Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/01/18

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive January 18th, 2014
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Dos Rosas (talk) 10:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 11:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo of Kim Jong-un, specified as "own work" by uploader, which is extremely improbable. No source is given, but Tineye shows that this picture is all over the internet. BabelStone (talk) 14:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete: the noise in the image is quite improbable for a original portrait, nearly sure a photograph/scan of a print etc.- Andy king50 (talk)

Deleted: This was not self-created. It is an official North Korean portrait, and the uploader is a driveby user with no other contributions, with a username in Latin Script and a European-sounding name. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mistake in upload. This video does not have a CC-license on Youtube. Ainali (talk) 14:36, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Support deletion is logical consequence if no free license available. - Andy king50 (talk)

Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 16:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploader's request. Duplicate of File:No.D182, BR no.46045 (Class 46) (6100489003) (2).jpg. The Yeti 15:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Support as orphanded duplicate. - Andy king50 (talk) 15:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, you can try {{Duplicate}} to mark them. Admin can compare two images and delete easily with this template. ㅡ레비Revi 16:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
i generally see no reason to keep orphaned trashy low-res copies of existign files. -20:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Deleted and replaced by a redirect. Closing orphan DR. The Yeti 04:27, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

/рлрркгвкилмплоюсв 37.110.107.85 19:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion, please remominate if needed Ymblanter (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Several images appear in this collage. The source and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient. High Contrast (talk) 00:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per High Contrast: We need a list of the original images and their licenses which is still missing. AFBorchert (talk) 07:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

фото из интернета Aysel Rustamova (talk) 00:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed, this was published on the Internet before: http://www.torange-it.com/photo/17/13/Rose-nella-neve-su-sfondo-del-desktop-1358589233_79.jpg AFBorchert (talk) 07:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

no information about publication Peacemaker67 (talk) 00:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: We have no real source information here that would proof that {{PD-USGov}} applies. In particular we do not know the photographer and where and when this has been published first. AFBorchert (talk) 07:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

no information about author or publication Peacemaker67 (talk) 00:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: There is no sufficient source information, about its first publication, and it does not help to name the depicted person as author of this photograph. Moreover the EXIF data provide following notice: This photograph is protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of the copyright owner. Licensing requests should be sent to photosales@nytimes.com. AFBorchert (talk) 07:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

no publication information Peacemaker67 (talk) 00:30, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: No reliable source information is given (just National Archive) without any further links or documentation. Hence, we have no proof that {{PD-USGov}} applies. AFBorchert (talk) 07:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

FOP in Germany only covers the external appearance of buildings only when the image is taken from a public and publicly-accessible place, the use of aids (such as a helicopters, ladders and planes) are not permitted. LGA talkedits 00:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Protest: The tower Messeturm, from with the photo was taken, had open day at the weekend, so it opend for everybody and was at this time therefore IMO a public place. Regards, -- Wolf im Wald 12:38, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would not make the place the image was taken both dedicated to the public and publicly-accessible. LGA talkedits 19:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: The Messeturm does not count as a public place in the interpretation of § 59 (1) UrhG, see here. AFBorchert (talk) 07:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

FOP in Germany only covers the external appearance of buildings only when the image is taken from a public and publicly-accessible place, the use of aids (such as a helicopters, ladders and planes) and those taken from the en:Maintower (which charges admission) are also not permitted. LGA talkedits 00:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: The Maintower does not count as a public place in the interpretation of § 59 (1) UrhG, see here. AFBorchert (talk) 07:57, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Really the uploader's own work? It is likely not High Contrast (talk) 01:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: This is indeed unlikely to be the uploader's own work as claimed: Low resolution, no EXIF data. AFBorchert (talk) 08:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate, shrunken version of File:Comparison Sudoku.png. Mahir256 (talk) 02:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)  Delete Agree with nominator, same image, just smaller. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:56, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Indeed. I have replaced it by a redirect to the bigger file. AFBorchert (talk) 08:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is unnecessary and already have a version on SVG Juancameneses11 (talk) 03:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: It is not exactly a duplicate of File:Logo Teleantioquia.svg but I accept this nomination by the uploader as it is currently unused. AFBorchert (talk) 08:17, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is unnecessary and already have a version on SVG Juancameneses11 (talk) 03:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: It is not exactly a duplicate of File:Logo Teleantioquia.svg but I accept this nomination by the uploader as it is currently unused. AFBorchert (talk) 08:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is unnecessary Juancameneses11 (talk) 03:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unused file by uploader's request. AFBorchert (talk) 08:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is unnecessary and already have a version on SVG Juancameneses11 (talk) 03:53, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: It is not exactly a duplicate of File:Logo Teleantioquia.svg but I accept this nomination by the uploader as it is currently unused. AFBorchert (talk) 08:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Complex shading may be too high for COM:TOO in Argentina. Need to complete move of w:File:Taringa_Logo.png Cube00 (talk) 06:11, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Please, tell me where is the complexity of the shading because I only see a very slight gradient on the typography with no further ornaments or additional effects. Apart from that, I don't really know what criterion was used by the WP editor (Magog the Ogre) to consider this logo not suitable for Commons. - Fma12 (talk) 12:39, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: I concur with Fma12 and Illegitimate Barrister. AFBorchert (talk) 08:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Want to re edit Ye Kyaw Tan (talk) 06:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep you can easily upload a better new version of the file. Please remove the text caption in the reupload (this will be done anyway, done by me in the file in question). I see no reason for deletion. - Andy king50 (talk) 09:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep You don't have to delete the file to upload a revised version. Simply upload the edited version and overwrite. Illegitimate Barrister (talk) 02:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Per Illegitimate Barrister who also kindly uploaded an updated version without the text caption. AFBorchert (talk) 08:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Some doubts about authorship by initial uploader, as this image (without the watermark/caption) had been published 2 days before upload to Commons at [1]. The initially uploaded version with watermark/caption had also been published 2 days earlier at [2]. -- Túrelio (talk) 08:54, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:29, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems FlickrWashing: Google logo is not probably on CC license. ㅡ레비Revi 07:52, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as nominated. AFBorchert (talk) 08:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This "José Luis López García" seems to be unknown to google 91.64.241.40 07:55, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from a book and presented as "own work" 91.64.241.40 08:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

book cover, no permission 91.64.241.40 08:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

obvious copyright violation (Google maps screenshot) Andy king50 (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Delete Agree with nominator, screenshot. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:14, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Ykvach as duplicate (Dupe) and the most recent rationale was: Marco Polo in tartar costum.jpg Natuur12 (talk) 09:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files are not exactly the same. Natuur12 (talk) 09:29, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete: the image to delete is a low quality/low-res crop of File: Marco Polo - costume tartare.jpg. I see no special reason tho keep this low quality trash. - Andy king50 (talk) 15:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
this is a very bad quality copy of File:Marco Polo in tartar costum.jpg. Yes, the file is not exactly same, but in any case it has very low resolution. Must be deleted. --Yuriy Kvach (talk) 16:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But for my puproses I need just this file, not the same or other, because i am using this file in pages and articles, also in user space. Please don't delete it. It's my work based on image from Wikipedia. Serge Rode (talk) 17:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: I don't understand Serge Rode's request -- the file is not in use anywhere. It is easy to use an image in a smaller size -- there is no reason to keep one for that purpose. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is this really an own work? 91.64.241.40 09:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have found the lyrics http://shigi.wordpress.com/lyrics/#Faster by singer/songwriter Category:Laura Shigihara https://twitter.com/supershigi 91.64.241.40 11:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No exif data. Old photograf low resolution. Not likely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 09:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete orphaned image is most unlikely to be the copyright of the uploader. Ww2censor (talk) 09:56, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete orphaned logo is unlikley to be the copyright of the uploader. Ww2censor (talk) 09:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Delete orphaned complex designed image is unlikley to be the copyright of the uploader. Ww2censor (talk) 09:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation highly probable: Photo of copyright protected book cover Andy king50 (talk) 10:07, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 10:24, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a screenshot from TV. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:22, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: looks indeed like screenshot Ymblanter (talk) 10:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This page has been uploaded erroneously and it must be deleted because copyright exists. Alejandro Porto (talk) 10:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader's request Ymblanter (talk) 10:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no license. An IP added {{Anonymous-EU}} later. But we have no evidence that this image is older than 70 years nor that it has been published anonymisly. JuTa 11:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Artwork by w:Isa Genzken. COM:OTRS needed. 217.186.93.62 11:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image includes the identifiable face of federal agent without his consent. The agent is on private property. There is a possible personal safety issue as it involves a terrorism arrest and the perpetrator was connected to other terrorists over the Internet. Holdek (talk) 11:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. I'm the photographer of this work. After reviewing Commons:Photographs of identifiable people, here's my take:
  • I don't think it's relevant that the agent was standing on private property. From the Commons guideline:
A private place is somewhere the subject has a reasonable expectation of privacy and a public place is somewhere where the subject has no such expectation. The terms are unrelated to whether the land is privately or publicly owned. For example, a tent on a beach is a private place on public land and a concert is a public place on private property. A place may be publicly accessible but still retain an expectation of privacy concerning photography, for example a hospital ward during visiting hours. Whether the place is private or not may also depend on the situation at the time: for example that same hospital ward would have been a public place during a tour before it opens.
That morning, the local NPR station reported the raid on the Watertown property, giving the location. When I arrived, there were several news trucks and reporters on the scene, hundreds of onlookers and several other photographers. So under the circumstances, I don't think that the agents working the scene had a reasonable expectation of privacy.
  • The suggestion here seems to be that there is a potential safety issue because of the terrorism-related nature of the incident. This is a very interesting objection. I cannot find any security exceptions for law enforcement officers in the Commons guidelines. Are there any? Loosely speaking, I don't think there's any reason to assume that there's a security issue here; I spent about 30-40 minutes that morning walking around the crime scene, taking pictures of the house, the tape, FBI agents and local police officers, as did other freelance and press photographers on the scene, and I was not approached and did not see anyone else approached to ask that we not take pictures of the agents. So I don't see that it makes sense for Wikimedia to assume that there is an issue. But I'm interested in hearing others' feedback. Tim Pierce (talk) 17:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:19, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

looks like a screenshot from TV 91.64.241.40 12:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free sculpture. Eleassar (t/p) 12:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also File:Jasna Lake Billygoat (9519824158).jpg. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Cropped the sculpture in both files. --Sporti (talk) 13:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Eleassar (t/p) 13:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 13:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


please post some examples for such pages. - Andy king50 (talk) 15:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/ho084DqHWnP/Inside+the+UNICEF+Ball/c1-RhiKhdiB/Laura+Marano Geraldo Perez (talk) 04:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, unknown subject. Out of scope. Stefan4 (talk) 15:27, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete: rather facebook-like self-promo. - Andy king50 (talk)

Deleted: out of scope Ymblanter (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

obvious copyright violation, image of copyrigth protected magazine cover Andy king50 (talk) 15:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

License review failed. (There is a similar video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmGU6citC74 , so you may want to upload this one) McZusatz (talk) 17:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notice. I don't really understand it, though. The video on YouTube is not only similar, but the same, and the video here on Commons was imported from YouTube. (So I don't understand "may want to upload this one".) The video on YouTube is marked with CC license. Is there anything more I should do with the licensing? --Itangalo (talk) 09:28, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please have another look at the YouTube IDs in the URL. They differ, so the video is not exactly the same. Also one of them has a CC-BY license and the other does not. --McZusatz (talk) 11:13, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per nom Natuur12 (talk) 15:03, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not likely to be his own work and a derative of a copyrighted painting. Natuur12 (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Previously deleted on Wikipedia due to insufficient OTRS permission. See en:Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files/2013 May 17#File:Eric DySart.jpg. Stefan4 (talk) 17:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete It was uploaded to en:File:Eric DySart, Actor.jpg as a non free version by en:User:Erdysart - that was naturally soon deleted. The same person then uploaded en:File:Eric DySart.jpg with source of "www.ericdysart.com" - when pressed they added {{OTRS pending}}. An OTRS ticket was started (2013012310014586), but when pressed for a proper copyright statement, no answer was ever received. Therefore I strongly suspect that the poster does not actually own the copyright, and would not agree to a legal note that said he owned it.  Ronhjones  (Talk) 18:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Info Last message sent from OTRS was 08/02/2013 18:16. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronhjones (talk • contribs)
 Delete Subject to restoration or early-closure of this AFD as "keep" as soon as OTRS requirements are met. Davidwr (talk) 23:35, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Well, this can be restored after OTRS-permission is granted. Natuur12 (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:TOYS. Stefan4 (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

mistake; meant to make a category Nanite (talk) 17:54, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:01, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company - single upload of user INeverCry 18:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No exif, no identification number, not logical name, not identifiable building... --Ganímedes (talk) 18:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC) Ganímedes (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)  Delete This ethereal Romanesque roof finial is everything the nominator says... not identifiable, name is illogical and there's no clue where it is, other than "Montevideo" where it was categorized. I think it fails COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:01, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

very poor quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

+ very ugly advertisement stuff in image description = speedily delete this uselus stuff. Andy king50 (talk) 20:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That’s not what speedy deletions are for. -- Tuválkin 22:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete, per nom and also copyvio: This image is everywhere in the web — even Tine-eye found 11 matches. The original image seems to be a portrait of noted guru Sai Baba of Shirdi, who died in 1918, made at an old age. While a live portrait could be already in PD, the style of the image (op art?) suggests it is much later. -- Tuválkin 22:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:56, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of COM:SCOPE, as this photo has too low resolution and is also unfocussed, thereby hardly usable. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

some blurred furry thing = delete - Andy king50 (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: In use now. Probadly the uloaders dog and uploaded for his userpage. Natuur12 (talk) 14:55, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in France. This picture shows a painting of Marc Chagall who died 1985 and is therefore less than 70 years dead. P e z i (talk) 20:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in France. This picture shows a painting of Marc Chagall who died 1985 and is therefore less than 70 years dead. P e z i (talk) 20:05, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:53, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


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

Outside of COM:SCOPE Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:15, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 DeleteAgree totally with nominator, this wiggling line has no educational purpose. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


ack/pro deletion: we have enough much better images of this species. - Andy king50 (talk)
 Delete Agree with nominator and also Andy king50... The project has much better photos of this species, Homo selficans selfpromotiensis. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:06, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per nom. Natuur12 (talk) 14:52, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

very low res, trashy pic, no rescue possible also because of ugly watermark block Andy king50 (talk) 20:40, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

very poor quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, backlit and fuzzy. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: com:SCOPE Natuur12 (talk) 14:49, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No source for the image (other than "web"). No author of the image. No date of the image. Therefore it's impossible to determine if the image is out of copyright. The identity of the actual creator of the stained glass window itself isn't given either. Therefore it's impossible to determine if an image of his/her work is in the public domain.--Brianann MacAmhlaidh (talk) 21:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:22:16‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

spam is out of scope — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palosirkka (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T10:54:39‎ (UTC)

 Delete Agree that this image is promotional, as are the other images of the uploading user. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

spam is out of scope — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palosirkka (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T10:54:45‎ (UTC)

 Delete Agree that this image is promotional, as are the other images of the uploading user. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:11, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:21:04‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:22:50‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, personal image, out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, personal image, out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very likely false authorship claims - this is an aerial photograph and it is quite unlikely that this was photographed by the uploader. Besides the resolution is typical for internet images High Contrast (talk) 22:13, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in Italy.--151.67.222.253 22:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Reopened. The "dead architects" exception as claimed by Italian parliament pronouncement is already deprecated: see COM:FOP Italy for full information. Architect Cesar Pelli died in 2019, still within 70 years of his posthumous copyright. See also the latest successful DR on an Italian architectural work by dead architects, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Tomba Brion. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 10:55, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:22:00‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:22:32‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

not own work — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fetx2002 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-18T00:31:04‎ (UTC)


Deleted: No EXIIF, small size and unlikely to be his own work. Natuur12 (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

spam is out of scope — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palosirkka (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T10:54:48‎ (UTC)

 Delete Clearly promotional material. User's other uploads are also nominated for deletion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

spam is out of scope — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palosirkka (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T10:54:57‎ (UTC)

 Delete Clearly promotional material. User's other uploads are also nominated for deletion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in Russia - COM:DW of monument. LGA talkedits 23:20, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The license provided is wrong. I don't know if there is another correct license. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 23:31, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: I don't think so and those logo's are com:TOO and copyrighted either way. Natuur12 (talk) 14:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 23:43, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused private image, no educational value → out of scope. Jahobr (talk) 23:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Another unused private image which fails COM:SCOPE due to lack of educational value. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Out of scope PierreSelim (talk) 14:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image has a Commons:URAA problem. In the US its still copyrighted until end of 2066 (95 years after publication). - Fma12 (talk) 18:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:29, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image has a Commons:URAA problem. In the US its still copyrighted until end of 2075 (95 years after publication). - Fma12 (talk) 18:44, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image has a Commons:URAA problem. In the US its still copyrighted until end of 2075 (95 years after publication). - Fma12 (talk) 18:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image has a Commons:URAA problem. In the US its still copyrighted until end of 2072 (95 years after publication). - Fma12 (talk) 18:48, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. Blurry selfie with no educational value. Natuur12 (talk) 23:09, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Delete Out of scope, low quality image. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Didym (talk) 18:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

extremely low qual image, bunches of pike oimages available Andy king50 (talk) 18:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with "extremely low qual image". --Palnatoke (talk) 18:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
what else than this is "extremly lo qual" then? Sujet very underexposed, massive reflections with masses of fingerprints clearly shown, most of image shows no recoginzable details. Any objective reasons to support your view ?? - Andy king50 (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Not as bad as you say and it is the only image we have of a pike swimming in the open. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gemeindename falsch geschrieben - Blessen anstatt Blessens — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschubby (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T08:48:04‎ (UTC)


Kept: Not a reason to delete -- use {{Rename}}. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gemeindename falsch geschrieben Le Rougève anstatt La Rougève — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschubby (talk • contribs) 2014-01-13T12:31:13‎ (UTC)


Kept: Not a reason to delete -- use {{Rename}}. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gemeindename falsch geschrieben - Le Salugy anstatt Le Saulgy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tschubby (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T08:48:58‎ (UTC)


Kept: Not a reason to delete -- use {{Rename}}. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:10, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons doesn't allow Fair Use. 190.25.102.163 04:48, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-textlogo 99of9 (talk) 12:22, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file is unnecessary and already have a version on SVG Juancameneses11 (talk) 03:47, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted as duplicate of File:Logo EPM.svg. --AFBorchert (talk) 08:22, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in Italy.--151.67.222.253 22:08, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Reopened. The "dead architects" exception as claimed by Italian parliament pronouncement is already deprecated: see COM:FOP Italy for full information. Architect Cesar Pelli died in 2019, still within 70 years of his posthumous copyright. See also the latest successful DR on an Italian architectural work by dead architects, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Tomba Brion. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 11:54, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. —‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

poor quality and not many enjoy look at April nude, she request old hairy photo be removed . Reddog11223 (talk) 05:18, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per uploader and nominator Túrelio (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

useless image — Preceding unsigned comment added by Palosirkka (talk • contribs) 2014-01-12T10:50:40‎ (UTC)

 Delete Agree with nominator, personal image, out of scope. And not even one Nude Woman in the entire picture! Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No Freedom of Panorama in Italy--151.67.222.253 22:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Etant l'auteur de ce fichier et ne souhaitant plus que celui ci soit accessible au public je souhaite le voir retiré de commons. Roumpf (talk) 21:10, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: We do not normally remove files at the author's request, but this appears to be out of scope in any case. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused file. no description. Thus out of scope McZusatz (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Didym (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused wikitable McZusatz (talk) 16:49, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Didym (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is not clear what point in the PD template the uploader thinks applies.

  1. (death of author): It is not known whether this point is satisfied as the author isn't specified.
  2. (published anonymously before 1943): the indicated publication is from 1978, and we don't know whether the photograph was published somewhere before 1978. Thus: no evidence that it was published before 1943.
  3. (published anonymously in 1943): there is no evidence that this was published in 1943.
  4. (corporate copyright): no evidence of this has been presented.
  5. (Art. 1151 of the Civil Code): no idea what this means. Stefan4 (talk) 16:04, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: , .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:04, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

плохая цветокоррекция Miksam69 (talk) 17:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Color is not a reason to delete. However, this appears to be a recent Russian monument and therefore this image infringes on its copyright. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP in Russia for non-architectural artworks Dogad75 (talk) 10:18, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:47, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

These images are almost completely identical to files in the Elongated circular route shields category with only minor font differences.

AdmrBoltz 05:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete New Jersey now uses the circle shield set. Dough4872 05:05, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep File:New Jersey 33 Business.svg, it does not have an equivalent. I suggest each other file also be double-checked before deleted. Fry1989 eh? 03:10, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That one has been struck. --AdmrBoltz 03:12, 19 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by BenTurner09 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope. Commons is not a personal photo-album.

Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:54, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:40, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Contentproz (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Outside of COM:SCOPE: self-promotion. User is blocked for spam in enwiki.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:45, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, this is promotional material & out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:57, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by D0nald.kiki (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope, per COM:PORN. No educational purpose.

Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 23:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, there are better images to illustrate these same concepts. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:15, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per nom Natuur12 (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Diaperboydamien (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope. Commons is not a personal photo-album.

Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: speedy deleted, clearly out of scope Trijnsteltalk 23:06, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by George Abodeeb (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused user signatures

91.64.241.40 10:14, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Giovanni Colussi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal files of user without other useful contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:41, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:02, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:57, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Nasho333 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

There is no evidence that uploader is the copyright holder of the images. Uploader has history of copyvios.

Jespinos (talk) 18:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Two different camera, one mentiones the actual author in the exif data and the third has a lack of exif data. Natuur12 (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pe payor (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution except self-promotion (en:User:Pe payor).

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:50, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, noting that one of the series seems to be a photograph of Michael Jackson, and most unlikely to be user's own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Rimzanms (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:03, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:54, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Santanamagliano (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Photo's of children with no importance for the encyclopedia, photos are family orrientated.

Dqfn13 (talk) 23:16, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator that these bleached older photos of children are outside of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Shahzadsaifi1985 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Commons is not your personal photo book, these pictures are out of scope.

Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, out of scope. Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:10, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:46, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Shiiverss (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Images used for vandalism on bg.wikipedia article Севлиево. And they do not meet the educational purposes of Wikimedia Commons, so are out of scope.

Senator2029Talk 18:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:59, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Temurshah (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution except self-promotion (en:User:Temurshah).

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:39, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete: obvious self-promo of a man "like you and me" = no encyclopedic useability of image at all. - Andy king50 (talk) 20:42, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:50, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by UrbanFarmboy (talk · contribs)

[edit]

uploader is not the author, no permissions

91.64.241.40 09:59, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

uploader is the owner of this intellectual property. Uploader possesses all rights. Do NOT delete.
File:Ernie Rivera photo by Kevin McIntyre.jpg

Deleted: There is no evidence to support the claim. Such claims must have a license from the photographer, using the procedure at Commons:OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

un-needed redirect George Orwell III (talk) 23:57, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I was the uploader of the duplicate copy…stupid error, I thought I had corrected it, butthis is a vestige of that. -Pete F (talk) 00:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 22:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Suspected Flickr laundering, as the Flickr gallery contains three images circulating elsewhere on the web, with no indication that the uploader owns the copyright. DAJF (talk) 10:37, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:13, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yu Takahashi.jpg

Part of a copyright advertising poster. No indication of permission to reuse by the original author. DAJF (talk) 13:46, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 20:11, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

erreur de téléchargement ortuns (talk) 23:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

un-needed redirect George Orwell III (talk) 23:53, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:12, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

worst version of File:Рисунок 33 Протоиерей Серафим Казновецкий.tif — Preceding unsigned comment added by Чръный человек (talk • contribs) 2014-01-15T12:40:04‎ (UTC)


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:06, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image is no software; no source or information given JurgenNL (talk) 13:08, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Imported years ago in 2006 to the old enwikivoyage (here), with no license, and originally uploaded on wikitravel.org/en (here)... They probably didn't care about licenses back then. Not sure what we can do to keep this file. We can't contact user "Pool" anymore: http://wikitravel.org/en/Special:Contributions/Pool. Trijnsteltalk 19:18, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To me it sounds like a case of Grandfathered old files. I participated in the Wikivoyage migration and it was indeed not uncommon to see a file from 2006 without clear license, just marked as own work or smth. I believe everything which eventually made it to Commons was somehow reviewed on Wikivoyage Share prior to transfer.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Grandfathering requires that the file has/had a proper license, which this one doesn't. INeverCry 22:00, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unclear copyright status. See previous DR above related to http://en.wikivoyage-old.org/w/index.php?title=File%3APasto_20051228_001.jpg (identical file, but lower res and no exif). In the meantime highly circulating in the internet before uploade date (12.01.2014). Gunnex (talk) 22:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Info --> uploader request via Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive#File:San Juan de Pasto de noche.jpg. Gunnex (talk) 22:25, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I re-uploaded this file because this photo is my own work: I was the original uploader back in 2006 (uploaded to Commons, I don't know why the file was deleted back then in 2007, supposedly marked as a dupe (link to original file, and link to log [3]), and when Commons deleted it some weeks ago I re-uploaded that photograph because I am the copyright owner. Moreover, these two images are not the same: When I uploaded again I made another copy of the image, that has EXIF information and is significantly bigger, and I have processed it from the original image using GIMP software (it has some levels adjustment). You will never find another version of that photo because the image uploaded to Commons back in 2006 has lower resolution.
In order to provide another proof: Now I have uploaded another image in the same series, taken only one minute before the original file and uploaded without processing, that has never been uploaded to the internet before. If you need, I can provide the original photograph only for verification purposes, but I don't want to upload it to Commons because in case of Copyright or license infringement, I can use it as a proof that the image is only mine, taken with my own camera in 2005. Jorgelrm (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Jorgelrm, thank you very much for you efforts in this case. From my side I have no further objections to raise. Sorry for the inconvenience. Btw, nice picture(s) :-). Gunnex (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, I believe Jorgelrm. Taivo (talk) 10:18, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uneeded image, better version in 2014 world cup.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiAnthony (talk • contribs) 2014-01-15T20:29:53‎ (UTC)


Deleted: Deleted by Taivo Natuur12 (talk) 20:50, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

very poor quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:32, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Small size, no valid EXIF data and the file can be found elswhere Natuur12 (talk) 12:47, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The letter „K“ indicates the rank Kursant/officer-student (ru: Курсане) and is only on the shoulder strap of the appropriate OR7-rank. On the other OR-shoulder straps, e.g. OR1 Рядовой, OR2 Ефрейтор, OR4Мл. сержант ,OR6 Сержант, OR7 Ст. сержант, OR8 Старшина the letter „R“ should be deleted. --HHubi (talk) 12:42, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be but the file is in use so I may not delete it. Natuur12 (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The letter „K“ indicates the rank Kursant/officer-student (ru: Курсане) and is only on the shoulder strap of the appropriate OR7-rank. On the other OR-shoulder straps, e.g. OR1 Рядовой, OR2 Ефрейтор, OR4Мл. сержант ,OR6 Сержант, OR7 Ст. сержант, OR8 Старшина the letter „R“ should be deleted. --HHubi (talk) 12:42, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be but the file is in use so I may not delete it. Natuur12 (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The letter „K“ indicates the rank Kursant/officer-student (ru: Курсане) and is only on the shoulder strap of the appropriate OR7-rank. On the other OR-shoulder straps, e.g. OR1 Рядовой, OR2 Ефрейтор, OR4Мл. сержант ,OR6 Сержант, OR7 Ст. сержант, OR8 Старшина the letter „R“ should be deleted. --HHubi (talk) 12:40, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be but the file is in use so I may not delete it. Natuur12 (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cropped from a video probably, copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 22:34, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Highly unlikely that this is how own work. Natuur12 (talk) 13:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The letter „K“ indicates the rank Kursant/officer-student (ru: Курсане) and is only on the shoulder strap of the appropriate OR7-rank. On the other OR-shoulder straps, e.g. OR1 Рядовой, OR2 Ефрейтор, OR4Мл. сержант ,OR6 Сержант, OR7 Ст. сержант, OR8 Старшина the letter „R“ should be deleted. --HHubi (talk) 12:37, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be but the file is in use so I may not delete it. Natuur12 (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The letter „K“ indicates the rank Kursant/officer-student (ru: Курсане) and is only on the shoulder strap of the appropriate OR7-rank. On the other OR-shoulder straps, e.g. OR1 Рядовой, OR2 Ефрейтор, OR4Мл. сержант ,OR6 Сержант, OR7 Ст. сержант, OR8 Старшина the letter „R“ should be deleted. --HHubi (talk) 12:35, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be but the file is in use so I may not delete it. Natuur12 (talk) 13:26, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:19, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:20, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

jednolo se o test Frisky007 (talk) 20:20, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:41, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I propose to delete this file, because this shoulder strap with one little star did never exist in the Red Army, in the Soviet Armed force or in the Armed force of Russian Federation. The Praposhich rank does have two little stars from the very beginning. --HHubi (talk) 17:12, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 09:21, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I propose to delete this file, because this shoulder strap with one little star did never exist in the Soviet Navy, Red Army, in the Soviet Armed force or in the Armed force of Russian Federation. --HHubi (talk) 15:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 09:21, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

imagen erronea del citio mensionado — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pablorosario2013 (talk • contribs) 2014-01-16T14:42:51‎ (UTC)


Deleted: FASTILY 09:21, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]