Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/08/11

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Commons logo
Commons logo

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive August 11th, 2013
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No encyclopedic value. Used for vandalism on the English Wikipedia Dawnseeker2000 (talk) 00:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted per nom. -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I won't use this picture anymore. Blackj0221 (talk) 01:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: obvious copright violation JuTa 23:01, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely own work if the uploader as claimed. JuTa 08:05, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, by Jcb as Game/video cover art. I'll delete also file:Crysis.png and file:Crysis3 cover.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 11:10, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Redundant mistake, image is at File:Olate dogs - on wheel.jpeg, see discussion http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Help_desk&oldid=101677214#Flickr_upload_bot_goof Liamdavies (talk) 08:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 16:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The newspaper in the background is problematic, it's not possible to claim any de minimis; it is an essential part of this image. Canoe1967 I hope you sent her the pic, and in future perhaps use a blank sheet of paper. Oh, and one last piece of advice. russavia (talk) 15:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I get a 404 type message. Check the link?--Canoe1967 (talk) 16:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Try this instead. I'll go ahead and delete the image. Oh and be sure to check out the special on the page I just linked to. ;) russavia (talk) 16:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Speedy request by uploader russavia (talk) 16:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clarified the "© All Rights Reserved" in the original source. OskNe (talk) 23:05, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: This image was originally posted to Flickr by AnastasyaFhily at http://www.flickr.com/photos/95592503@N04/8721140500/in/photostream. It was reviewed on 8. Mai 2013 by the FlickreviewR robot and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-2.0. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clearly not taken by user. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 17:37, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Obs.: High wiki use, uploaded by RobertoZimme in 11.2010. Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, most likely grabbed from http://web.archive.org/web/20101025123722/http://especiais.ig.com.br/zoom/metropolis (10.2010, photo nr. "2", credit: "Paulo Vitale", © Copyright 2000-2010, Internet Group). Paulo Vitale is a professional Brazilian photographer (http://www.paulovitale.com.br/bio.html).

Nominating - per above reason - also:

and

  • File:Rushtimesp.jpg (uploaded in 11.2010, but per above link: photo nr. "19", credit: "Paulo Vitale")

Btw, all other uploads by RobertoZimme recently detected as copyvio. Gunnex (talk) 22:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Also contacted by Photographer OTRS 2013081410010781  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Microstar and 2 fresh copyvios. Gunnex (talk) 07:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Gunnex as no license (no license) well, there is a license, but its doubtfully own work. JuTa 19:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Delete: original source link http://www.flickr.com/photos/histardis/9371621829/ that was removed by an anon user shows a Creative Commons non-derivative licence which is unacceptable to us. Current source does not link to this image and that website; http://www.hawtcelebs.com/copyright-policy/ states that its images are used under a fair-use claim, but also claimed to be in the public domain. However, no original sources or attributions are given that could verify the actual licence. Ww2censor (talk) 22:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete looks like the author changed the license of the photo in that case we can't use it we must delete it. Dman41689 (talk) 23:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope. Érico Wouters msg 05:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope. Érico Wouters msg 05:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Logo artwork, and not the uploaders own work. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be the work of the uploader, watermarked image is from http://hnlrarebirds.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/n594ab.html MilborneOne (talk) 18:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

out of scope Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 07:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyvio: http://www.metro.df.gob.mx/red/estacion.html?id=35, http://www.metro.df.gob.mx/red/logos/chabacano.jpg Sofree (talk) 02:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:23, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The 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) 11:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

out of scope Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Derivative work, closely based on a copyright image. Not suitable for this license or for Commons. Guinnog (talk) 10:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep This is heraldry. Individual representations of heraldic works are created by reading and following a blazon, a text description of the work. The individual representation has a copyright of its own, but that is not a problem here, because it was drawn by User:Sodacan and properly licensed for use here. While the blazon may have a copyright (most do not), drawings made from it are not derivative works. See Commons:Coats of arms for a full explanation. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Own work based on the blazon which is PD. Also PD-old because the lion crest of Canada dates back to 1923. Fry1989 eh? 20:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 00:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clearly not free to use Mattythewhite (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright infringement from http://www.techmahindra.com/network_services/test_automation.aspx / http://www.techmahindra.com/PictureContentLibrary/Images/EZFrame_big.jpg Brainy J (talk) 12:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No scope. Fry1989 eh? 19:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not too different from the hundreds of "Special or fictional flags" that we already have on Commons, and it should definitely be allowable as a personal user page image (though the JPEG format is rather unfortunate). AnonMoos (talk) 06:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe in category user page images. Fictional flags are problematic in general, many lack educational content / project scope. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 02:03, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
However (as has been discussed before), we have hundreds of them, and the usual practice has not been to delete them just because they're "special or fictional", but only when there's some additional aggravating factor (such as being hoaxing or hatemongering)... AnonMoos (talk) 10:13, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete I have never understood why we keep flags that have sprung from the imagination of users any more than we keep personal artwork from users unless they are notable artists. "We have hundreds of them" is unfortunate, but not a reason to keep one more. Perhaps even -- dare I suggest -- it's time to follow our own rules and delete all of them. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Out of scope. INeverCry 00:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 18:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope Steinsplitter (talk) 07:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 18:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope Steinsplitter (talk) 07:49, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 20:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 20:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Can't verify license at source as image is tagged as private. Other images by this account all marked Copyright Disney. Can't identify account as being owned by Disney so any release given there dubious anyway. Larger version of this photo at http://celebsecrets4u.com/2013/04/29/2013-radio-disney-music-awards-red-carpet-arrival-gallery-radiodisney-rdma/jacob-latimore/ shows photographer as DISNEY CHANNEL/Todd Wawrychuk Geraldo Perez (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation - small size - no EXIF - own work claim doubtful INeverCry 18:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyright violation Steinsplitter (talk) 07:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional image INeverCry 18:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope (promotional image) Steinsplitter (talk) 07:35, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

fichier obsolète Assj rugby (talk) 08:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Uploader's request one day after uploading. Taivo (talk) 14:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Disagree with the uploaded I'm pretty sure that Argentine copyright rules don't cover film posters Flickrworker (talk) 20:14, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 18:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope Steinsplitter (talk) 07:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Gunnex as no license (no license). Well, there is a license, but its doubtfully own work. JuTa 19:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope: self promotion? High Contrast (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

All Rights Reserved Sinbad the sailor (talk) 14:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Fastily Steinsplitter (talk) 07:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of project scope, probably copyright violation. El Grafo (talk) 11:48, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 20:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The 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) 11:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The source/license and author information of 1 image (File:Pdh2.jpg: "Zapopan skyline released to the public domain by Raveonpragha.") used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. Additionally: unsure about the file described with "Picture scanned from a 2003 Mexican brochure about oil (a work from the Mexican State Government) which is in the public domain as it precedes the change to CC-BY-NC-ND 2.5 that the Mexican Government implemented in 2006" (license text: http://fox.presidencia.gob.mx/tecnologia/, last modified: 2006), considering Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Mexico#Government works. Obs.: collage of 7 images but 10 sources. Some sources seem to be related to a version in the file history. Gunnex (talk) 08:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:28, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clearly not free to use Mattythewhite (talk) 19:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quaility out of scope Flickrworker (talk) 20:38, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 21:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Keine enzyklopädische Verwendung denkbar. Ne discere cessa! 04:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


Deleted: Out of scope. Steinsplitter (talk) 08:03, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope: self promotion High Contrast (talk) 20:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Clearly not free to use. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Fair Use file from en:wp. May or may not be in the Public Domain, but information about photographer and date of creation/publication is missing. El Grafo (talk) 12:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal image -- out of scope .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

creative logo for a school/team, no evidence uploader has licensing permission. DMacks (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 21:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This is cover art. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Uploader changed author and source after the image was marked as "no license" and added a doubtfull license. Prior values: source=https://twitter.com/tucaramsuenatvn author=Twitter Oficial de Tu Cara Me Suena TVN (Panamá) JuTa 10:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

As per Commons:Nudity Flickrworker (talk) 19:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Although uploaded in good faith, it is a photograph of a copyrighted 3D work, taken in the UAE (Dubai). The UAE, sadly, doesn't allow Freedom of Panorama, making this, I believe, a breach of copyright. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:27, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 20:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private picture of user, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 19:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

IMHO out of scope Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Dianakc (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of scope, unused

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by FacundoTobías (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - unused personal images

INeverCry 18:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope - unused personal images Steinsplitter (talk) 07:32, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Gloryvalue1353 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - unused personal images

INeverCry 18:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope - unused personal images Steinsplitter (talk) 07:33, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Ismael alejndro (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope, probably copyvio / dw.

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:24, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jesuslarasotelo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - promotional images

INeverCry 19:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope - promotional images Steinsplitter (talk) 07:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Malivaqui (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Possibly out of scope - no indication of notability of person or invention

INeverCry 18:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Possibly out of scope - no indication of notability of person or invention Steinsplitter (talk) 07:52, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Mcaimz (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - unused personal images

INeverCry 19:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope Steinsplitter (talk) 07:37, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Mercedesmayol (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - promotional images

INeverCry 18:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of scope - promotional images Steinsplitter (talk) 07:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Pepmanrajasekar (talk · contribs)

[edit]

possible copyvios/out of scope - tiny unused images with no EXIF

INeverCry 18:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of COM:SCOPE (+ tiny unused images with no EXIF) and possible copyvios Steinsplitter (talk) 07:43, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Starlit (talk · contribs)

[edit]

possible copyvios/possibly out of scope - photos of paintings with no indication of author/permission - the name in the titles is Ahmad Hanandeh, but no indication of notability on google search https://www.google.com/#bav=on.2,or.r_cp.r_qf.&fp=6ae07e803f2b335e&q=ahmad+hanandeh - none of these is in use

INeverCry 17:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: photos of paintings with no indication of author/permission (= no premission / copyvios), + no indication of notability (= out of scope) Steinsplitter (talk) 07:58, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by TheFamousCo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Not own work, some files still have metadata attached, stating (c) Antix

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 06:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:25, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Yhisleim (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Taken from a manga/anime series, so not the uploader's own work. Commons does not allow copyrighted material to be uploaded.

El Grafo (talk) 13:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Most of them seems to be screenshots of copyrighted material. So, not really own work.—Teles «Talk to me˱M @ C S˲» 15:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Anime/manga. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal image -- out of scope .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Per the result of Commons:Deletion requests/File:AAPLogo.jpg.

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 11:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt whether File:ECI-full-sun-with-rays.png / File:ECI-full-sun-with-rays.svg would be copyrightable in the United States (don't know about India)... AnonMoos (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 11:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The text, the photographs, and the map/plan on this plaque all have copyrights. There is no evidence that we have permission from any of the copyright holders. It is possible that the City of Fremantle holds all the necessary copyrights, so that OTRS permission from the city would be sufficient. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Cliché trop sombre, le nouveau fichier "Chapelle des Marrons-41.JPG" donne une image valable de la chapelle Fr.Latreille (talk) 20:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Work of art by NN artist Andre Engels (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company - single upload of user INeverCry 18:06, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused logo of non-notable company - single upload of user INeverCry 18:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not educationally useful Fixertool (talk) 01:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hola

No veo por que la solicitud de borrado, por Dios! Fiese que las caratulas originales de los álbumes no pueden ser publicadas. Pero un logo sí.! un logo como el de inédito no tiene ningún problema, ademas la mayoría de artículos que poseen Logos no son borrados. véase [1] , [2]. Entre otras.


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Just a black image? Slick (talk) 10:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

If the painter of all the paintings within this PDF is René Magritte, they woul be copyrighted until 2038. If notit should b claryfied whois the paintor to b able if they are pulic domain or not. JuTa 11:11, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Logo to complex or not? Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 17:17, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company - single upload of user INeverCry 18:57, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused logo of non-notable company - single upload of user INeverCry 18:59, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope INeverCry 19:02, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional image INeverCry 19:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Title name wrong Muthu1954 (talk) 22:53, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

svg version available Perumalism Chat 15:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Svg version available Perumalism Chat 16:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Wrong name 8Dodo8 (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Wrong name 8Dodo8 (talk) 18:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyvio: http://www.metro.df.gob.mx/red/estacion.html?id=33, http://www.metro.df.gob.mx/red/logos/zocalo.jpg Sofree (talk) 02:55, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 22:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

"Very old (WWI) German photograph" is insufficient - very likely not published in the US at first due to the fact that is - as the uploader stated - a photograph from Germany. There is unfortunately no final evidence for a PD status High Contrast (talk) 00:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - "old German photograph" was much too vague. With a bit of research however - I have determined that the photo in question has been published many times. The earliest I can confirm is in the 1919 edition of Janes All the World's aircraft. In view of this I really don't think it is likely that this 98 year old photograph has any likely copyright problems, really!! --Soundofmusicals (talk) 01:57, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How could {{PD-UK-unknown}} apply? The author must have been a German serviceman. What certain evidence can be brought out of those various sources where this image "has been publish many times"? --High Contrast (talk) 10:15, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 06:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not educationally useful Fixertool (talk) 01:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

devirate of File:Liliputi Színház 2.jpg which never had a license since upload. JuTa 08:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Missing EXIF, no source, third party attribution by self CC licensing, looks like a copyvio to me. Liamdavies (talk) 09:08, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Can anyone help me to rename this file please? I wanted rename to: barbara krafftowna.jpg and I've made mistake and dont know how to fix it. Thank you Kiciatycia

Sorry, but we need to sort this out first. The licensing for this image doesn't look complete. Where is the picture from? And what license was it originally published under? Liamdavies (talk) 09:34, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 06:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Photo of a 3D Badge, no evidence that the picture is the work of a state employee. LGA talkedits 11:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. Greetings, LGA. I understand your concerns, and have contacted the original uploader for clarification of the source material. Thank you, and best regards. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 12:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep I have uploaded a drawing that is not 3D, so that concerns are removed. SGT141 (talk) 00:46, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment SGT141, it is a nice drawing, but is that an accurate representation of an SDSO badge? The ones I've seen in photographs are not full-color, but are rather monochrome with blue lettering (just like the one I uploaded originally). Best regards, Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 03:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not a photo, not 3D, and the State Seal is PD.  Keep Fry1989 eh? 04:04, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the image is no longer a 3D Photo, happy withdraw this providing that the photo revision is deleted and the file is renamed as "Seal of the San Diego County Sheriff's Department.png". LGA talkedits 08:17, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The rename is unnecessary. Fry1989 eh? 18:54, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Seconded. We already have a file by that name. Besides, this is a badge, not the seal (which is something else entirely). Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 01:32, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: apparently ok FASTILY 06:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The text of the oval Moore building plaque is fully legible and certainly has a copyright. There is no evidence of permission. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But the oval plaque isn't by a long shot the subject of the photo. Does that count for anything? I've no idea about the rules of how to feature copyrighted stuff I'm afraid. Surely it's permitted in some forms? I mean, you don't mention the other sign in this photo, so I presume that's okay? Anyway, if you could point me towards some information about what is and is not permitted, I'd be most obliged. Thanks! — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 12:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The text of the oval Mark of the Century plaque is fully legible and certainly has a copyright. There is no evidence of permission. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My query at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2013-08-11 0740 Freopedia plaque at Moore's Building.JPG applies to this one too. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 23:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The text, the photographs, and the map/plan on this plaque all have copyrights. There is no evidence that we have permission from any of the copyright holders. It is possible that the City of Fremantle holds all the necessary copyrights, so that OTRS permission from the city would be sufficient. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My query at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2013-08-11 0740 Freopedia plaque at Moore's Building.JPG applies to this one too. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 23:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The text of the Victoria Hall plaque is fully legible and certainly has a copyright. There is no evidence of permission. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:26, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My query at Commons:Deletion requests/File:2013-08-11 0740 Freopedia plaque at Moore's Building.JPG applies to this one too. — Sam Wilson ( TalkContribs ) … 23:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:56, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Claim of "own work" seems questionable: Higher resolution versions of this file can be found on multiple places on the web ([3], [4], …). El Grafo (talk) 13:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, C'est une photo qui a été prise sur la base aérienne d'Oum El Bouaghi dans l'Est algérien, publiée en exclusivité sur le forum algérien forumdz.com, il n'y a par conséquent aucune raison de laisser place à la polémique ni aux tergiversations de quelque sorte que ce soit, cette photo est parfaitement légale suivant les critères fixés par la charte et les droits d'auteur. Bien à vous. Jobason 17:46, 11 août 2013 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your reply and sorry for answering in english, my french is terrible …
Could you give us a link to the thread at forumdz.com where the picture was published? Unfortunately, the search function there is not available for unregistered users … Merci, --El Grafo (talk) 10:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 06:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unnecessary: We already have File:Borussia Dortmund.png and File:Borussia Dortmund logo.svg. Additionally, the uploader of this one falsely claims copyright ownership. El Grafo (talk) 14:05, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete This is PD-textlogo, the uploader is not the CR holder. Fma12 (talk) 20:52, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 06:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I think it is a logo may be copyrighted Sinbad the sailor (talk) 14:23, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This image was originally posted to Flickr, and it's licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 Generic . It was reviewed on 2013-08-11 08:50:06 by FlickreviewR- operated by Bryan. Don't need to attract unnecessary attention. Valio subaru (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete Whether it was uploaded and reviewed from flickr is not the issue here. The issue is, was the flickr user being naughty. If they took an image of the team logo from a van/media tent then Ok. But I'm inclined to not to believe that and think that they have been naughty and posted it under that licence with no permission, therefore it has no place on commons. Flickrworker (talk) 20:03, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete This car company's design is too complicated to not be copyrighted. Its not a generic design. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:03, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 06:46, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A better version has been uploaded in a different file format: File:Bowery Theatre, 46 Bowery, New York City.png. Vzeebjtf (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: FASTILY 06:53, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A better version has been uploaded in a different file format: File:Bowery Theatre, 46 Bowery, New York City.png. Vzeebjtf (talk) 16:47, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: FASTILY 06:53, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely that a company will give up the copyright on her logo. This logo is, in my opinion, not a simple textlogo as claimed by the uploader, due to the flame and semi-cirkel above the I and the "leave" above the h. The Banner (talk) 17:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

can be claimed under {{PD-Shape}} Perumalism Chat 12:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That is what you claim, I doubt that. The Banner (talk) 14:36, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
i think it was not so complex for copyrights Perumalism Chat 15:18, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let us wait for the specialist to decide... The Banner (talk) 15:33, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: IMO too complex for pd-shape FASTILY 06:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely that a company will give up the copyright on her logo. This logo is, in my opinion, not a simple textlogo as claimed by the uploader, due to the flame and semi-cirkel above the "I" The Banner (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: IMO too complex for pd-shape FASTILY 06:54, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

file change Wikimanfree (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:48, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The CC license from Flickr is bogus, and as this photo is from 1929 (taken in Spain upon the occasion of the wedding of en:Princess Isabel Alfonsa of Bourbon-Two Sicilies), we also cannot assume that ist author was certainly dead by 1942. Also, in the US the photo is still protected until 1925. Rosenzweig τ 18:43, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The photo of Flickr is a photo of a photo. I don't know if the license of Flickr is false or not, but in Flickr say Atribución 2.0 Genérica (CC BY 2.0). Other things are suppositions.--EeuHP (talk) 21:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Flickr uploader is quite obviously not the author of this image nor does he hold any rights to it, so the license is not valid for this image. And what do you mean by "Other things are suppositions."? --Rosenzweig τ 21:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In Flickr appears: Atribución 2.0 Genérica (CC BY 2.0). And this is a valid license.--EeuHP (talk) 22:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Only if given by someone who is authorized to do so. --Rosenzweig τ 01:25, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you think this, call Flickr and tell them that picture must not have been there. If the image is there and has a valid license, I do not understand your request for deletion.--EeuHP (talk) 22:22, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Flickr has other rules for dealing with copyrights than we do. If an image is on Flickr, that doesn't automatically mean it's OK for us, even if it has a CC license there. --Rosenzweig τ 22:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 06:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The photo does not have a date. As the person depicted died in 1957, it is too recent to assume the author was dead by 1942. We don't know the author, but that does not make the image truly "anonymous" as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:46, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The author is completely untraceable. On the website where I got it is not even mentioned, nor the year, nor the place where it was taken. With this past, I believe that we can say that this photography is "anonymous".--EeuHP (talk) 21:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No. Just because a website doesn't name the author of an image it is not "anonymous". --Rosenzweig τ 21:09, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No website says the author's name (even http://www.artehistoria.jcyl.es, a website that usually put the names). Two options: anonymous or general unprofessional.--EeuHP (talk) 21:19, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "general unprofessional"? I don't understand. --Rosenzweig τ 21:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Error of google translator. Two options: photo anonymous or non-professionalism of all webmasters.--EeuHP (talk) 22:37, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 06:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This looks like a screenshot from some video, but certainly not like "own work" from 2013 as claimed. Rosenzweig τ 18:50, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the image is a screenshot from one video (from the TV program ¡Cómo nos reímos!, TVE) but I retouched the image and thought that the tag "own work" was adequate.--EeuHP (talk) 21:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Roland zh as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: imho authorship not clear [see metadata], imho 'personal adveritsements' and not in use, Roland zh 18:25, 11 August 2013 (UTC) O (висчвын) 20:58, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:49, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Roland zh as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: imho authorship not clear [see metadata], Roland zh 18:31, 11 August 2013 (UTC) O (висчвын) 21:02, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Roland zh as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: imho authorship not clear [see metadata], Roland zh 18:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC) O (висчвын) 21:04, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Flickrworker as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Logo of a company, all rights reserved, Source is dubious, but this may not fall under threshold of originality. O (висчвын) 21:32, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by Natuur12 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Based upon an Item developed by Nintendo. Seems to be a derivative work but is part of a GPL software. O (висчвын) 21:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment simple stylised mushroom. official drawing of Nintendo's mushroom have three spot (not five) and (partially) different form and eyes. --valepert (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: not a copyvio I guess FASTILY 06:50, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Blurry low quality photo replaced by File:Tarvaris Jackson in 2011.jpg in the main en:Tarvaris Jackson article Arbor to SJ (talk) 22:00, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This image is currenly licensed under CC-BY-NC (non-commercial) Nonenmac (talk) 22:20, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Mrs Wallace (or her employer) changed the license - the first 4 images for the search Rebekah D. Wallace are uploaded as CC-BY, insectimages/bugwood lists them as CC-BY-NC. As those images have no strict 2-person-process like Flickr we probably can't prove the former license and have to delete them :(
I didn't checked them but probably all her images are affected.
Rbrausse (talk) 08:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: NC licenses are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 06:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Its against human emotions and that's why humanity. No one has right to utter a single word against any religion....if you dont like it dont follow it but pls dont make fun of any religion 83.110.250.192 12:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This file has been previously deleted, and restored, see Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2010-08#File:Mohammed by meco.png. __meco (talk) 13:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No new reaons for deletion. russavia (talk) 07:38, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not in scope; Commons doesn't exist for users to upload their own personal drawings. Pete F (talk) 18:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]



No consensus to delete -FASTILY 06:51, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I read the previous discussions. Nothing in there convinces me that we should keep this offensive material from a user banned for child porno! If I had drawn such a pic for that user or anybody else, I would very possibly be blocked for personal attack and this is mass attack against any believer, irrespective of their religion. Let's keep the useful contributions of the banned user but also clean the dirt they left behind. Would you keep any child porn for "not censuring"? Please let's all / always be more sensitive on sensitive issues. Thanks. E4024 (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Religious criticism is one of the tennents of free speach and democracy, like Piss Christ and this cartoon by Carlos Latuff about the Israeli occupation of Palestine and anti-semitism, depicting a stereotyped jew. Not hatred speech, like some seen on extreme religious channels be it Muslim, Christian, Jewish or Buddhist, where the "preacher" appeals to the faithfulls to kill, behead, burn, explode with the unfaithfull.
Hate speech is not being able to be a christian in the Middle East because you can be killed for it, the same with muslims and christians in India, being rammed by a car on a mosque on france just for being a muslim, be stabbed for being a christian woman in Finland, etc. That is what is hate speech, to appeal to the physical destruction of others, not the depiction of Muhammad. Tm (talk) 13:49, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: in use. --Basvb (talk) 09:24, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Texasknowsbest (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - no indication of notability of subjects

INeverCry 18:36, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:48, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Russian credit card images

[edit]

Photos of copyrighted work, I don't know what Russian COM:TOO is like but they wouldn't pass many other countries COM:TOO and are unlikely to be COM:DM. Although I am unsure about File:PayPass Card (back).jpg, that might be free due to such a low level of creative originality. Liamdavies (talk) 07:49, 11 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

What creative originality? I just remove CVC2 code and real card number (embossed) by security reason... And I already make request to the bank (with future answer to the permissions-ru@wikimedia.org), by result I will write here. Jackie (talk) 03:32, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The creative originality applies to the design on the credit card that you photographed. There are pictures on the credit cards, and it is likely that they are copyright by the banks that issued them. We cannot host things that are copyright so we need the bank to release the credit card design under a free license (an email saying that we can host them is not enough, others need to be able to use them for any reason, including for profit) to do this we need COM:OTRS permission, or we have to delete the files (if found to be copyrightable). This is not about your photo, but what you photographed, I hope this makes it clearer. Liamdavies (talk) 13:53, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Missing evidence of permission. If you are the uploader, please email OTRS FASTILY 06:53, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]