Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2013/12/17
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
_hinten.png){kind=link}
_vorn.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
out of scope - promotion of non-notable company INeverCry 04:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 13:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Epxlict image without 2257 compliance statement, Image has high potential for vandal use. 80.176.129.180 15:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Seemingly deleted at Flickr. Making it unsourced 80.176.129.180 15:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Comment - That the source is no longer active does not make an image unsourced. We have flickrreview for this sort of thing, and that tells us that when it was uploaded it was being freely distributed under the stated licence. As for 2257, we don't require it, and "potential" for vandalism is no reason to delete anything. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)- Speedy
Delete - the title and description strongly suggest this is an attack image, and there is no indication of consent as per COM:IDENT. -Pete F (talk) 16:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Agree with analysis by nominator and by Peteforsyth. -- Cirt (talk) 16:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
This map was overwritten by a different map from an unknown source. We therefore need to delete the current file. The old file upload can be kept, though. Stefan4 (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The map is from the CIA, www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/docs/refmaps.html and their copyright notice says "Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Central Intelligence Agency Web site is in the public domain and may be reproduced, published or otherwise used without the Central Intelligence Agency's permission. We request only that the Central Intelligence Agency be cited as the source of the information and that any photo credits or bylines be similarly credited to the photographer or author or Central Intelligence Agency, as appropriate". The file description already said that it is from a CIA map in the public domain, do you need me to do anything else? Nikswerdhond (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- The old file is the same for copyright, from a CIA map, so why would you delete the updated version but keep the old version? Nikswerdhond (talk) 12:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- There was no source for your upload, so it wasn't possible to tell that it came from the CIA. As you have provided the information, the file is now fine. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Source provided. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Low quality ; blurry ; there is a better image :File:Logo monument historique - noir sans texte.svg Tangopaso (talk) 21:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: MediaWiki toolbar button, see Category:MediaWiki edit toolbar. Coyau (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Low quality ; blurry ; there is a better image : File:Logo monument historique - rouge sans texte.svg Tangopaso (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: MediaWiki toolbar button, see Category:MediaWiki edit toolbar. Coyau (talk) 15:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Signature at the bottom right reads "V. Heyfron 1982". Not "own work by uploader"unless User:Rodin777 was Victor Heyfron, in which case OTRS confirmation would be needed. Painting is copyrighted. Lupo 19:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- It's possible that OTRS already has evidence that User:Rodin777 is Victor Heyfron. Many works attributed to Victor Heyfron, uploaded by Rodin777, claim "Own work", and apparently got OTRS approval (ID 2531682). See, for example, File:Hank_Marvin_1964.jpg, File:Sir_Ian_McKellen_2009.jpg, File:HRH_Prince_Charles_2008.jpg , File:Ken_Dodd_2008.jpg, etc. Can someone with OTRS access check the OTRS ticket linked from these files and see if it includes an assertion that Rodin777 is Victor Heyfron? —RP88 03:20, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I've posed that question at Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard. Though if so, I find the 1979 vs. 1982 discrepancy a bit strange. Lupo 10:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS ticket confirms that the uploder is the artist (VH) Jarekt (talk) 15:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: blurry, low quality. Stefan4 (talk) 20:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete, of a lower quality and blurry in nature. -- Cirt (talk) 05:38, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 16:59, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Nixón (wop!) 23:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy, as copyright violation A.Savin 10:35, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
claim for cc-by-sa but no source given Geraki TLG 23:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as unsourced Ymblanter (talk) 20:19, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Clearly copyvio Mattythewhite (talk) 20:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image -- no description or useful cat . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:48, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image. No descriptionor useful cats. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FOP in Mozambique Darwin Ahoy! 05:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per lack of FoP Ymblanter (talk) 10:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
spam image DS (talk) 15:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Also applies to File:728x90C.jpg, uploaded by the same person, who has done nothing else. DS (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
It's modern building. No FoP in Russia. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
It's modern building. No FoP in Russia. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
A portrait of the uploader ? 91.66.153.214 13:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This not the picture of Amjadieh Stadium (Wrong name).i Msanta20 (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Use {{Rename}} instead. INeverCry 18:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
این تصویر استادیوم امجدیه (شهید شیرودی) نیست Msanta20 (talk) 08:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete At first, this is small photo with no proper EXIF data. This can be copyright violation. At second, the author is claimed unknown, but the license said, that (s)he died before 1980. How do we know that? At third, there is no freedom of panorama in Iran and this seems to be a modern building. Taivo (talk) 11:37, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Info Cropped from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/79362373 (2012, © All rights reserved by zhivik89) or http://de.soccerway.com/venues/iran/shahid-shiroudi-stadium/ (credit: "Abdolrahman Rafati") http://cache.images.globalsportsmedia.com/soccer/venues/600x450/2034.jpg (last modified: 2009). May be in PD in Iran +30 years after publication (and Iran is URAA-unrelated) but a tangible evidence for a publication date (in Iran) is needed. Gunnex (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Considering this, my doubts are increasing... Gunnex (talk) 11:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncertain copyright status. Yann (talk) 14:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- This file is a crop of a TV screenshot of CID; the episode Khooni Gulaal (9 March, 2012) http://i279.photobucket.com/albums/kk122/DemonStar89/Screencaps/m9c3.png --Auric (talk) 05:02, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
There are photographs on this poster and therefore I don't think it's public domain. Discostu (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Free availability is doubtful. The website of MdB Hendricks only states: "You can use this picture gladly for your publications." -Excolis (talk) 20:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Can you explain the Problem? I can't see any infringement of copyright. --Zellbiologe (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- You had to _invent_ a license to upload it. This didn't make you think? "You can use this picture gladly for your publications." is not a valid free license. --AndreasPraefcke (talk) 21:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Fastily Ymblanter (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
File needs an OTRS ticket 91.66.153.214 14:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
No freedom of panorama in the Philippines. Stefan4 (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP#Italy: the billboard is not in the public domain; it was published in 1949. Eleassar (t/p) 20:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope. Stefan4 (talk) 15:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This has been overwritten by an unfree image of Tom & Jerry which must be deleted. I don't know whether the original image is covered by case 4 in {{PD-Democratic Republic of the Congo}} or whether that only applies to text. Stefan4 (talk) 19:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: but reverted to the original version and removed the Tom & Jerry version. In future cases feel free to revert it already, so that the various articles about this banknote do not show a weird Tom and Jerry image for one week. Jcb (talk) 12:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The closing administrator only addressed the concerns for one of the images under this file name, but not the other one. It is still not known whether these banknotes count as "official acts of authority" as stated in the copyright law:
Art.7.- Les actes officiels de l’autorité ne font naître aucun droit d’auteur. Toutes autres publications littéraires, artistiques ou scientifiques faites par les pouvoirs publics engendrent un droit d’auteur au profit de ceux-ci.
The wording "official acts of authority" could be interpreted to mean only legal texts such as laws, court rulings, decisions and similar but not other documents such as banknotes. Whether banknotes are meant to be included in that definition is not known, and the uploader has not provided any indication of how a Congolese court would argue if a case like this would appear in a Congolese court. Stefan4 (talk) 13:52, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 00:04, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Chris Dickinson 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As of this request, this is a personal image that is unused on any project, and thus falls out of COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
File:Data=Ay5GWBeob WIPLDYoIWcfVXxvZu9XwJ55OX7Ag,T8ajiKD-VUPkXGGvMlCGOoKzQoLzKuRYbgLnf0aquFBTp16KtqQx0Xub-6KWv-vaG3XpSxjW0xpQEIfKG1IV3fY 1.gif
[edit]
taken from Google Ciaurlec (talk) 00:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 09:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Archivo inexacto, carece de fuentes que demuestren la veracidad de los datos graficados Cuzco13 (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Acá estan las multiples fuentes: http://www.diariobae.com/diario/2013/12/02/33753-los-numeros-de-la-recuperacion-de-aerolineas.html http://www.cronista.com/negocios/-El-deficit-de-Aerolineas-20131202-0022.html http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/economia/2-225424-2013-07-27.html
Gracias!
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Low quality, not useful Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:20, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
File:Embedded SIM from M2M supplier Eseye with an adapter board for evaluation in a Mini-SIM socket.jpg
[edit]
Out of scope: advertisement. Stefan4 (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused in personal pages Ciaurlec (talk) 00:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: no educational value High Contrast (talk) 17:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:40, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Photo of a 2002 painting in Italy, which lacks Freedom of Panorama Tortie tude (talk) 08:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Info Work of (per http://laregledujeu.org/hertzog/2013/06/06/269/adieu-a-regis-deparis//) fr:Régis Deparis (1948—2013). Gunnex (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Probable copyright violation, attributes Penn State University and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories as sources, this disqualifies as Government PD. National labs' works may be copyrighted Geogene (talk) 20:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
incompatible licence (using a deprecated template) requiring a prior permission for any purpose. image from http://www.arbeitsagentur.de/nn_29904/Navigation/Dienststellen/besondere-Dst/FBA/FBA-Nav.html Atlasowa (talk) 15:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:George Francomb 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 00:35, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:George Porter 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:George Taft 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unfree character Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
No evidence of permission to upload unless French chef Gilles Epie is swdandap, unlikely. Brianhe (talk) 21:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
I am not Gilles Epie. This was publicly available when it was uploaded. Please delete since permissions are not in place. Swdandap
Deleted: INeverCry 18:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
low quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
low quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
See Commons:Deletion requests/Crazy Horse Memorial. Kelly (talk) 19:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Vanity portrait, no particular use for Wikipedia, as far as I can see, therefore out of scope for the project. Blue Elf (talk) 20:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The photo is marked as copyrighted at the website of the Bundestag. -Excolis (talk) 19:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry. You're right. --Zellbiologe (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Maybe copyrighted on the website of the Bundestag, but what's the reason. Its only a crop of this one that seems to have permission. --Les Meloures (talk) 21:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: by Fastily Ymblanter (talk) 09:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE: unused, poor quality, non-notable person Эlcobbola talk 21:10, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Possibly out of scope: likely not useable for educational purposes High Contrast (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Per COM:DW. Jespinos (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Jack Midson 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Evidence is missing that this image is in the public domain in the source country High Contrast (talk) 14:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
No scan of the reverse to show that there was no copyright notice. January (talk) 09:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Incorrect information Sac soccer12 (talk) 02:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete unless somebody can assert with confidence that the title is accurate. In addition COM:IDENT may apply depending on the circumstances of the photo (was it at a public game or a private practice?) -Pete F (talk) 06:56, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
1973 copyrighed postcard. Kaluga.2012 (talk) 20:58, 17 December 2013
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
a derivative work of copyrighted content; no permission by the original copyright holder of the drawing given High Contrast (talk) 14:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Copyright violation of publicity photo: http://www.starpulse.com/Music/Meyers,_Krystal/gallery/Krystal-Meyers-sb04/ http://www.freecodesource.com/album-covers/B001BP4U0E--krystal-meyers-make-some-noise-%28includes-bonus-dvd%29-album-cover.html http://www.titletrakk.com/music-interviews/krystal-meyers-interview.htm (3/4 of the way down the page). Lack of EXIF data is also worrying. Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Lewis Montrose 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Modern stamp of Liberia, presumably still under copyright. Licence is wrong. Philafrenzy (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Small resolution. No EXIF data. Unlikely to be own work. Dura-Ace (talk) 19:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
out of scope, del. on de Nolispanmo 09:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This appears identical to images on Apple.com which are not under Creative Commons Justin14 (talk) 08:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: not "realistically useful for an educational purpose". Tortie tude (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Out of scope St1995 22:25, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:26, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The PD-old license has been wrong from the beginning, as it applies only to the medal itself, but not to the photo that has been shot of it by a person different from the uploader. So, we either need a permission from coinarchives.com or the image needs to be deleted. --Túrelio (talk) 17:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Michael Coulson 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 19:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Michael Smith 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 00:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image -- not the same image as the previous DR. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:52, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 13:57, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
Unused personal image . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:54, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal image . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
False authorship claims - This map is highly likly not self drawn by the uploader High Contrast (talk) 14:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know what you have against me, dude, but I have taken a 2010 Commons-Uploaded Mongolia-Map and modified it using Paint.NET to signal the operations of Ungern-Sternberg and his troops in Mongolia in 1920-1921. You will find the original map on Commons if you search for "Maps of Mongolia". --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Dude, I do not have anything against you but against your style of working here: it is what it is - false authorship claim by you - you are not the creator of this map but you only did a very simple modification based on an existing file which you did not mention on the file page. Do so and this DR is done. --High Contrast (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: a clear copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As of this request, this is a personal image that is unused on any project, and thus falls out of COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Neal Ardley 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Neal Ardley 07-09-2013 2.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Copyright vio. Figure 2 from this IJERT journal article; author surrendered copyright to publisher. Glrx (talk) 00:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Nigel Worthington 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free map; per COM:DM#Slovenia not de minimis. Eleassar (t/p) 22:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- This would be errected by the goverment so it may be free, if not it can be cropped out. --Sporti (talk) 06:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- It does not qualify as an official text or a work accompanying an official text, as demanded by Art. 9 of the Slovene copyright act for a work to be considered official (see Template:PD-SloveniaGov). It is also not an official document or a court decision as demanded by the former Yugoslav copyright act ([1], Art. 4). Of course, I don't object to keeping this image if the map is cropped away. --Eleassar (t/p) 08:59, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Ok cropped. --Sporti (talk) 11:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Old revision deleted. INeverCry 18:54, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
The image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. Note, that there is no usable authorship information given, just "private" which is not sufficient High Contrast (talk) 14:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Image is Inappropriate Content 68.4.81.49 17:40, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep DR is innapropriate. Image is "only" one of the world masterpieces. Tm (talk) 16:30, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- The requester should read at least this: [[2]]. 82.141.67.208 18:28, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
khong thich 123.23.40.234 17:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Dont like it? Dont look at it! Also this is a world masterpiece. Tm (talk) 17:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Oh God, not again! Some people should look up the word 'Art' in a dictionary before coming here. Anatiomaros (talk) 00:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
J'ai des enfants mineures 81.66.155.156 11:07, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: A 1866 painting widely in use. Two previous DRs resolved as kept. Commons is not censored. --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:47, 8 March 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
COM:FOP#Finland Stefan4 (talk) 15:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE - unused, poor quality, non-notable person Эlcobbola talk 21:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:42, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
{{Not-PD-US-URAA}} Stefan4 (talk) 15:06, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete. Per request. - Fma12 (talk) 20:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Bad quality Ralph Hammann (talk) 09:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Indeed.--Edelseider (talk) 10:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free masks Eleassar (t/p) 22:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Included in copyrighted press kit, no evidence of permission to upload. Brianhe (talk) 21:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:50, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 12:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Copyright vio. Figure 4 from this IJERT journal article; author surrendered copyright to publisher. Glrx (talk) 00:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 13:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Per COM:SCOPE. Stefan4 (talk) 15:30, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:46, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It's a modern monument. No FoP in Russia. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It's a modern monument. No FoP in Russia. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:29, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
It's a modern monument. No FoP in Russia. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:44, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
JPG version uploaded at File:Sammy Moore 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 00:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
We don't need this later uploaded yellowish low resolution quasi dupe from this image. Due to watermark removing the feet are cut off. It is unusable. Ras67 (talk) 14:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
I see no utilization in this tighter cropped low quality image from this one. A similar crop is in the file history of the high resolution original. Ras67 (talk) 14:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
_hinten.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_hinten.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
_hinten.png){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
_hinten.png){kind=link}
_vorn.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_vorn.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
_vorn.png){kind=link}
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
_vorn.png){kind=link}
Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/URAA review. Copyrighted in the U.S. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 22:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:55, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Scans of various receipts in a PDF without useful description or categorization. Appears to be out of scope. El Grafo (talk) 13:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:32, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Tom Chamberlain 07-09-2013 1.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
JPG version uploaded at File:Tom Chamberlain 07-09-2013 2.jpg. Mattythewhite (talk) 20:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Italy. 84.61.176.82 16:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:FOP#Italy. — Jeff G. ツ 01:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:DW of the trophy. LGA talkedits 10:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
It says that this is a photograph by Sandy Rosenthal, but according to this page, this is a photo of Sandy Rosenthal, and it doesn't look like a self-shot. It appears that Flickr has been redesigned, and I'm no longer able to find the copyright information, so I don't know whether the photograph has been licensed on Flickr or not. In either case, there is no freedom of panorama for signs like this, so it should be deleted as a derivative work of the sign if nothing else. Stefan4 (talk) 15:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:33, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Low quality, no camera EXIF, uploaded with copies of book covers (i.e., derivative works) and technical quality suggest this is not uploader's work. Quack? Эlcobbola talk 21:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in Mozambique Darwin Ahoy! 05:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per lack of FoP Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
What is URL Peter supposed to mean? Who is the author? Leyo 18:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Author is not uploader, no evidecne of permission . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:29, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This is a derivate work of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nECijjMl8yY&t=10s around 10 seconds into the clip, which is uploaded as Standard YouTube Licence. So in the end it is Flickr washing. CennoxX (talk) 17:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
SPAM -- used only on now-deleted advertising gallery. Probably not own work. While we permit watermarks, I don't think we want notes in images that link to Facebook. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:43, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete, as nominator. St1995 12:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Автор (ЮЮрий) просит удалить этот файл. ЮЮрий (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
As of this request, this is a personal image that is unused on any project, and thus falls out of COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: advertisement. No source or copyright tag. Stefan4 (talk) 15:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:37, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Banknotes of Pakistan
[edit]Per COM:CUR#Pakistan.
- File:0020 Rs (Twenty Rupees بیس روپے) Back New.jpg
- File:0020 Rs (Twenty Rupees بیس روپے) Back.jpg
- File:0020 Rs (Twenty Rupees بیس روپے) Front New.jpg
- File:0020 Rs (Twenty Rupees بیس روپے) Front.jpg
- File:5rupees observe.JPG
- File:K2 and 50 Rupee Note.JPG
- File:PAKISTAN 50 RS by Qwrk 1024WIDE.JPG
- File:Pakistan Rupees.gif
- File:Pakistani 1000 Rupee (October 2007).jpg
- File:Pakistani 5000 Rupee (October 2007).jpg
- File:Pakistani Rupees.jpg
- File:PKR 5000 Face.gif
- File:PKR1000OBV.JPG
- File:PKR1000REV.jpg
- File:PKR1000REVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR100OBV.jpg
- File:PKR100OBVHAJJ.jpg
- File:PKR100REV.jpg
- File:PKR100REVHAJJ.jpg
- File:PKR100REVOLD.JPG
- File:PKR10OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR10REV.jpg
- File:PKR10REVHAJJ.jpg
- File:PKR10REVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR1OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR1REVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR20OBV.jpg
- File:PKR20REV.jpg
- File:PKR2OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR2REVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR5000OBV.jpg
- File:PKR500OBV.jpg
- File:PKR500REV.jpg
- File:PKR500REVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR50OBV.JPG
- File:PKR50REV.jpg
- File:PKR50REVOLD.JPG
- File:PKR5OBV.JPG
- File:PKR5OBV1948.jpg
- File:PKR5OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR5OBVREV1948.jpg
- File:PKR5REV.jpg
- File:PKR5REV1948.jpg
- File:PKR5REVOLD.jpg
- File:Ходжак 5 рупи.PNG
_Back_New.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Back.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Front_New.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Front.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 19:52, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:47, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Banknotes of Pakistan
[edit]Unclear copyright status, per previous DR and COM:CUR#Pakistan. Supposed "own works" derivated from modern Pakistan banknotes, copyrighted by the issuer en:State Bank of Pakistan.
- File:Obverse 1000 PKR.jpg
- File:Obverse 50.jpg
- File:PKR1000OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR100OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR10OB.jpg
- File:PKR500OBVOLD.jpg
- File:PKR50OBVOLD.jpg
- File:Reverse 1000 PKR.jpg
- File:Reverse 50.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 08:23, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
- Spezial cases
- per en:Pakistani rupee a Hajj banknote of Pakistan (issue of special notes for the express use of the pilgrims), used 1960–1969.
- sported both Urdu and Bengali until 1971 (circulated between 1947-1971)
- Gunnex (talk) 08:27, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: As per COM:CUR#Pakistan, the two special cases are also Pakistanese currencies made by the State bank as the others (see WP articles). --Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:36, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Banknotes of Pakistan
[edit]Per COM:CUR Pakistan, currencies of Pakistan are copyrighted unless they have been published for 50 years.
- File:5 Rupees of Pakistan.jpg
- File:Badshahi mosque Lahore and Pakistani 500 rupees note (cropped).jpg
- File:Badshahi mosque Lahore and Pakistani 500 rupees note.jpg
- File:PakOneRupee-side1.jpg
- File:PakOneRupee-side2.jpg
- File:PKR Rs 1000.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A1Cafel (talk) 07:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Geni (talk) 18:44, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Files in Category:Banknotes of Pakistan
[edit]- File:75 PKR note.jpg
- File:Old one rupee depicting iqbals tomb.jpg
- File:Pakistan current Rs.20 note obverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan current Rs.20 note reverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan old Rs.20 note obverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan old Rs.20 note reverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-10-obverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-10-reverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-100-obverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-100-reverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-50-obverse.jpg
- File:Pakistan-50-reverse.jpg
Delete per COM:CUR Pakistan. Johnj1995 (talk) 22:28, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --FitIndia Semi-retired 16:49, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Derivative work of coins.
- File:- Money 01 -.jpg
- File:Centimes euro vrac.jpg
- File:Euro muntstukken.png
- File:Eurobox Blue.jpg
- File:Le beurre et l'argent du beurre.jpg
- File:Wiener Schachtel.png
Stefan4 (talk) 10:53, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, what is the problem with derivative works of coins ? Lionel Allorge (talk) 00:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- You are not the copyright holder to the coins, so you can't upload photos of them. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, after reading COM:EURO, I believe it does not apply to my picture (File:Le beurre et l'argent du beurre.jpg) because the copyright faces of the euro are a very small part of my picture and therefore, De Minimis should apply. Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:04, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- De minimis doesn't depend on the size of the images but on the purpose of the photograph and whether the shown parts are above the threshold of originality. See for example this court ruling from the European Court of Justice. Showing coins is one of the main purposes of the image (the file name even mentions money), and the coins are clearly visible. The coins therefore do not satisfy de minimis. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi, after reading COM:EURO, I believe it does not apply to my picture (File:Le beurre et l'argent du beurre.jpg) because the copyright faces of the euro are a very small part of my picture and therefore, De Minimis should apply. Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:04, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
- You are not the copyright holder to the coins, so you can't upload photos of them. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Non-free coins. Some of them are tagged with {{PD-GermanGov}}, but as explained at Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, that template can only be used for text. A coin is not text. Some of the images do not have permission from the photographers, which a coin always must have.
- File:1 Cent - Juan Pablo II (2002-2005).jpg
- File:1 Cent - Sede Vacante (2005).jpg
- File:1 Euro - Benedicto XVI (2005-2013).jpg
- File:1 Euro - Juan Pablo II (2002-2005).jpg
- File:1 Euro - Sede Vacante (2005).jpg
- File:1 eurocent 1 pfennig.jpg
- File:1-€-Münze.jpg
- File:10 Cent - Benedicto XVI (2005-2013).jpg
- File:10 Cent - Juan Pablo II (2002-2005).jpg
- File:10 Cent - Sede Vacante (2005).jpg
- File:2-€-Münze.jpg
- File:5 euro cent Slovenie.png
- File:50 cent coin SK Bratislavsky hrad.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Euro coins are not free for Commons: derivative works are not allowed if they are not in the "faithful likeness" and "not detrimental to the image of the euro". See also the previous discussions.[3][4]
- File:Austria 2e.gif
- File:Europa 2009 face.jpg
- File:Europa 2010 face.jpg
- File:Money - The last Cent.jpg
- File:Pièce 1000€ Côté Pile.jpg
- File:Pièce 100€ Côté Face.jpg
- File:Pièce 100€ Côté Pile.jpg
- File:Pièce 200€ Côté Face.jpg
- File:Pièce 200€ Côté Pile.jpg
- File:The Austrian 25 Euro bimetal coin 'Renewable Energy'.jpg
- File:The Austrian 25 Euro bimetal coin 'Year of Astronomy 2009'.jpg
- File:Tire-Euro-Bad.JPG
Eleassar (t/p) 13:33, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 20:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Non-free coin.
Stefan4 (talk) 15:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Non-free coin. One of the files can be saved by reverting to the original revision which doesn't contain any coin and deleting only those revisions which show a coin.
Stefan4 (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Reverted one per Stefan, deleted the other. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Unfree coin.
Stefan4 (talk) 11:19, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 00:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Non-free coins.
Stefan4 (talk) 21:18, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Delted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Per COM:DW.
Stefan4 (talk) 21:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins
[edit]Missing permission from engraver. See COM:CUR#Euro.
- File:1 euro 1999 España.jpg
- File:1 euro 2010 España.jpg
- File:1 euro 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:1 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:1 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:1 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:10 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:10 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:10 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:2 euro 1999 España.jpg
- File:2 euro 2010 España.jpg
- File:2 euro 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:2 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:2 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:2 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativa EURO 2012 estonia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 austria.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 belgica.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 eslovaquia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 holanda.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 italia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 luxemburgo.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2009 malta.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2011 malta.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2011 portugal.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2012 monaco.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2012 san marino.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2014-1 malta.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo 2014-2 malta.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 bélgica.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 chipre.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 irlanda.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 italia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 malta.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativo EURO 2012 portugal.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2005 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2010 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2011 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2012 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2013 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos 2014 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos EMU 2009 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos EMU 2009 francia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos EURO 2012 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos EURO 2012 francia.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos ROMA 2007 España.jpg
- File:2 euro conmemorativos ROMA 2007 francia.jpg
- File:20 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:20 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:20 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:5 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:5 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:5 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:50 euro cent 1999 España.jpg
- File:50 euro cent 2010 España.jpg
- File:50 euro cent 2011 estonia.jpg
- File:Reveal-DX.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
There's no problem in using images of the designs of euro coins. I wrote the european central bank and various central banks of europe. The problem is when you use images of an specific web page. I made the photographs of every coin I uploaded. Euro images CAN BE USED because they DON'T HAVE COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS. European central bank even told me that I could use the images in their web page if I cite them as authors of it. That's even written in their web page!! For all those reasons I think that this topic MUST BE INVESTIGATED BEFORE DELETING THE FILES --Philloven (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Everything you say is true, but not the whole story. At the European Commission web site it says
- "Only the following reproductions are allowed:
- reproductions in a format without relief (drawings, paintings, films) provided that they are not detrimental to the image of the euro."
- "Only the following reproductions are allowed:
- This means that you cannot use images of the coins to create parodies of the Euro or any other derivative work. And that means that they are not free enough to keep on Commons. As you will see above, this has been well established over eight DRs. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- Euro coins are more complex than that. There is one common side, shared by all countries. The European Central Bank owns the copyright to this side of the coins and decides the restrictions, and the conclusion on Commons is that the common side is unfree. Therefore, pictures of the common side may not be uploaded to Commons.
- There is also a national side, for which the restrictions depend on the country of issue. For the national side of the coins, coins from Latvia are fine per {{Latvian coins}}, while coins from Finland probably are fine per {{PD-FinlandGov}}. Lithuania will introduce the euro on 1 January 2015, and Lithuanian euro coins will be fine per {{PD-LT-exempt}}. The national side of the coins from other countries are not fine, and can't be uploaded to Commons without OTRS permission from the copyright holders. The list above does not cointain any coins from Finland, Latvia or Lithuania. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I asked if I could use the images to write an article in wikipedia and they answered "yes, you can if it is not detrimental to the image of the euro". The use of the image, as I used it, is not detrimental in ANY WAY to the euro. It's not a parody either. Yes I see it has been discused but I think it's a mistake. It can't be that the BCE itself says that the images can be used and we delete them based on interpretations. --Philloven (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
- Commons requires that all images hosted here are free for any use by anybody anywhere. Your WP article may be perfectly all right with the Bank, but that is not enough to keep it here -- they must be OK with any use, even parody, which, obviously, they are not. You can probably use the images on WP:EN for a single article under Fair Use, but they cannot be kept here. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Krd 16:44, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
1 cent euro coins (national sides)
[edit]No evidence that these coins would be in the public domain. The national sides of the coins can't be represented on Commons unless the individual member state that issued the design releases it under a free license; as far as I know, none have.
- File:1 cent coin Es serie 1.png
- File:1 cent coin Es.jpg
- File:1 cent coin Sk serie 1.png
- File:1 cent coin Sk.jpg
- File:1 cent coin Sm serie 1.png
- File:1 cent coin Sm.jpg
- File:1 cent Euro coin Es.gif
- File:1 cent Euro coin Sk.gif
- File:1 cent Euro coin Sm.gif
- File:1 cent SK 2009.jpg
- File:1, 2 & 5 euro cents Belgium 2nd series.gif
- File:1, 2 & 5 euro cents Cyprus.gif
- File:1, 2 & 5 euro cents Estonia.jpg
- File:1, 2 & 5 euro cents Spain.png
- File:Austria 1c.PNG
- File:Coin austria 1c euro a.jpg
- File:Piéce 1 cent.jpg
- File:Slovakia 1, 2, 5 euro cent.png
Eleassar (t/p) 08:23, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
1 cent euro coins (common sides)
[edit]Per Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2, the common sides of euro coins are not free for Commons.
Eleassar (t/p) 08:25, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Please think about this very carefully, as some of these images have been in heavy use for many years now! I do not agree with the assessment of the last Deletion request (and neither did a lot of contributors). The not detrimental to the image of the Euro clause is comparable to personality rights attached to pictures of living people. This is a non-copyright issue which we leave up to the reuser. --Dschwen (talk) 17:33, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- I've read the discussion and think these images don't meet the terms of the Definition of Free Cultural Work that should be met per the Wikimedia licensing policy, in particular the freedom to "make changes and improvements, and to distribute derivative works". I don't see how the requirement for "faithful likeness" would be in the scope of "permissible restrictions". I also don't think the copyright and the personality rights are comparable. Namely, in regard to the inclusion of material, Commons concerns itself only with copyright. --Eleassar (t/p) 21:21, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
- Delete all the non-Estonian coins. See Template:EEK coin, which is what they should be tagged. For the others, national sides of Euro coins are copyrighted to the countries of origin. In almost all cases, there are not available under a free licences. Exceptions are Finland and Estonia. Also, most of these candidate coins are tagged with {{Money-EU}}. This is wrong. These coins are most emphatically NOT banknotes. That license does NOT apply to coins. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:14, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- The template EEK coin states: "This is an image of an Estonian kroon coin." These are euro coins, not kroon coins. Please provide a link that states euro coins may be freely reproduced in Estonia. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Please see Commons:Currency#Estonia. Bank of Estonia responded on this issue, and confirmed the stance on Kroons applies to Euro notes and coins as well. --Hammersoft (talk) 22:19, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply, but I can't find the relevant information there. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:21, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
- Please see reference #2. If you need more, I would recommend you contact the OTRS team for verification. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:06, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
- I've verified the relevant ticket (ticket:2008071410045309). As far as I understand, it allows for the free reproduction of banknotes and the kroon coins, but not the euro coins. I've left a request for help also at User talk:Quibik, who has added the note. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:00, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks! --Hammersoft (talk) 19:37, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
- Ok, Quibik has translated the relevant material at User talk:Quibik#Estonian euro coins. That would be:
- "Is referring to the Bank of Estonia as the author sufficient when using the design of the Estonian euro coin?"
- "The Bank of Estonia owns the economic rights [as defined in $13 of Estonian Copyright Law, I guess] of the national side of the Estonian euro coins. Non-economic rights, including authorship rights[?], belong to the author of the design. So referring to the author of the design would be the correct way."
- It doesn't give any explicit permission for the free reusage of Estonian euro coins. In the best case, it is unclear. --Eleassar (t/p) 18:59, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the legwork. Well, "unclear" defaults to "delete" on Commons, so I move to Delete the Estonian coins too until we can clarify their status. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:15, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the legwork. Well, "unclear" defaults to "delete" on Commons, so I move to
- The template EEK coin states: "This is an image of an Estonian kroon coin." These are euro coins, not kroon coins. Please provide a link that states euro coins may be freely reproduced in Estonia. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:36, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming these files as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host them on Commons FASTILY 06:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins (1 cent)
[edit]Unfree coin.
Stefan4 (talk) 21:16, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:50, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins (1 cent)
[edit]Non-free coins. Designer not yet dead for at least 70 years.
Stefan4 (talk) 01:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 01:18, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins (1 cent)
[edit]per en:File:1 cent euro coin common side.gif and COM:EURO (Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2)
Josve05a (talk) 15:02, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The Euro coin in File:Leinsamen.jpg is blurry. Hence, there are no elements above COM:TOO recognizable. Alternatively, the coin may be replaced by something else. --Leyo 17:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: sorry but the copyrighted elements are recognizable enough emho and the composition can also be copyrighted since Europe has a low TOO.
Files uploaded by 489unioncityloacal (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF/different cameras.
- File:NeoCenter2.jpg
- File:Applebees1.png
- File:Union-city-civic-center-main-pic.png
- File:03a topic.jpg
- File:Station-center-1-spr13.jpg
- File:James logan.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:34, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by AFM-RAYAN10 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Watermark suggests that the images are likely not own work of the uploader.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Augusto ferrer dalmau (talk · contribs)
[edit]Modern art. I think painter identity/permission confirmation via Commons:OTRS is necessary.
- File:Don carlos.jpg
- File:Al pie del cañon.jpg
- File:Secuencias.jpg
- File:Proceso.jpg
- File:Bocetos rocroi.jpg
- File:Bocetos rocroi 1.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept per ticket 2013121910011754 - Jcb (talk) 15:21, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Upload behaviour not really trustworthy... --> User talk:CEscudos
- Additional info
- File:Rony Jason 13.jpg + File:Rony Jason.jpg - most likely video screenshots from unknown source (both already deleted in the past)
- File:Torcida do Fortaleza no Estádio Castelão.jpg + File:Mascote do Basquete Cearense.jpg - mysteriously retouched (commercial banners painted over, 1st image already deleted twice in the past)
- Concerning association football logos of Brazil
Imho, out of scope of {{PD-textlogo}}{{PD-shape}}, examples:
- File:Associação Esportiva Tiradentes.jpg
- File:Associação Trairiense de Futebol.jpg
- File:Maracanã Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Salgado da Gama Atlético Clube.jpg
- File:Salgado da Gama Atlético Clube.jpg
- File:Estádio Municipal Governador Virgílio Távora - Crato.jpg
- File:Estádio Municipal Governador Virgílio Távora.jpg
- File:Estádio do Junco em Sobral.jpg
- File:Estádio Municipal dos Amaros.jpg
- File:Torcida do Fortaleza Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Torcida do Fortaleza no Estádio Castelão.jpg
- File:Clube Atlético Pacajuense.jpg
- File:Rony Jason 13.jpg
- File:Rony Jason.jpg
- File:Eusébio Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Logo Fac.jpg
- File:Mascote do Basquete Cearense.jpg
- File:Centro Esportivo Ubajarense.jpg
- File:Quixadá Futebol Clube.gif
- File:Centro de Treinamento Uniclinic.JPG
- File:Associação Trairiense de Futebol.jpg
- File:Associação Esportiva Tiradentes.jpg
- File:Palmácia Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Maracanã Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Arsenal de Caridade.jpg
- File:Clube Atlético Cearense.JPG
Gunnex (talk) 20:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: , . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 23:14, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Do we know what the threshold of originality is in Brazil? No indication it is above the line of these images.
- File:Rio Branco Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Associação Esportiva Estação Antônio Bezerra.png
- File:Caucaia Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Ginásio São joão.jpg
- File:Iguatu Futebol Clube.jpg
- File:Ce crato.JPG
- File:Calouros do Ar.jpg
- File:Penarol de Fortaleza.JPG
- File:Orion de Fortaleza.JPG
- File:Nacional de Fortaleza.JPG
- File:Barbalha Futebol Clube.JPG
- File:Gentilândia de Fortaleza.JPG
- File:Duque de Caxias de Fortaleza.JPG
- File:Usina Ceará.JPG
- File:Volante Atlético Clube.JPG
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:45, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:27, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. 24 files (4x logos and 20x coat of arms/flags) from organizations and municipalities in Brazil. Unlikely {{PD-shape}} (for logos of organizations like File:Associação dos Desportistas de Pacatuba.JPG or File:Ferroviario fundação.jpg) or {{PD-BrazilGov}} (for municipalities), especially considering that for a licensing via {{PD-BrazilGov}} the creation date per municipal (local) law is mostly decisive and no date and further details were provided by uploader. File:Bandeira de Barroquinha.PNG can't be "commissioned by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) prior to 1983" because the municipality was created only in 1988. Same for File:Brasão de Fortim.jpg, municipality created only in 1992, File:Bandeira de Itaitinga.jpg (which appears to be a photo/scan), municipality created in 1992, File:Bandeira de Itarema.jpg, municipality created in 1985, File:Bandeira de Acarape-CE.PNG, municipality created in 1987, File:Bandeira de Madalena.PNG, municipality created in 1989, File:Bandeira de Varjota.PNG, municipality created in 1985 etc. An alternative license via PD-whatever fails as the coat of arms have a high COM:TOO. Note that even a Brazilian municipality created before 1983 may have updated significantly his "corporate identity".
The logo File:Nacional Atlético Clube.jpg might be borderline...
For the uploader. "Lei brasileira em Propriedade Industrial " does not apply here --> see Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-BrazilGov 2 (cited by http://simbolosmunicipais.blogspot.com.br/2012/01/ceara.html at the bottom of the page, the main source for these files)
- File:Nacional Atlético Clube.jpg
- File:Associação dos Desportistas de Pacatuba.JPG
- File:Itapipoca 2014.jpg
- File:Ferroviario fundação.jpg
- File:Brasão de Pentecoste.png
- File:Brasão de Jaguaruana.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Jaguaruana.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Caridade.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Varjota.PNG
- File:Bandeira Redenção-CE.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Piquet Carneiro-CE.PNG
- File:Bandeira Altaneira.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Alto Santo.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Barroquinha.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Cariús.PNG
- File:Brasão de Fortim.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Itaitinga.jpg
- File:Brasao do Eusébio-CE.jpg
- File:Bandeira do Eusébio-CE.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Aiuaba-CE.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Madalena.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Itarema.jpg
- File:Bandeira de Acarape-CE.PNG
- File:Bandeira de Abaiara-CE.PNG
Gunnex (talk) 21:44, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - I blocked the uploader a month for File:Associação dos Desportistas de Pacatuba.JPG. I wouldn't take any single one of these licenses at face value without investigating and verifying each and every one. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:07, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted per COM:PRP. INeverCry 21:48, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:CEscudos/logs (serial copyright violator)/previous DRs. Historical photos, uploaded since 2014 for several Brazilian association footbal clubs (mostly pt:Ferroviário Atlético Clube (Fortaleza)). Mostly undated and unsourced files (at least source/date of 1st disclosure is needed), making a check via {{PD-Brazil-media}} impossible. Most likely scanned from local newspapers or "photos of photos".
Ignoring supposed "own works" from (example) 1910 and other supposed "own" works which may be already in PD via {{PD-BR-1937}}.
Considering also:
- File:Calouros do Ar - tremendão da Aerolândia.jpg (1950th/1960th) --> http://botoesparasempre.blogspot.de/2011/02/calouros-do-ar-ce-raridade-da-brianezi.html (2011) = http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-ZWHELah2Uys/VldhwgfPwjI/AAAAAAAAY1w/FSAe2P_nI3Q/s1600/Calouros_do_Ar_-_tremend%25C3%25A3o_da_Aerol%25C3%25A2ndia.jpg
- File:Usina Ceará Atlético Clube.jpg --> (1957) obvious newspaper scan, considering also the version of http://cacellain.com.br/blog/?p=66274 (2014) = http://cacellain.com.br/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Usina-CEara.jpg
- File:Gentilândia Atlético Clube.jpg --> http://futebolesociedadecearense.blogspot.de/2013/05/campeonato-cearense-de-futebol-clubes.html (2013, photo from 1957) = http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-SecI_6A8iIg/UalLCoVLHmI/AAAAAAAAAHI/f4LSUmEfg4c/s1600/Gentilandia1957.jpg
- Special case
- File:Lp do ferrão.jpg --> derived from the official mascot of pt:Ferroviário Atlético Clube (Fortaleza)
- File:1945 - Maguaray.jpg
- File:Obras do Castelão - Começo da década de 70.jpg
- File:Pavilhão do Padro - Estádio Presidente Vargas - Década de 40.jpg
- File:Pedra inaugural do Estádio Castelão.jpg
- File:Ferroviário Campeão.jpg
- File:Ferroviário - primórdios.jpg
- File:Penarol Esporte Clube.jpg
- File:Penarol - Clube das Normalistas.jpg
- File:Gol do Peñarol Sport Club.jpg
- File:Fortaleza Esporte Clube - 1946.jpg
- File:Calouros do Ar - tremendão da Aerolândia.jpg
- File:Gentilâdia - Leão do Subúrbio.jpg
- File:Gentilândia - time dos acadêmicos.jpg
- File:Lp do ferrão.jpg
- File:Usina Ceará Atlético Clube.jpg
- File:Irmãos Gomes.jpg
- File:Gentilândia Atlético Clube.jpg
- File:Fortaleza Sporting Club - Década de 40.jpg
- File:Ferroviário Atlético Clube - Década de 40.jpg
- File:Fortaleza Esporte Clube - Década 50.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:55, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ersinceylan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:4892bc7db55d367909f2de23e2b8ee75.jpg
- File:Görüntü 1 (30.jpg
- File:Hqdefault.jpg
- File:WP 20130626 042.jpg
- File:B5x8fzBz7XM(2).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Logo of the educational institution Simon Balle School, and therefore highly likely the uploader isn't the copyright holder. As the image is over the threshold of originality, therefore they can't be hosted on Wikimedia Commons.
User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 21:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope.
- File:Dear John Band with Red March.jpg
- File:Arsyl John 02.jpg
- File:Glenn John 01.jpg
- File:Glenn John 02.jpg
- File:Arsyl John 01.jpg
- File:Jeffrey Balts.jpg
- File:Dear John Band Performance.jpg
- File:Kenny Gillu.jpg
- File:Dear John Band Wallpaper.jpg
- File:John Mran.jpg
- File:Racing with a fan.jpg
- File:Dear John Band.jpg
- File:Glenn John.jpg
- File:Arsyl John.jpg
- File:AMA Performance.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 15:01, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:41, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gul.milanopablo.44 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Uploaded in batch of blatant subway-related copyvios (see talk/deleted contribs); low resolution; no metadata.
Эlcobbola talk 20:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:49, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kevin reys (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope.
Stefan4 (talk) 15:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:46, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE
- File:Erect circumcised penis.jpg
- File:Flaccid circumcised.jpg
- File:Foreskin restoration technique.jpg
- File:Semi-erect circumcised penis.jpg
- File:Circumcised penis erect.jpg
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope: low quality, blurry.
- File:Foreskin restoration using tape ring2.jpg
- File:Foreskin restoration using tape ring.jpg
- File:Flaccid big.jpg
- File:Forskin pulled forward.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 01:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete, not the best quality here, -- Cirt (talk) 05:38, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete COM:PORN. --Yikrazuul (talk) 20:43, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete, my sugestion is, to ask friend to take pictures of such distances. Pictures making "from hand" is not the best way to good results. Zboralski (talk) 12:11, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Not sure how we missed this one: File:Penis, human.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 17:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Uploaded in batch of copyvios (see user talk/deleted contribs) with same subject matter. Lower resolution; either no metadata of metadata with varying camera models and image editing software (File:EyeCollection01.jpg, for example, even has ©Rafael Gamo in the metadata, whereas File:Sillacorona.jpg has metadata that credits Adam Wiseman). File:ARCHIVOIMPRESO-covers.jpg seems an unambiguous derivative of book/publication covers. Duck copyvios.
- File:TenisPanam.png
- File:Sillacorona.jpg
- File:ARCHIVOIMPRESO-covers.jpg
- File:Morphology Oaxaca Pottery by Innovando la Tradicion.jpg
- File:The Letter E is everywhere at Archivo.jpg
- File:Archivo Pavilion.jpg
- File:Petates at The Letter E is everywhere.jpg
- File:Archivo's reception.jpg
- File:"Assembly Manual" exhibition.jpg
- File:Building façade.jpg
- File:View of "Here & There".jpg
Эlcobbola talk 22:12, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:39, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Fake "logos" for events that are not happening - Turkey did not bid for the world cup or Confederations Cup, unused and of no educational value.
LGA talkedits 10:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:31, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pocholonerosep (talk · contribs)
[edit]Distinct watermarks and missing EXIF. The images are likely not own work.
- File:Avion militar de bolivia- k-8.jpg
- File:K-8 atardeciendo.jpg
- File:Avion presidencial boliviano.jpg
- File:Avion vicepresidencial boliviano.jpg
- File:T -33 con k-8.jpg
- File:Pilotos bolivianos con k-8.jpg
- File:K-8 bolivianos volando alto.jpg
- File:K-8 boliviano.jpg
- File:Armamento del k-8.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 01:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:28, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by S-d-o-1970 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
- File:2013-12-15 me next to plane tree b and w filter hue.png
- File:2013-12-15 me next to plane tree original.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:48, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
No substantiation of PD claims. No sources or source of "Private collection" fail COM:L requirement that description "must contain the information required by the license (author, etc.) and should also contain information sufficient for others to verify the license status". How can we verify when these were published?
- File:Aubreyschenck.jpg
- File:Grandnational.jpg
- File:Alperson.jpg
- File:Trevorbren.jpg
- File:Taffyhbfn.jpg
- File:Wallacecactusyearbook.jpg
- File:Prheinstein.jpg
- File:Edjackfn.jpg
- File:Molotov hilger hitler.jpg
- File:Lamedshapiro.JPG
- File:Morrisenamel.JPG
- File:Gabrielenamel.JPG
- File:Athill.jpg
- File:Almweissfn.jpg
- File:Hhoyt.jpg
- File:Dfitzgerald22.jpg
- File:Vanderkloot.jpg
- File:Churchillcommando.jpg
- File:Kellyrogers.jpg
- File:Animalsarefn.jpg
- File:Commhs.jpg
- File:Ath1933.jpg
- File:Howey36.jpg
- File:Annet.jpg
- File:Girlshighlion.jpg
- File:Girlshigharial.jpg
- File:Girlshighbank.jpg
- File:Girlshighschoolfull.jpg
- File:Girlsentry.jpg
- File:Girlshs22.jpg
- File:Girlshighschool.jpg
- File:Hitrechlin.jpg
- File:Garssonfn.jpg
- File:Algellman.jpg
- File:Mlenierfn.jpg
- File:Robertmintz.jpg
- File:Gbye2.jpg
- File:Georgetbye.jpg
- File:Frankninafn.jpg
- File:Buckmuriel.jpg
- File:Alfred Flechtheim and Betty Goldschmidt.jpg
- File:Ferrinfraser.jpg
- File:Wendell morganfn.jpg
- File:Wdunn.jpg
- File:Ath55fnn.jpg
- File:Lynneroberts.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 21:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:51, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Shaggycarlos (talk · contribs)
[edit]Appear to be images from Facebook (see here - no indication of free licenses) photoshopped onto non-free backgrounds (e.g., File:Estacion_rockmance_principal.jpg has background from here). Also, non-notable band/group?
- File:Estacion rockmance 2.jpg
- File:Estacion rockmance.jpg
- File:Segundo logo Estacion rockmance.jpg
- File:Logo Estacion rockmance.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 21:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:53, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Asuman krause 2013-12-15 09-04.jpg
- File:Asena 2013-12-15 09-00.jpeg
- File:Asena 2013-12-15 08-59.jpeg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:35, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Technical qualities suggest this is a photograph of an existing photo (i.e. derivative work). No permission for underlying image. Other images in uploader stream are obvious derivative works (e.g., File:Gmmanuale.jpg)
- File:Driussigualtiero 3.jpg
- File:Driussigualtiero 2.jpg
- File:Driussigualtiero.jpg
- File:Gualtierodriussi.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 21:47, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Uploader indicated here that the underlying photo is indeed his/her original work. I'm willing to AGF and retain the images on that basis. However, the uploader has since uploaded a superior version of this picture (File:Driussi.jpg - not nominated here), so the images above should probably still be deleted as inferior quality duplicates. Эlcobbola talk 16:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:52, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Some unused self-portraits
[edit]- File:Irfan Qurashi, and his chins..jpg
- File:This me and my mum is called veronica wlff 2013-09-24 17-47.jpg
- File:Me and my son--- -Abhishek and Shaurya 2013-06-20 08-18.jpg
- File:Me and my friend, hamas! 2013-10-11 17-12.jpg
- File:Me and my wife 2013-12-13 23-24.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-23.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-22.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-21.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-20.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-19.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-18.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-17.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-16.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-15.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-13.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-12.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-08.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-07.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-03.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-02.jpg
- File:My book 2013-12-13 23-01.jpg
- File:If you've long felt like you're destined for something -bigger, better and more purposeful in your life, but -you've been wondering how to unleash your inner -greatness…---Then this is the universe telling y 2013-12-13 22-56.jpg
- File:This is my uncle jason reardon he has became really well known -he is in his early 30s and love me and my sister and his other people in our family 2013-09-28 12-16.jpg
- File:Son 2013-12-10 10-45.jpg
- File:Ava 2013-12-10 10-44.jpg
- File:Me 2013-12-10 10-43.jpg
- File:Hubby 2013-12-10 10-43.jpg
- File:Son 2013-12-10 10-42.jpg
- File:Me and my daughter 2013-12-10 10-31.jpg
- File:Super falcon camp with chinasa,dede and jane david.JPG
- File:Same award day.jpg
- File:Me and my elder sister comfort david.jpg
- File:Jane david.JPG
- File:Jane David and Mimi in trinidad and tobago world cup.jpg
- File:Jane David at the lagos airport about taking off to miami for the world cup tour.JPG
- File:David Jane giving out my autograph to the kids.jpg
- File:David Jane celabrating after the season.jpg
- File:David Jane getting ready for a match against china.JPG
- File:David Jane chiling at the airport lobby in Turkey.jpg
- File:Best player of the team and the best goal keeper of the team Jane David and Sivieta.jpg
- File:David Jane at the airport in turkey.jpg
- File:David Jane at the buberry shop doing what i love best shopping.jpg
- File:David Jane receiving with her club Manager.jpg
- File:After training with my team mates in the National Camp Super Falcon in Abuja Nigeria.JPG
- File:David Jane with my little fan.jpg
- File:David Jane about leaving for lunch.jpg
- File:After concert.jpg
- File:Before concert.jpg
- File:Me and My Sis 03 (2565883332).jpg
- File:Me and My new camera (334458293).jpg
- File:My NSUI Team.JPG
- File:Me and my niece Zoya.jpg
- File:Noori chamb2.jpg
- File:Noori chamb.jpg
- File:Modeling.jpg
- File:President Of NSUI.jpg
- File:Shahadra.jpg
- File:Shahadra sharief.jpg
- File:Campus MCA.jpg
- File:Pic School.jpg
- File:Me And My Photos (256387720).jpg
- File:Me and My Wii (502342662).jpg
- File:Me and My Xsi (2454800787).jpg
- File:Abdulatif Ally.JPG
- File:20131011 162638 副本.jpg
- File:Imagejamm.jpg
- File:Murari Lal Swami.jpg
- File:Pawneshwer Gupta.jpg
- File:Pawneshwer Gupta 2.jpg
- File:Pawneshwer Gupta 3.jpg
- File:Your's truly.jpg
- File:Gurdeep, sharan.jpg
- File:Gurdeep Singh (Spiritual Man) Maanavta.jpg
- File:Benthanhmarket.JPG
- Keep No longer unused. Ivo Goedhart (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- File:Tati Herz Stella.JPG
- File:RJ with friend.jpg
- File:Rajendra Kumar Yadav, Aniket shelke, Ashutosh, Anandu.jpg
- File:Rajendra Kumar Yadav.jpg
- File:Rajendra and his friend.jpg
- File:Tetew2.jpg
- File:Varshith.jpg
- File:Kushiprasad.JPG
- File:Picturessssss 002.jpg
- File:Dolphins and me.jpg
- File:Rob and Alli at Military Ball.jpg
- File:Meandmydaughter.jpg
- File:My wife and I.jpg
- File:Manoj choudhary roorkee.jpg
- File:Manoj.choudhary roorkee..jpg
- File:Manoj.choudhary roorkee.jpg
- File:M.manoj.jpg
- File:Manoj.122.jpg
- File:Untitled-002.manoj.jpg
- File:Manoj-001.jpg
- File:Ch.jpg
- File:Manoj...jpg
- File:Manoj.1.jpg
- File:Manoj.choudhary.jpg
- File:Heey.jpg
- File:Annam 19 july 2009.jpg
- File:Timothymonaghan.jpg
- File:Elizabeth (8687017828).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth - Last One (8683941094).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8701964885).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8663216953).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8665935870).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8668246903).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8661998433).jpg
- Keep
- File:Elizabeth (8659318489).jpg
- Keep Professional artistic portrait in photostudio with flickr licence. --Svajcr (talk) 17:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Question is not about quality or license. Commons is not an art gallery or gallery for all persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects. These photos were uploaded by bot mechanism in an excess, but according to De minimis policy so many views of one subject no need. Also, Articles about Elizabeths actresses no still involved any of these photos, who is it unclear even and an encyclopaedic value as "professional artistic portrait" in other articles near null moreover. And, at last, "If you wish to see more photos of all of these models, plus lots of lighting and other tutorials, visit my website here..." words in description evidents as unacceptable promo advertisement unequivocally. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- These are good illustration for articles aka glamour, nude photography, portrait, creativity portrait, etc...--Svajcr (talk) 16:39, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Question is not about quality or license. Commons is not an art gallery or gallery for all persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects. These photos were uploaded by bot mechanism in an excess, but according to De minimis policy so many views of one subject no need. Also, Articles about Elizabeths actresses no still involved any of these photos, who is it unclear even and an encyclopaedic value as "professional artistic portrait" in other articles near null moreover. And, at last, "If you wish to see more photos of all of these models, plus lots of lighting and other tutorials, visit my website here..." words in description evidents as unacceptable promo advertisement unequivocally. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Did you even had the bother to read the files description? Tm (talk) 12:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Yes, I read it carefully before posting my vote. I see nothing indicating the kind of consent required in COM:IDENT. If you think the files should stay, perhaps you could ask the photographer for clarification? If there's a clear assertion by the photographer that she consented to broad publication, I'd be happy to change my vote. -Pete F (talk) 01:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
- Removing my "delete" vote above, in consideration of the points made below (especially by Darwin) about the nomination overall. -Pete F (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
- File:Bharat Rawat.jpg
- File:Chandigarh.jpg
- File:Me at shoot of an assignment.jpg
- File:Photo2tpmtpt34.jpg
- File:Me at Kayak Point.jpg
- File:Me At The Rock (2550115230).jpg
- File:Me at 7 am (3014543872).jpg
- File:Me at markonahalli dam.JPG
- File:Alex Klein.JPG
- File:My Papa My Mommy and Me.jpg
- File:Austinn 034.JPG
- File:Raghunath on valentines day.jpg
- File:Wdding.jpg
- File:Cute-------- 2013-07-26 18-57.jpg
- File:My Friends and Me 2013-07-26 18-52.jpg
- File:Sina&me.jpg
- File:Casi.jpg
- File:Mi familia en las cataratas de niagara.jpg
- File:Ket 2013-12-16 15-52.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Maanavta.jpg&action=edit&redlink=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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Unused self-portraits like private photoalbum. 178.205.101.6 09:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Motopark (talk) 12:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I don't support this kind of large batches where everything fits, they are not helpful at all. David Jane Ajana, for instance, is a notable player from the Nigeria National Team. All her pictures should be dealt with separately, in case they should be discussed. Examples:
- I recommend closing this as kept and deal with the pictures in smaller, more consistent batches.-- Darwin Ahoy! 12:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Commons is not a gallery for famous persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects. Amongst these three (and other especially) photos first pretty and cheerful photo absolutely no have an encyclopaedic value, other two may kept indeed although still no used for a long time in Nigeria national football team article and is unclear is it team persons or not. Also, wiki articles about David Jane Ajana no exists but Jane David Ajana Commons category will excessive contra De minimis policy and will look as non-encyclopaedic private photoalbum without listed above these photos even. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- "Wikimedia Commons - a database of 19,688,704 freely usable media files to which anyone can contribute" - I've no idea where you have got that weird notion that Commons is a just a "illustrating tool for wikiprojects". Our guide lines are what can possibly be used in an educative manner, inside and outside wikiprojects, not what is used. Again, I recommend closing this mess untouched. Nobody has time to wade through this titanic nomination separating the wheat from the shaft.-- Darwin Ahoy! 22:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Commons is not a gallery for famous persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects. Amongst these three (and other especially) photos first pretty and cheerful photo absolutely no have an encyclopaedic value, other two may kept indeed although still no used for a long time in Nigeria national football team article and is unclear is it team persons or not. Also, wiki articles about David Jane Ajana no exists but Jane David Ajana Commons category will excessive contra De minimis policy and will look as non-encyclopaedic private photoalbum without listed above these photos even. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Sloopy DR nomination. Tm (talk) 15:04, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- For a matter and for a mechanism is not a difference how to place this DR here - by one or separate sections. Selection for nominations was conducted manually but not by any bot. There is no proposal to delete all of these photos as one set and nothing prevents to discuss any of these photos with (contr-)arguments at this talkpage. All of these photos no have an encyclopaedic value. Commons is not a gallery for all persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects that in these cases no used for a long time in userpages even. Also, as you may check, almost all of uploaders of these photos have no any contributions in Commons and in any wikies even besides of these self-portrait photos. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- There are a number of problems with this statement (for instance, "encyclopedic" value is not a consideration for keeping files on Commons). But the one that best illustrates Tm's point is that the nominator/IP is dead wrong on the last point: these are not all self-portraits. If the nominator can't even keep straight what these images have in common, that clearly illustrates the problem with nominating them as a batch. -Pete F (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
- For a matter and for a mechanism is not a difference how to place this DR here - by one or separate sections. Selection for nominations was conducted manually but not by any bot. There is no proposal to delete all of these photos as one set and nothing prevents to discuss any of these photos with (contr-)arguments at this talkpage. All of these photos no have an encyclopaedic value. Commons is not a gallery for all persons as itself but illustrating tool for wikiprojects that in these cases no used for a long time in userpages even. Also, as you may check, almost all of uploaders of these photos have no any contributions in Commons and in any wikies even besides of these self-portrait photos. 178.205.101.6 06:45, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep: Sloppy lazy blanket DR. Nominator needs to work harder, Commons is not a toy. Also, better learn what de minimis actually means. -- Tuválkin ✉ 15:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- A few of these could be deleted on scope/quality grounds:
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-22.jpg: unencyclopedic frame and legend
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-20.jpg: too small
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-19.jpg: too small
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-18.jpg: bad composition, smallish, blurry
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-17.jpg: unencyclopedic frame and legend
- File:Me 2013-12-13 23-16.jpg: resolution badly blown
- File:Imagejamm.jpg: bad lighting, smallish
- File:Murari Lal Swami.jpg: too small
- File:Rajendra Kumar Yadav, Aniket shelke, Ashutosh, Anandu.jpg: bad composition, blurry
- File:My wife and I.jpg: too small
- File:Ch.jpg: unencyclopedic frame, semantic dupe
- File:Me at shoot of an assignment.jpg: unencyclopedic frame, distorded
- File:Me at Kayak Point.jpg: bad lighting, tilted
- File:My Papa My Mommy and Me.jpg: too small
- Also:
- File:President Of NSUI.jpg: possible copyvio
- File:Me and My Wii (502342662).jpg: possible copyvio
- File:Manoj.1.jpg: possible copyvio
- For all other images a case for keep can be made.
- It should be said, over and over again, that this kind of lazy DRs, coupled with some closing admins’ irresponsible deletionist zeal, is very bad for Commons — for, mixed with an flood of pooor images whose loss is but irrelevant, some outstandingly important images (such as this one) risk being lost. -- Tuválkin ✉ 18:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
-- Tuválkin ✉ 18:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep all, per Darwin (overriding my previous, more specific vote). The Wikimedia community actively seeks out contributions (for instance, from museums and archives around the world) irrespective of any supposed need for them to be used in a different project. The nominator's opinion that Commons exists only as an "illustrating tool for wikiprojects" is clearly out of step with the project and its mission. While I do think many of these should be deleted, they should not all be considered as a batch, because the reasons vary so widely. -Pete F (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: per DarwIn and others, these files should be dealt with individually or in smaller groups as needed, rather than in a big indiscriminate mess. INeverCry 18:23, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
Self-promotion, no apparent notability, no article on any Wikipedia; Commons is not Facebook. Rodhullandemu (talk) 18:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Also images File:Jozvan Vera Studio.jpg, File:Jozvan Vera.jpg and File:Jozvan Vera Live at Megacable Studios.jpg, same reasons. Rodhullandemu (talk) 18:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:43, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by LGA as no license (no license) INeverCry 17:28, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as there is no valid licence, according to enwp's Daily Herald article the paper had ceased to exist prior to when this picture was taken, the source given lists it as "Wire Picture" and as even if the person who took it passed away the very next day it would still be in copyright in the UK up to 2037. LGA talkedits 07:27, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete - obviously this picture is not in the public domaine because of it's age. I agree with LGA and it is not clear to me who owns the copyright of the picture. Natuur12 (talk) 13:16, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete Being the Uploader I would like to say that LGA is Right,After doing an extensive research on this I found that this is still a Copyrighted work within UK,Seems to me that the Copyright ownership is with Associated Press.Hence Delete this with its extracted Photograph which can be found here -> Bobby Moore (1941-1993) Thanks for your revelation LGA :) MediaJet talk 14:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment We will probably need to review all images sourced to the National Media Museum flickr feed. LGA talkedits 20:02, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: per consensus above. whym (talk) 12:59, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
منبع دهی مشکل دارد آیوش (talk) 17:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:02, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
User:OgreBot/Uploads by new users/2014 March 25 12:00 علی اللهیاری (talk) 08:44, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:40, 31 May 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
یرذ لپ اتد Hadisemosavi (talk) 17:36, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion: nonsense, probably just a simple mistake by a newbie. --4nn1l2 (talk) 19:32, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
عکس حسین حسین فرجی هروانی Hosfa (talk) 18:12, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --4nn1l2 (talk) 18:16, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
I found higher resolution version of this image posted earlier than sep 28, 2012: https://www.google.com/search?sa=N&q=m+countdown+smile+thailand&tbm=isch&tbs=simg:CAQSYRpfCxCo1NgEGgIIBwwLELCMpwgaOAo2CAESEPICggK7AasBFHwStwEvsAEaIMi5bPUFU3pE1MuUyIJNY8-RnL21U6L8B9PGgGiUeZkpDAsQjq7-CBoKCggIARIEY1bw8Qw&ei=Ww98UYTuA8uqlAWytoHYDA&ved=0CCsQ2A4oAA&biw=1280&bih=866#imgrc=lOu27b0zPMai8M%3A%3BEU3K76XSxfe6hM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.talkertain.com%252Fwp-content%252Fuploads%252F2012%252F09%252Fapink-2.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.talkertain.com%252F2012%252F09%252F24%252Fmnet-12%252F%3B900%3B600 Puramyun31 (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
- And I replaced this image with a non-copyvio infobox image on Apink article of English Wikipedia. --Puramyun31 (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Permission has been lodged with OTRS MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:10, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
I found a same image on internet:http://mwave.interest.me/enewsworld/en/article/16327/a-pink-added-to-m-countdown-smile-thailand-concert-lineup (2012.09.28 15:46, earlier than commons version) Puramyun31 (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS ticket. Yann (talk) 17:35, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Italy. 84.61.176.82 22:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The problem was already showed for the same author, architect Giuseppe Terragni, on ground of copyriright break. According to here and to the it:Giuseppe Terragni, the copyright of the picture should be already expired because architect Giuseppe Terragni died on july 1943. So I can't see why the File shoul be deleted.--K.Weise (talk) 07:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- (Sorry, I had forgotten to log-in)--K.Weise (talk) 07:58, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:FOP#Italy and Commons:Deletion requests/File:CasadelFascio-Fronte.JPG; restore 00:00 1 January 2014. — Jeff G. ツ 01:41, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: PD in 5 days. Yann (talk) 17:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Italy. 84.61.176.82 16:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I was not aware of this when I uploaded the photo. But please don´t wait too long, dear administrators. After 1-1-2014, that is two weeks from now, the building on the photo will be PD. Its architect died in 1943. Fransvannes (talk) 21:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:FOP#Italy and Commons:Deletion requests/File:CasadelFascio-Fronte.JPG; restore 00:00 1 January 2014. — Jeff G. ツ 01:42, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: PD in 5 days. Yann (talk) 16:36, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
COM:FOP#Italy. 84.61.176.82 22:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The problem was already showed for the same author, architect Giuseppe Terragni, on ground of copyriright break. According to here and to the it:Giuseppe Terragni, the copyright of the picture should be already expired because architect Giuseppe Terragni died on july 1943. So I can't see why the File shoul be deleted.--K.Weise (talk) 07:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
(Sorry, I have forgotten to log-in)--K.Weise (talk) 07:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:FOP#Italy and Commons:Deletion requests/File:CasadelFascio-Fronte.JPG; restore 00:00 1 January 2014. — Jeff G. ツ 01:43, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: PD in 5 days. Yann (talk) 17:25, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Coin was made in 1628, book was published in 1888, hence, encraver and photographer should be dead for 70 years.--Linear77 (talk) 06:45, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Looks OK. Yann (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:26, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Coin was made in 1628, book was published in 1888, hence, encraver and photographer should be dead for 70 years.--Linear77 (talk) 06:50, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I see that you have just changed the source for the photograph. Why did you change the source? --Stefan4 (talk) 16:28, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Looks OK. Yann (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Uploader probably not the designer of this rubber stamp so licence wrong. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The designer is me unknown.--SchiDD (talk) 06:36, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Too complex and no date. Yann (talk) 17:23, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
False authorship claims - This map is highly likly not self drawn by the uploader High Contrast (talk) 14:23, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- I don't know what you have against me, dude, since you're signaling all my uploads on Commons. I have taken a 2010 Commons-Uploaded Mongolia-Map and modified it using Paint.NET to signal the operations of Ungern-Sternberg and his troops in Mongolia in 1920. You will find the original map on Commons if you search for "Maps of Mongolia". --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 16:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Dude, I do not have anything against you but against your style of working here: it is what it is - false authorship claim by you - you are not the creator of this map but you only did a very simple modification based on an existing file which you did not mention on the file page. Do so and this DR is done. --High Contrast (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- You mean if I write the link in the file desc it is done? --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- You must do so because it must be very clear on what your work is based on. It is fact that this map is not your own work. --High Contrast (talk) 12:13, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
- You mean if I write the link in the file desc it is done? --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 12:45, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Dude, I do not have anything against you but against your style of working here: it is what it is - false authorship claim by you - you are not the creator of this map but you only did a very simple modification based on an existing file which you did not mention on the file page. Do so and this DR is done. --High Contrast (talk) 21:30, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
DONE SO!--Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Source included now. Yann (talk) 16:32, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free drawing. Eleassar (t/p) 22:33, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep The small drawing is an unavoidable part of the scene - father and son looking ah the information board - so clearly de minimis. Also the traffic safety boards would be errected by theministry of transport so it is official. --Sporti (talk) 06:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- None of the drawings or photos at the information board is incidental (de minimis); they were all included on purpose, and this one is the title image of the action to increase the driving safety. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Read my previous post again, I never said it is on the information board incidental, just unavoidable, small and nonessential to the photograph - so clearly de minimis. --Sporti (talk) 11:05, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: as per Sporti. Yann (talk) 17:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Hans Haase (talk,express talk) 00:53, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep: In scope. Also, the model shows an abdominal scar — something so far we seem to have not a lot. -- Tuválkin ✉ 02:13, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep: Appears to be in scope. Nicoli Maege (talk) 18:14, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept, quality is satisfactory and abdominal scar distinguishes the photo from usual porn. Would be even better to know, where the scar origines from. Taivo (talk) 11:51, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Per COM:IDENT. There is no assertion from the photographer that consent for broad publication was given. The Flickr account has been deactivated, so there is no way to follow up with the photographer. Pete F (talk) 20:24, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete as nominated. This combined with the clear identifiability makes this an obvious delete. Proposing under the wrong rationale shouldn't inhibit catching IDENT problems. --SJ+ 21:56, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted, per nom. whym (talk) 13:01, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
File:Prabhudeva, Sonu Sood, Shahid Kapoor, Sonakshi Sinha and Kapil Sharma on the sets of Comedy Nights with Kapil.jpg
[edit]
Picture is taken at a film set. Permission for film sets is not included. Natuur12 (talk) 11:11, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- The Bollywood Hungama ticket specifies that photo has to be clicked by their employed photographers at parties, events etc. Moreover they were promoting the film en:R... Rajkumar at an event not in the film set. It does not matter if the image is clicked in the stars bathroom or in front of a Boeing 707's wing tail, it has to by their own photographers, which in this case is since no other high resolution copy exists in the net. Sohambanerjee1998 15:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Your discription says: Shahid Kapoor, Sonakshi Sinha, Sonu Sood, Prabhudeva, Kapil Sharma on the sets of Comedy Nights with Kapil promoting their 2013 film R... Rajkumar. and the licening template says: explicit exception of images from non-Indian events, film sets, screenshots, wallpapers, vacation pictures, or promotional posters and similar exceptions. So if the image is taken at a film set permission is not grated. That's how I read the licening template. Natuur12 (talk) 15:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- It is strange btw that there is no EXIF-data. This indicates that this could be a printscreen. And if you look at this page it is not unlikely. I cannot check it properly because the video is not available in my home country... Natuur12 (talk) 17:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Your discription says: Shahid Kapoor, Sonakshi Sinha, Sonu Sood, Prabhudeva, Kapil Sharma on the sets of Comedy Nights with Kapil promoting their 2013 film R... Rajkumar. and the licening template says: explicit exception of images from non-Indian events, film sets, screenshots, wallpapers, vacation pictures, or promotional posters and similar exceptions. So if the image is taken at a film set permission is not grated. That's how I read the licening template. Natuur12 (talk) 15:46, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: This is a TV show, not a "film set". Yann (talk) 16:29, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dth-hamburg as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Bild wurde ohne Rücksprache mit Institution eingestellt. --Dth-hamburg (talk) 11:53, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Converted by me to DR, as this needs discussion. -- Túrelio (talk) 12:02, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep This is a photo of a building. As there is FoP in Germany, I don't see the problem here. Pleclown (talk) 13:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC) (PS: I've been tented to speedy keep.)
Comment: The username of the nominator suggests that he/she might represent the current owner/user of the depicted building. --Túrelio (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Is there anything copyrighted on this photo? The Deichtorhallen were built 1906-11 after plans by the "Baudeputation, Ingenieurwesen" (department of buildings of the city administration, engineering) according to the official list of monuments.[5] An article abut the planning of the new market construction was published in 1906 ([6], p. 539). So, either it's a non-copyrightable utilitarian building in the first place, or the "author" is anonymous and the building thus not copyrighted anymore. FOP is then irrelevant; it applies only to copyrighted buildings. I doubt that the restorations from 1989 on added new copyrightable elements, and if so, I'd think they'd be de mininis here anyway, as restorations typically aim at not modifying the building as such. The two posters over the entrances are certainly de minimis (and not even legible/recognizable in this photo). Also, the photo appears to have been taken with explicit permission from the operator of the balloon. Permission from the management of the Deichtorhallen is not needed to photograph the building, nor for publishing photos thereof. Lupo 22:50, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: FOP in Germany applies. Yann (talk) 16:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free mask. Eleassar (t/p) 22:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Also File:Ptujski pustni karneval in kurentovanje 1961 (56).jpg, File:Ptujski pustni karneval in kurentovanje 1961 (8).jpg. --Eleassar (t/p) 22:39, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Keep this is just streching FOP to far.--Sporti (talk) 06:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Don't see why. It is well established that masks and other sculptural works are copyrighted and not FOP-exempt. --Eleassar (t/p) 09:06, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Because they are just too simple. --Sporti (talk) 11:02, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- You base your opinion on what? See for example this example, where the sculpture is more simple, yet it has still been considered copyrighted and the image has been deleted. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:26, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see the connection. Not every mask mother creates for her child is art. --Sporti (talk) 12:32, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- If we are to be consistent we should base our opinion about whether this sculptural work is copyrightable to the cases that we have deemed copyrightable in the past. We're not discussing a mask that a mother created for her child, although it could also qualify as an individual creative work. --Eleassar (t/p) 12:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: as per Sporti. Yann (talk) 17:31, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files in Category:Euro coins (1 euro)
[edit]Per the same reason as Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Euro coins (1 cent) and Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Euro coins (2 cents): the euro coins (both the national sides and the common side) are copyrighted and not free for Commons.
- File:" 02 - ITALY - 1 € Italia - Vitruvian Man - Uomo vitruviano - Leonardo da Vinci - 1euro.jpg
- File:1 euro coin Es serie 1.png
- File:1 Euro coin Es.gif
- File:1 euro coin Es.jpg
- File:1 euro coin Sm serie 1.png
- File:1 Euro coin Sm.gif
- File:1 euro coin Sm.jpg
- File:1 euro Italia 2002.png
- File:1 EURO ITALY 2009.JPG
- File:1 euro Spain.png
- File:30-mg-mxe-euro.jpg
- File:50 Jahre Deutsche Bundesbank - Sondermarke.jpg
- File:Austria 1e.PNG
- File:Billetetranviaparla.JPG
- File:Confocal measurement of 1-euro-star 3d and euro.png
- If the deletion can not be avoided (see my comment below) I could replace the inset picture of the coin with some type of rough sketch of the coin to show the size relation and the measurement location. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- File:Eliche-Nr-56-A.jpg
- File:Eliche-Nr-56-C.jpg
- File:Eliche-Nr-56-D.jpg
- File:Eliche-Nr-56-F.jpg
- File:Eliche-Nr-56.jpg
- File:Euro675.jpg
- File:GastrocoptaPellucidaHrdcla1.jpg
- File:Graining.JPG
- File:Grece 1 euro.jpg
- File:Lancer pile ou face.jpg
- File:Latvian 1 Euro coin design.jpg
- File:Lepista saeva 1.jpg
- File:MicroSD.jpg
- File:One Euro - white bg.jpg
- File:Pièce Malte 1€.gif
- File:Slovakia 1 euro.jpg
- File:Spherical silicon.jpg
- File:Tire-Euro-OK.JPG
- File:Uang 5.jpeg
Eleassar (t/p) 08:05, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment Several of these are already listed in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Euro coins (Slovakia). It may be confusing to have two separate deletion requests which discuss the same files. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- Ok. I've removed them from this list. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:10, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- The Euro in File:MicroSD.jpg might just get cropped away. --Leyo 13:29, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
- Comment I am not convinced that the 2-dimensional depiction of a 3-dimensional registered design like a coin is a violation of the authors copyright. Since a coin is definitely 3-dimensional, a photography of the coin should therefore not violate the copyright in my oppinion. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 14:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I found a statement on the reproduction of common sides of Euro coins here [7]: "Only the following reproductions are allowed: reproductions in a format without relief (drawings, paintings, films) provided that they are not detrimental to the image of the euro. ..." In my oppinion this gives us the freedom to use reproductions of the common side! -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 14:19, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- See Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2: we can't host these images because derivative works are not allowed. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Eleassar, I have read the discussion you cited and can not see why these pictures have been deleted. There where a lot of convincing arguments to keep the pictures. To me it is completely unclear why the deletion has been performed. Sorry to roll up the old thread, but I am not convinced about the deletion yet. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- The coins must be reproduced in "faithful likeness" and can't be reproduced in a way "detrimental to the image of the euro", which means that only a limited set of derivative works is allowed. For us, images must be free for any purpose and all derivatives must be allowed. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Regarding the arguments from "Orionist ★ talk 14:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)" in this thread, I do not see a violation to our guidelines. Also counting the votes in the cited thread I don't see a majority for deletion. I still wonder why this happened. Sorry to insist on this subject, but these images would be of great value for us. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- A deletion request is not a majority vote. The permission for example doesn't permit parodies of the coins, so you can't e.g. add a moustache to the w:Vitruvian Man on the Italian coins. Specific problems with some of the images:
- {{Money-EU}} can only be used for banknotes, not coins.
- There needs to be a separate copyright tag for the photograph, and the photograph needs to be identified.
- File:Famas cartouche01.jpg and File:Famas cartouche02.jpg: Only the original uploader has been identified, but the photographer is unknown. The coins are hardly visible, though, so I don't think that you can claim that the copyright to the coins is violated in these images. Maybe User:Bloody-libu, who deleted the files on French Wikipedia, can identify the photographer somehow, if this is specified on the file information page on French Wikipedia. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:20, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- "photographie prise le 25 août 2004 par YannTech" : the original uploader is the photographer. Bloody-libu (talk) 15:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- A deletion request is not a majority vote. The permission for example doesn't permit parodies of the coins, so you can't e.g. add a moustache to the w:Vitruvian Man on the Italian coins. Specific problems with some of the images:
- Regarding the arguments from "Orionist ★ talk 14:51, 7 November 2010 (UTC)" in this thread, I do not see a violation to our guidelines. Also counting the votes in the cited thread I don't see a majority for deletion. I still wonder why this happened. Sorry to insist on this subject, but these images would be of great value for us. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- The coins must be reproduced in "faithful likeness" and can't be reproduced in a way "detrimental to the image of the euro", which means that only a limited set of derivative works is allowed. For us, images must be free for any purpose and all derivatives must be allowed. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:50, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi Eleassar, I have read the discussion you cited and can not see why these pictures have been deleted. There where a lot of convincing arguments to keep the pictures. To me it is completely unclear why the deletion has been performed. Sorry to roll up the old thread, but I am not convinced about the deletion yet. -- Dr. Schorsch (talk) 14:40, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
- See Commons:Deletion requests/Template:Euro coin common face 2: we can't host these images because derivative works are not allowed. --Eleassar (t/p) 14:32, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Permission that prohibits parodies and other kinds of derivative works is not free enough for Commons. I kept tha confocal measurement because the focus of the image is the star and the coin is thre only incidently, and, given the specialized use, it is unlikely that anyone will want to make a DW. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:50, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- Files in Category:Euro coins (1 euro)
Unfree coins. Also artwork which isn't installed permanently in one of them.
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
'Fasnacht' chariot, i.e. being a folclorical element, Roland zh 21:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Stefan4 (talk) 21:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Also artwork which isn't installed permanently in what? This delition request is not understandable. What is meant whith "one of them"? At least File:Son Servera 03 ies.jpg is permanently installed in public along with other murals in Son Servera. Compare particularly to File:Son Servera 01 ies.jpg. In my opinion all these murals are clearly covered by FoP. -- Ies (talk) 16:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Keep see File:Son Servera 01 ies.jpg and {{FoP-Spain}}. Holger1959 (talk) 19:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
1 Deleted, 2 Kept as per Holger1959. Yann (talk) 17:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Euro coins (1 euro)
[edit]Per com:currency euro coins are non free
- File:1 euro 1999 francia.jpg
- File:Austrian 1 euro.png
File:Chocolate euro coin at Christmas (3090213227).jpg- File:Deutsch 1-Euro-Münze.jpg
- File:Estonia 1 euro coin.jpg
File:N22978 1 eur Lietuva 2015.jpgKept for now, needs discussion whether the knight depicted is a state symbol or not. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 09:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)- File:Son Servera 03 ies.jpg <- covered by FOP Spain. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 09:01, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
File:Strobocoin (4072962364).jpgNo coin design visible, can't be a copyvio. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 09:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Natuur12 (talk) 15:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep the chocolate coin, it's a parody and so can be considered against protected against copyright claims. It may fail scope, maybe, but that's not the nomination. --Fæ (talk) 15:13, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- That one should be com:PACKAGING than but I will withdraw that one because we should discuss that in a seperate DR. Natuur12 (talk) 15:15, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep File:Son Servera 03 ies.jpg. Note that this image does NOT show a coin. It shows an artistic and stylised painting of a coin. Distinguish between the non free coins and their artistic depictions that, for instance when covered by FoP, are free!
- It is a derivative work of the original coin: "A 'derivative work' is a work based upon one or more pre-existing works, such as [...] art reproduction, [...] or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted". BrightRaven (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep This is Russavia. Keep File:Strobocoin (4072962364).jpg. It isn't infringing in any way on any design, and it's in use, and can also be used to illustrate photographic effects. RRTyne (talk) 05:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Some kept, some deleted: The kept decision is only preliminary. The kept files may be subject to another DR Euro coins by issuing country. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:57, 1 September 2015 (UTC)
Obs.: High wiki use. Uploaded in 2008 and taken from (as indicated) "Siete Días . Año XIV, numero 776, Mayo de 1982" and licensed with {{PD-AR-Photo}} (+25 years), failing COM:URAA = (+ 95 +1 years) Category:Undelete in 2078. Gunnex (talk) 21:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 22:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Missed the URAA date (January 1, 1996) by one month. Author died in Febraury that year. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 22:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 22:43, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
False authorship claims - obviously not the uploader's own work High Contrast (talk) 14:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- False. I made it on my computer using Paint.NET. You can try. It's pretty easy, if you get enough information from realiable sources and can get the necessary photographs from the Spanish Police most-wanted terrorist lists (that are free-of-copyright because everyone has the right to diffuse and divulge the terrorists photos). Then simply try making some rectangles using the "Draw" Paint.NET function, insert the photos there and add the names and roles in the organisation. Unite the rectangles with arrows and write some text about the different functions of the military cells, add the 2011 Commons-Uploaded ETA mark and you will have the image you accused. And please, dude, stop quarrelling about all my self-uploaded pics. Thanks from Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 16:41, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Delete Nicholas Urquhart| might have used paint.net but did Nicholas Urquhart| also photographed the depivted persons??? I guess not. As such delete it and Nicholas Urquhart| should learn what 'own work' really means. I support the nominator's action. Thanks. --79.237.136.246 18:02, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- I may have not photographed the nominated persons, but you can also talk in a less rude tone and READ before talking. That said, I have created the work using photographs from the Spanish Civil Guard most-wanted archives. The photographs are absolutely free to use, and it reads "Everyone is free to use, diffuse and divulge these images" since they represent criminals in-hiding and "diffusing and divulging" them may help catching them --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 19:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- The IP is absolutely right, Nicholas Urquhart, your understanding of copyright is null. "Free to use" is nothing, that is not free in the sense of Commons. --High Contrast (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have indeed understanding of Copyright and I do not permit neither you nor the IP to talk with me in such rude tone. I have simply taken some photographs that are NOT copyrighted, since the Guardia Civils most wanted list does not even have a government-copyright: all the images are free to use, to divulge and publish, without any copyright. If it shall be a major problem, I can remove the photographs and keep the structure without images. Would this solve the problem? --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 12:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, if the images get removed, this file can be kept. --High Contrast (talk) 12:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
- Is there a way to keep some of the images? --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 13:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, if the images get removed, this file can be kept. --High Contrast (talk) 12:14, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
- I have indeed understanding of Copyright and I do not permit neither you nor the IP to talk with me in such rude tone. I have simply taken some photographs that are NOT copyrighted, since the Guardia Civils most wanted list does not even have a government-copyright: all the images are free to use, to divulge and publish, without any copyright. If it shall be a major problem, I can remove the photographs and keep the structure without images. Would this solve the problem? --Nicholas Urquhart (talk) 12:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- The IP is absolutely right, Nicholas Urquhart, your understanding of copyright is null. "Free to use" is nothing, that is not free in the sense of Commons. --High Contrast (talk) 21:32, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: If you are the uploader, please email COM:OTRS FASTILY 08:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
I am unsure if the puzzle piece shape is "simple" enough to fall under the US threshold of originality. Masem (talk) 15:55, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep It's under the Com:TOO in US. --Rezonansowy (talk) 18:57, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence has been presented that it is below the threshold of originality of the United States. A good example is the first page of this PDF file which contains two logos: one copyrighted, one which is too simple. This puzzle looks more complex than the extra border which was sufficient to grant copyright to the second logo in the PDF file. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:54, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sometimes some users proved this PDF as an argument, like here, however usually later these files are restored with strong consensus. This PDF is not a main link to judge files with the threshold, we have COM:TOO as a guideline and examples provided there and consensus on many DRs is IMO an evidence. Besides the puzzle pattern is itself very basic and popular symbol, which we can find everywhere (on streets, toys...) and its shape isn't something original, just like this one from COM:TOO - File:Nikken Logo.jpg. That's exactly the idea of simple shapes, we can find them everywhere. --Rezonansowy (talk) 12:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- So you think that Commons should use your definition of what's below the threshold of originality instead of the definition given in the law? This is furthermore an SVG file, so we need to identify where the SVG code comes from and obtain a licence from the person who created the SVG file, per w:Adobe Systems, Inc. v. Southern Software, Inc. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Stefan4, I'm not a lawyer and I don't think we should do something like this. Basically, I don't understand it, I've edited and uploaded this file. --Rezonansowy (talk) 17:38, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- So you think that Commons should use your definition of what's below the threshold of originality instead of the definition given in the law? This is furthermore an SVG file, so we need to identify where the SVG code comes from and obtain a licence from the person who created the SVG file, per w:Adobe Systems, Inc. v. Southern Software, Inc. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sometimes some users proved this PDF as an argument, like here, however usually later these files are restored with strong consensus. This PDF is not a main link to judge files with the threshold, we have COM:TOO as a guideline and examples provided there and consensus on many DRs is IMO an evidence. Besides the puzzle pattern is itself very basic and popular symbol, which we can find everywhere (on streets, toys...) and its shape isn't something original, just like this one from COM:TOO - File:Nikken Logo.jpg. That's exactly the idea of simple shapes, we can find them everywhere. --Rezonansowy (talk) 12:34, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete I am not able to reproduce the logo, so I do not consider this simple. Taivo (talk) 10:54, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Excuse me, but what you mean by "reproducing this logo"? --Rezonansowy (talk) 15:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry my bad English, I mean redrawing. Taivo (talk) 11:29, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Excuse me, but what you mean by "reproducing this logo"? --Rezonansowy (talk) 15:03, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 08:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
May be OK, but the license is wrong: some user can't release the seal of the Prime Minister in the public domain. According to {{PD-Bangladesh}}, gouvernment works are in the public domain 60 years after publication. Since Banglasdesh was created in 1971, no gouvernment works will be in the public domain before 2032. Yann (talk) 19:22, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- Also all files below. Yann (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- File:Prodhanmontri-emblem.jpg
- File:National emblem of Bangladesh.svg
- File:Seal of the President of Bangladesh.svg
- File:Bangladesh coa.png
- File:Presidential Standard of Bangladesh.svg
- In relation to COM:COA, I believe this qualifies as an independent rendition. It is significantly different from any official versions I've been able to find. The Government has a PDF but I can't link it because there's no URL, however you should be able to see it in this google search. The president's website also uses a different style. Keep Fry1989 eh? 19:53, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- If this is the case, it should be noted in the description. It looks like a bit misleading to me otherwise. Something like "Due to copyright restriction, this image is not exactly identical to ... . The differences are ..." Thanks for your input, Yann (talk) 19:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed, though we don't really have a COM:COA license perhaps it would be good to create one. Fry1989 eh? 20:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- You are the expert here, so please go ahead, create one. ;o) Yann (talk) 08:12, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- Keep [@Fma12 - see the upload date here http://www.jibonbarta.com/photo.php?pid=48 - which is 2010-08-04 but Commons hosted it before 2009] --Aftab1995 (talk) 15:29, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
- Agreed, though we don't really have a COM:COA license perhaps it would be good to create one. Fry1989 eh? 20:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
- If this is the case, it should be noted in the description. It looks like a bit misleading to me otherwise. Something like "Due to copyright restriction, this image is not exactly identical to ... . The differences are ..." Thanks for your input, Yann (talk) 19:59, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Couldn't find a reason why these images might be PD. JuTa 21:12, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
- Restored: after discussion at Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests#Files_in_Commons:Deletion_requests.2FFile:Seal_of_the_Prime_Minister_of_Bangladesh.svg. Yann (talk) 12:18, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
I am reopening this DR for the remaining files, as I believe this is a clear case of a copy of a copyright work, The original seal as created by the Bangladesh government is still in copyright; the description (or blazon) that accompanies the statue that announces the emblem on its own is not sufficient to create these works. There are lots of examples of these emblems on the internet however they all trace their origins back to that first original work. I see this as no different to someone drawing their own replica of a corporate logo or an artist painting a picture of a statue from a series of photographs in all these cases the produced works are derivatives of other copyright works. Since this seal is copyright to the government of Bangladesh we can't host it here under a free licence as you would not be free to use the image in anyway in the source county (and in my view anywhere that is a signatory to the Berne Convention).
Also :
- File:National emblem of Bangladesh.svg
- File:Seal of the President of Bangladesh.svg
- File:Presidential Standard of Bangladesh.svg
LGA talkedits 08:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep discussed in un-deletion. Not copyvio as copyright works on a image and not on a description. This CoA is not an exact duplicate of what the Govt. uses rather a creation from blazon description. Blazon is originally described in constitution and thus the description of blazon is not copyrighted. Also read the licensing notice in file. --Nafsadh (talk) 21:31, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- try to read COM:COA--Nafsadh (talk) 21:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- But the description alone is not sufficient to create this work and and therefore other copyright graphic versions must have been used as a source and reference. LGA talkedits 21:56, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- read COM:COA and the description alone is sufficient to create CoA. Again, national CoA are generally never copyrighted unless there is an explicit claim of copyright over CoA. National CoA are meant to be PD. With all due consideration, necessity of having CoA images and as several contributors understood legal documents, these emblems are rightfully here unless any explicit legal document is produced stating illegality of use of these emblems whatsoever. --Nafsadh (talk) 22:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- "national CoA are generally never copyrighted unless there is an explicit claim of copyright over CoA" do you gave a source for that claim ? as everything (subject to TOO) is subject to copyright unless there is a explicit law or act that says otherwise. Besides we now know that this image was not created from the description. LGA talkedits 22:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Can you explain why and how COA do not apply to these emblems? --Nafsadh (talk) 23:21, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- the origin: File:COA_of_Bangladesh.svg--Nafsadh (talk) 23:29, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- COA does not apply here because, it is not a traditional heraldic CoA but a emblem, the published description ("The Emblem consists of Shapla Flower on water flanked on two sides by shoots of paddy and decorated by four stars and three jute leaves at the top.") is not enough to reproduce the emblem without the need to refer to officially produced versions and due to the age of the emblem they are still copyright. LGA talkedits 23:45, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- "national CoA are generally never copyrighted unless there is an explicit claim of copyright over CoA" do you gave a source for that claim ? as everything (subject to TOO) is subject to copyright unless there is a explicit law or act that says otherwise. Besides we now know that this image was not created from the description. LGA talkedits 22:43, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- read COM:COA and the description alone is sufficient to create CoA. Again, national CoA are generally never copyrighted unless there is an explicit claim of copyright over CoA. National CoA are meant to be PD. With all due consideration, necessity of having CoA images and as several contributors understood legal documents, these emblems are rightfully here unless any explicit legal document is produced stating illegality of use of these emblems whatsoever. --Nafsadh (talk) 22:07, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- But the description alone is not sufficient to create this work and and therefore other copyright graphic versions must have been used as a source and reference. LGA talkedits 21:56, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- try to read COM:COA--Nafsadh (talk) 21:33, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Consensus at unDR was clear and COM:COA applies. LGA, you do not get to tell the Bangladeshi Government whether or not their symbol is in your opinion "heraldic" or not, and we have had this discussion several times before. If a Government (for example Ohio or Mali) considers it a coat of arms, you are not in a position to tell them they are mistaken. That's the height of arrogance I've seen from you. Moreover, COM:COA does not require it to be considered purely European-style heraldry in nature, it requires a publicly released description of the nature of the design which can be considered a "blazon". We have that. Fry1989 eh? 18:07, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: as per Fry1989 and others. Yann (talk) 20:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Victoria line station Motifs
[edit]No freedom of panorama for 2D works in the UK.
- File:Blackhorse Road Motif.jpg
- File:Blackhorse Road stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:BLACKHORSE ROAD.jpg
- File:Brixton tube station motif.JPG
- File:BRIXTON.jpg
- File:Euston Motif Victoria line.jpg
- File:Euston tube station Victoria line motif.JPG
- File:Finsbury Park stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:FINSBURY PARK.jpg
- File:Green Park stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:Green Park Victoria Leafs.jpg
- File:GreenParkTilework fx wb.jpg
- File:Highbury & Islington stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:HIGHBURY AND ISLINGTON.jpg
- File:Oxford Circus stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:OXFORD CIRCUS.jpg
- File:Seven "elm tree" tiles, by Hans Unger (Seven Sisters station, London Underground).jpg
- File:Seven Sisters stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:Stockwell station Victoria motif.JPG
- File:STOCKWELL.jpg
- File:Tottenham Hale Motif Ferry across the River Lea.jpg
- File:Tottenham Hale stn Victoria line motif.JPG
- File:Vauxhall tube stn motif.JPG
- File:Victoria line - Warren street.jpg
- File:Victoria silhouette.jpg
- File:Victoria tube seat.jpg
- File:Victoria tube stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:Walthamstow Central stn Victoria motif.JPG
- File:Warren Street stn Victoria line motif.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 22:05, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Five years (!) after these pictures were uploaded this suddenly bothers you? Copyright paranoia in the most extreme form. --178.38.97.162 11:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I nominate potential copyright violations as I come across them. Sometimes that means they are uploaded 5mins, sometimes 5 years. As for copyright "paranoia", following the law is not paranoia, it's our policy. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:19, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I know I've quoted before Section 62 of the UK Copyrights, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, which exempts "sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship (if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public)". Would it apply in this case? Sunil060902 (talk) 12:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming these files as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host them on Commons FASTILY 08:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fredlyfish4 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Derivative of sign/plaque/map - no FoP in United States
- File:Deep Time sign Grand Canyon.JPG
- File:Grand Canyon snakes sign.JPG
- File:Tusayan Ruin Trail sign.JPG
- File:San Francisco Peaks sign Grand Canyon.JPG
- File:Large Kiva sign Tusayan Ruins.JPG
- File:Food for the Pueblo sign Grand Canyon.JPG
- File:Tree-ring dating sign.JPG
- File:Silver Bridge sign.JPG
- File:Phantom Ranch wildlife sign.JPG
- File:2013 High-Flow Experiment sign.JPG
- File:Bright Angel Creek sign.JPG
- File:Lure of Grand Canyon sign.JPG
- File:Black Bridge sign.JPG
- File:Bright Angel Pueblo sign.JPG
- File:Bright Angel Pueblo sign 2.JPG
- File:Dynamic Relationship sign Grand Canyon.JPG
- File:With Help from Neighbors sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Innovative accommodations sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Value for All sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Agricultural Legacies sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Protecting Your Park sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Community lifeline sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Ecological abundance sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Community connections sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Ready-made shelter sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Neighbors Near and Far sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Valuable Valley sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:A Balanced System sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Your Role in Preservation sign Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:On the Move sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Like no other Place Montezuma Well.JPG
- File:Lifeline sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Aloft but not Alone sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Cycles of care sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Timeless Beauty sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Creating a Home sign Montezuma Castle.JPG
- File:Tuzigoot Pueblo's Plaza sign.JPG
- File:Rich in Minerals sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:Rocks, rituals, and resources sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:Caring for Traces of the Past sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:Tuzigoot sign clues.JPG
- File:Clues in Architecture sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:Evolving village sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:People of the Verde sign Tuzigoot.JPG
- File:Box Canyon ruins sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:Sunset Crater Volcano sign in Wupatki.JPG
- File:Daily life sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:Ancient landscapes sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:Box Canyon ruins sign.JPG
- File:Dry land farming sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:Legacy of the past sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:Village and abandonment sign Wupatki.JPG
- File:The Citadel sign.JPG
- File:Farming sign in Wupatki.JPG
- File:Wupatki community sign.JPG
- File:Nalakihu sign.JPG
- File:Wupatki blowhole sign.JPG
- File:Wupatki ballcourt sign.JPG
- File:Wupatki map.JPG
- File:Wupatki sign 3.JPG
- File:Wupatki sign 2.JPG
- File:Wupatki sign 1.JPG
- File:Wukoki sign 2.JPG
- File:Lomaki sign.JPG
- File:Wukoki sign.JPG
- File:Walnut Canyon sign 5.JPG
- File:Walnut Canyon sign 4.JPG
- File:Walnut Canyon sign 3.JPG
- File:Pinus ponderosa sign.JPG
- File:Purshia stansburiana sign.JPG
- File:Yucca baccata sign.JPG
- File:Cercocarpus montanus sign.JPG
- File:Walnut Canyon sign 2.JPG
- File:Walnut Canyon sign 1.JPG
- File:Volcanic Terrain sign.JPG
- File:Sunset Crater sign 2.JPG
- File:San Francisco Peak sign.JPG
- File:Sunset Crater sign.JPG
- File:Painted Desert sign on Doney Crater.JPG
- File:Doney Crater view sign.JPG
- File:Doney Crater prehistoric farm sign.JPG
- File:Ben Doney sign.JPG
- File:Doney Crater summer homes sign.JPG
- File:Doney Crater sign.JPG
- File:Doney Craters Trail sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Camp Life sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Wilderness without boundaries sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Living in Limestone sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Partners in Protection sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Shared Resources sign.JPG
- File:Sotol Vista sign.JPG
- File:Homer Wilson Ranch sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Cotton Boom sign.JPG
- File:Carro Castellan sign.JPG
- File:Mule Ears Spring Trail sign.JPG
- File:Big Bend Land of Distances sign.JPG
- File:Henbury Meteorite pieces.JPG
- File:Chinga meteorite piece.JPG
- File:Sikhote-Alin Meteorite.JPG
- File:Canyon Diablo meteorite pieces.JPG
- File:Dugout Wells sign.JPG
- File:Animal highways sign Big Bend.JPG
- File:Santa Elena Canyon sign.JPG
- File:River Running sign in Big Bend.JPG
- File:Tuff Canyon sign 2.JPG
- File:Tuff Canyon Sign.JPG
- File:Boquillas Crossing Sign.JPG
- File:Mount Antero sign.JPG
- File:Denver, South Park & Pacific RR sign.JPG
- File:Agnes Vaille Falls sign.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 21.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 20.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 19.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 18.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 17.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 16.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 15.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 14.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 13.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 11.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 12.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 10.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 9.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 8.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 7.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 6.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 5.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 4.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 3.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 1.JPG
- File:Florissant Fossil Beds sign 2.JPG
Эlcobbola talk 21:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- These are all works of the National Park Service, U.S. Forest Service, or other agencies that are part of the U.S. federal government and are in the public domain. Fredlyfish4 (talk) 22:58, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't buy that installation in a national park is tantamount to federal authorship. The federal government can and does contract with private entities (here, for example) to produce signs and content thereon. The federal government is not disallowed from holding copyright on works transferred to and/or created for it. Where is substantiation of the claim of federal authorship? Эlcobbola talk 15:34, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm. I may have acted too quickly. I agree that there are cases where a work that seems to be PD-USGov is not -- several of the official presidential portraits, for example. I'm inclined to believe that all of these that actually have the NPS name and logo on them are free. I base that on our practice of accepting plaques on NRHP sites that have a Federal Agency's name on them. Those that have no name on them, might better be deleted under COM:PRP. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- If that's a compromise that needs to be struck, so be it, but I still can't agree. I have a tangential familiarity with the issue, as a number of years ago I assisted the incorporation of a company that produces signs and displays for museums. The company's work product regularly includes the museum’s logo as a mere function of branding (logos in no way associated with the sign company, thus not indicative of authorship). So too, at the example site above: the NPS logo is included in numerous signs (e.g. [8], [9], etc.) despite explicitly being non-federal authorship. I don't really see that our practice has an adequate foundation. Эlcobbola talk 16:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- It's authorship that is at issue, not actual production. If the Federal government creates a brochure and sends camera ready copy to a private printer, the brochure is still PC-USGov, despite the fact that it was privately printed. Your company's production of signs for the museum had nothing to do with the copyright unless it did the design work, and both cases that you link from woodproductsigns.com could well be PD-USGov if the design for the artwork was done by the NPS. On top of that, I wouldn't be surprised if there's a work for hire agreement in place with any private contractors.
- With that said, I agree that we're not on completely solid ground here. I'm just very reluctant to open the can of worms that is sitting in front of us -- your concerns would raise questions about a lot of images, including my own File:GH Bent Milton MA 02.jpg. We've just wiped out a lot of plaques from Pennsylvania, an action I endorsed with regret. I'd hate to lose all the Federal ones as well.
- I'll skirt very near the prohibitions in COM:PRP and suggest that when an informational sign is located in a National Park or other similar reservation such as a National Forest and has the NPS logo or no author identification at all, that we can safely assume that it is PD-USGov.. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:56, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I understand the distinction between production and authorship. My example was thus perhaps poorly worded, as the museums say go forth and create X (i.e., the company was responsible for both). Even if whatever entity produced these park signs was given content by a federal agency, design decisions such which images and elements ultimately to use, how to size them, how to orient them, how to shade them, how to color them, etc. are potential creative input by the sign producer that could itself be sufficient for copyright (indeed, a bunch of words ineligible for copyright in and of themselves become copyrightable upon creative arrangement into a poem.) It's possible the sign maker slavishly transferred a fully federal-produced design to a slate, but we'd need some suggestion of that. And I would be very surprised if there wasn't a work-for-hire agreement in place, but that is my point; the federal government would be allowed to have a copyright in that circumstance (copyright can acquired from private entities; it is only disallowed when the work is created by a federal employee in the course of his/her duties.) Эlcobbola talk 22:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think we're mostly in agreement -- I think that there is almost certainly a style guide for this kind of sign, so that the production company's freedom to create is very limited. Certainly the government can hold copyrights -- that is the case with the obverse of the Sacagawea dollar. I don't think it routinely does -- perhaps the work for hire agreement specifies that any work under it is PD.
- So, what do you want to do? If we're going to delete them all based on our reasoning, I think we're setting new precedent and should take this to a different place for thorough discussion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:43, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- I suppose I’m not familiar enough with previous discussions to know whether this would truly be a precedent. To my mind, we’re merely asking these images to meet the same burden of evidence we ask of all images. 17 USC § 105 is routinely misconstrued/misapplied and cleanups (e.g. Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-USGov-Military-Air Force Auxiliary and related files) are not uncommon. Obviously, what would be best would be receiving clarification from the NPS (not hopeful) or indication of when these were installed to perhaps apply a no notice template to those from before 1978. Эlcobbola talk 16:53, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- Just to be clear, I understand the distinction between production and authorship. My example was thus perhaps poorly worded, as the museums say go forth and create X (i.e., the company was responsible for both). Even if whatever entity produced these park signs was given content by a federal agency, design decisions such which images and elements ultimately to use, how to size them, how to orient them, how to shade them, how to color them, etc. are potential creative input by the sign producer that could itself be sufficient for copyright (indeed, a bunch of words ineligible for copyright in and of themselves become copyrightable upon creative arrangement into a poem.) It's possible the sign maker slavishly transferred a fully federal-produced design to a slate, but we'd need some suggestion of that. And I would be very surprised if there wasn't a work-for-hire agreement in place, but that is my point; the federal government would be allowed to have a copyright in that circumstance (copyright can acquired from private entities; it is only disallowed when the work is created by a federal employee in the course of his/her duties.) Эlcobbola talk 22:08, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- If that's a compromise that needs to be struck, so be it, but I still can't agree. I have a tangential familiarity with the issue, as a number of years ago I assisted the incorporation of a company that produces signs and displays for museums. The company's work product regularly includes the museum’s logo as a mere function of branding (logos in no way associated with the sign company, thus not indicative of authorship). So too, at the example site above: the NPS logo is included in numerous signs (e.g. [8], [9], etc.) despite explicitly being non-federal authorship. I don't really see that our practice has an adequate foundation. Эlcobbola talk 16:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm. I may have acted too quickly. I agree that there are cases where a work that seems to be PD-USGov is not -- several of the official presidential portraits, for example. I'm inclined to believe that all of these that actually have the NPS name and logo on them are free. I base that on our practice of accepting plaques on NRHP sites that have a Federal Agency's name on them. Those that have no name on them, might better be deleted under COM:PRP. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:50, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
![[8]](http://www.woodproductsigns.com/nps_pictures/cimmaron.jpg){kind=link}
![[9]](http://www.woodproductsigns.com/nps_pictures/glacier-bay.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming these files as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host them on Commons FASTILY 08:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by German 6666 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unclear copyright status (PD-status in the US): All files uploaded in 2013, mostly taken from "Museo de Cine Argentino" (source unspecified: no link), licensed with {{PD-AR-Photo}} (+ 25 years) and always dated with URAA-date 1996 - 25 years = 1971, 1972 ff., failing COM:URAA = (+ 95 + 1 years). Some of these files screenshoted from unknown movies or videos (example: File:Andino.jpg or File:Jorge Javier Diaz.jpg) = eventually {{PD-AR-Movie}} (+50 years of death of involved director etc.) or declared to be anonymous = {{PD-AR-Anonymous}} (+50 years publication).
- File:Coccinelle Trans.jpg
- File:Sombra Rius.jpg
- File:Rubén Mattos.jpg
- File:Carmen Morales.jpg
- File:Tita Russ.jpg
- File:Divino Vivas.jpg
- File:Nya Quesada.jpg
- File:José María Vilches.jpg
- File:Orlando Marconi.jpg
- File:Adriana Brodsky.jpg
- File:Anita Almada.jpg
- File:Alejandro Urdapilleta.jpg
- File:Albinoni- Traverso- Porcel- Olmedo.jpg
- File:Dolores de Cicco 2.jpg
- File:Julia Alson.jpg
- File:Nancy Herrera.jpg
- File:Tandarica.jpg
- File:Guadalupe Leuviah.jpg
- File:Mimí Ardú.jpg
- File:CésarPierry.jpg
- File:Hilda Mayo 2.jpg
- File:Hilda Mayo.jpg
- File:Pina Criscuolo.jpg
- File:Mimí Pons.jpg
- File:Saúl Canessa.jpg
- File:Graciela Cimer.jpg
- File:Edgardo Mesa.jpg
- File:Jorge Oscar Kofman.jpg
- File:Libertad Lablanc.jpg
- File:Mónica Guido.jpg
- File:Carlos Artigas.jpg
- File:Alba Castillo.jpg
- File:Martín Andrade 2.jpg
- File:Ana Itelman.jpg
- File:Nelly Fontán.jpg
- File:Juan Manuel Tenuta.jpg
- File:Marta Bianchi.jpg
- File:Clínica con música.jpg
- File:Una viuda descocada.jpg
- File:Adelco Lanza.jpg
- File:Ana Maria Caso.jpg
- File:Julia von Grolman.jpg
- File:Gloria Montes.jpg
- File:Aldo Barbero.jpg
- File:Martín Gianola.jpg
- File:Horacio Dener.jpg
- File:Walter Balzarini.jpg
- File:Naanim Timoyko.jpg
- File:Patricia Dal.jpg
- File:Edda Bustamante.jpg
- File:Susana Brunetti.jpg
- File:Adriana Aguirre.jpg
- File:Humberto Serrano.jpg
- File:María Elena Sagrera.jpg
- File:Chany Mallo.jpg
- File:Isabel Salomón.jpg
- File:Susana Romero.JPG
- File:Carlos Bermejo.jpg
- File:Lidia Catalano.jpg
- File:Ariel Keller.jpg
- File:Mónica Jouvet.jpg
- File:Nora Massi.jpg
- File:Norbert Degoas.jpg
- File:Adrián Ghio.jpg
- File:Carlos Moreno1.jpg
- File:Adrián Martel.jpg
- File:DanielMendoza.jpg
- File:Horacio Bruno.jpg
- File:José Slavin.jpg
- File:Thelma Stefani.jpg
- File:Luisa Albinoni.jpg
- File:Jorge Javier Diaz.jpg
- File:Flora Steinberg.jpg
- File:Ignacio Finder.jpg
- File:DaniloDevizia.jpg
- File:Danilo Devizia.jpg
- File:Andrés Redondo.jpg
- File:Cludia Nelson.jpg
- File:Andino.jpg
- File:Ramón Andino.jpg
- File:Pedro Favini.jpg
- File:Los Bombos Tehuelches.jpg
- File:Ismael Echeverría.jpg
- File:Carlos Parrilla.jpg
- File:Pochi Grey.jpg
- File:Wanda Seux 1973.jpg
- File:Moria y Castiglione.jpg
- File:Alicia Muñiz.jpg
- File:Katia Iaros.jpg
- File:Perla Caron.jpg
- File:Nito Mores.jpg
- File:Héctor Varela.jpg
- File:Vallejo, Soto y Perciavalle.jpg
- File:Calabró y Tixou.jpg
- File:Thelma Tixou.jpg
- File:Olmedo- Parets.jpg
- File:Slavin y Parets.jpg
- File:Adriana Parets.jpg
- File:Emilio Vidal.jpg
- File:Regino Maders.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 23:15, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I consider the files laking a source. The source information is not a quotation of a verifiable source, and most likely the information is pure fiction based on a possible dating. AtFile:Raquel González.jpg the uploader provides the information that this screenshot of a 2012 advertising comes from the "source" Museo de la Televisión Argentina 1988. There is no place for unreliable or fictional information on Commons, therefore the invented source information must be removed. Files without source information cant be hosted on Commons. --Martin H. (talk) 01:37, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Gentlemen users: sources: "Museum of the Argentine cinema" or "Museum is the Argentine Television" are corresponding to the same page of access that is http://www.acceder.gov.ar/es/buscador, in this houses available content that images of great figures of anteano and historical. The same are increases with the licensed with { {t|PD-AR-Photo} }. I ask you to consider that are completely legal and public; and that is kept due also to the great effort to create each one of those pages.--German 6666 (talk) 18:55, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hi German 6666! Thank you for your comment. Indeed, http://www.acceder.gov.ar/es/buscador, seems to be the source of some nominated images above --> e.g.: File:Adrián Ghio.jpg (source: "Museo del Cine Argentino 1975") --> cropped from http://www.acceder.gov.ar/es/td:Fotografias.26/1166146. The problem is - per Commons:Licensing/es - that "Wikimedia Commons solo acepta material: (...) que esté en el dominio público al menos en los Estados Unidos y en el país de origen de la obra." and all the files above configured with {{PD-AR-Photo}} and date 1971+ (1996 - 25 years) are {{Not-PD-US-URAA}} because at URAA-date 01.01.1996 these files were NOT in public domain in the United States and had their copyrights restored = + 95 years from publication... By the way: http://www.acceder.gov.ar/es/td:Fotografias.26/1166146 --> where did you get the info, that this photo was created in 1975? I don´t see any publication year specified? Gunnex (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
The photo of Adrian Ghio that was extracted of http://www.acceder.gov.ar/es/td:Fotografias.26/1166146, was not appearing the year but if the name of the movie that it was integrating at the moment of the above mentioned photo. For it I looked for it on this another page http://www.cinenacional.com/pelicula/los-gauchos-judios to verify its time..--German 6666 (talk) 04:16, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- The source of the initial upload ([10]) reads: A publication named Museo del Cine Argentino published in 1975. Thats completely wrong. There is no such publication and the years is not the publication year but the year that you think the file has been created. Please describe your sources accuratly! A correct attribtion is the museum, the collection and some sort of identifier. If you must provide information that you invented (the year) please say that this is your personal opinion. es:Wikipedia:Referencias 101% applies on Commons too with the only exeption that we not use templates. --Martin H. (talk) 03:07, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
![[10]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Adri%C3%A1n_Ghio.jpg&oldid=104257941){kind=link}
- Delete Most of the files I viewed are PD in Argentina but not in the US, due to Commons:URAA. - Fma12 (talk)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming these files as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host them on Commons FASTILY 08:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
The photographer, date of creation, and date of publication are unknown. The subject died in 1967. If the photograph was taken after 1955, it may be copyrighted in Australia. If it was taken after 1946, it may be considered copyrighted in the U.S. (due to the URAA). – Quadell (talk) 18:37, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I understood it was taken circa 1954. Any photo taken before 1955 is public domain in Oz. Sardaka (talk) 06:20, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Is this still protected by URAA? FASTILY 03:53, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
Image is not PD-USGS because it incorporates copyrighted ESRI/National Geographic map layers. See link below to USGS info page on sources. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/map/doc_aboutdata.php Geogene (talk) 23:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- As far as I can tell that is not the case for this image. According to the USGS page for this particular earthquake [11], the map layer shown is "USGS topography" (click on the layer symbol to the top right). Mikenorton (talk) 23:04, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't see that before, so I'm withdrawing the nomination. Thanks! Geogene (talk) 21:59, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn FASTILY 03:52, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
As I know, one cannot make "two-dimensional scan" and claim it is faithful reproduction of 3d object (coin). Therefore photography of a coin falls under copyrights of photographer. Masur (talk) 15:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Keep - 3D subject photography is not common for all, and many of the images in commons falls under 3D, I cannot see this as a valid reason for deletion..Kalarickan | My Interactions 19:17, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment In other words - now the template claims that this particular file (so photo) is in the PD, because of its age, which is trurly not correct. The coin itself is PD of course, but when one makes an image of it, one gains full credibility for this image, including copyrights. It wouldn't be the case for 2D reproductions od 2D works being in the PD, but the coin is 3D, so its "reproduction" (a photo) is not only "a mechanical reproduction without original input". That was my point. Masur (talk) 12:20, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
- Comment Please quote some copyright law for your claims....such as US LAW, Where it is saying like this...--Captain - Talk to me 13:40, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Kept. Jcb (talk) 14:29, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
As requested in Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Medals of Germany, all the remaining images should get individual deletion discussions. This image, as well as the rest of the images, lacks a copyright tag for the photograph of the coin, which is required per COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Unless we get a copyright tag from the photographer, we can't keep the photograph of the coin. Stefan4 (talk) 16:27, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 03:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
NASA/JPL-Caltech images in general are public domain, just as other NASA images are. The NASA and JPL logos are not, nor are copyrighted images from other sources that may appear on the JPL web site. However, this template was created in the mistaken belief that all JPL images are copyrighted, based on a misinterpretation of the request for attribution in their image use policy at: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/imagepolicy/ NASA's image use guidelines have a similar request for attribution: Http://www.nasa.gov/audience/formedia/features/MP_Photo_Guidelines.html or http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/copyright.html and state explicitly that "Photographs are not protected by copyright unless noted" (the latter also states "It is unlawful to falsely claim copyright or other rights in NASA material."). NASA's galleries also have some of the same images as JPL's Photojournal, e.g., the image of Io here: http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/BROWSE/voyager-galileo_1.html and here: http://photojournal.jpl.nasa.gov/catalog/?IDNumber=PIA02308 So clearly the images on the JPL-associated web sites are also not copyrighted. WolfmanSF (talk) 07:09, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- I've created the template in 2006 - if it's not needed just do what you want to do with it... --katpatuka (talk) 07:21, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep "JPLers are Caltech employees",[12] not federal employees, even though JPL is federally funded. I believe this means that Caltech would generally hold a copyright on any (sufficiently creative) images its employees create as part of their work. This is quite different from the situation for images produced solely by NASA employees, which are in the public domain in the US under Title 17, Chapter 1, Section 105 of the US Code. Contrast with {{PD-USGov}} and {{PD-NASA}}. --Avenue (talk) 08:14, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with Avenue. Furthermore I kindly ask everybody to participate in the core matter. WolfmanSF is trying to create facts before the core matter has been cleared. Tony Mach (talk) 09:41, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- One more thing regarding the hq.nasa.gov example vs. jpl.nasa.gov example: hq.nasa.gov does have a credit line there!!! It says right there: "Center: JPL" And even if an hq.nasa.gov employee did (knowingly? unknowingly? mistakenly?) release that image into the public domain (which is doubtful – to quote w:User:Cyrius: "merely appearing on nasa.gov does not make something public domain"), it does quite clearly not follow that all JPL images have been released into the public domain. Tony Mach (talk) 11:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- If there was a blanket copyright on JPL images, that would would be stated somewhere in their image use policy. It isn't. Someone's unsubstantiated belief to the contrary does not justify a usage policy. (If I'm wrong, show us where copyright is claimed.) Why invent a problem where none exists??
- In the NASA "GRIN" web site discussed above, every image is identified as to which NASA center it came from (see Browse GRIN by Center and Facility). JPL images are not described differently than those from any other NASA center, and no copyright is claimed for any of the images I browsed through; therefore, according to the statement about copyrights ("Photographs are not protected by copyright unless noted") they are not copyrighted. WolfmanSF (talk) 23:13, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Additionally, if a third party copyrighted image does appear somewhere in a JPL website, which is possible, obviously the template would not apply. WolfmanSF (talk) 23:18, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Copyright exists whether it is claimed or not (although it might be lost in the US if works were published without a copyright notice before 1 March 1989).[13] JPL does not need to claim or even mention copyright in its image use policy page to retain their copyright. I note that page does not disclaim copyright, in contrast to NASA media usage guidelines,[14] which explicitly state that "NASA still images; audio files; video; [...] generally are not copyrighted."
- The GRIN site appears to credit your JPL image example indirectly, with its "Center: JPL" line. However it doesn't credit JPL in the requested form, and even says "Creator/Photographer: NASA", so I don't think it complies with even the spirit of the JPL image usage policy.
- You are correct that GRIN doesn't note any copyright on this image, so if you believe they are infallible (and that this image is a photograph), then you could conclude that it isn't protected by copyright. I don't think we can rely on that chain of argument, because I don't believe they are infallible. IMO it's more likely that they don't really understand or care about the copyright technicalities of this case as much as we do. --Avenue (talk) 00:14, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Delete There is no such thing as JPL copyright, they explicitly state so themselves. And under the FAR general data rights clause (FAR 52.227-14), the government has unlimited rights in all data first produced in performance of or delivered under a contract, unless the contractor asserts a claim to copyright or the contract provides otherwise. So since Caltech explicitly denies claiming copyright and since probably the contract doesn't specify this either (they would have mentioned that in their image use policy which for a US contractor is actually quite detailed and accurate), the rights that are there fall to the US federal government, effectively making it PD-USGov-NASA (though you could argue for a PD-USGov-NASA-Calltech template, since this issue comes up twice a year for various contractors, so perhaps we do need a separate template for every contractor of NASA). Credit lines are not by definition copyright claims. The terms Credit and Attribution lines are used somewhat interchangeably by people. TheDJ (talk) 00:23, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see anywhere on that page where they state there is no such thing as JPL copyright. Can you please give a relevant quote?
- [I've now seen WolfmanSF's similar (and more specific) claim at COM:VP, and I've rebutted it there.] --Avenue (talk) 03:09, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Even if all JPL's rights in data are conferred to the federal government, and even if that extends to images, that would not make the images PD. It would simply mean that the government then owns the images' copyright, and can choose to license the images however they wish (as can any copyright owner). It appears from the JPL image use policy that they have chosen to license them under a liberal license, requiring the user only to provide appropriate credit (and not claim any endorsement by Caltech, JPL, or NASA), but that is still very different from the images being PD. --Avenue (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Is think this might be the contract http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/FOIA/jpl/docs/NMO000055_002.PDF Per the Government records section, I presume the Government is wholly owner of the copyrights of the material. So I guess that leads us towards a {{Attribution-USGov-NASA}} or something with attribution and moral rights licensing. TheDJ (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- Do you mean section H-16, "Government Rights in Records", on page 99? Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see anything there about copyright. Yes, it says the government owns all records and data (including photographs) produced by the contractor in performing the contract, but it's not at all clear to me that this includes the contractor's copyright over such records. The section seems to be more concerned with things like ensuring access to the physical records, so my initial understanding is that it's primarily talking about ownership etc of the physical records, not about copyright. --Avenue (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
- Is think this might be the contract http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/FOIA/jpl/docs/NMO000055_002.PDF Per the Government records section, I presume the Government is wholly owner of the copyrights of the material. So I guess that leads us towards a {{Attribution-USGov-NASA}} or something with attribution and moral rights licensing. TheDJ (talk) 19:31, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see anywhere on that page where they state there is no such thing as JPL copyright. Can you please give a relevant quote?
- Delete Another thing that can be pointed out is that on NASA's APOD web site, while they are careful to note image copyrights as well as credits for most images, no copyright is mentioned for NASA images, including those associated with JPL (see examples: #1, #2, #3, #4, etc.). They repeat the statement that NASA images are in the public domain, without making any exception for JPL. Observations such as these ought to settle the question, IMO. However, I have written NASA HQ to ask for a definitive statement on the subject. WolfmanSF (talk) 17:53, 1 January 2014 (UTC)
- A definitive statement from NASA would be helpful, but the sort of woolly inference you rely on here is not. For instance, in 3 of the 4 APOD examples you list, another organisation (besides JPL, USGS, and NASA) is also credited - (Cornell, CICLOPS/SSI, and ESA) - and in one case even a private individual (Ted Stryck). None of those APOD pages explicitly mention that these organisations (or this person) might hold copyright on the image. In other words, APOD treats these organisations just the same as they do JPL. But images from those organisations (and that person) are generally not PD,[15][16][17][18] so we can't conclude from your APOD examples that JPL images are PD either. --Avenue (talk) 11:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, but believing that NASA means what it explicitly says about image copyrights on its web sites is not "woolly inference". A belief to the contrary is a conspiracy theory. WolfmanSF (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
- A definitive statement from NASA would be helpful, but the sort of woolly inference you rely on here is not. For instance, in 3 of the 4 APOD examples you list, another organisation (besides JPL, USGS, and NASA) is also credited - (Cornell, CICLOPS/SSI, and ESA) - and in one case even a private individual (Ted Stryck). None of those APOD pages explicitly mention that these organisations (or this person) might hold copyright on the image. In other words, APOD treats these organisations just the same as they do JPL. But images from those organisations (and that person) are generally not PD,[15][16][17][18] so we can't conclude from your APOD examples that JPL images are PD either. --Avenue (talk) 11:47, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No consensus for deletion. Alan (talk) 14:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
It looks as if the website from which this image comes has a collection of family photos (or similar). Family photos are often unpublished, and unless this was published sufficiently long ago, it is therefore unfree in the United States, as explained at COM:HIRTLE. Stefan4 (talk) 23:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Taigariver (talk) 07:31, 11 December 2013 (UTC) NOTE I believe this file should not be deleted, as it is in the public domain in Finland, where it was created in 1940. I uploaded this file to wikipedia uploads, which was the wrong place, and also mishandled the copyright. Twice. However.. This file is I believe free to use as per {{PD-Finland50}}. It is not a work of art. The photo was created in Helsinki Finland by Jaakko Kuusisto (commercial photographer, deceased) in 1940. It was a publicity photo for a theater event. It has been in the public domain in Finland since 1990 and it also qualifies in the U.S., since it was PD before 1996. It is currently available online at archives of the Institute of Migration. If needed I can of course get permission from them to use it, but since the photo is 73 years old, I do not believe that is needed. Pls advise. - Many thanks.
- It is only in the public domain in the United States if it was published before 1 March 1989 (necessary but not sufficient condition). You have not proved that it was published before that date. The source looks like a page which contains a large collection of previously unpublished family photos. Some of them may have been taken by commercial photographers, but that doesn't automatically make them published. It is unlikely that the Institute of Migration holds the copyright to the photograph in the United States. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:02, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Taigariver says that this was a publicity photo -- that is consistent with her career as an actress and author. It was PD in Finland from 1966, so even if unpublished, it does not meet the second URAA test. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:34, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
The question is not whether publicity photos are published, but whether the photo is a publicity photo in the first place. The uploader has not provided any evidence that this is a publicity photo, but only linked to a place which hosts what looks like a collection of family photos. User:Jameslwoodward claimed that "It was PD in Finland from 1966, so even if unpublished, it does not meet the second URAA test" but he didn't tell what this means. The URAA test only affects published photographs, whereas all unpublished photographs have to satisfy the terms in {{PD-US-unpublished}}, regardless of whether they were in the public domain in the source country on the URAA date. Stefan4 (talk) 16:22, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
First: The second URAA test to which I referred is at COM:URAA. There is a more comprehensive test at Wikipedia:Non-U.S._copyrights#Four-point_test which doesn't seem to match Stefan's conclusion:
Four-point test
The answers to questions on this page help determine the copyright status. Answering these questions in order will lead to a conclusion in bold.
- Is the source country a WTO member or a Berne Convention signatory?
- NO: apply the test at Non-restored copyrights.
- Is the work copyrightable in the United States?
- NO: Are you sure?! The main exception is architectural works (i.e. buildings) constructed before December 1, 1990.
- Had the copyright expired in the source country on the date of restoration?
- YES: The work is probably in the public domain in the United States, but see "subsisting copyrights.".
- Was the work published before January 1, 1923?
- YES: The work is in the public domain in the United States, but may still be under copyright in the source country and in other countries.
- NO: The work is under copyright in the United States, and will remain so until at least 2019. See "Wartime copyrights" for a limited exception. [links adjusted]
This image gets a "Yes" to questions #1, #2, and #3, leading to the bold statement following #3 -- that it is PD.
Why does this not apply in this case?
Second: The woman was an actress and author. This looks like a publicity photo, which she certainly would have needed. The uploader says its a publicity photo. A larger crop at the source site appears to be signed by her -- how many family photos are signed? The fact that it appears on a site with other family photos doesn't say that it is not a publicity photo -- if my grandmother were an actress, one of her publicity photos would be among my family photos. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:40, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Question #3 says "probably in the public domain", but "probably" doesn't mean that it is in the public domain. Most importantly, the source country of a work is irrelevant to the copyright status of the work in the United States if the work is unpublished. This is shown at for example COM:HIRTLE, where the section "Never published, Never registered works" doesn't contain any exception for works from other countries. Also, if you go down to the "Works First Published Outside the U.S." section, you will find that the source country is irrelevant if the first publication was on 1 March 1989 or later (unless any of the "Anytime" cases at the bottom applies). This matter is also explained at Commons:Subsisting copyright.
- Note the text at the bottom of the page: "Kuvaaja: Jukka Kuusisto." (Photographer: Jukka Kuusisto). The text on the photograph seems to be Kuusisto, i.e. the photographer's name and not the signature of the subject of the photograph.
- Compare for example with e.g [19] ("Aira -Tampere-", clearly a photo studio and a city name) or this (contains a name, street address and city - clearly the photographer's contact information). --Stefan4 (talk) 22:03, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
COM:DW of the trophy LGA talkedits 10:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep - This is just ridiculous... please! This image depicts Romário with the trophy, not the trophy with an unknown person. Dantadd✉ 13:46, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 09:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
COM:DW Stefan4 (talk) 15:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Upload by the right holder.--KAMUI (talk) 13:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
- @KAMUI: Could you please provide a link to the exact post where the contribution is done by someone officially associated with them? I found a related post but it just announced that a Wikipedia page of the character is started, not a statement of release or statement of their contribution to Wikipedia. --whym (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- @Whym: This character is the official character of Onagawa, Miyagi from 1990. Onagawa Town Tourist Association has managed, such as the right of the character. Facebook and Twitter have been operating in the joint names of the character and Tourist Association. Creating character article of the JAWP, and upload images to the Commons was made in the name of the Tourist Association both. And we announced on December 17 that "have created a character article" also tweet on the official website of the Tourist Association.--KAMUI (talk) 11:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- To be clear, I don't doubt that http://onagawa.org/ is official and https://twitter.com/seapal_onagawa is official. However I don't know if User:女川町観光協会 is official unless they explicitly say that they contributed to Wikipedia (and Wikimedia Commons), or they send a note to COM:OTRS. This ("wikipediaの項目が完成した") or this ("wikipediaデビューした") doesn't look as clear as we hope to me. --whym (talk) 12:24, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- @Whym: This character is the official character of Onagawa, Miyagi from 1990. Onagawa Town Tourist Association has managed, such as the right of the character. Facebook and Twitter have been operating in the joint names of the character and Tourist Association. Creating character article of the JAWP, and upload images to the Commons was made in the name of the Tourist Association both. And we announced on December 17 that "have created a character article" also tweet on the official website of the Tourist Association.--KAMUI (talk) 11:25, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
- @KAMUI: Could you please provide a link to the exact post where the contribution is done by someone officially associated with them? I found a related post but it just announced that a Wikipedia page of the character is started, not a statement of release or statement of their contribution to Wikipedia. --whym (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 09:04, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
