Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/10/05
 |
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}
_2013-09-25_20-51.jpg){kind=link}
_Ke_Semua_Music_Yang_Di_Cipta_Atau_Pun_Di_Record_Tiada_Kaitan_Di_Mana-Mana_Laman_Web_Melainkan_jaringan_Yang_Tersembunyi_Yang_Amat_Sukar_Di_Te_2013-09-30_04-05.jpg){kind=link}
_RM_11128.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Blank page with only a title Gabrielchihonglee (talk) 09:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Please use {{Speedy}} for routine housekeeping. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
album cover, copyvio Mjrmtg (talk) 12:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyvio Tabercil (talk) 13:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This is not FOP (see FOP in Ukraine). It was built in 1981. Kulmalukko (talk) 16:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- If that is the case, then almost everything in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev should go away. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: As per nom and as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 07:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Clearly not free to use Mattythewhite (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 18:32, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Buildings from Vincevinss
[edit]- File:Majunga coté puteaux le 24 septembre 2013.jpg
- File:Majunga le 24 septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Blanche septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Areva Septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Coeur Défense septempbre 2013 atlantique.JPG
- File:Tour Carpe Diem 3 Septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Tour D2 coté courbevoie.JPG
- File:Tour Atlantique septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Tour atlantique bas.JPG
- File:Tour Franklin 3 septembre 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga Atlantique.JPG
- File:Tour D2 aout 2013 esplanade.JPG
- File:Tour D2 aout 2013 coté Courbevoie.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga aout 2013 coté Puteaux.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga aout 2013 dos.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga aout 2013 avant.JPG
- File:Tour D2 aout 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Carpe Diem aout 2013.JPG
- File:Fondation Louis Vuitton 12 Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Arrière de la fondation 12 juillet 2013.JPG
- File:La fondation en Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Fondation Louis Vuitton Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Face sud de la fondation louis Vuitton 12 juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga coté esplanade juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga 11 juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour D2 juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Mazars Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Eqho 11 Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Carpe Diem Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Areva 11 juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Coeur Défense coté ouest 11 Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Détail tour Majunga.JPG
- File:Avant de la tour D2 en Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour D2 Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Base de la tour.JPG
- File:Tour Carpe Diem 11 Juillet 2013.JPG
- File:Tour Majunga le 3 juillet 2013.jpg
- File:Tour Majunga le 8 mai 2013.jpg
- File:Tour Majunga - mai 2013.jpg
- File:Tour D2 - mai 2013.jpg
- File:Tour Carpe Diem.jpg
- File:D2 le 18 mai 2013.jpg
- File:La tour Majunga mai 2013.jpg
- File:Noyaux de la tour majunga.JPG
- File:Tour D2 7 février 2013.jpg
- File:La tour tos de la tour D2 en Janvier 2013.jpg
- File:La tour D2 le 14 Janvien 2013.jpg
- File:Tour carpe diem 14 janvier 2013.jpg
- File:Tour Carpe Diem coté esplanade le 14 Janvier 2013.jpg
- File:Tour Carpe Diem le 14 janvier 2013.jpg
- File:La tour Carpe Diem le 2 Décembre 2012.jpg
- File:La tour Carpe diem - Octobre 2012.jpg
- File:Carpe diem vue de l'esplanade.jpg
- File:Dos de la tour D2.jpg
- File:La tour Carpe diem (Aout 2011).jpg
- File:First Tower.jpg
- File:Tour carpe diem.jpg
- File:La défense near paris.jpg
- File:4 tour la défense .jpg
- File:La perspective ver l'Arc de Triomphe.jpg
- File:EDF 12.jpg
- File:La défense 271.jpg
- File:Gan tower.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
No COM:FOP#France. According to French law, it is not allowed to publish picture whose the main subject is an original building (or original creation) until 70 years after the death of its author. Unless prior authorization by the author or his heirs. Commons:De minimis does not apply here, because the tower is the main subject of the picture. Creasy (talk) 13:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the "own work" of the uploader; copyrighted material Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be the "own work" of the uploader; copyrighted material Skeezix1000 (talk) 19:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Article on en wiki already deleted. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:14, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
and:
- File:Ramapir.jpg doubt own work claim, see [1]]
- File:Nabahat Khan.jpg and File:Signature of Nabahat Khan.png Both self promotion for webdesign (small) business.
- Overall, misuse of Commons/WP for advertisement. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:26, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Thanx for restoring images. Yes I admit that I created one or two pages which looks like advertisement or self promotion and used these images File:Nabahat Khan.jpg, File:Signature of Nabahat Khan.png and File:Aaroh.png in those articles because at that time I was just a very new user and wasn't aware of the facts and use of wikipedia. But now a days I'm trying to make decent contributions to wikipedia and would like to use these just for User page images. Maybe that's a fair use, If not kindly correct me and guide me. And yes File:Ramapir.jpg is my own work also used on net as published under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0. Thanks again. If anything in support of these images you need, just let me know.Regards. --Nabahat (talk) 06:35, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Invalid copyright tag. {{PD-textlogo}} doesn't apply here. Stefan4 (talk) 14:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per Stefan4 McZusatz (talk) 12:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: 12:39, 12 October 2013 by McZusatz. closed by . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unarranged scripts used chaotically (some even with incorrect rendering)... Is of little use in the present form. Besides, an SVG file created from scratch which displays scripts in an arranged form would better serve the purpose. Syed Wamiq Ahmed Hashmi (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: sorry, we cant delete this one, as it is still in use. Please feel free to create a superior version and nominate again for deletion McZusatz (talk) 10:59, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Book cover: http://tineye.com/search/c85215cb3625ea9eff608815c9a26a3fa7b54e56/?sort=size&order=desc FunkMonk (talk) 10:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Delete out of scope. Warfieldian (talk)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Crop of a file that has already been deleted as copyvio. A.Savin 09:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
File:April Guzman is a mexican and american girl she has 2 brothers a mother and father, she is one of the guzmans- April is an actress in her drama class at eastern high school she's in the 8th grade and plays bow 2013-10-03 17-40.jpg
[edit]
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Personal or out-of-scope image, not currently in use. (Note; Google translated text says "BORN ON 13 OCTOBER 1989, HIS PARENTS ARE ADA ROSALINA GIMENEZ AND ROBERTO CARLOS ROJAS, PRIMARY TERM IN THE ESC. OVIEDO FLORENTIN COLONEL AND THE SECONDARY IN COL. NATIONAL EMD, DR PEDRO P. PEÑA ELECTROMECANICA TECHNICIAN AS BS. CHAMPION IN THE YEARS 2004,2005, OLIMPIDAS GENEREALES THE MATH OF SAID GOLD MEDAL IN FISCAQUIMICA OLIMPIDAS OF THE YEAR 2007 GOLD MEDAL IN THE OLYMPICS OMAPA. STRESSES ALSO ADVANCED COMPUTER PROGRAMMER AS HAVING YOUR OWN vasado UNIX OPERATING SYSTEM EFFECTS, DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCES, SPECIALIZED IN TRIGONOMETRY, LINEAR ALGEBRA. A MEMBER OF THE COLONEL I.E.A.D.M OVIEDO"). Ubcule (talk) 18:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photos, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Who is "Celeste"? In absence of further info, we can only assume that this is an unused personal image. The quality is also dire; even if it was someone famous, it'd be impossible to recognise them from this. Ubcule (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Crop of a file that has already been deleted as copyvio. A.Savin 09:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Courten inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 06:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No real source, no real license. JuTa 11:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: superseded by File:DDR Verwaltung.png McZusatz (talk) 12:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:16, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Two reasons; (i) Text is illegible at this resolution, (ii) Photograph (derivative / slavish copy) of another work without clear evidence of permission, i.e. probable copyright violation. Ubcule (talk) 18:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo of an organization. Rapsar (talk) 07:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image (apparently of uploader himself), not otherwise in scope. Ubcule (talk) 19:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 15:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
_2013-09-25_20-51.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2013-09-25_20-51.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
I doubt that this photo was taken by the uploader because most of his other uploads have been deleted due copyright violations. IusticiaBY (talk) 10:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
_2013-09-25_20-51.jpg){kind=link}
_2013-09-25_20-51.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
I doubt that this photo was taken by the uploader because most of his other uploads have been deleted due copyright violations.| Ezarateesteban 13:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: And this one appears in several places on the Web. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:37, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 20:46, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Uploader needs a permission from the Photographer. 91.66.153.214 11:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete no indication on website of source that photo is Creative Commons licensed. Warfieldian (talk)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
2 files created in response to request at en Graphics lab.
Obvious thing seemed to be to use {{Duplicate}}, but that stipulates exact duplicate, so listing instead. Begoon - talk 15:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: uncontested DR. unused file McZusatz (talk) 12:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation of this picture. –Fredddie™ 22:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete --Rschen7754 23:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Get it out of here. TCN7JM 01:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 10:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No source, no real license. JuTa 11:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as well as no source or valid license, the validity of the map also appears to be in question. Warfieldian (talk)
- Delete because it is historically wrong --Roxanna (talk) 15:33, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Two reasons; (i) Text is illegible at this resolution, (ii) Photograph (derivative / slavish copy) of another work without clear evidence of permission, i.e. probable copyright violation. Ubcule (talk) 18:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Two reasons; (i) Text is illegible at this resolution, (ii) Appears to be a photograph of someone else's image- derivative work and hence probable copyvio Ubcule (talk) 18:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Same as for Commons:Deletion requests/File:Holla.jpg: Compeletely useless file, no educational value. Everyone can put 3 Greek letters next to each other in plain text should there be a need to do so. Uploader is blocked for spamming on enwiki. Also I doubt the "PD old" license (it's certainly not that old; though surely under the threshold of originality). MF-W 11:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No source, no real license. JuTa 11:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- please, it's a plain map based on pd GIS data, no threshold of originality. --Dbachmann (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- I think I fixed it now [2]. Please use some circumspection when submitting obvious PD files for deletion just because they aren't tagged correctly, there is a log of needless damage you may cause by such an approach. --Dbachmann (talk) 10:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File%3AEurope_plain_rivers.png&diff=106533884&oldid=106350959){kind=link}
- I also fixed the page on my site with the .psd/.xcf originals and link to source: https://brionv.com/misc/maps.php (lost some formatting but the links and text are back). Please consider them public domain. --brion (talk)
- Aaand I updated the file license data from PD to PD-User, pointing at the last modifier. :) --brion (talk) 15:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: McZusatz (talk) 12:52, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No real source, no real license. JuTa 11:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No real license. Why this image is {{PD}}? JuTa 11:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: {{PD-ineligible}} McZusatz (talk) 12:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
broken source, no real license. Why this image is {{PD}}? JuTa 11:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No real source, no real license. Why whis image is {{PD}}? JuTa 12:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Because images from the CIA Fact Book are public domain? Regardless, there are better versions of this coat of arms. Thuresson (talk) 20:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: still in use McZusatz (talk) 12:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
There is no evidence at the source website that these 3 shots are indeed the work of an employee of the U.S. federal government. -- Túrelio (talk) 19:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: / . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:34, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
bogus GFDL/CC license. Is this i.e. {{PD-old}} or similar? JuTa 12:09, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: We need to know when the author, Sanke, who is named, died. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused user image, out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Not yet PD in its source country UK. Will become PD next year. JuTa 12:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. also restore usage: [3] McZusatz (talk) 12:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Restored in 2014. odder (talk) 01:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
No real source, no real license. JuTa 12:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: has both McZusatz (talk) 12:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No source, no real license. JuTa 12:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:30, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license. JuTa 12:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. This file was uploaded in January 2005. As things were done then, the description pages often did not use the templates that became in common use only later. That is not a problem, as long as all the essential informations were provided, as is the case here. The uploader declared himself as the author, uploaded his file from his own Commons account, mentioned the date and released his photo to the public domain. The generic "PD" template was still fine when the author put it on this file in January 2005. It was deprecated in 2006 only. It is obvious that if it we transpose that declaration from the author into the terms that have become common today, it means "PD-self". The fact that a description page written in 2005 is not formatted with templates that came into common use later is not a reason for deletion. If useful, we can reformat the description page with today's templates, which I did. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:49, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: per Asclepias McZusatz (talk) 12:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No source, no real license. JuTa 12:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Uploaded in January 2005. Does have source and status. Those informations can just be reformatted with modern templates if useful. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: per Asclepias McZusatz (talk) 12:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license. JuTa 12:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy keep. Uploaded in January 2005. Does have source and status. The informations can just be reformatted with modern templates if useful. -- Asclepias (talk) 21:32, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: per Asclepias McZusatz (talk) 12:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license. JuTa 12:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: needs permission McZusatz (talk) 12:37, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Hasty haety -عبدالعزيز عطاالله الحوم -شمال شرق المملكه العربيه السعوديه -مدينة تبوك محافظة البدع -العمل - مؤسسة البريد ال 2013-09-28 17-43.jpg
[edit]
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license. JuTa 12:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: uploader seems not be an copyviouploader McZusatz (talk) 11:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
blurrier version of File:Hells Angels-02-MJ.jpg Mercurywoodrose (talk) 01:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Delete It can be deleted, because similar image (with a bit better quality) exists. --Kulmalukko (talk) 20:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license. Why this image is {{PD}}? JuTa 12:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission McZusatz (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Compeletely useless file, no educational value. Everyone can put 3 Greek letters next to each other in plain text should there be a need to do so. Uploader is blocked for spamming on enwiki. Also I doubt the "PD old" license (it's certainly not that old; though surely under the threshold of originality). MF-W 11:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:33, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Copied from http://www.kidsgeo.com/images/atmosphere-density.jpg with "All Content Copyrighted © 1998 - 2013" Gabrielchihonglee (talk) 09:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
OS is copyrighted. Fry1989 eh? 23:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Why?
[edit]
It under Creative Commons works, according to the results (through CC - Google images). MrJoker07 (talk) 00:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- A far as I am aware, operating systems are copyrighted. I may be wrong about this one, but that would require proof. Fry1989 eh? 01:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Please provide a link to the permission. (google images CC search does not count) McZusatz (talk) 10:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license. JuTa 12:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: superseded by File:Incompleto.svg McZusatz (talk) 12:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Ini Mengenai Semua Judul-Judul Album Yang Mengenai (Nasrul Heliyus) Ke Semua Music Yang Di Cipta Atau Pun Di Record Tiada Kaitan Di Mana-Mana Laman Web Melainkan jaringan Yang Tersembunyi Yang Amat Sukar Di Te 2013-09-30 04-05.jpg
[edit]_Ke_Semua_Music_Yang_Di_Cipta_Atau_Pun_Di_Record_Tiada_Kaitan_Di_Mana-Mana_Laman_Web_Melainkan_jaringan_Yang_Tersembunyi_Yang_Amat_Sukar_Di_Te_2013-09-30_04-05.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Ke_Semua_Music_Yang_Di_Cipta_Atau_Pun_Di_Record_Tiada_Kaitan_Di_Mana-Mana_Laman_Web_Melainkan_jaringan_Yang_Tersembunyi_Yang_Amat_Sukar_Di_Te_2013-09-30_04-05.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Sculpture by Albert Charkin who is still alive. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: No FoP in Russia -- Steinsplitter (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Sculpture by Albert Charkin who is still alive. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete agree Warfieldian (talk)
Deleted: No FoP in Russia -- Steinsplitter (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Sculpture by Albert Charkin who is still alive. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:36, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:52, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unlikely to be own work Mjrmtg (talk) 13:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No real license. An compar http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/history/Miscellaneous/Copyright.html In my eyes they didn't check for copyright they just declare it may b public domain. JuTa 19:20, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 11:46, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The copyright of this image is in doubt. It has no extended data and thus appears to have been culled from elsewhere. The uploading editor needs to assert ownership clearly, probably via OTRS, for this to be a free image Timtrent (talk) 12:36, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Seems a promotional photo, no article in Wikipedia, no wellknown people, only twitter links on google search Ezarateesteban 13:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:25, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real souce, no real license. JuTa 19:24, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- it's a 19th century painting, made about 1840. Clear case of PD-old. this reproduction of the painting was published in print in 1854. --Dbachmann (talk) 10:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per Dbachmann McZusatz (talk) 11:42, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
the image is somehow broken, we have enough images of the same object. Herzi Pinki (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more prcise File:Karrer inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 08:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Karrer inf 1740.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 09:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Kendall is drinking a futuristic drink with a girl,Logan is floating around with a girl outside on a light board,Carlos is dancing with another girl,and James is dancing with two girls outside 2013-09-28 04-13.jpg
[edit]
small photo, possibly copyvio with watermark Mjrmtg (talk) 13:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license. JuTa 19:35, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Objects that are scanable are under PD-art [4] McZusatz (talk) 11:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:La cour au Chantre inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 10:04, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:DelaMarche inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 15:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: uncontested DR McZusatz (talk) 12:19, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Looks like personal potrait without educational value. Maybe not notable person. Kulmalukko (talk) 21:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope McZusatz (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license JuTa 19:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: uploader seems not be an copyviouploader McZusatz (talk) 11:24, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license JuTa 19:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: uploader seems not be an copyviouploader McZusatz (talk) 11:23, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license JuTa 20:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: has source, has license. McZusatz (talk) 11:03, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license JuTa 20:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Special:Contributions/Gul666 seems not like an copyvio uploader McZusatz (talk) 11:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license JuTa 20:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Special:Contributions/Gul666 seems not like an copyvio uploader McZusatz (talk) 11:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license JuTa 20:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: also not in use McZusatz (talk) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
_RM_11128.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_RM_11128.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Reduntant. Almost identical image is here. Kulmalukko (talk) 21:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
_RM_11128.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 10:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
_RM_11128.JPG){kind=link}
Personal photos of subject with no discernible notability. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Me and cuz went on burden street I New Orleans I'm in pink of course 2013-07-02 20-56.jpg
[edit]
out of project scope Didym (talk) 16:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:07, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 18:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Ukraine. 1982 gravestone. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:47, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of modern sculpture made about 1991. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: No FoP in Russia -- Steinsplitter (talk) 12:22, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Low quality penis photo. -mattbuck (Talk) 00:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:57, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Images of the bridge have been deleted already here as well as here. As it is an image of the unveiling of the bridge, the bridge is of central importance, thus it is not de minimis. Eleassar (t/p) 11:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Keep the reason is the unveiling ceremony, bridge is DM. --Sporti (talk) 12:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- The bridge is an indispensable part of the image, in the same manner as the train station here. If you removed the bridge, it would not make sense: people can't stand above the water without it. Or it would be just another image of a crowd celebrating something. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Keep This is neither a protectable artwork nor are there protectable design elements visible. --Denniss (talk) 13:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- This is a work of architecture, and works of architecture are protected in Slovenia, in whole or in part. We have no evidence of any threshold of originality in Slovenia. A bridge surely qualifies as an "individual intellectual creation", which is the definition of a copyrighted work by the Slovene law. --Eleassar (t/p) 15:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Keep per sporti. The bridge is important in the image, but the copyrightable aspects of the bridge aren't.--Pere prlpz (talk) 21:04, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- The bridge in its entirety is a copyrightable architectural work. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:40, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- You said the reason of the bridge being of central importance is the fact that it is an image of the unveiling of the bridge. The central point is not to show how is the bridge but to show the celebration. What is copyrightable is how the bridge is.--Pere prlpz (talk) 22:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- In my opinion, if the title is "Unveiling of the bridge in Podvelka", the intent is to show both the celebration and the bridge. Both were of interest to the reader of the newspaper article where the image was originally published. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- You said the reason of the bridge being of central importance is the fact that it is an image of the unveiling of the bridge. The central point is not to show how is the bridge but to show the celebration. What is copyrightable is how the bridge is.--Pere prlpz (talk) 22:32, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: An object cannot be de minimis to its own unveiling. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no freedom of panorama in Italy. FunkMonk (talk) 11:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
I see the problem but feel obliged to make much the same point as last time (Indohyus).Is this a scientific exercise or a flight of fancy? If the last then it is no use to me and should not appear on the page.But are you so sure? No response from Italy yet.No hard feelings on my point I just find your argument difficult to follow but art isn't my area. Best regards Robert aka Notafly (talk) 14:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: It doesn't matter whether it is a real animal skin, a recreation of an animal, or a flight of fancy -- in any case it has a copyright and this image infringes. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
There's no freedom of panorama for this type of plaque in the United States. Also, the copyright status of the incorporated photograph is unknown. I am nominating a copy of the image on en.wiki for deletion as well (en:File:Interpretive plaque on southside of Fort Lowell hospital.jpg) -- Diannaa (talk) 15:55, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Elcobbola as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: See metadata: copyright Mario Koss Media Lobby.de Tel.0049-172-<redacted>
Converted by me to DR, as the uploader has protested. However, I am with the nominator. The EXIF data of this image show that the author is a different person than the uploader. The uploader has to provide evidence that the photographer has released this image under the claimed free license. -- Túrelio (talk) 09:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Mario Koss (author per metadata) ≠ Yury Chernavsky (uploader). As the metadata contains an email address, an email from that address to OTRS would resolve the issue. In the absence of such an email, the uploader’s history (see deleted contribs and yet-to-be-deleted unambiguous copyvios) do not inspire confidence or trustworthiness. Эlcobbola talk 23:34, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:09, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
bessere Version im jpg-Format Hajog (talk) 17:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: File:Heinz Buchholz Berufsverbot Reichskunstkammer 1935.jpg McZusatz (talk) 11:52, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Logo. No evidence that it is own work. Stefan4 (talk) 14:44, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Drawn after another drawing, description says, derivative. FunkMonk (talk) 11:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:28, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Beschwerde von Eigentümer Allexkoch (talk) 06:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason to delete. Only copyirght issues concern us here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Beschwerde von Eigentümer Allexkoch (talk) 06:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason to delete. Only copyirght issues concern us here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Beschwerde von Eigentümer Allexkoch (talk) 06:41, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason to delete. Only copyirght issues concern us here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Beschwerde von Eigentümer Allexkoch (talk) 06:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not a reason to delete. Only copyirght issues concern us here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unused user portrait 91.66.153.214 15:10, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No description. 91.66.153.214 10:46, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission com:otrs McZusatz (talk) 12:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality ; no description ; it has be uploaded in wikiloves monument campaign, but it is not an historic monument ; there are many better images of this statues Tangopaso (talk) 13:53, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:34, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:Sacagawea Dollar... Ms. L. Corlione Cruz is the real face model on the USA 2000 1$ Coin....JPG
[edit]
Overexposed self-potrait. Maybe not notable person. Not realistically usable? Kulmalukko (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 10:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
La imagen no esta sujeta a modificaciones Hamilton9648 (talk) 23:02, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: still in use McZusatz (talk) 10:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Definitely wrong info on image creation date since Kishore Kumar died in 1987 and could not be photoed in 2004, nor Sangeetha Katti (b.1970) could be still a kid or teenager by this year. Thus, it's reasonable to assume that actual date should be around late 70s to early 80s while "own work" of Kattiaiwa in 2004 refers only to scanning of old photo and cannot be a valid base for CC-BY-SA lisense. Tatewaki (talk) 14:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Seedorff inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 13:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: uncontested DR unused file McZusatz (talk) 12:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
This pic was uploaded by mistake. This is my personal picture Sharmila kandee (talk) 07:18, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Comment: Nominator/uploader however deleted the DR — by mistake? Please confirm? -- Tuválkin ✉ 18:34, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
This picture was uploaded by mistake Sharmila kandee (talk) 15:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete: Per uploader’s request: Unused personal photo, recently uploaded, by mistake. -- Tuválkin ✉ 01:03, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Tuválkin. Uploader's request, unused and recently uploaded file (at the time of the first request anyway). whym (talk) 03:38, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Soviet sculpture made after WWII, no FoP in Russia A.Savin 10:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
suspecting it is not own work, because there is not any meta data Coekon (talk) 20:00, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
- Keep It's used on the user page on WP, although it's a very strange user page written like a broken article. Maybe somebody should alert them there, if they will find something wrong with that user, then this file can be deleted here. VolodyA! V Anarhist Beta_M (converse) 10:49, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
Kept: User pics are allowed and there are no indices on possible copyvio. A.Savin 20:08, 6 February 2012 (UTC)
Unused user portrait 91.66.153.214 10:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted Now unused. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The low quality. Zindox (talk) 04:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The low quality. Zindox (talk) 04:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Not too low . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
The low quality. Zindox (talk) 04:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Keep Not so bad quality. I think it's usable. --Kulmalukko (talk) 20:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
this has to be copyvio Mjrmtg (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
this has to be copyvio Mjrmtg (talk) 13:18, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:26, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
A copyrighted 3D photograph.[5] Eleassar (t/p) 16:52, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Objects that are scanable are covered by PD-art [6] --McZusatz (talk) 12:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: No, strictly speaking, Bridgeman covers only old Master paintings. WMF extended that to all 2-D subjects, but not anything with depth -- coins, for example, cannot be PD-Art. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:47, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unused, poor file-format (have File:4-Hydroxy-TEMPO.svg) and uses uncommon symbol for the lone electron (usually is a dot, asterisk usually means an excited state) DMacks (talk) 07:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Useless without a description 91.66.153.214 09:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 12:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Tschudy inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 06:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Vigier inf 1740.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 06:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: , . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unused user portrait 91.66.153.214 17:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unused user portrait 91.66.153.214 17:37, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet artwork made in the 1950s or later. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet artwork made after 1974. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:29, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet sculpture made in the 1950s or later. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:33, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet sculpture made in the 1950s or later. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:32, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet artwork made in the 1950s or later. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Wittemer inf 1734.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 14:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
replaced by more precise File:Wittemer inf 1740.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 14:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:35, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused user image, out of project scope Didym (talk) 18:49, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet relief made after 1942, no FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of Soviet relief made after 1974, no FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of a bust created in 1960. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 10:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Derivative of a signboard with probably copyrighted content. No FoP in Russia. A.Savin 12:27, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:31, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Teodoro Andreu
[edit]The works of this artist are still copyrighted according to the rules in Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/Spain#Spain.
- File:Alegoría de la República Española.jpg
- File:Arruixa, que Plou.jpg
- File:El-pintor-teodoro-andreu-sentamans.jpg
- File:Tres Roses en un Pomell.jpg
- File:Tresrosesenunpomell-TeodoroAndreu.JPG
Underlying lk (talk) 16:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:40, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Éder Álvarez Balanta.jpg
- File:Gabriel Mercado.jpg
- File:Teófilo Gutiérrez.jpg
- File:Rodrigo Nicanor Mora Núñez.jpg
- File:Cristian Ledesma.jpg
- File:Jonathan Bottinelli.jpg
- File:Jonatan Maidana.jpg
- File:Barovero.jpg
- File:Leonel Vangioni.jpg
- File:Andrada.jpg
- File:Ramón Díaz.jpg
- File:Ponzio.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Opinión
No creo aver hecho algo para que sean borradas porque a mi me cuesta tiempo subirlas, admito que en otras oportunidades he subiso imagenes de internet este no es el caso. Gracias. AS-W (talk · contribs) 14:23, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: need permission McZusatz (talk) 12:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Collection of advertisement of company with questionable notability. Also unclear copyrights status.
- File:Stingray FB Cover.jpg
- File:201307-five-trucks-8.jpg
- File:Kevon-doc-15-yr-old2.jpg
- File:Doctor Flue, Chimney Sweep.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Demon 007sheikh (talk · contribs)
[edit]unused personal photos, commons is not a personal photo album, out of scope
- File:Burcu and Ali Rocket.jpg
- File:Ali Rocket in the Go-Kart.jpg
- File:Ali rocket winning.jpg
- File:Ali rocket.jpg
- File:Ali rocket motocross.jpg
- File:Ali rocket certificate.jpg
Mjrmtg (talk) 12:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:39, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fisherfeatures (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of movie posters/newspaper artcles/promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Article by David Fisher about Berlin screening of Love Inventory.jpg
- File:Yehuda Stav on Love Inventory.png
- File:Irit Shamgar on Love Inventory.png
- File:Amir Kaminar on Love Inventory.jpg
- File:Nachman Ingbar on Love Inventory.jpg
- File:David Shalit on Love Inventory.jpg
- File:Meir Shnizer on Love Inventory.png
- File:Kobi Niv on Love Inventory.jpg
- File:Picnic in gunskirchen.jpg
- File:פוסטר שישה מיליון ואחד.jpg
- File:ביקורת על הסרט שישה מיליון ואחד - ידיעות אחרונות.jpg
- File:Six Million and One Hebrew poster.jpg
- File:David Fisher and Ronel Fisher.jpg
- File:Love Inventory offical film poster.jpg
- File:Cinematographer Ronen Schechner, director David Fisher, Gunskirchen liberator and WWII veteran Mickey Dorsey and Pat Waters (son of General Patton) during the making of Six Million And One..jpg
- File:The spot from which Joseph Fischer was liberated in Gunskirchen.JPG
- File:Josef Fischer.jpg
- File:Six Million and One poster.jpg
- File:David Fisher at Crossing Europe Film Festival.jpg
- File:Six Million and One film poster.jpg
- File:Fisher Features Logo.jpg
- File:Love inventory.jpg
- File:David Fisher.jpg
- File:Reconstruction of Tito's Palace in Mostar.JPG
- File:Yuval Fisher and Salam Sa’adi.jpg
- File:David, Yuval and Neus.JPG
- File:Mostar round-trip poster.jpg
_during_the_making_of_Six_Million_And_One..jpg){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:15, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Humtum1986 (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope
- File:Saurabh srivastava during photoshoot 2013-07-07 23-10.jpg
- File:Saurabh Srivastava 2013-07-07 22-57.jpg
- File:Saurabh srivastava photoshoot 2013-07-07 22-49.jpg
Didym (talk) 18:40, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:48, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jetonkelmendi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of book covers and promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Three dots.jpg
- File:Comme le commencement est silencieux.jpg
- File:Jeton kelmendi kinezisht.jpg
- File:Therras gjerat e harruara.jpg
- File:Largea jeton kelmendi.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kelvin Estrelaa (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope
Didym (talk) 18:25, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Collection of promo photos which could be found on other web sites.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- The HariDP picture is property of The Hindu [7]sulfurboy (talk) 08:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom McZusatz (talk) 12:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
unused user images, out of project scope
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb1.jpg
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb4.jpg
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb5.jpg
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb3.jpg
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb2.jpg
- File:Manpreet singh mpsb.jpg
Didym (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:49, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
out of project scope
Didym (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:08, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mlovespizza (talk · contribs)
[edit]very poor quality, out of project scope
Didym (talk) 18:21, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 11:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Three files uploaded by Monomony
[edit]Of five live uploads by Monomony, one was exposed to be an [allegedly] public-domain image uploaded earlier by another user, and another was stolen from Afrazwarsi (talk · contribs) – or there is actually no Afrazwarsi, who knows? Where originate the remaining three files,
- File:Race 2 stars with Suhail Galadari at Khaleej Times (10).jpg,
- File:Stars2-111111.jpg,
- File:Suhail A Galadari.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
I have no insights, but no Commoner IMHO would bet that from Monomony in any reasonable sense. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 09:59, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Collection of promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Aparna nair.jpg
- File:Aparna nair as hima.jpg
- File:Sankar and crew with aparna.jpg
- File:Sankar.jpg
- File:V r sankar.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Assuming credible evidence of permission doesn't arrive before this AFD closes: For those in use on other Wikis, transwiki and if necessary reduce the quality to comply with that Wiki's non-free content criteria. Delete all others. If permission does arrive then of course keep as long as they are not out of scope. Davidwr (talk) 19:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Also fair use is not allowed McZusatz (talk) 12:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soyaustraliano (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Маркина Наталия (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low-res files with suspicious watermarks, suppose copyvio from the web
- File:GetImage.jpg 4 Церковь Покрова на Нерли.jpg
- File:GetImage.jpg Слобода на пиру в гостях у Ивана Грозного.jpg
A.Savin 09:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 12:55, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Venezuelan stamps copyrighted minimum 60 years from publication and this image includes many recent stamps. Licence wrong. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:45, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Dubious license, see also his other images. FunkMonk (talk) 10:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:16, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Dubious: http://tineye.com/search/d7e5b12ba1f3084ad882822d5f0b0fa0ba132c47/?sort=size&order=desc FunkMonk (talk) 10:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Many of this guys other images are copyvios, so this probably is too. FunkMonk (talk) 10:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No evidence that this photo would be pd: missing information about the place of the first publication and the year of the photographer's death. Eleassar (t/p) 16:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
No evidence that the photo was published before 1923. Eleassar (t/p) 17:08, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no permission, no real license. JuTa 19:28, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real license. Is is {{PD-old}} or similar? JuTa 19:42, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license JuTa 19:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no real source, no real license JuTa 19:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
no source, no real license JuTa 20:01, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 20:17, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 1
[edit]No Commons:Freedom of panorama in Ukraine. 1981 monument. See w:en:Mother Motherland, Kiev.
- File:Kiev - Motherland monument2.jpg
- File:Kiev - Motherland monument3.jpg
- File:Kiev - Motherland monument4.jpg
- File:Kiev warmuseum 070611 01.jpg
- File:Mother of the Fatherland - Museum of Great Patriotic War-Kyev-Ukraine.jpg
- File:Mother of the Fatherland Monument, Museum of the Great Patriotic War complex. Kiev, Ukraine, Eastern Europe.jpg
- File:Motherland Monument-2.jpg
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 002.jpg
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 003.jpg
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 004.jpg
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 005.jpg
- File:Rodina Mat' .jpg
- File:Rodina mat'.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:57, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, they can be deleted, if there is FOP problem. Btw, should all the pictures of the Motherland monument in Kiev be deleted? ---Kulmalukko (talk) 15:06, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 002.jpg may fall under {{PD-RU-exempt}} as contains COA of Soviet Union (and it is main object of the photo).--Anatoliy (talk) 15:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama. See also w:Mother Motherland, Kiev.
- File:2005-08-15 Motherland Rodina Mat Monument Kiev 312.JPG
- File:2005-08-15 Motherland Rodina Mat Monument Kiev 433.JPG
- File:Detail of The Mother Motherland monument 16m sword - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8600793975).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland (3942763587).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland (3942767265).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland (3943545734).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland (3943547340).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland Rodina Mat statue (8162257793).jpg
- File:Mother Motherland statue (8162375308).jpg
- File:Mother of the Fatherland - Museum of Great Patriotic War-Kyev-Ukraine.jpg
- File:Mother of the Fatherland Monument, Museum of the Great Patriotic War complex. Kiev, Ukraine, Eastern Europe-2.jpg
- File:Mother of the Fatherland Monument, Museum of the Great Patriotic War complex. Kiev, Ukraine, Eastern Europe.jpg
- File:Motherland Monument-2.jpg
- File:Motherland-Kiev.jpg
- File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 001.jpg
- File:The Mother Motherland monument soaring 102m. above ground level - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8600682945).jpg
- File:The Mother Motherland monument soaring 102m. above ground level - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8600686045).jpg
- File:The Mother Motherland monument soaring 102m. above ground level - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8601782238).jpg
- File:The Mother Motherland monument soaring 102m. above ground level - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8601784042).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-матір (вид з обеліску вічного-вогню).JPG
- File:Батьківщина-матір.JPG
- File:Батьківщина-мати. Місто Київ.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 01.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 02.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 03.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 04.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 05.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 06.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 07.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 08.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 09.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 1.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 10.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 11.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 12.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 2.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 4.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері 5.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері у Києві.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері, Київ.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері, м. Київ.JPG
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері.JPG
- File:Монумент Родина-мать.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 16:56, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Delete all, except for File:Museum of the Great Patriotic War - Kiev - 001.jpg which is more of a panoramic photo. Undelete all in 2081 (Borodai died in 2010). russavia (talk) 07:56, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep also thos one: File:The Mother Motherland monument soaring 102m. above ground level - Museum of Great Patriotic War (8601782238).jpg --178.2.56.234 12:41, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Why? The photo clearly focuses on the statue. --Stefan4 (talk) 12:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in Ukraine.
Stefan4 (talk) 18:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per comments McZusatz (talk) 12:03, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Ukraine.
Yevgeny Vuchetich died in 1974, so photos of his Motherland Monument cannot be free until 2044.
- File:Kiev Mother Motherland IMG 6246 1725.jpg
- File:Монумент Вітчизни-матері Monumento a la Madre Patria 3.jpg
- File:Парк Вічної Слави 4.jpg
- File:Стауя київської Батьківщини-матері у Бахчисарайському парку мініатюр.JPG
Josve05a (talk) 09:09, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 19:23, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 2
[edit]no FoP in Ukraine - monument designed by Yevgeny Vuchetich who died in 1974
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
INeverCry 08:59, 14 May 2015 (UTC)
--- Deleted: per INeverCry. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 05:08, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 3
[edit]No FoP in Ukraine. Copyright expires in 2081
- File:80-382-0520 Родина-мать.jpg
- File:Kyiv - Mother monument front.jpg
- File:Kyiv - Mother monument with tanks.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (1).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (10).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (2).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (3).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (4).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (5).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (6).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (7).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (8).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати, Київ (9).jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати.jpg
- File:Київ, вул. Лаврська 27, Монумент «Батьківщина-мати».jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Off-shell (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 4
[edit]No FOP in Ukraine (see FOP in Ukraine).
- File:1.Київ 2012 (Батьківщина-Мати).jpg
- File:Kyiv - Mother-land close.jpg
- File:Kyiv - Mother-land.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» 01.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» 03.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» 04.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» 05.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Kulmalukko (talk) 12:50, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ruthven (msg) 09:06, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 5
[edit]No FOP in Ukraine. (Built in 1981.)
- File:2018-04-16 Motherland monument in Kiev.jpg
- File:Kiev - panoramio (85).jpg
- File:Kiev 106 Monument to the Motherland.jpg
- File:Pechers'kyi district, Kiev, Ukraine - panoramio (3).jpg
- File:Pechersk 473.JPG
- File:Pechersk 4730.jpg
- File:Statue of Motherland - panoramio.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» 02.jpg
- File:Родина-мать (Киев) (1).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Kulmalukko (talk) 18:34, 22 July 2018 (UTC)
- O co dokładnie chodzi? Fafik Napisz coś® 17:46, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- This statue is protected by copyright law, until the designer has been dead for 70 years. --Kulmalukko (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
- OK, i understand. Fafik Napisz coś® 09:12, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- This statue is protected by copyright law, until the designer has been dead for 70 years. --Kulmalukko (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 13:08, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 6
[edit]No FOP in Ukraine. (The designer died 9 years ago.)
- File:Playing Soldiers At War Memorial (236349933).jpeg
- File:Pechers'kyi district, Kiev, Ukraine - panoramio (225).jpg
- File:Родина Мать - panoramio.jpg
- File:The Motherland Monument - Kiev - Ukraine - 03 (29868142968).jpg
- File:The Motherland Monument - Kiev - Ukraine - 02 (42834941525).jpg
- File:The Motherland Monument - Kiev - Ukraine - 01 (42834942845).jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати».jpg
- File:Київ Монумент «Батьківщина-мати».jpg
- File:Памятник "Родина мать".jpg
- File:Памятник "Родина мать" 4.jpg
- File:Памятник "Родина мать" 3.jpg
- File:Памятник "Родина мать" 2.jpg
- File:Памятник "Родина мать" 1.jpg
- File:Монумент "Батьківщина Мати".jpg
- File:Motherland Statue.jpg
- File:Motherland Statue in Kiev.jpg
- File:Kiev’s Motherland Statue.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» в Києві.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» в Києві1.jpg
.jpeg&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}
Kulmalukko (talk) 20:23, 13 February 2019 (UTC) Please do not delete. Photos are copyright. No violations. DENAMAX (talk) 15:00, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:20, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 7
[edit]No FOP in Ukraine. 1981 monument. See w:en:Mother Motherland, Kiev. The designer died in 2010.
- File:80-382-0520 Монумент «Батьківщина-мати».jpg
- File:Mutter-Heimat-Statue Kiev.jpg
- File:Pechers'kyi district, Kiev, Ukraine - panoramio (268).jpg
- File:Rodina matj.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати 03.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати в Києві.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати.jpg
- File:Мати 0337.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» P1140475.jpg
- File:Національний музей історії України у Другій світовій війні DSC 7295.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Off-shell (talk) 22:30, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 8
[edit]No FOP in Ukraine. Built in 1981. The designer died in 2010.
- File:Detail of Rodyna Mat (Mother's Statue) - Museum of the History of Ukraine in World War Two - Kiev - Ukraine - 01 (26735709440).jpg
- File:Motherland Monument.jpg
_-_Museum_of_the_History_of_Ukraine_in_World_War_Two_-_Kiev_-_Ukraine_-_01_(26735709440).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Off-shell (talk) 15:02, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 9
[edit]No FoP in Ukraine. Built in 1981. The designer died in 2010.
- File:Батьківщина-Мати ввечері 2016.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати.jpg
- File:Монумент «Батьківщина-мати» Киев.jpg
- File:Одина - Мать - автор, funsize - 18 авг 2010 В 1981 году на День Победы этот комплекс открывал генеральный секретарь ЦК КПСС Леони - panoramio.jpg
Off-shell (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. - FitIndia Talk ✉ 05:37, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 10
[edit]No FoP in Ukraine. Built in 1981. The designer died in 2010.
- File:Detail of Rodyna Mat (Mother's Statue ) - Museum of the History of Ukraine in World War Two - Kiev - Ukraine - 02 (27009680365).jpg
- File:Kiev- Motherland Monument.jpg
- File:Kyiv - Mother monument 1.jpg
- File:Mother Kyiv.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №10.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №11.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №12.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №13.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №2.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №3.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №4.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №5.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №6.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №7.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №8.jpg
- File:Батьківщина-Мати (Київ). Світлина №9.jpg
- File:Київ. Статуя Батьківщина-мати.jpg
_-_Museum_of_the_History_of_Ukraine_in_World_War_Two_-_Kiev_-_Ukraine_-_02_(27009680365).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%9610.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%9611.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%9612.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%9613.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%962.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%963.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%964.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%965.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%966.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%967.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%968.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
._%D0%A1%D0%B2%D1%96%D1%82%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%B0_%E2%84%969.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Off-shell (talk) 20:36, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination.--- FitIndia Talk ✉ 10:50, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Files in Category:Monument to the Motherland, Kiev 11
[edit]No FoP in Ukraine. Built in 1981. The designer died in 2010.
Off-shell (talk) 05:16, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Sealle (talk) 17:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file and File:Albert Bierstadt - Puget Sound on the Pacific Coast.png are copies of the same source image. The PNG version fixes JPEG corruption from the original, so it is of higher quality. Jordon Kalilich (talk) 16:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- I have a bigger picture of loaded, now it's no longer the same. --Botaurus (talk) 19:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks, Botaurus. Admins, I withdraw this request. Jordon Kalilich (talk) 20:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have a bigger picture of loaded, now it's no longer the same. --Botaurus (talk) 19:50, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Dispute claim to creating of image 2.121.142.55 13:36, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 17:05, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
No evidence that this image would be in the public domain. The place and date of the original publication are unknown. If it was first published in Yugoslavia, all images published at least since 1 January 1970 may be copyrighted (depending on the succeeding country: in Slovenia, it is 1 January 1970, elsewhere, it is a year or a few years later). Eleassar (t/p) 09:39, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted - no proper sourcing given. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Italy has no Freedom of Panorama for the prominent deer sculpture unless the artist died 70 years ago. Then the sculpture becomes copyright free. Do we know how old the sculpture is? Leoboudv (talk) 00:07, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
As far as I know (i.e. gran parent stories) this scultore stand in front of museum since it has been established in this definitive building (i.e. end of XIX). I know that one animal has been stolen and after years replaced by a copy and I remember years ('70's) without one gazel (it is not a deer). --Bramfab (talk) 12:19, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment: I let the closing Admin decide if this image can be kept or not. One solution, if necessary, is to crop out most of the deer, to focus on the museum. I filed this DR just to be safe. Nothing more. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:11, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- I'm looking for the author, asked to the museum. -- Fulvio 314 10:23, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
- The museum gave me informations, author is Guido Righetti [8] (1875-1958). Removed antelopes from picture, not deer, nor gazel, ;), now we can keep it. -- Fulvio 314 20:29, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Image is now OK . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:28, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
No evidence that this photo is in the public domain. Who took it? Where and when was it published for the first time? Eleassar (t/p) 17:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep This artistic work created by the United Kingdom Government is in the public domain.
- It is a photograph created by the United Kingdom Government and taken prior to 1 June 1957. The ship sunk November 14, 1941.
- HMSO has declared that the expiry of Crown Copyrights applies worldwide--EH101 (talk) 12:04, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- We need a reliable reference for the claim that it has been created by the government. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- It's unlikely that anybody not part of the Royal Navy, in the eve of World War II could:
- Fly near a new Royal Navy carrier.
- Take photos of it.
- Therefore, it's extremely unlikely that the images weren't taken by the United Kingdom Government.
- Anyway, a counterexample with an image of any capital ship taken from a plane in 1934-41 by anybody different than government would undermine my reasoning, but I'm quite sure none will be found.--Pere prlpz (talk) 20:52, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:HMS Gloucester sinking.jpg? File:HMS Ark Royal (91) just after launching.jpg? File:HMS New Zealand LOC ggbain 16722.jpg? I'm not sure who else could take a photo of this ship. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- I must admit that the image of HMS Gloucester matches the conditions I asked, but the proposed image is clearly not taken from a German plane attacking it.--Pere prlpz (talk) 22:51, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed. What I wanted to say is that the image could also have been taken by a foreign reconaissance aircraft, by an allied aircraft or by a journalist. However, per [9], "From collection of Wiki-Ed's great uncle, possibly taken by someone else and then traded." I'm not sure by whom it was taken, and also not that every work by the Royal Navy aviators qualifies as a work of the Royal Navy. Shouldn't there be some evidence that it was taken in the course of his duties? See also this comment. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:36, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:HMS Gloucester sinking.jpg? File:HMS Ark Royal (91) just after launching.jpg? File:HMS New Zealand LOC ggbain 16722.jpg? I'm not sure who else could take a photo of this ship. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:42, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- It's unlikely that anybody not part of the Royal Navy, in the eve of World War II could:
- We need a reliable reference for the claim that it has been created by the government. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:57, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
_just_after_launching.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Undelete&target=File%3AHMS+Ark+Royal.JPG×tamp=20071105080700){kind=link}
Deleted: Unfortunately, the burden of proof is on those who want to keep the image that it is beyond a significant doubt that the image is PD. I think it is very likely that this is a UK government image, but there are other possibilities -- Jane's has many images that did not come from official sources and certainly capital ships were newsworthy, so ther could well be other photographers as well. Remember also, that WWII escalated very rapidly -- Chamberlain returned from Munich with "peace for our time" -- security was not at a high level until well into 1939. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
The source is unknown. At least gwpda.org says it cannot guarantee where the pictures come from. Eleassar (t/p) 17:19, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- keep So what? The age is enough. We can be reasonably (in the legal sense) confident from the age of the photo alone that this is PD, even if we don't know the precise date or author. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Andy, I don't understand your comment. If it were taken by a soldier whose job was not photography, it is a private image and is under copyright until 70 years after the soldier's death. It is PD only if it is an official UK government image and we don't know that. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:12, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
No convincing reason given why this image should be pd. "The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum website says it is public domain" certainly is no reason, this museum cannot declare any image to be in the pd. Rosenzweig δ 14:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- Comment See also Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Einsatzgruppen-Killingfull.jpg, it's the same picture, "Last Jew in Vinnitsa". Trycatch (talk) 14:37, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Deleted. Per precedent. FunkMonk (talk) 16:20, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- Reopened per popular demand. Note that this book[10] states the photo was found in "a German soldier's personal album". This does in no way make it public domain, and unless we get more specific info about the author of the photo, it remains without proper source and thus unfit for Commons. FunkMonk (talk) 21:21, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per {{PD-Ukraine}} see http://www.yivoinstitute.org/exhibits/holopix7.htm. Obelix (talk) 22:50, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
- It is not disputed that the photo was taken in Ukraine. But that fact has no effect on the copyright status, what matters is where it was firs published and when. The archive is Russian, so it could very well have been in Russia too. FunkMonk (talk) 22:59, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Comment See also en:File talk:Einsatzgruppen Killing.jpg for further discussion and info on the image. --Rosenzweig δ 07:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
- Surely the sensible way would be to open an undeletion request based on Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Einsatzgruppen-Killingfull.jpg, not uploading it again and deletion nominating it again. /129.215.149.97 09:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
- Deleted: duplicate of a deleted file (see Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Einsatzgruppen-Killingfull.jpg for reference). Rama (talk) 15:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
The USHMM does not say that the image is public domain (they state here that the copyright is owned by the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum). I am unable to find it at the Library of Congress website. This image was previously deleted in 2008 as there's no proof that it's public domain. There's a copy at en.wiki that's currently templated for fair use. Diannaa (talk) 15:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- I think that the PD claim is based on the same argument as in w:Template:PD-HHOFFMANN: certain confiscated property is in the public domain in the United States. However, I can't find any evidence that this is confiscated property. According to [11], "The Collections Division is actively soliciting donations of original prewar, wartime, and immediate postwar family photos." This suggests that the memorial museum contains lots of images from lots of different sources, so we can't just assume that anything there is confiscated property. Also, it probably means that the museum has a mixture of published and unpublished material, as family photos usually are unpublished. Unless it is confiscated property, then the photo is copyrighted in the United States per {{Not-PD-US-URAA}}.
- As the museum collects material from various different sources, published as well as unpublished, I think that we will have to assume that this is unpublished unless other information becomes available and Delete until it is 120 years old, per {{PD-US-unpublished}}. --Stefan4 (talk) 16:00, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- One of the uploaders is currently blocked and wrote this on his talk page:
Sigh. Anonymous, more than 70 years old. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 16:31, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- It does indeed seem to be anonymous from the information we have, so that should render it free in Germany, but the problem is the United States. --Stefan4 (talk) 17:11, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Why was this restored anyway when it was deleted in 2010? And why do people think it is "anonymous"? It seems it was found in a soldier's album, but so far I havent't read anywhere that nobody knows who said soldier was. That he was/is not named in literature does not make him unknown in a legal sense, and it does make the image "anonymous". --Rosenzweig τ 17:43, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
- Keep The USHMM website where the original version was copied from says: "Credit: United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, courtesy of Library of Congress; Copyright: Public Domain" you can find the page by clicking the link on the page which will get you to [12], but USHMM urls change often so direct link might not work. It is a very famous photograph by unknown photographer made more than 70 years ago so {{Anonymous-EU}} should be fine. It was printed in countless books and magazines see fig 10.2 here for 1958 newspaper with it. The photographer is anonymous since I assume that if it was known someone would mention his name in all those publications. I know that some sources say that it was found in someone's album but that does not prove authorship. There seem to be also multiple "original prints" see [13] and [14], both of which are different than commons version. --Jarekt (talk) 05:02, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- "I know that some sources say that it was found in someone's album but that does not prove authorship": No. But neither does it prove that the image is really anonymous in a legal sense as required by German law (which is practically impossible to prove). As I have written in numerous deletion requests, this makes the provisions regarding pre-1995 anonymous German works practically worthless for us. --Rosenzweig τ 17:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- According to Berne Convention art. 5. [15] the country of origin is the country of the first publication of the photo. So at least in the eyes of the law it is most likely non German work. The earliest publication I am aware of is Finland, but I can only assume it was a well known and publicized image at that point. By the way as far as I can tell the image also meets requirements of {{PD-1996}}. --Jarekt (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- Whether {{PD-1996}} is satisfied or not depends on the country of first publication. If it was published in Finland before 1966, and if Finland was the country of first publication, then the photo satisfies {{PD-1996}}. If it was first published in some other country, then it doesn't necessarily satisfy {{PD-1996}}. --Stefan4 (talk) 20:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- According to Berne Convention art. 5. [15] the country of origin is the country of the first publication of the photo. So at least in the eyes of the law it is most likely non German work. The earliest publication I am aware of is Finland, but I can only assume it was a well known and publicized image at that point. By the way as far as I can tell the image also meets requirements of {{PD-1996}}. --Jarekt (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
The point is: We simply don't know enough about the image (like the author and time and place of first publication) to really make a valid assessment of its legal status. In such cases COM:PRP mandates the deletion of the file. --Rosenzweig τ 21:08, 6 October 2013 (UTC)
- As with most images we host there is some degree of uncertainty. For most historical photographs "time and place of first publication" is hard to prove and might easily change is earlier publication is found. Our Precautionary principle is applied to the cases "where there is significant doubt about the freedom of a particular file" (my emphasis). But in this case we are dealing with 70+ years old widely published photograph by anonymous photographer, which has been in publication from at least 1950's and which has been assessed as "Public domain" by United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. In most other cases we treat such assessments as true until proven false. We trust Bundesarchiv assessments that they are the copyright holders to all the images they provided, and question such assessment only in rare cases when they are obviously wrong, like here or here. Same thing with files in Category:Files from Flickr's 'The Commons': if a well known institution goes on record claiming that file has no known copyright restrictions we trust their assessment, unless we have a prove that they made a mistake. --Jarekt (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- We trust their assessment? Only until somebody makes a deletion request voicing significant doubts. Which is what happened here. --Rosenzweig τ 18:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- DR does not mean "significant doubt" people often use DR mechanism as "I do not understand something so someone with more time should check it". If we had to apply Precautionary principle to each image with DR, than none would survive since we are almost never 100% sure of anything. --Jarekt (talk) 03:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- We trust their assessment? Only until somebody makes a deletion request voicing significant doubts. Which is what happened here. --Rosenzweig τ 18:27, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
- I do consider my doubts voiced in this deletion request to be significant. --Rosenzweig τ 17:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- The current web page at the USHMM for this image does not claim the image is in the public domain. It states that the USHMM owns the copyright. It states that the image appears "courtest of Sharon Paquette". Corbis also claims they own the copyright: see here. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- There are apparently two contradictory USHMM pages:
- Only one of the pages contains the photo, but both pages refer to photo #64407, so they are obviously both talking about the same photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:27, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- That is confusing especially since one of those pages and large number of USHMM pages has no images. I suspect some partial website shutdown due to US government shutdown. I assume that the missing image on [18] is the original upload of the File:Einsatzgruppe.jpg see here. It looks to me like USHMM treats 2 different prints of the same image differently. They consider the print from "Sharon Paquette" as their own and the print from Library of Congress (with horizontal line above the grave) as PD. --Jarekt (talk) 03:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- The current web page at the USHMM for this image does not claim the image is in the public domain. It states that the USHMM owns the copyright. It states that the image appears "courtest of Sharon Paquette". Corbis also claims they own the copyright: see here. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:24, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
- Which is only a further hint that the known facts about this image are not quite as crystal clear as we would like them to be. Hence my significant doubts (see above). --Rosenzweig τ 17:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Some authorized Museum staff member(s) with the complete legal and practical knowledge – I think more comprehensive than ours - has made this decision. Majority of their WWII pictures are not PD. But they assessed this one as PD. I see no reason why we should question USHMM’s knowledge of copyright law, conscientiousness and the resulting statement on the website regarding this picture. Keep Boston9 (talk) 21:51, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
- Some authorized Museum staff member(s) with the complete legal and practical knowledge – I think more comprehensive than ours - has made this decision. Majority of their WWII pictures are not PD. But they assessed this one as PD. I see no reason why we should question USHMM’s knowledge of copyright law, conscientiousness and the resulting statement on the website regarding this picture.
- Which is only a further hint that the known facts about this image are not quite as crystal clear as we would like them to be. Hence my significant doubts (see above). --Rosenzweig τ 17:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- And I see no reason why we shouldn't think for ourselves. Especially in a case where employees of an American museum assess a non-US image like this one. For them it may be enough to assess the legal status in the US. For us, that is not enough. --Rosenzweig τ 21:02, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- Am I right in thinking that the problem has been reduced to finding this second, non-US license? But what is wrong with {Anonymous-EU}? Boston9 (talk) 23:16, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
- I already wrote about that above. We don't really know where (and when) this image was published first, and we don't really know if it its truly "anonymous" in a legal sense. That we don't know the author does not automatically mean an image (or any other work for that matter) is automatically anonymous.
- I am also not sure the USHMM people are correct in their assessment of the copyright status of the image in the US. If you take a look at the Hirtle chart, section Works Published Abroad Before 1978, you can find [Published] 1923 through 1977, Published in the US more than 30 days after publication abroad, without compliance with US formalities, and not in the public domain in its home country as of URAA date: [Protected for] 95 years after publication date and similar cases. There is a very strong possibility that one of those "95 years after publication date" cases applies here. --Rosenzweig τ 10:18, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
- I share your thoughts. However, that is major risk to all our pictures which are marked as anonymous. Let us have some trust in USHMM staff and their work. Due to its profile and geographical location overwhelming majority of their pictures are non-US, so this Museum operates within a very challenging legal framework regarding copyrights. I am now aware of the overall statistics, but in the topics and places I am interested in, having a photo marked as PD by USHMM is not an everyday occurrence. But for some good reason they have marked this one as PD. So I would keep this photo. We can keep an eye on it and can always continue this discussion if the new facts or information become known. Boston9 (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- We trust Bundesarchives when they claim CC licenses on similar images by anonymous photographers, see here. Also with other institutions, we usually trust their assessment until we have a proof that they are wrong. --Jarekt (talk) 21:36, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) The problem is that we have no information on why the USHMM staff thinks that the photo is anonymous. There is also a statement that the image is "courtest of Sharon Paquette". Is Sharon Paquette the author? In that case, the photo isn't anonymous at all. A way to determine whether a photo is anonymous is to check whether the photographer was named the first time the photo was published. If the photographer wasn't named at that point, then it is unlikely that the photographer isn't anonymous. In this case, the first publication isn't specified, so we don't know whether the photographer was credited there. A minimum requirement should be to verify at least the first publication of the photo. Also, the claim that the photo is in the public domain in the United States is very dubious. This would require that the photo was published in the United States within 30 days after the photo's first publication, or that it is seized enemy property, of which we have no evidence. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Since there are numerous old prints of the photograph, I assume that "Sharon Paquette" is a person that gave one of those prints to the USHMM. USHMM might have multiple prints of the photo and that is why there are different images with different metadata on their website. Nobody ever listed "Sharon Paquette" as one so I am not sure why you think she might be one. Problem with checking the first publication is that it is unknown for most images, so we usually have to settle for the oldest known publication, which might be changing. As for US copyright the requirement would be that the photo was not published in the United States within 30 days after the photo's first publication. --Jarekt (talk) 03:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- {{PD-1996}} is not satisfied as {{PD-1996}} never is satisfied for German photos created after 1925. The requirement, {{PD-URAA-Simul}}, is that it was published in the United States within 30 days after publication in Germany. --Stefan4 (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- As I mentioned above "According to Berne Convention art. 5. [19] in case of anonymous work the country of origin is the country of the first publication of the photo", and in case of Holocaust images it is rarely Germany. The oldest publication we found so far if Finland. --Jarekt (talk) 15:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- {{PD-1996}} is not satisfied as {{PD-1996}} never is satisfied for German photos created after 1925. The requirement, {{PD-URAA-Simul}}, is that it was published in the United States within 30 days after publication in Germany. --Stefan4 (talk) 08:47, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- Since there are numerous old prints of the photograph, I assume that "Sharon Paquette" is a person that gave one of those prints to the USHMM. USHMM might have multiple prints of the photo and that is why there are different images with different metadata on their website. Nobody ever listed "Sharon Paquette" as one so I am not sure why you think she might be one. Problem with checking the first publication is that it is unknown for most images, so we usually have to settle for the oldest known publication, which might be changing. As for US copyright the requirement would be that the photo was not published in the United States within 30 days after the photo's first publication. --Jarekt (talk) 03:14, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- I share your thoughts. However, that is major risk to all our pictures which are marked as anonymous. Let us have some trust in USHMM staff and their work. Due to its profile and geographical location overwhelming majority of their pictures are non-US, so this Museum operates within a very challenging legal framework regarding copyrights. I am now aware of the overall statistics, but in the topics and places I am interested in, having a photo marked as PD by USHMM is not an everyday occurrence. But for some good reason they have marked this one as PD. So I would keep this photo. We can keep an eye on it and can always continue this discussion if the new facts or information become known. Boston9 (talk) 20:57, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- But we do not know where and when the image was published first. --Rosenzweig τ 16:33, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
The German Federal Archive (Bundesarchiv) acquired lots of images from several news agencies, among them ADN, the official news agency of East Germany. Included with these acquisitions were extensive usage rights, essentially the same rights those news agencies had, which means the Bundesarchiv may not be the author of said images, but owns full usage rights to them and can release them under a free CC license. At least that is what they say, and that is where we believe them.
The USHMM, on the other hand, does not claim to have acquired this image as part of a news agency image collection along with extensive usage rights. It seems they did acquire some print(s) of the image from one or more donor(s), and they simply claim that the image is in the PD, without even the slightest explanation why.
So: This image is very different from the Bundesarchiv images, and one simply cannot say we should trust the USHMM because we trust the Bundesarchiv. The Bundesarchiv gave us a reasonable explanation. The USHMM did not.
Once more: This whole debate shows that we simply don't know enough about the image (like the author and time and place of first publication) to really make a valid assessment of its legal status. In such cases COM:PRP mandates the deletion of the file. --Rosenzweig τ 16:49, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- One question: does it mean that you contacted USHMM and they have clarified the legal status of the photo in a way you have just described? Boston9 (talk) 20:01, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- No, I haven't contacted them (nor have I claimed anywhere that I did). I was only recapitulating this discussion and the information available at the USHMM website. --Rosenzweig τ 21:32, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- I see. So I am afraid you should not speak so convincingly that USHMM had no right to have marked this picture as PD. Not without evidence or further clarification. USHMM is a well respected American institution acting in good faith, which is the basis for all our volunteering work at Commons. I trust USHMM, as I trust Bundesarchiv. Also, COM:PRP emphasizes significant doubt. There is always a high level of uncertainty regarding anonymous pictures from WWII we have here. This one is no different. I think this picture should be kept as long as USHMM declares it is in public domain. From pure legal point of view that is suffice. With this declaration it meets our licensing requirements. Boston9 (talk) 20:16, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
- @Boston9: Nowhere have I written that they have "no right to have marked this picture as PD". I merely pointed out the differences between this image and the Bundesarchiv images and that the Bundesarchiv gives us reasons to trust them, whereas the USHMM does not. Consequently, and as several legal aspects make it at least doubtful that the image is really in the PD (as discussed at length above), I do not trust them with this. Especially considering the contradictory information from them about this image (see Stefan4's contribution below; essentially they claim that the image is both copyrighted and PD). Also, once again, I do consider my doubt to be significant. The precautionary principle means that when there is such doubt, it has either to be dispelled by facts, or the file has to go from Commons. --Rosenzweig τ 16:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- One more: You write "There is always a high level of uncertainty regarding anonymous pictures from WWII we have here." You're quite right, and that is also the reason why none of these pictures should be on Commons unless their copyright status is perfectly clear. Which is rarely, if ever, the case. --Rosenzweig τ 18:09, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- Rosenzweig, I guess we mostly agree on facts and possibly even on probabilities that something is PD or not. The difference is in the probability thresholds: for me the fact that image is most likely PD based on partial information we have is good enough reason to keep the file, while for you if there is any missing information or uncertainties, anything less than "perfectly clear" than the image should be deleted. In US courts that would be a difference between Clear and convincing evidence that something is PD and beyond the shadow of a doubt that something is PD. I agree that in case of WWII images, and other historical images, we rarely can achieve beyond the shadow of a doubt certainty, but I do not agree that that's the "reason why none of these pictures should be on Commons". I think we might just agree to disagree on this matter. --Jarekt (talk) 18:55, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- Contrary to your assessment, I don't think it is likely that this image is in the PD. At least not in the US, where the term of protection for this image would most likely be 95 years from publication—a term which clearly is not over yet for a 1941/42 image. Per the Hirtle chart, that term would apply in a number of cases, none of which is very unlikely. As for its country of (legal) origin/first publication: We don't even know which country that is, so how can we think it is likely that the image is in the PD there (where?) This is not an image from 1800, or even 1850, for which we could assume that any copyrights that existed have expired long ago. And even in such a case one could be wrong, the copyright laws of countries worldwide have lots of special terms and cases for e. g. works that were unpublished until recently. The arguments presented in this discussion are far from clear and convincing evidence that the image is in the PD.
- But anyway, this is not a court of (US) law, but an internal debate about the application of our own standards, specifically the precautionary principle. The Commons approach is not to host files when in significant doubt. A case where we know almost nothing definite (see discussion) except the place and approximate date the photo was taken (1941 or 1942) is clearly very doubtful. --Rosenzweig τ 19:36, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- But Corbis also claims they own the copyright: see here. That puts some significant doubt in my mind.-- Diannaa (talk) 02:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- A lot of historical PD images can be downloaded from Gettys or Corbis services that claim copyright on them. For example File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-2005-0039, Warschauer Aufstand, Kapitulation.jpg by August Ahrens can be found at Gettys images (Photographer: Keystone/Stringer ) and Corbis Images (© Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS). Same with File:Prisoners liberation dachau.jpg taken by US soldiers in Dachau, which you can find on Corbis. Or File:Warsaw Uprising - Cyprian Odorkiewicz and Rafałki.jpg which you can also find both on Getty Images (Editorial image #3422370) or on Corbis Images Image #HU040429. That seems to happen all the time. --Jarekt (talk) 03:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is also that the USHMM doesn't only claim that it is in the public domain; the USHMM also claims that the photo is copyrighted. As mentioned above, the USHMM maintains two separate pages about the photo which contradict each other. This suggests that the USHMM doesn't have a clue of what it is talking about. --Stefan4 (talk) 08:04, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- A lot of historical PD images can be downloaded from Gettys or Corbis services that claim copyright on them. For example File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-2005-0039, Warschauer Aufstand, Kapitulation.jpg by August Ahrens can be found at Gettys images (Photographer: Keystone/Stringer ) and Corbis Images (© Hulton-Deutsch Collection/CORBIS). Same with File:Prisoners liberation dachau.jpg taken by US soldiers in Dachau, which you can find on Corbis. Or File:Warsaw Uprising - Cyprian Odorkiewicz and Rafałki.jpg which you can also find both on Getty Images (Editorial image #3422370) or on Corbis Images Image #HU040429. That seems to happen all the time. --Jarekt (talk) 03:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
- But Corbis also claims they own the copyright: see here. That puts some significant doubt in my mind.-- Diannaa (talk) 02:19, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -- Thanks to Stefan for putting part of my problem here so well -- the fact that USHMM has described this image as copyrighted in one place and PD in another eliminates any trust I might have in their opinion.
The other problem I have is that several of the comments above use the word "anonymous". Please, please, do not confuse "anonymous" and "unknown". In order to use the provision in many copyright laws that gives special treatment to "anonymous" works, it must be shown that the author intended to be anonymous. An author who is simply unknown to us is not "anonymous" and his work does not qualify for special treatment. There are some copyright laws that give special treatment to works by "unknown" authors. That is different from "anonymous", but even using the "unknown" rules requires doing a reasonable investigation -- not simply taking something off the Web from a site that does not give credit. This is a photograph by an unknown author, but we have no reason to believe that he intended to be anonymous and we cannot, therefore, apply the rules for anonymous works to this. Since we know that this is an image from around 1942, it is unlikely that its author has been dead for 70 years -- that is true even though the author was likely a soldier -- while being a German soldier in WWII was certainly riskier than many occupations, most of them survived the war.
So, we have an image by an unknown, but not anonymous, author who has probably not been dead for 70 years. We do not know where or when it was first published. First publication in most countries would leave it still under copyright. Therefore we can't keep it.. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:51, 30 October 2013 (UTC)