This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Comment — Is it your intention to upload a higher resolution version of this identical image? If so, it isn't necessary to delete this image, you can upload the superior version to the same page. If, on the other hand, you have a better, but not identical, version of the same subject you can just upload it as a new image. —RP8817:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The uploader seems not comfortable sharing his picture on grounds of privacy. I think it is a valid reason. The image is unused as well, so I believe we should honor his request. Sreejith K (talk) 15:20, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Keep This file is in use on multiple sister projects. The nominator hasn't uploaded any images, but if they are in possession of superior file they can just upload it as a new file and mark this one with the {{Superseded}} template and edit project pages to use the new image. —RP8816:48, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The uploader seems not comfortable sharing his picture on grounds of privacy. I think it is a valid reason. The image is unused as well, so I believe we should honor his request. Sreejith K (talk) 15:21, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
KeepThe only restuarations in the 20th century where: church was covered with Eternit in 1959 (thus the marking on the church) and the painting of the church was restored in 1962, according to the county's culture department. By definition, the objective of the restoration is to bring the object back to it's original shape, not to create a new one. While this hasn't been documented in Romania, it has been in other European countries [2][3]. As a historic monument, all changes need to be approved by the culture departments and would therefore be documented. As such, I postulate that the chandelier is pre 20th century and the painting do not have a different copyright than that of the original painter, which has long ago expired.--Strainu (talk) 09:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's the same as with the icons. In my opinion, the chandelier does not look 300 years old and a reliable source is needed for such a claim. --Eleassar(t/p)10:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Eleassar, I am sorry to say that for you even the air in the church is copyrightable. I have seen and written about 1000 old Romanian wooden churches. If there is one thing inside the church as old as the church itself, that is the chandelier, I have no doubt. Țetcu Mircea Rareș (talk) 18:56, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Keep Really, that's all you could do? The cloth? The image is clearly about the altar. The cloth can be painted in any color and be done with.--Strainu (talk) 09:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I said before that Eleassar has some of the most ridiculous and frivolous delete requests. But this one must be a winner by far! --Codrin.B (talk) 08:58, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm referring to this tablecloth. It is an original and creative work and as such copyrighted. The altar is hardly visible. To the concluding administrator: please note that all the above users come from Romania. --Eleassar(t/p)10:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This DR is not based on individual paintings, but the table cloth in its entirety. Per COM:DM, it is "very unlikely" de minimis: "Copyrighted work X is a key part of the subject (eg it is the reason for taking the photo). Removing it would make the derivative work radically different, but potentially still useful." Paintings of fruits, flowers and birds are surely above any TOO: they're much more complex than e.g. this graffito. --Eleassar(t/p)10:38, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Tablecloth is an utilitarian object, and the image subject isn't the tablecloth. The subject is the arrangement of elements in the table and the wall. Furthermore, if this image were a copyright infringement, images of people wearing patterned clothes would be copyright infringements, too.--Pere prlpz (talk) 18:48, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Per Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Clothing: "Images illustrating clothing styles or articles of clothing are normally acceptable; in the United States, fashion is not copyrightable.[1] However, care must be taken not to infringe the copyright of any printed or woven design that may appear on the clothing's surface," and this is the case here: creative woven designs appear on the tablecloth's surface and make it copyrightable.
As to the de minimis argument: the tablecloth takes almost all the lower half of the image. Due to its colours and its position in the front, it is in stark contrast to the rest of the image - the background. It is clearly a key element of the image and the image would be radically different without it. It therefore cannot be considered de minimis. --Eleassar(t/p)22:08, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, so I suppose your next target will be images of people wearing patterned clothes. Good to know.
As to this image, you're grossly overstating the size of the only cloth that could possibly be copyrighted. There are 4 different materials on that table, and none of them "takes almost all the lower half of the image". You might want to open Gimp or another image editing program and actually measure before making such outrageous claims. I reckon you'll find that it takes at most 10% of the whole image.--Strainu (talk) 10:02, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
What evidence would it be? The church is a historic monument, three hundred years old, it is not used for the religious service anymore, all the constructions around it are old, including the crucifix, which was traditionally placed at the entrance of an orthodox church or graveyard. Its age can be easily seen from the quality of the painting, made by a peasant, a popular craftsman, not by a qualified painter.Țetcu Mircea Rareș (talk) 12:17, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It is irrelevant who made the painting as long as it is a creative work, and the age of the crucifix is probably different than the age of the church. For example, in this image, one may read the years 1959 and 1965. --Eleassar(t/p)12:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Do not try to drag the discussion into complete absurdness: the years shown, are years in which repairs were made to the church. To show their attachment to the community, the name of the families who paid for the repairs are written on the church walls or on the crucifixes.Țetcu Mircea Rareș (talk) 12:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Eleassar, I want you to prove it is an year and not some ID people wrote on the icon prior to transferring the icon from another church. // Gikü said done Thursday, 14 November 2013 17:24 (UTC)
I read the same year on [5]. It would not make sense to use the same ID on two images. I think this constitutes a significant doubt, and in any case, the burden of proof is on the uploader. --Eleassar(t/p)19:51, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
KeepThe church was covered with Eternit in 1959 (thus the marking on the church) and the painting of the church was restored in 1962, according to the county's culture department. By definition, the objective of the restoration is to bring the object back to it's original shape, not to create a new one. While this hasn't been documented in Romania, it has been in other European countries [6][7]
Again, I read 1962 on one of the icons,[8] and I think this is not the year of the renovation. This drawing on the cross and the accompanying ones seem quite recent, not 300 years old. --Eleassar(t/p)09:27, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It would be great if someone could explain why any restaurator would write "1962" on an old icon. In my opinion, this icon does not look 300 years old and a reliable source is needed for such a claim. --Eleassar(t/p)10:35, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The owner of the house does not want a photo of it on commons. As the photographer I can agree with him, because it is only used at one german article and there is probably no use for it outside this article. The owner also promised another photo as a replacement, where the house is seen from a less closer angle. --Einsamer Schütze (talk) 00:35, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
If we don't know when and where it was published originally, we can't know whether it was originally published anonymously and whether there was a clear copyright notice or not. --Eleassar(t/p)22:27, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Such coloured seals never existed, at least in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Your example shows like real seal looks and of course it's not coloured. King's priviledges usually contains the picture of coat of arms and the description of city seal. These thing are connected. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 08:54, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For example everyone who understand Belarusian could read about it in: Цітоў А. Геральдыка Беларусі. — Мінск, 2010 or Цітоў А. Сфрагістыка і геральдыка Беларусі. — Мінск, 1999. There were no coloured seals in Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 09:15, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you expect something like "there were no coloured seals" it's impossible. These works contain descriptions of all existing seals of Belarusian sities and towns and among all these seals there are no mentions about coloured ones. So they never existed. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 17:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
In 1921-1939 this place was a part of Poland, and the photo was made by polish photographer (polish citizen). Nowadays it is stored in Polish Academy of Sciences. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 19:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I can't name the exact edition, but there is no doubt that all such photos from Polish Academy of Sciences collection were published before 1994. Anyway it doesn't matter because this photo is anonymous and was taken more then 70 years ago, so it is in the public domain. --Kazimier Lachnovič (talk) 21:05, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thank you for the info. The problem is that if we don't know when and where it was published originally, we also can't know whether it was originally published anonymously and whether there was a clear copyright notice or not. --Eleassar(t/p)21:55, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The auther ot the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
unfortunately there is no fop in ukraine. monument was opened in august 2011 and its sculptor, Микола Король should not has died 70+ years before now :) BaseSat (talk) 14:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Your beliefs is your own business. We are talking about facts. if you have the facts, bring them. This is, for example, taken from there, that's a violation. And if the argument is the belief, we are talking about nothing. For example I do not believe in Islam, so I should removed all articles about Islam? In general, there is no infringement - to take and make a drawing.
We're talking about such fake claims as you have made about this image: you stated that it was your own work, but the close view of the black surfaces shows that it is a print (there are small white points that are characteristic of print). --Eleassar(t/p)07:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand what you are saying. I first painted the picture, and then photographed, and then edited. The spots are the result of editing.--Павел Петро (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Your beliefs is your own business. We are talking about facts. if you have the facts, bring them. This is, for example, taken from there, that's a violation. And if the argument is the belief, we are talking about nothing. For example I do not believe in Islam, so I should removed all articles about Islam? In general, there is no infringement - to take and make a drawing.--Павел Петро (talk) 02:36, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
We're talking about such fake claims as you have made about this image: you stated that it was your own work, but the close view of the black surfaces shows that it is a print (there are small white points that are characteristic of print). --Eleassar(t/p)07:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I do not understand what you are saying. I first painted the picture, and then photographed, and then edited. The spots are the result of editing.--Павел Петро (talk) 07:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Your beliefs is your own business. We are talking about facts. if you have the facts, bring them. This is, for example, taken from there, that's a violation. And if the argument is the belief, we are talking about nothing. For example I do not believe in Islam, so I should removed all articles about Islam? In general, there is no infringement - to take and make a drawing.
We're talking about such fake claims as you have made about this image: you stated that it was your own work, but the close view of the black surfaces shows that it is a print (there are small white points that are characteristic of print). --Eleassar(t/p)07:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The auther ot the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 18:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The auther ot the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The auther ot the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author--Павел Петро (talk) 18:36, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The author of the photo is unknown. Most of the intellectuals were killed by Stalin's purges in 1939 and during the Second World War. In any case, according to Belarusian law, copyright term is 50 years from the death of the author.--Павел Петро (talk) 04:46, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
File:Нацыянальная бiблiятэка Беларусi crop.jpg is also stamp, croped from envelope. From Template:PD-BY-exempt: according to the Law of the Belarus No. 370-XIII of May 16, 1996 on Copyright and Neighbouring Rights. Article 8. Works that are not Objects of Copyright Shall not be objects of copyright: state symbols and signs (flag, coat of arms, anthem, awards, banknotes and other signs (Postage stamps are state signs according to the Article 1 of the Law of the Republic of Belarus No. 258-З of December 15, 2003 on Mail Service)--Хомелка (talk) 07:13, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're reading too much here - this original synthesis goes against
Article 15:[10] "The personal non-ownership rights shall belong to the author irrespective of his/her ownership rights and are preserved with him/her even after assignment of exclusive ownership rights on use of the work."
Article 19: "Reproduction or communication for universal knowledge of works of architecture, fine art, photos, which are permanently located in a place opened for free visiting, except for cases when an image of the work is the main object of such reproduction or communication for universal knowledge or when it is used for commercial objectives."
Please mind that your interpretation about Belarusian postage stamps being PD is not supported by any reliable source; see e.g. this page, which states that the modern Belarusian postage stamps are copyrighted. It's customary that when in doubt, the copyright should be interpreted to the benefit of the author, and here we have just the same problem as we are having when the United States government takes a photo of an unfree statue: by claiming that this reproduction is not an object of copyright, we're infringing the architect's copyright. --Eleassar(t/p)08:22, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Статья 7. Произведения, не являющиеся объектами авторского права
1. Не являются объектами авторского права:
...
государственные символы Республики Беларусь (Государственный флаг Республики Беларусь, Государственный герб Республики Беларусь, Государственный гимн Республики Беларусь), символы государственных наград Республики Беларусь (ордена и медали), государственные знаки (денежные знаки Республики Беларусь, почтовые марки и иные знаки), официальные геральдические символы (флаги, гербы административно-территориальных единиц Республики Беларусь, геральдические знаки, знамена, нагрудные знаки, эмблемы государственных органов и др.);
Article 7. Works that are not subject to copyright
1. Objects are not of copyright:
...
state symbols of the Republic of Belarus ( Belarus national flag , the national emblem of the Republic of Belarus, the National Anthem of the Republic of Belarus) , symbols of state awards of the Republic of Belarus (medals), state (banknotes of the Republic of Belarus, post stamps and other signs), the official heraldic symbols (flags, coats of arms of the administrative-territorial units of the Republic of Belarus, heraldic signs, banners, badges, emblems and other government agencies)
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
@Jeff G.: Despite the low quality, it still seems to be useful to illustrate the building, specially at night and illuminated, so I would choose Keep for that one.--DarwinAhoy!04:22, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Kyykaarme: No, because it doesn't show any copyrightable elements. But it still shows a building roughly with that chape, illuminated with those colors at night. I certainly would use it in the article about the library.--DarwinAhoy!14:16, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jeff G.: We can always change the filename. It seems impossible to photograph that street in that direction without partially catching that building in the end.--DarwinAhoy!05:17, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
As per [11], the modern architectural marvel was authored by architects Mihail Vinogradov and Viktor Kramarenko. Its inception was in 2006. Unfortunately, Belarusian freedom of panorama prohibits commercial uses of images of recent artistic works in public spaces by living or recently-deceased architects, sculptors, muralists etc. These images do not show the work as "not the main subject". Either needs COM:VRTS permission for use of commercial Creative Commons licenses from Mihail Vinogradov and Viktor Kramarenko or have the law changed to remove non-commercial restriction.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This has only a license tag that applies to the road sign itself, but none for the photo. There's no assertion that the photo is own work. darkweasel9407:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The versions on en.wiki indicate that the photo was taken by Sara Knoff, not the uploader. "Was sent to me personally via email". Also, we do not have permission to display the incorporated artwork. Diannaa (talk) 03:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The license states that "this photograph is in the public domain because [...] all photographs by Polish photographers (or published for the first time in Poland or simultaneously in Poland and abroad) published without a clear copyright notice before the law was changed on May 23, 1994 are assumed public domain in Poland.", but according to the EXIF data and the information provided by the uploader on the file description page, this photo was taken in February 2012. Therefore, it can't have been published before 1994, so it's unclear why this is in the public domain. That means that we don't know if this photo is 'free content' and it should probably be deleted. Mathonius (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted: Apparently this could have been uploaded only on the fair use principle (or equivalent) which cannot be used on Commons. Already moved to fr.wikipedia. as stated whym (talk) 13:48, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This is a screenshot, probably from this site, and therefore most probably a copyright infringement. As the given information isn't sufficient to determine the real status, it should be deleted from Commons. @ uploader Laura1999love: Please give us details about the license status if you believe that this is not the case. Regards, PanchoS (talk) 23:29, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Poorly composed picture used as a PR shot by a self declared representative of Ms Baugher on en WP. The article it is used by currently is subject to a deletion discussion there. I'm unsure what the conflict of interest rules are on Commons. on en WP it is most assuredly a COI since this is a client/representative relationship. Timtrent (talk) 10:52, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Delete If the filename would be "PAZ bus in Volgograd", then I would say, that the sculpture is de minimis. Now it seems to me main object. Taivo (talk) 23:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I can see no consent of the parents of the depicted girl to publicate this picture. The girl can bei clearly identified, the girl is in focus of the picture und not a person of public intererst. If there is no consent this picture violates german personal rights law. Weissbier (talk) 09:39, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I can see no consent of the parents of the depicted girl to publicate this picture. The girl can bei clearly identified, the girl is in focus of the picture und not a person of public intererst. If there is no consent this picture violates german personal rights law. Weissbier (talk) 09:41, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Zitat der Disk. bei Ureinwohner (DE): Fake, Homepage von Baleares kennt ihn nicht, sein Name findet auf spanischen Seiten keinerlei Erwähnung. [1]. Das Foto ist auch sehr professionell (man beachte den Schriftzug). Artikelseite war zudem auf meiner Beobachtungsliste, weil mir dieser Name früher schonmal bei einem versucthen Fake-Eintrag unterkam. Weltfussball.de ist informiert (nicht das erste Mal, dass dort ein Fake vorhanden ist) --Ureinwohner 17:30, 14. Nov. 2013 (CET)Nolispanmo16:59, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Guten Abend Betreff wegen meinem Artikel Predrag Risticevic
> Wollte mal klar stellen das das kein Fake ist und diese Behauptungen sind falsch
> !!
>
>
> 1.Der Spieler Predrag Risticevic befindet sich gerade im Aufbautraining und ist
> momentan bei der B Mannschaft vom Atletico Baleares und wird jetzt im Winter
> verliehen um spielpraxis nach seiner Verletzung zu sammeln.
>
> darum wollte ich das hier klar stellen !!
>
> 2.Die homepage befindet sich gerade im Aufbau des Vereins !
>
> 3. Die Löschung ist überflüssig meiner Meinung da nichts falsches geschrieben
> wurde.
>
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Could you point us to the legal text in Belgium that would need the removal of this page? As droit d'auteur/"copyright" applies for architect on plans and sketches not on a photography of the performed/executed work by the builder. AlexandreDulaunoy (talk) 21:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Keep What do you mean with "out of scope". Some time ago I tried find sth photo or picture to ilustrate a poem about happines and found nothing special on Commons. It is ridiculous that some of yours think that it is "out of scope". So please give me a better egzample to ilustrate "Happiness". I am waiting... Btw. I am an admin on pl-wikisource and I know well what is need for our project. Electron<Talk?>07:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You should have in mind that Commons is not only a store for Wikipedias but also for other wikimedia projects like Wikisources, Wikibooks & etc. Some pictures that are "out of scope" for Wikipedia are very good ilustrations for poems, romanses, books and so on. Btw. I move a picture to Category:Happiness in art. Maybe now it would be more easy to understand. Electron<Talk?>07:56, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Out of scope personal image. Looks like it was a random upload from a Flickrbot. It's been photoshopped, and I can't see this being used to illustrate any project articles in the near future. Orphaned, too. Sarah (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Thank you very much for your recommendation. I noticed that the inclusion of this image in other articles and projects made no sense, however, you're right, it is best to clear nominate instead of quick removal. thank you very much :) --The Photographer (talk) 20:56, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete"Well OMG OMG OMG i am soooo soo happy"... that this file is not in use anymore. This is just another selfie upload that we should scrub from commons. --Dschwen (talk) 03:24, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't want to comment on the merits of this work. But the file description is problematic which has no relation to the media content depicted here. This is a general problem of third party uploaded contents here, especially from social media sites like Flickr. Unlike an educational website like NASA or LOC, Flickr is a casual media sharing application, (mostly) used for sharing intimate contents and to build and maintain healthy relations. So the texts that we see there may not be anyway related to the picture displayed there, and not meant for to be shared in sites like Commons. Such contents should be removed/edited by passing through an editorial review. A bot can only review the license; no such things. :(
Keep This image falls within scope as it is easy to categorize (as it has been) into a range of topics where it may be useful to re-use for illustrative purposes. As Jakadavoor has demonstrated, this is a wiki, so the descriptive text was easy to improve without deleting the image (Commons:First_steps/Quality_and_description is not a normal rationale for deletion, neither are old discussions from Jimmy Wales' English Wikipedia talk page). I have double-checked the licence, that seems fine. In terms of "scrubbing selfies" from Commons, I agree that at least 99% of uploaded selfies are so poor that they mean nothing but housekeeping work, however this image is reasonable quality, has been preserved on Commons for 5 years and has reasonable animation and composition. A comparison with others in the "Blue dresses" category shows that it is in the top 1/3 by pixel resolution. --Fæ (talk) 09:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Source category: Blue dresses (filter by mime 'image')
Total number of unique images in category, 4 child and 2 grandchild categories: 603
Number with pixel >= target resolution: 222 (in top 37%)
Number with file size >= target file size: 328 (in bottom 47%)
Report completed: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 09:19 (21.6s runtime)
Buy a car for a great value that does not guarantee a good engine quality. Similarly, size is relative, an image with great number of pixels not necessarily is quality, there are several factors that influence it as the term "effective pixels", composition, light level, among other things. In this case, we are seeing an image of low quality and in my opinion should be deleted immediately. However, this depends on the observer's viewpoint. It is good to know that commons is participatory and everyone can comment with your vote. --The Photographer (talk) 11:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So long as it can be used for educational purposes, it is in scope. The comparison with buying cars is not appropriate as we do not have to choose which images to buy in order to deliver the aim of this project; if someone pops up with 14,000 photographs of mosquitoes we can accept them gladly for their educational value, not quibble that 100 or 1000 photos of mosquitoes are already too many. There is no community consensus to delete images on quality grounds alone or because we have sufficient alternative images, apart for images featuring nudity or where the quality is so appalling that there can be no expectation of reuse. --Fæ (talk) 12:04, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Fæ; it seems you agree with my edit on file description. It is a pity that this file has been preserved on Commons for 3 1/2 years with that crappy description. We definitely need more volunteers as Jimmy has no time to do such routine jobs now. :) JKadavoorJee10:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
He has plenty of time to reply to distracting OMG Think Of The Children type discussions about Commons, on the English Wikipedia, so perhaps if he and others used that time to fix problems here, rather than grandstanding there, we might get more done. --Fæ (talk) 10:50, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As in previous DR. This is not a self-promotion, because I am a man and (sadly ;) have nothing to do with this pritty girl... Also in my opinion here are not many good photos with happy girls, that are have good quality and high artistic values. Electronツ➧☎11:36, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. It is next useful picture of a good quality. You should remember that commons is gathering the picture not only for wikipedia use but also for others wikiprojects use, and not only fon now, but also for the future use. And many times I have found here nothing for my use on others projects because of the people that are thinking as you. So from time to time I upload the photos that can be used in the future, I suppose. Electronツ➧☎16:34, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hardly stretching. Exactly what policy based grounds are there for deleting this five-year-old image, in the light of the fact that plenty of folks view this of value for illustration rather than only a personal album shot? I agree "Commons is not Facebook", pretty obvious, so what, Commons is not the English Wikipedia either. There is no policy on this project for deleting otherwise perfectly reasonable photographs of "non-notable" people, and is not something that a closing Commons admin could ever be expected to do, as you well know, being one. I have re-run my report, this time focusing on a category this image is in of Category:Women of the United Kingdom in order to compare the size with "notable" people as well as the unknown; not much of a surprise that it still comes out in the top 1/3 by image resolution. --Fæ (talk) 17:55, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per COM:EDUSE, this provides no knowledge, is not instructional, and is not informative. It's a poorly photoshopped (see, for example, remaining orange tones between the body and dress - her skin or dress before photo manipulation?) image of a non-notable person. It was/is "used" on pl.wiki because the uploader added it (27 August 2013 - during a previous DR), not because it was deemed relevant by a disinterested third party, which would be a genuine measure. Its usage in that article is labored and without educational contribution. That it could be categorized or has been here x years (2013 - 2010 ≠ 5) are utterly irrelevant to its satisfaction of scope. Эlcobbolatalk18:29, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Minor pointers;
The norm on Commons is to be more resistant to deleting images that have been on the project for several years, compared to those only uploaded several days ago, this is in fact of quite some significance when assessing issues such as Photographs of identifiable people. This is not "utterly irrelevant" when judging scope as in that time community members have added it to several categories where they thought it might be useful, hence in-scope.
Rationales about "image of a non-notable person" are not part of policy on Commons.
Assessment of whether an image has educational, cultural, historical or social value is not dependant on an assessment by a disinterested third party. However if you wish to believe this, then I am as close to a disinterested third party as you can get in this discussion, having never seen this image before noticing this resurrected DR, having absolutely no interest in women in blue dresses, nor any connection to the uploader or subject, so your claim about "deeming" as relevant is manifestly untrue as I already "deemed" it relevant above though for some reason you are choosing to ignore that evidence.
You are an admin, so I assume you are not just being sarcastic and you are aware how experienced I am as a Commons contributor. Precisely what part of definition of Scope do you think I am mistaken or ignorant about? Thanks --Fæ (talk) 20:34, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As I commented above, I don't want comment on the quality of this work; but browsing through her photo stream leads me to several doubts.
Most of the photos in her stream are "self portraits"; but many of them are difficult to believe considering the environment in them.
In some works she clearly stated they are manipulated with Photoshop.
In some works, she stated that they were taken by her boyfriend.
Her profile page lacks any useful info; and I wonder how we handle if one of our registered user used her user page for publishing information like "5'4 tall, black hair, dark brown eyes, waist size x inches"
Keep It's in use in the article space of Wikipedia. That puts it solidly in scope. Basically any other consideration besides copyvio or invasion of privacy goes to the wayside in the face of that.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:39, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Also, it's on Wikiquote (history) and as you can see the person who added it has nothing to do with Electron. Nor is there any evidence that it's the person pictured. It's not self promotion. I'd note that The Photographer accusing people of vandalism for adding this photo (see the history here linked) doesn't do much for his credit; there's no evidence it's vandalism, either.--Prosfilaes (talk) 09:51, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for highlighting that history. As The Photographer is the nominator here, perhaps they could explain the context? --Fæ (talk) 10:09, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The context is simple: The Photographer got pissed off because someone filed a deletion request on his racist caricature File:negrita.svg. He reacted i.a. by filing in himself a bunch of random deletion requests. This one is becoming pretty successful, as it draws in the usual {{Vd}}-prone crowds: Pure deletionists, haters of brown people, haters of women (especially happy ones), and people who genuinely think that Commons is supposed to host only Wikipedia images and/or that all depicted people should be notable. -- Tuválkin✉08:47, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To everybody who says that it is "Self Promotion" I can declair: I am a man, I am Pole, I am much older than the girl, I have never been to the UK, I don't know the person who is on the photo, I have never met her or somebody from her family. It is clear? What about my work on Commons: I edit here from 2006, I have here more than 22.000 edits on my account and uploaded here tousands files. So, I think is not a bad score here and I can feel to be trusted. Electronツ➧☎13:24, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think The Photographer meant the subject in question, and not you. Her Flickr stream clearly seems like self promotion, with supporting page descriptions on every page. I suggest you to edit such "useless" descriptions in future uploads. BTW, The Photographer too is not a native English speaker; so some "issues/wrong tones" in his comments. I have no doubt in your intentions. JKadavoorJee
OK. I uploaded the file 3 years ago when the commons customs were different than now. In that time I think that the more orginal description, the better (and it may be usuful in the future to indetify the subject of the photo if the oryginal photo on Flickr will disapper some day). It can be easealy changed or removed (as have been done). Electronツ➧☎14:58, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
KeepBecause Commons is not Facebook. Image is in scope and is of good quality, and is in use in here and in here, even if the user that made this third DR tried to removed it by claiming (his or other person?) vandalism not in one article, but in two. Tm (talk) 09:05, 19 November 2013 (UTC) Corrected some writing errors and links. Tm (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
looking at a small sample of the images nominated for deletion I would offer the deletions are merited for exactly the reasons stated. It does seem odd we applaud people that upload through bots a flood of internet crap yet place a suspicious eye on someone that looks to stem the tide. 131.137.245.20613:21, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Making these sorts of anonymous comments from your current network is fairly unwise, doubly so if they are not your employer or without their permission. --Fæ (talk) 14:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, whoised the IP. This is quite funny! You could say he is somewhat on topic. Department of The Photographer Defence :-). Not commenting on the bot upload point (which looks like it could be directed at Fae) I have to agree with the first point though. The Photographers nominations have been largely productive. I alone must have deleted hundereds of blurry selfies from uploaded who never made a single edit except for uploading their pic. Also a stunning amount of CVs. --Dschwen (talk) 17:25, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Dschwen, I did not read the comment as specifically about me. If you have specific recommendation for my upload projects, one that falls in line with existing policies and existing community consensus rather than just your own viewpoint, and has some reasonable chance of being fixable, then please do raise it on my user talk page rather than in the middle of a DR. As for The Photographer's accuracy, in November 21% of DRs raised by them resulted in {{Vk}}, which should be compared to a starting point of choosing mostly mobile uploads or selfies, in which categories a random selection by bot of new uploads would have a hit rate of 90%+. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 18:27, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Let me explain, it is very easy to understand that by commenting on it and directing it at me, then adding a the words "not commenting" does not stop the fact that you made the comment. --Fæ (talk) 23:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry that the distinction between a meta-comment (my interpretation of the IPs intention, supported by both the fact that the comment was in reply to one of your comments and your thin skinned reaction) and a comment on the merits of this particular accusation (whether the IPs classification of bot uploads as flood of internet crap is accurate) is so unclear. It worries me a bit that you feel the need to reply with a certain acerbity to my comments. I hope I have not offended you. But let's close (or move) this distracting aside. Neither of us wants to derail the DR, right? --Dschwen (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It should be repeted (because it is written above, but some people don't like to read the all DR)?... : You should have in mind that Commons is not only a store for Wikipedias but also for other wikimedia projects like Wikisources, Wikibooks & etc. Some pictures that are "out of scope" for Wikipedia are very good ilustrations for poems, romanses, books and so on, and not only fon now, but also for the future use. And many times I have found here nothing for my use on others projects because of the people that are thinking as you. So from time to time I upload the photos that can be used in the future (e.g. for poems or books ilustration on Wikisource or Wikibooks), I suppose. Btw. the picture is used now in 2 projects as illustration. Electronツ➧☎16:01, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Commons has of course to be useful for much project than wikipedia, but this file is used indeed as a simply reference to blue colour, both in poland wikipedia than in in poland wikiquote (where has nothing more related to the citation); colour of photo is altered, so probably could fit the category "Colour isolated photographs", or even "joy" regard the "intention" of uploader, but very few can be seen about female hair fashion, and dress and obviously it's hard to interpret her a s a women from united kingdom. Maybe a picture like this is less categorizable in such cateories than the previous one? I conclude that the goal of commons has to be a quickly recover of files by matter, usable in all of wiki projects, and probably this way of catalogating images may "lose" part of poetic description of them. But is surely efficacious. --Ciaurlec (talk) 23:56, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep considering this item has already survived 2 PREVIOUS DRs why are we doing this again!?
The Photographer is spamming DRs with dozens of DRs per-day, all using the same short, repeated, zero-effort rationales. "non-encyclopedic" is not even a legitimate deletion rationale. this is COMMONS, not WIKIPEDIA.
it's a perfectly good isolated-colour image of a girl in a blue dress. it's been in use various places at various time, & it fits in MULTIPLE SUBJECT-CATEGORIES' @ wmc, therefore it is NOT "out of scope".
the motivations of the uploader, & their chosen range of interests & uploads are IRRELEVANT in considering whether a particular file is useful, or not. it is useful, it is used, therefore KEEP.
the fact that the nominator has also behaved improperly in stripping the image out of use on other projects, etc., just seals the case.
Delete, this image should NOT be used to illustrate any articles, or pages like the wikiquote page, for the color blue, as this is not a good representation of the color, it being a photoshopped color. the image is not a good representation of the use of photoshop, as its a crude coloring. I particularly dont like it being used at wikiquote, as "blue" is ALWAYS associated in quotes with emotions OTHER than joy. I just dont see any legitimate use of an altered image like this. i wouldnt mind it staying as a perfectly good image of a happy woman if it wasnt shopped. now, its "all about the dress", which contradicts her emotions, but not so much as to be used to demonstrate irony or cognitive dissonance. In regards to The Photographer spamming, etc. despite my feeling like i was actually a target of a few of his deletion requests, and i strongly rejected his arguments for deleting some of my uploads (which i was correct about), in this case (as in many others i suspect, as he has a good history of uploads and thus knows something about this site), The Photographer is correct, based on the merits of the image. I would myself immediately remove this image from its 2 uses, if it wasnt up for review right now. I think the argument of "its being used" can be very disingenuous, and just cause some project is using it, doesnt mean i cant go to that project, which i never edited before, and edit it now. as long as my argument is valid, those other editors dont "own" that page, even if its in a language i dont read. I WILL remove these images from those pages, if this closes as keep, and i will argue there for not using them. I must also agree with some of the flickr comments above: these images are often really badly named, really badly described, and horribly categorized at times. if the flickr uploaders put even 1/10th as much time in organizing the images as they spend uploading, we might have functional image categories instead of the mess we have now.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:54, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
In other words you would dictate to Polish speakers what images they should use on their Wikipedia and Wikiquote pages? How would you argue, in a language you do not understand? You don't even know what quotes are being used on that Wikiquote page, so you can't say they aren't about joy. Of course there's quotes that associate blue with joy; the first line of Judith Mathieson's "Joy is Everywhere" is "Joy is in the skies of blue". The Duel says "Joy is streaming from you—a joy that's making me drunk. 'Blue joy!" Black and Blue: The Bruising Passion of Camera Lucida says "Both the meal and the children are hued, at least metaphorically, in blue joy." Charles Harvey's "anonymous men" says "There is blue joy in solitude, sweetness in the lonely soft night that drapes the bones of black men." D. H. Lawrence wrote about the "blue joy of my soul".
It would be more funny if we chose to randomly delete images off the English Wikipedia in discussions held in Chinese. Not that we haven't frustrated enough English Wikipedians over the years, but now we could add additional frustration by make it hard from them to understand the deletion discussion and virtually impossible to contribute. Wouldn't that be fun, to have to deal with an image you added to an article being proposed for deletion on the grounds of "I don't like it" in a language you don't understand?--Prosfilaes (talk) 06:58, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I see two problems: 1) This is a photoshoped image, so the shirt could be also red or green. We donna know that exactly. This leads also to the 2nd problem: 2) Out of scope. Just promotional, wikiadvertisment, private image. --Yikrazuul (talk) 13:19, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And what the problem? This photo it an egsample of piece of art a bit. What the matter what kind of tools artist has used? In old times this was a paint, nowadays they use a photoshop, as well... Maybe you haven't noted this, yet? Electronツ➧☎21:44, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see a dress of blue color and a joyful girl in the image. These two "elements" are completely appropriate for illustrating an article or a quote about blue or joy. Do you see something else / for example a dress of red colour? --Eleassar(t/p)22:16, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I see a grey girl, should we use that picture to illustrate how grey aliens? women? are looking? Are all women in "blue" shirts grey? Besides, the quality is not very good (noisy). --Yikrazuul (talk) 14:33, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Have you ever heard of something called B&W photos? Also dont try to remove this image from its usages, and replace it with other worst (ironically this replacement image was one uploaded by me), calling this image an controversialimage. Tm (talk) 16:23, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - no good reason has been given for deletion; this sort of aggressive DR's only discourages people from contributing to the project :/ - tsca (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It reflects badly on commons to have a commons user that neither speaks the language of the local project nor has any prior edits on the project revert the edits of a local admin and veteran contributor. --Dschwen (talk) 22:30, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I've restored file. There was a mistake. Museum of belorussian cinematography was established in this building in 1976 but building is elder than museum. It was built in the begin of the XX century. --Butko (talk) 12:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Per COM:FOP#Belarus: built in the first half of the 20th century (that could be as late as the 1940s), no evidence that the architect died before 1963. Additionally, per [19], the building was reconstructed in 1994-1998; at least the right part of the building (the entrance and the facade above it) seems modern. Eleassar(t/p)14:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This model is displayed at the Mir Castle and is public property. Photograph it - the same as to photograph itself Mir Castle or, if you like, the president's residence in Minsk--Павел Петро (talk) 18:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This model is displayed at the Mir Castle and is public property. This is non-commercial model. The owner is Republic of Belarus. It cannot die. Your link is empty. I can't read it.--Павел Петро (talk) 13:45, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, this is a non-commercial model. Such models are not allowed into Commons. Here everything must be usable in commercial purposes also.
Это некоммерческий модель. Но в Викискладе всё должно быть совершенно свободный, в том числе для коммерчкского использования. Taivo (talk) 09:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This model is displayed at the Grodno Old Castle and is public property. This is non-commercial model. The owner is Republic of Belarus. According to the Belarussian Copyright Law it is allowed photographing such objects in the non-profit educational purposes--Павел Петро (talk) 07:15, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, this is a non-commercial model. Such models are not allowed into Commons. Here everything must be usable in commercial purposes also.
Это некоммерческий модель. Но в Викискладе всё должно быть совершенно свободный, в том числе для коммерчкского использования. Taivo (talk) 09:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted, 70 years not from creation, but from death of architect is needed. 70 лет нужно подождать не из строения дома, а из смерти архитектора. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted, 70 years not from creation, but from death of architect is needed. 70 лет нужно подождать не из строения дома, а из смерти архитектора. Taivo (talk) 09:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I do not understand anything... Every day, thousands of images are made of monuments and buildings, and in the meantime under national law there was not a single case of copyright infringement! What is the violation?--Павел Петро (talk) 18:46, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Belarusian copyright law photographing objects, that are constantly in a place open to public access, is allowed without the consent of the author or other copyright owners and, unless otherwise provided in this Chapter, without remuneration for such use--Павел Петро (talk) 04:51, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, no freedom of panorama in Belarus. Фотографии из здании и скульптур, сделанные в Беларуси (а также в России и в Украине) нельзя загрузить в Викисклад, потому что запрещено использовать их в коммерческих целях. Taivo (talk) 10:26, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted, значит, вообще нельзя фотографировать. Точнее, фотографировать разрешено, а загрузить фотографии в Викисклад запрещено. Taivo (talk) 10:52, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The name of the file is "The alley of poplar trees in Volgograd". What is the subject of copyright? Looks like an absurd nomination to me, sorry. --Fedor Babkin (talk) 04:42, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted, the file is really so named, but the scuplture is nevertheless important and not de minimis. Ну всё-таки скульптура на этом фотографии находится на слишком важном месте, нарушая авторские права скульптора. Taivo (talk) 10:45, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Missing source about the age of the interior decoration of this church. I read 1962 on one of the icons.[20] There is no freedom of panorama in Romania.
KeepThe church was covered with Eternit in 1959 and the painting of the church was restored in 1962, according to the county's culture department. By definition, the objective of the restoration is to bring the object back to it's original shape, not to create a new one. While this hasn't been documented in Romania, it has been in other European countries [21][22]--Strainu (talk) 09:30, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It would be great if someone could explain why any restorator would write "1962" on an old icon. In my opinion, these icons do not look 300 years old and a reliable source would be needed for such a claim. --Eleassar(t/p)10:36, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that one of the icons has 1962 written on it does not mean that all of them are in the same situation. Also "do not look old" does not mean anything else that the restoration was successful. Does the right part of this image look 600 years old? Of course not, because it was executed in the 1980s. This doesn't mean it is protected by new copyright. As to sources, have you taken the time to look at all the pictures? One of them contains the information I provided: File:Biserica_de_lemn_din_Apatiu_(19).JPG.
To the admin closing the discussion: the same applies to the rest of the proposals made by Eleassar relating to the church in Apatiu.--Strainu (talk) 21:09, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The year 1962 is written not only on one, but on all the three icons in the bottom row, and it is highly unlikely that any restorator would damage an old icon by writing the year of restoration on it. For the rest of them, without a reliable source we can only speculate how old they are. We don't keep images based on speculation. --Eleassar(t/p)22:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I agree: If somebody suggests deletion based on FOP Belarus, he/she should be more specific to show arguments, i.e. that key designers/ architects have not been alive > 50 years. This is the key criteria for copyright. Unless this is clarified, no clear reason for deletion exists. Now, this deletion criteria has not been shown clearly for this category of files (Minsk-1 airport). E.g., find out and share us the precise reason for deletion request? Just "I think so" is not enough.--Paju (talk) 12:32, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No, sorry. There are numerous cases where it is not possible to establish the death year of the architect or even his name (see en:Orphan works). However, the time difference between 1933 and 1953 is so short that it is likely the architect was still alive less than 50 years ago, which constitutes significant doubt that the architecture is free. The precautionary principle demands us to delete files in such cases. --Eleassar(t/p)12:44, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I was suggesting more constructive approach, i.e. specifying the architects and giving some sources, so case could be decided more precisely and openly. Please note: 2013 minus 50 years= 1963, not 1953 :). OK, I spent some time and can quickly argument two cases of Minsk related non-FOP requests: 1) one already removed photo the national opera house (finished 1938-1939) and 2) this airport case Minsk-1. It turned out that in the first case (opera house), the architect was one of the most famous Belarusian architechts, i.e. Iosif Lanhbard (be: Іосіф Рыгоравіч Лангбард) i.e. Iosif Langbard Ио́сиф Ла́нгбард) (18.1.1882, Bielsk Podlaski, Grodno governate – 3.1.1951, Leningrad), who passed away already > 50 years ago, i.e. copyright is not anymore valid.=> Photo could be kept in Commons (restored). In the latter case of Minsk-1, however, the copyright seems to be valid. Namely, a) the main building of the airport was constructed not 1933 when the airfield was taken into use, but during years 1946-1956 or, based on other source, in January 1958 1. This source mentioned the architects. They lived quite a long time afterwards: b) Aleksandr Voinov (ru: Александр Петрович Воинов, 1902–1987) and c) Georgi Zaborski (ru: Георгий Владимирович Заборский, 1909–1999), for sources, see e.g. Minsk-1 article of fiwiki. Thus, in the second case, based on years of life of b) and c), the copyright is still valid and photos under Minsk-1 category, where this terminal building of Minsk-1 is the main target, should be removed from Commons. To summarize: I consider the facts-based-approach much better for the users & for the maintenance of Commons, than just assuming something. You can quite easily be either right or wrong, as the examples 1 & 2 show. Thus, this case can be closed. --Paju (talk) 23:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to find the architects, but did not manage to. That's what DRs are for: to discuss the copyright (and other) issues and potentially discover more information about the file. Thank you for having provided it. Given that the last living author died in 1999 and the copyright lasts for 50 years, starting on 1 January of the year following the year of the author's death, I've added this DR to Category:Undelete in 2050. --Eleassar(t/p)07:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Deleted, 70 years not from creation, but from death of architect is needed. 70 лет нужно подождать не из строения дома, а из смерти архитектора. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
I'm not a rule geek, but I would suppose so. You need to attribute to something if you create a derivative file, and if this is deleted, attribution cannot properly happen. Bonkers The Clown (talk) 03:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Hi Yann, I tried to move the w:File:Complexity-map-overview.png from Wikipedia to Commons, but it seems you deleted this file in 2010. As far as I can see this file is original work by w:User:Bcastel3, who identified himself as Brian Castellani, sociology professor of the Kent State University, Kent Ohio. Could you explain, what I am missing here? And maybe how we could solve this? -- Mdd (talk) 15:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
The copyright act from July 4, 1994 in article 33 point 1 allows to propagate works that are permanently exhibited on the publicly. This banner is placed in corridor of school "Gymnasium nr 2 in Sanok", so it is permanently exhibited on the publicly to see for all the visitotors. Moreover I don't the problem of banner, when we have in Wikimedia tens of categories for banners in countries and there is no harm when they are published on wikimedia files.. Lowdown (talk) 16:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Similar stuff exists is not a valid argument; we're trying to remove non-free material not add more of it on the basis that we already host it. Article 33 [24] states: "It shall be allowed to disseminate: 1) the works permanently exhibited on commonly accessible public roads, streets, squares or gardens, although not for the same use; 2) the works exhibited in commonly accessible public collections such as museums, galleries, and exhibition halls, though only in catalogues and printed publications for promotion of such works and also in press and television current event reports within the limits justified by information purposes." This does not allow for free commercial exploitation of this photograph of the copyrighted logo. --Eleassar(t/p)16:10, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Appreciate the comment. Correct, not my work, but photos both in my possession. Maybe I should re-characterize this? My first attempt at doing this. How can I re-submit?
You must be the copyright holder in order to publish this file under a free license. Obviously you aren't. As such, I think this one must get deleted if a another suitable PD-license can be found. --High Contrast (talk) 18:20, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The picture comes from the University of Saskatchewan, University Archives & Special Collections, A-1163. It is listed as in the public domain. Will that suffice?
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Schools in Poland are organizations of Voivodeships. Logos and coat of arms of these governments are free. Analogous can be treated organizations subordinate to them. And I repeat, that there are tens of file ilustrations of banners and standards in Wikimedia, and there is no problem with that. Lowdown (talk) 16:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Similar stuff exists is not a valid argument; we're trying to remove non-free material not add more of it on the basis that we already host it. Can you provide a reliable source stating that logos and coats of arms of schools in Poland are free? --Eleassar(t/p)16:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
Files still in use in "smaller" wikis (most likely created by socks or created due to the temporary "enwiki-effect"), nevertheless out of COM:PS, considering "Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose" in the meaning of "providing knowledge; instructional or informative" Files got eventually already deleted uploaded by related socks.
Info I informed all wikis locally at the talk page of the related article about the hoax-problem on 14.11.2013 and some entries were already deleted. Nevertheless, most of the files above are still in use (File:Dariani belle (4).jpg not any more)... Gunnex (talk) 21:47, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment — Is it your intention to upload a higher resolution version of this identical image? If so, it isn't necessary to delete this image, you can upload the superior version to the same page. If, on the other hand, you have a better, but not identical, version of the same subject you can just upload it as a new image. —RP88 17:04, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Keep This file is in use on multiple sister projects. The nominator hasn't uploaded any images, but if they are in possession of superior file they can just upload it as a new file and mark this one with the {{Superseded}} template and edit project pages to use the new image. —RP88 16:48, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination --Eleassar (t/p) 11:52, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Delete The image was used at http://eladies.sina.com.tw/getnews.php?newsid=60647 before it was uploaded here, so it seems to be a copyright violation. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:24, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Support --Bohème (talk) 22:35, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
--Fæ (talk) 10:50, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![19 File:A common wardrobe of a "Hipster" 2013-11-13 17-14.jpg](#File:A_common_wardrobe_of_a_"Hipster"_2013-11-13_17-14.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![47 File:Пам"ятник Степану Бандері.jpg](#File:Пам"ятник_Степану_Бандері.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_007.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_1.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_3.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_4.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_5.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_01.JPG){kind=link}
![176 File:Ancien magasin Old England 2008.jpg (previously under "File:Ancien magasin Old England.jpg")](#File:Ancien_magasin_Old_England_2008.jpg_(previously_under_"File:Ancien_magasin_Old_England.jpg")){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![06:02, 14 November 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/11/14#c-Magog_the_Ogre-2013-11-14T06:02:00.000Z-File:A_common_wardrobe_of_a_"Hipster"_2013-11-13_17-14.jpg){kind=link}
![18:49, 22 November 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/11/14#c-Yann-2013-11-22T18:49:00.000Z-File:A_common_wardrobe_of_a_"Hipster"_2013-11-13_17-14.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
![[4]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Biserica_de_lemn_din_Apatiu_%2813%29.JPG){kind=link}
![[5]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c2/Biserica_de_lemn_din_Apatiu_%2812%29.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Seal_of_N%C3%A1chod_town_from_1570_%28big%29.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![14:42, 14 November 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/11/14#c-BaseSat-2013-11-14T14:42:00.000Z-File:Пам"ятник_Степану_Бандері.jpg){kind=link}
![20:38, 21 November 2013 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2013/11/14#c-Ymblanter-2013-11-21T20:38:00.000Z-File:Пам"ятник_Степану_Бандері.jpg){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}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_007.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_007.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_007.jpg){kind=link}
_007.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_-_1.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_1.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_1.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_1.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_3.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_3.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_3.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_3.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_4.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_4.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_4.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_4.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_5.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_5.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_5.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_5.jpeg){kind=link}
_-_01.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_01.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_-_01.JPG){kind=link}
_-_01.JPG){kind=link}
![[16]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Bust_u_Czyrvonym_kasciole_-_Minsk_-_Edvard_Vajnilovicz_-_2013_AD.JPG){kind=link}
_%D1%96_%D1%8F%D0%B5_%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B1%D1%83%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0,_foto_2_by_futureal.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.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}
_(1).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(4).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(6).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(7).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(4).JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Info I have reverted your POV, and by the way: it is not b/w - at least partially. --Yikrazuul (talk) 18:13, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
.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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
