their identity is not sufficient, because a long time ago we used to take people's word for such things but this proved too easy a method for people to get away with copyright violation.") A forwarded mail could technically be altered (you can just type over it after clicking forward, it doesn't take a genius) so it really comes down to Commons trusting me not to alter it in that case. To be clear: I won't. It would be stupid and I have nothing to gain from it. I hereby also promise I won't hold their response back if they say the Flickr stream is in violation. I will forward it just the same. If that happens we need to delete them anyway as there would be a high likelihood of our users getting approached for settlements. If you really are sure such a forwarded mail will be sufficient and @Green Giant: isn't going to contest the forwarded communication I'll get to work. - Alexis Jazz 13:31, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, sure. If you get an answer from Getty, please forward that to OTRS, that would be the ultimate proof. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:50, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment I got an answer from Brian Ach. He said he doesn't hold the copyright, and that he "was shooting for Getty for TechCrunch". I am forwarding that to OTRS for the record. Regards, Yann (talk) 10:01, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- "For Getty for TechCrunch" may be just on the wrong side of ambiguity. Is the copyright jointly owned? That was always my second choice behind, TechCrunch owns these images and can do whatever they please with them. I never assumed that the photographer owned the copyrights since these were very obviously works for hire. Perhaps the two opposing admins at the UDRs would like to chime in. @Jcb and Jameslwoodward: your opinions would be appreciated. --Majora (talk) 20:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Majora: If I were to hazard a guess (no more than a guess as I have no access to the private communication between TechCrunch and Getty): the actual copyright is held by Getty. TechCrunch either has an unlimited right to license and re-license the photos or the rights experts from Getty have advised TC to use the "Photo by Brian Ach/Getty Images for TechCrunch" attribution on Flickr for Creative Commons. (the result is the same) This may also be the reason TC is hesitant to answer copyright questions: they are likely doing exactly as they were told and don't want to risk a lawsuit by giving us wrong information. They are not lawyers. I certainly wouldn't expect them to say "we own the copyright". Also: any photos that would be found on Getty but not on the TC Flickr stream (I don't know if there are such cases) obviously haven't been released with a free license and should not be uploaded here. All the photos uploaded here were found (afaik) on the TC Flickr stream, so they are (imho) okay. It's not realistic to think Getty is unaware of the Flickr stream or is aware of it and yet continues to take assignments from TC. But we'll try to get more proof (see OTRS Noticeboard), even though I don't think it should be neccessary. If Wikimedia hasn't received DMCA takedown notices and/or settlement suggestions from Getty/PicScout/LCS and the like (and I'm not aware of any such thing) for hundreds of images we host for years, we can very safely assume we are not violating their copyright. - Alexis Jazz 22:49, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- "For Getty for TechCrunch" may be just on the wrong side of ambiguity. Is the copyright jointly owned? That was always my second choice behind, TechCrunch owns these images and can do whatever they please with them. I never assumed that the photographer owned the copyrights since these were very obviously works for hire. Perhaps the two opposing admins at the UDRs would like to chime in. @Jcb and Jameslwoodward: your opinions would be appreciated. --Majora (talk) 20:21, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, If TechCrunch doesn't answer, may be the photographer will? I am writing to him. Hold on the DR for a while. Regards, Yann (talk) 06:46, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- hey - that's great, let's round up all the usual suspects, wonder what they will say? -
- yes - techcrunch hires some stringers, puts their copy in their flickr feed with their CC terms, and distributes via Getty who likes to play on the precautions of others to charge the gullible in their distribution channel. (just like they charge for public domain images) if they really owned a copyright we would have seen a DMCA by now, because they are so stringent, aren't they? after they sent a stern letter to an actual photographer who had the original. Slowking4 § Sander.v.Ginkel's revenge 03:00, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Now I got an answer from TechCrunch, after my initial request (see ticket:2018041510004936). The mail clearly says that TechCrunch holds the copyright. So I am going to close this as Kept, and undelete all files from TechCrunch, unless someone as a new objection. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:03, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment great job, no objection (I can't see the ticket but I trust you when you say that's what it says), but this means I no longer have to contact Getty? - Alexis Jazz ping plz 07:07, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Oppose keep closure and undeletion - they wrote "We contract on-site as well as allow our editors access to the event for event photography/videography. In these cases, TechCrunch becomes the licensed owner of these images.". It's unclear what they mean with "licensed owner", but the most probable interpretation is that someone else is the copyright holder and that this copyright holder granted a usage license to TechCrunch. In the ticket it has become more and more obvious that there is significant doubt about the copyright situation, so that we have to delete (and refrain from undeletion) per COM:PCP. Jcb (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jcb: How is this quote not a violation of our Privacy Policy? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- Of course it is not. Their statement on copyright situation is not confidential information. (Although it's unfortunate that it's needed that I cite from the message, the ticket should not have been mishandled in the first place). Jcb (talk) 15:44, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
- @Jcb: How is this quote not a violation of our Privacy Policy? — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 15:38, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - per previous closures and two failed UDRs. Also nothing substantial has happened in the OTRS ticket. --Jcb (talk) 18:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
- Restored: as per [5]. Yann (talk) 05:28, 17 February 2019 (UTC)
Violaciones de derechos de autor, Copyright infringement teleмanίa (discusión) 11:40, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Very simple text and shape. Below the threshold of originality. {{PD-text}} and {{PD-shape}}. Sinnamon Girl (talk) 02:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Too simple. Fry1989 eh? 19:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete I suspect, that I am not able to produce such. Not a simple logo. Taivo (talk) 10:29, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete I don't think it is that simple (but maybe I'm just commenting on my own, limited graphics skills)--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:07, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Nor PD-text-logo --Alan Lorenzo (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Besides the simple text, the rest are just simple geometric forms. It would be easy to make it vectorial. --UAwiki (talk) 14:02, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Looks like Pd-Simple FASTILY 23:12, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive Gustavo neto (talk) 20:22, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 18:29, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 20:12, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archive --Principal adjoint (talk) 21:00, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives Gustavo neto (talk) 20:21, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
Support--Principal adjoint (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: dup -- Cirt (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Duplicate Archives--Principal adjoint (talk) 21:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)