Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/01/20
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(5977013054).jpg){kind=link}
_(5977014578).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_2014-01-20_00-13.jpg){kind=link}
)))_2014-01-19_19-39.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_relação_mutualista_com_a_planta..jpeg){kind=link}
![139 File:"circumcision jpg".JPG](#File:"circumcision_jpg".JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Don't like advertiements 70.195.12.223 01:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Abusive DR. INeverCry 03:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Ich, der Urheber dieses Werkes, möchte das dieses Bild gelöscht wird. JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 18:20, 12 June 2013 (UTC)
Keep This is the best photo we have about D 2505. The photo is here more then 2 months and is used. Free licences are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 13:17, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
Keine Quell- oder Lizenzinformationen. JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 22:05, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Keep - per last request. I reverted your deletion of image and license information. Reasons for deletion should be discussed here before changes to the image. GermanJoe (talk) 11:22, 27 June 2013 (UTC)
- Keep Per previous DR and GermanJoe. Also per File:Deutz D 8005 A.jpg. Tm (talk) 14:16, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
ich möchte einfach das diese Datei gelöscht wird, ohne große Diskussion! Das ist es, was mich auf wikimedia commons so ärgert!
Kept - fine image, no problem with the license, free license not revocable. --Denniss (talk) 10:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
SVG contents consist solely of an embedded PNG, which has already been extracted to a separate file; otherwise, the SVG is not of much use in its current form... AnonMoos (talk) 05:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, worse than File:NorthEastSomersetconstituency.png. Taivo (talk) 11:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Not needed as can't be rendered and original is on Commons Hazmat2 (talk) 06:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Delete Imperfect, not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, bad quality. Taivo (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Does not provide additional information or quality for Wikimedia Commons Hazmat2 (talk) 07:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Delete Not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, give us this day our daily penises ... Taivo (talk) 15:43, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:08, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Enough already! Useddenim (talk) 18:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Enough of what? It is very disruptive when users add {{Speedy}} without first checking COM:CSD to confirm whether the speedy deletion rationale is valid. User:YLSS has been adding lots of {{Speedy}} tags lately, despite the rationales clearly not meeting any situation listed on COM:CSD. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:10, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Neutral - I recognize and acknowledge Stefan4's valid concern regarding deleting redirects to find whether or not they are used. But in this case, the redirect appears to be unused, and I have no problem with deletion. --Scottalter (talk) 15:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Enough already! Useddenim (talk) 18:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Enough of what? It is very disruptive when users add {{Speedy}} without first checking COM:CSD to confirm whether the speedy deletion rationale is valid. User:YLSS has been adding lots of {{Speedy}} tags lately, despite the rationales clearly not meeting any situation listed on COM:CSD. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:14, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:15, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries where it is expected to go blank under the obsolete title). Stefan4 (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No reason for deletion given. Redirects are not listed at COM:CSD, so they can't be speedily deleted. Redirects should normally not be deleted as there is no way to find out whether they are unused. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete And here we go again... Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. YLSS (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Enough already! Useddenim (talk) 18:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Enough of what? It is very disruptive when users add {{Speedy}} without first checking COM:CSD to confirm whether the speedy deletion rationale is valid. User:YLSS has been adding lots of {{Speedy}} tags lately, despite the rationales clearly not meeting any situation listed on COM:CSD. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages and project galleries). Stefan4 (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given, see COM:CSD. I'm not sure why the user continues to add {{Speedy}} to redirects despite having been told that COM:CSD doesn't list any speedy deletion criteria for redirects. Redirects should not be deleted as there is no way to prove that a redirect isn't in use. --Stefan4 (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. I keep adding {{Speedy}}'s because admins keep deleting them as they did before (except in those cases where you intercept). BTW, ever considered creating a single nomination instead of a multitude similar? YLSS (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:19, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by YLSS as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Deprecated redirect. All usage has been replaced (except on user pages). Stefan4 (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep No valid reason given, see COM:CSD. I'm not sure why the user continues to add {{Speedy}} to redirects despite having been told that COM:CSD doesn't list any speedy deletion criteria for redirects. Redirects should not be deleted as there is no way to prove that a redirect isn't in use. --Stefan4 (talk) 18:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Ditto Commons:Deletion requests/File:BSicon fexENDEl.svg. I keep adding {{Speedy}}'s because admins keep deleting them as they did before (except in those cases where you intercept). BTW, ever considered creating a single nomination instead of a multitude similar? YLSS (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, there have been a lot of such deletion requests. Taivo (talk) 17:18, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
It has error. I have corrected newer version. Please delete it. Vijayantv (talk) 07:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Info First you upload the new correct file; then you ask with {{duplicate}} to remove the old wrong version. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, by principle, DenghiuComm is correct. Vijayantv, please do so next time. But the file qualifies for speedy deletion nevertheless as uploader's request two days after uploading. Taivo (talk) 12:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
This document has error. I have corrected it and need upload newer version please delete it. Vijayantv (talk) 07:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Info First you upload the new correct file; then you ask with {{duplicate}} to remove the old wrong version. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, by principle, DenghiuComm is correct. Vijayantv, please do so next time. But the file qualifies for speedy deletion nevertheless as uploader's request two days after uploading. Taivo (talk) 12:15, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Keine Ahnung, warum statt der schönen laufenden Gif-Datei nur Schwarz zu sehen ist. Fritz@Joern.De Fritz Jörn (talk) 08:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week, and Micky Mouse is copyrighted anyway. I'll delete also copy File:MickeyMouseMoviesPhenakistoscope.jpg due to Disney's copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
resolution not sufficient طلحة الخير بالليل (talk) 08:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, so small photos (11×30 pixels) are worthless. Taivo (talk) 11:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This image is taken from this article according to its source. It doesn't seem properly attributed, I don't see any permission and the image does not seem to be {{PD-ineligible}}. Lymantria (talk) 09:37, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- But, the image is created by or for the US government and it's licences is PD, you can see it here. I think that the only problem is to fix the source and licencse, the correct license is {{PD-USGov}}, I think. Bye, --Elisardojm (talk) 23:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept, fixed. Taivo (talk) 12:25, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Civil Air Patrol Stinson Reliant SR-5A during flight check.jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 12:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Flight line at CAP Coastal Patrol Base 20 (2179902668).jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 12:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Civil Air Patrol Stinson 105 undergoing maintenance.jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:44, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Men in formation on flight line at CAP Coastal Patrol Base 20 (2179112949).jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 13:22, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Civil Air Patrol Fairchild 24W on flight line.jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 13:24, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Lower resolution version of File:Waco YKS-6 undergoing maintenance at CAP Coastal Patrol Base 20 (2179902068).jpg. Not an exact duplicate (very very slightly different crop), but otherwise the exact same image. — Huntster (t @ c) 09:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, scaled-down almost-copy. Taivo (talk) 13:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Roberto Bayeto Carballo.jpg Gbawden (talk) 07:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 10:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:28, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
File:San Diego Comic-Con 2011 - Chalice of Kali from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom prop replica (Sideshow Collectibles booth) (5977013054).jpg
[edit]_(5977013054).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5977013054).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't see why this photograph of a film prop is a copyright violation.--SunOfErat (talk) 15:08, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 15:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
File:San Diego Comic-Con 2011 - Teddys Finger from the Hangover Part II (Legendary booth) (5977014578).jpg
[edit]_(5977014578).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5977014578).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:29, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:30, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Unambiguous copyright violation. Unclear why User:Jcb decided to remove the copyvio tag. Stefan4 (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Stefan - excellent speedy candidate Эlcobbola talk 19:30, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Derivative work of non-free book covers. Stefan4 (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- A collection of books, similar to a book shelv, not a derivative work from one copyright-cover. --Christos Vittoratos (talk) 22:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Unambigous derivative of book covers Эlcobbola talk 19:39, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: non-free modern architecture (a swimming pool). Eleassar (t/p) 11:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep this is just trying to push FOP to far. --Sporti (talk) 11:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Any reason why swimming pools would not count as architecture? We've already discussed this at Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Hotels in Slovenia. --Eleassar (t/p) 11:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, I have never seen such swimming pool. This is surely architectural work, and very elaborate. Taivo (talk) 11:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
some pgotoshopped picture, face picture added to some other picture ? Motopark (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, very out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 12:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicata of Flag of Languedoc-Roussillon.svg Superbenjamin (talk) 14:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
- Yes, this can be deleted. (For those wondering, I uploaded this file when I replaced File:Flag of Languedoc-Roussillon.svg with a different flag, which is now at File:Flag of Languedoc-Roussillon2.svg.) SiBr4 (talk) 14:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, exact copy. Taivo (talk) 13:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
Taken from TV, copyright violation Berthold Werner (talk) 14:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Eigener Fehler Sichtweisen2014 (talk) 14:39, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, by Jcb with reason "Text PDF file with no evidence of permission from copyright holder". Taivo (talk) 13:31, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, private image. Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum is blurry. BrightRaven (talk) 15:17, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 14:01, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
not an "own work" 91.64.241.40 16:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, real author's name is in lower right corner. Taivo (talk) 14:08, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted, small bad photo, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:52, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Seems to be a TV screenshot High Contrast (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader also confessed, that this was error. Taivo (talk) 12:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:29, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 12:06, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Too small, unusable picture. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, so small photos (140×98 pixels) are useless. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 12:08, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
1 Hyacinth (talk) 19:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, by INeverCry due to uploader's request and also "page moved, no links, no likely links". Taivo (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
er gtro ufeuj 190.113.212.101 23:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept, this is not a reason to delete. The file is big and properly licensed, it is correctly categorized and used. Taivo (talk) 13:00, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, so small photos (150×119 pixels) are useless. This is derivative work from File:鄧善蔚.jpg. I delete both as unused personal photos and now are the uploader's all contributions deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:37, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, unused image about unidentified person, description is "portrait", the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, very bad quality, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
File:Approach to the Bridge at Night by George Wesley Bellows, 1913, oil on canvas - Chazen Museum of Art - DSC02469 03.JPG
[edit]
wrong file name (my mistake) Daderot (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. But next time please use {{Rename}}. Taivo (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
File:Approach to the Bridge at Night by George Wesley Bellows, 1913, oil on canvas - Chazen Museum of Art - DSC02469 02.JPG
[edit]
wrong file name (my mistake) Daderot (talk) 22:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. But next time please use {{Rename}}. Taivo (talk) 11:41, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Se ve muy pequeño, es mejor hacer un gráfico grande y nuevo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thegastiinthedark (talk • contribs) 2014-01-20T05:57:20 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:47, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Imatge duplicada --Pacopac (talk) 08:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: and redirected to duplicate File:Germán Fuente CARREGANT EL CARRO.JPG JuTa 23:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Kikou yolo (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Affiche de la saison 1 de l'Heure du Secret.
Deleted: Movie poster. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:09, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use personal pictures.
Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, copyright of toy producers is not violated. Simply very bad quality. Now are all the user's uploads deleted. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Arredondo ales (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely authorship claims based on the uploader's history, the low resolution of the files and the lack of metadata.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
—LX (talk, contribs) 13:54, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Arredondo ales (talk · contribs)
More files with more unlikely authorship claims, which the uploader chose to add after the previous nomination (instead of commenting on it) together with two blatant copyright violations.
- File:AVT Corina-Bille 4770.jpeg
- File:Andrea vitali.jpg
- File:Massimo gramellini.jpg
- File:Ernest-J-Gaines2.jpg
—LX (talk, contribs) 14:48, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violations. --High Contrast (talk) 15:11, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Arredondo ales (talk · contribs)
Unsourced logos, certainly not "own work" as declared, licensed with self-{{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} and for which an alternative licensing via {{PD-textlogo}}{{Trademarked}}{{PD-shape}} (or whatever) would - IMHO - fail. Related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Lapazcollage.png.
Additional nominating, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Arredondo ales + the user is infinite blocked:
- File:Ypfb aviación.png
- File:Freebox1.png
- File:ACB BOLIVIA.png
- File:U ANDINA BOL.png
- File:LOGO UATF BOL.png
- File:UAGRM BOL.png
- File:UAJMS BOL.png
- File:UFSC BRA.png
- File:UTO BOL.png
- File:SC LP.png
- File:Logo UNP.png
- File:Logo UFRJ.png
- File:UNI SALESIANA LP.png
- File:UNI LOYOLA.png
- File:UMSA LOGO.png
- File:UCB LP.png
- File:UNI AQUINO LP.png
- File:Logo-EMI.png
- File:COL AL.png
Gunnex (talk) 16:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete --McZusatz (talk) 22:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Kathisma (talk) 00:05, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 00:10, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aylin calle 7 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope. Not-in-use user page images.
Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, these are the uploader's only contributions. Taivo (talk) 12:03, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kalinga Jaysingh (talk · contribs)
[edit]promotional content, unused.
Steinsplitter (talk) 12:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Support delete, out of scope. - Andy king50 (talk) 17:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: I delete also File:Creative work.jpg, which is used for making aforementioned images. Taivo (talk) 12:09, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- Files uploaded by Kalinga Jaysingh (talk · contribs)
unused private images, out of scope
- File:Holi with kalinga.jpg
- File:Make ur choice & fav.jpg
- File:Multi talent in one.jpg
- File:The star of dance.jpg
- File:Wedding photo.jpg
Indeedous (talk) 14:22, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 21:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by SuperBallState (talk · contribs)
[edit]some obvious copyright violations, the rest seems to be a copyvio, too, or at least not own work as stated
- File:Canberra 2014-01-19 11-11.jpg
- File:Hartsville Battleground 2014-01-19 11-01.jpg
- File:Cane Hill 2014-01-19 10-55.jpg
- File:Painting of the battle 2014-01-19 10-50.jpg
- File:Asterinella growing on a decaying leaf 2014-01-19 02-11.jpg
- File:Garmon in 2005 2014-01-19 02-01.jpg
- File:John Newman Edwards 2014-01-19 01-55.jpg
- File:Foster after the Civil War 2014-01-19 01-49.jpg
- File:Sketch of Lone Jack 2014-01-19 01-42.jpg
- File:Battle layout 2014-01-19 01-19.jpg
Didym (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, after creation of this deletion request SuperBallState did not explain anything, but uploaded two more very suspicious files as own work. I warned him and I'll delete all his uploads. Taivo (talk) 13:26, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Picture of copyrighted book cover. P. S. Burton (talk) 00:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: DW Alan (talk) 01:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Does not provide additional useful information to Wikimedia Commons. Hazmat2 (talk) 07:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Delete Not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete COM:PORN, we do have tons of images, nothing new. --Yikrazuul (talk) 22:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Alan (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Low quality selfie Gbawden (talk) 14:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep this is actually a high quality selfie, perfectly in focus, and may become a better photograph by being cropped. Better than 97% of similar images, see report. --Fæ (talk) 15:46, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Target file File:Penis2.JPG
- Pixel resolution = 4752 x 3168
- Source category: Human penis (filter by mime 'image')
- Total number of unique images in category, 23 child and 49 grandchild categories: 2427
- Number with pixel >= target resolution: 59 (in top 2%)
- Number with file size >= target file size: 66 (in top 3%)
- Report completed: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:04 (3m 9.4s runtime)
- Delete COM:PORN, we do have tons of images, nothing new. --Yikrazuul (talk) 22:13, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Comment I deleted two images of twenty, but most of them are used or at least well usable. Taivo (talk) 11:40, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep, per Fæ: We need to document dicks, too. (How meta!) -- Tuválkin ✉ 23:44, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Without consensus for deletion or keep. Alan (talk) 01:31, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
개인사정.......... Dispolt (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - user requested deletion of own photo. -mattbuck (Talk) 20:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete It can be helpful to write to a volunteer on OTRS, or to contact Oversight, when there are circumstances that should be kept private. As the uploader is the requester, a courtesy deletion seems reasonable. --Fæ (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion --Krd 08:25, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Does not provide additional information or quality for Wikimedia Commons Hazmat2 (talk) 07:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Keep We have not other files with this position. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Keep Provides a view of the "plow" position. What additional information should be submitted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mstinner (talk • contribs)
Keep This is the perfect photo for what is, the art of autofellatio. This man is a legend for all. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 173.81.244.213 (talk)
Keep Not too sure why anyone's against it; it's what autofellatio is. Unless you want to grab a picture of an ancient Roman performing autofellatio; this honestly just fits the box. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 118.208.185.166 (talk)
Keep This is an exact depiction of Autofellatio. Having seen this picture I feel a sort of comfort knowing that I'm not the only one who acts on these urges. Autofellatio, as exhibited in this picture, is very difficult to achieve and takes practice. This picture will provide some sort of frame of reference and quell some individuals curiosities, while encouraging others. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.19.42.252 (talk)
Keep The depiction is accurate for the plow technique, and I honestly didn't believe it was possible until I came across it. Definitely should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.196.198.232 (talk)
Keep Perfectly demonstrates the act of autofellation. Was unclear on the process but the picture explains it in a simple and clear manner. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 147.4.174.87 (talk)
Keep Gives a clear and informative insight into the act. I now have a better understanding of the human condition, having seen this picture. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.186.102.255 (talk)
Keep Perfect example of autofellatio. Fantastic. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.230.245.34 (talk)
Keep Plow motion is more realistic for more men, and should be displayed as the primary motion. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.229.104.62 (talk)
Keep Any confusion caused by the text entry is cleared up with the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 110.20.92.234 (talk)
Keep This photo shows exactly what auto fellatio is in the perfect manner. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.193.149.207 (talk)
Keep Depicts the proper "Plow" technique and is of high quality. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 135.23.85.204 (talk)
Keep This picture shows the technique for autofellatio perfectly. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.119.42.184 (talk)
Keep This photograph allowed me to accurately gauge the flexibility needed to perform autofellatio. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.119.42.184 (talk)
Keep The picture helped me understand what an autofellatio is and how hard it looks to do it — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.38.140.64 (talk)
Keep The description may be confusing: this definitely explains what the article is talking about — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 93.42.41.105 (talk)
Keep Photo subject well-lit, view of occurrence of auto fellatio is unobstructed. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.187.140.208 (talk)
Keep Photo allowed me to understand lighting differences and I have no aced my Photography class. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.161.96.236 (talk)
Keep Bobek (talk) 04:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Keep This is a great photo depicting a man performing autofellatio — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 50.53.164.119 (talk)
Keep The photo is a clear example of how autofellatio should be performed. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.21.104.240 (talk)
Keep Didn't understand the article until the picture loaded. Clear, informative. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.156.83.90 (talk)
Keep This picture perfectly illustrates the act of autofellatio and I feel enlightened for having seen it. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 98.214.8.230 (talk)
Keep This pictured accurately demonstrated autofellation, thus it should be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.195.13.45 (talk)
Keep Helped me finally achieve a deep, true love for myself. Enlightening. Thank you, Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2602:306:cde5:7360:8961:e195:fb34:98b9 (talk)
Keep It is sometimes hard to understand or imagine what an article is trying to explain, the image definitely helps and now I can see how autofellatio is possible and achieved. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 201.141.226.61 (talk)
Keep Clearly demonstrates the act upon which the image is published and leaves no room for confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 120.147.67.182 (talk)
Keep Fantastic fellation of the self, duly impressed — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 2601:5:c380:316:ccf2:7766:988d:5c34 (talk)
Keep I don't see why so many people have to say that it should be kept, it is obvious that the photo plays an important roll in the article, which can be hard to grasp just what it is describing. Additionally, future reader's of the article would much prefer to see this pictured here, then to search auto fellatio on the internet to try and find images depicting it. — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.228.105 (talk)
- Delete The photo is small and has no metadata. Probably it is copyright violation and should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 15:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Taivo, the picture is almost the exact same size as the current picture being used on the English site. 640 × 478 vs 480 × 628. It seems through the enhancing process it lost a few pixels and can reupload with the full size enhanced if needed. The lack of metadata is from using enhancement software. There are no copyright issues. This picture shows a different and more popular way of performing autofellatio. Mstinner (talk)
- If this is own work, can you re-upload it in full size, for example, 1500×2000 pixels? Taivo (talk) 17:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- The original is 520 x 680. I can reupload that one if it would be better. Mstinner (talk) 17:26, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Comment I smell sockpuppetry? ViperSnake151 (talk) 02:22, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- no, i think that's the smell of sarcasm Lx 121 (talk) 11:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
oh Keep for all of the reasons given about & more (such as: massively IN-USE!!!!), & how about closing this snowstorm? i've seen it done often enough for non-sexual DR's... Lx 121 (talk) 11:02, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright violation. Sources found previous to Wikimedia Commons (05:58 20 ene 2014) -> 1, 2, 3, 4, ... and more... Alan (talk) 01:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
_2014-01-20_00-13.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2014-01-20_00-13.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality selfie Gbawden (talk) 14:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
_2014-01-20_00-13.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete Not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Alan (talk) 01:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
_2014-01-20_00-13.jpg){kind=link}
Doubt this is own work - looks way too professional Gbawden (talk) 14:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Quite small photo with no metadata, the uploader's only contribution ... suspicious. Taivo (talk) 13:28, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:PRP Alan (talk) 01:43, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
There's no scale here, so I have no idea what is being measured and how. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 14:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
ผผปผแพกดก้ด 182.52.143.191 04:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 14:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Low quality penis. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:42, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 01:16, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
Does not provide additional useful information to Wikimedia Commons Hazmat2 (talk) 07:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Delete Not useful. --DenghiùComm (talk) 15:32, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete COM:PORN, we do have tons of images, nothing new. --Yikrazuul (talk) 22:12, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted by Alan. Yann (talk) 14:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Apparent Copyright violation which can be seen from the watermark of the company. This is a graphical renderation which must have an artist. Amartyabag (talk) 07:18, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Does not add informational value to Wikimedia Commons that is not already present Hazmat2 (talk) 07:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep There is no better photo in Commons about ginger pubic hair. The file has EXIF data. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 14:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
This not the picture of Amjadieh Stadium (Wrong name).i Msanta20 (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Kept: Use {{Rename}} instead. INeverCry 18:30, 24 December 2013 (UTC)
این تصویر استادیوم امجدیه (شهید شیرودی) نیست Msanta20 (talk) 08:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete At first, this is small photo with no proper EXIF data. This can be copyright violation. At second, the author is claimed unknown, but the license said, that (s)he died before 1980. How do we know that? At third, there is no freedom of panorama in Iran and this seems to be a modern building. Taivo (talk) 11:37, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Info Cropped from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/79362373 (2012, © All rights reserved by zhivik89) or http://de.soccerway.com/venues/iran/shahid-shiroudi-stadium/ (credit: "Abdolrahman Rafati") http://cache.images.globalsportsmedia.com/soccer/venues/600x450/2034.jpg (last modified: 2009). May be in PD in Iran +30 years after publication (and Iran is URAA-unrelated) but a tangible evidence for a publication date (in Iran) is needed. Gunnex (talk) 11:00, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
- Considering this, my doubts are increasing... Gunnex (talk) 11:12, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Uncertain copyright status. Yann (talk) 14:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Matt_mccauslin1 uploaded it claiming it as his own but http://www.huffingtonpost.com/artinfo/move-over-graceland-memph_b_811830.html says "Photograph by Maude Schuyler Clay". Matt_mccauslin1 does not indicate that they are Maude Schuyler Clay. Lopifalko (talk) 08:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Small photo with no metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 12:01, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 14:36, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unused logo of a non relevant hockyclub from the Netherlands. The article is removed as non relevant at the Dutch Wikipedia for a couple of times. Natuur12 (talk) 09:47, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:19, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
File:This year I don't wanna be obamaself - @CraicMeTomlin on twitter -)))) 2014-01-19 19-39.jpg
[edit])))_2014-01-19_19-39.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
)))_2014-01-19_19-39.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
out of scope Gbawden (talk) 10:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Obama's pic is probably not own work, so copyvio is possible. BrightRaven (talk) 11:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Watermark not removed after 4 months. 194.95.59.160 10:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: not a valid reason for deletion. BrightRaven (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion JurgenNL (talk) 07:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 11:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Look uploader's name ANTCOM2 and you see self-promotion. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:45, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 11:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Look the uploader's name 15thstory and you see self-promotion. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:21, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion. The images could also be copyvio. BrightRaven (talk) 11:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 11:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Look the uploader's name Negetirsek and you see self-promotion. The uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 11:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
not own work, and also to young to be pd-old Hangsna (talk) 11:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:22, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unused personal photo, the uploader's only contribution Taivo (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Uploader is Matriz1961, but author is said to be Marinetti. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Looks like a screenshot from a video game. JurgenNL (talk) 07:23, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unused personal photo about non-notable people. Poor description and missing categorizing make difficult to use the photo. This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 07:24, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The uploader has not done anything in Wikipedia except self-promotional userpage in en.wiki and uploading a self-portrait. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The uploader has not done anything in Wikipedia except userpage in en.wiki and uploading a self-portrait, his other edits were deleted. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:37, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:26, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I do not believe, that this is own work from 2014. Taivo (talk) 11:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Suspected copyright violation. Author is Manuel Manzano-Monis, but uploader is Variopaint. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Not big photo, no metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, the uploader's only contribution Taivo (talk) 11:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
File:This is Christopher Green new disney star hired january 10, 2014 --Born- july 4, 2000-Movies- N-A-T-V- N-A 2014-01-14 17-21.jpg
[edit]
Unused personal photo, the uploader's only contribution Taivo (talk) 11:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
_rela%C3%A7%C3%A3o_mutualista_com_a_planta..jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_rela%C3%A7%C3%A3o_mutualista_com_a_planta..jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyvio © Todd Palmer http://www.spektrum.de/alias/oekologie/aus-der-balance/938932 Wer?Du?! (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
_relação_mutualista_com_a_planta..jpeg){kind=link}
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:31, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
_relação_mutualista_com_a_planta..jpeg){kind=link}
copyvio Alle Rechte vorbehalten https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/o3t7VksFwUi2jzMPQ8KkoQ Wer?Du?! (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Copy of http://www.moulinsdesoulanges.com/templates/k3m/images/0.png Patrick Rogel (talk) 15:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Looks like TV screenshot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete small photo with no metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 14:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete I add for deletion File:Bish.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 14:06, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope. Not-in-use user page image. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:33, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Beautiful, but due to excessive promotionality out of project scope. I add for deletion File:Royaye parvane shodan.JPG and File:To ki hasti.JPG. Now are all his contributions presented for deletion. Taivo (talk) 12:13, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: no educational value High Contrast (talk) 16:57, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:09, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
No information about the whereabouts of the picture or its author. As, it seems, it's not exhibited outdoors, proper information about authorship is needed, in order to assert public domain Discasto talk 22:01, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 18:39, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:35, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:25, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:27, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Fernasis nominated all his uploads for deletion due to privacy issues. This is bad. His photos have no privacy problems. Photos are good and free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Template:Privacy Fernasis (talk) 17:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: No valid reason for deletion. JurgenNL (talk) 09:08, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Dalí died 1989. His work is shown Alinea (talk) 19:49, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete I add for deletion File:Dali Berlin surreal SNCF.jpg due to same reason. Both photos are very good, unfortunately copyrighted. Taivo (talk) 11:06, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 09:18, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
This file uses Wikipedia logo which is protected by WMF but no such data available in the filedesc; Crossing logo like this violates wmf:Visual identity guidelines#18. See similar case: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pyshemo pro euro.jpg BaseSat (talk) 20:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Stupid guidelines. Taivo (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 09:16, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Paul Dardé is dead in 1963. No freedom of panorama in France. 83.204.166.56 20:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 09:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Paul Dardé is dead in 1963. No freedom of panorama in France. 83.204.166.56 20:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 09:20, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Der Urheberrechtsinhaber wünscht Löschung der Datei JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 21:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is good foto. Free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 11:30, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Taivo. JurgenNL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Der Urheberrechtsinhaber wünscht Löschung der Datei JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 21:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is good photo. Free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Taivo. JurgenNL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Der Urheberrechtsinhaber wünscht Löschung der Datei JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 21:05, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is good photo. Free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 11:32, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Taivo. JurgenNL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Der Urheberrechtsinhaber wünscht Löschung der Datei JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 21:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is good photo. It is even used. Free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 11:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Taivo. JurgenNL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Der Urheberrechtsinhaber wünscht Löschung der Datei JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 21:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This is good photo. It is even used. Free licenses are irrevocable. Taivo (talk) 11:34, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Taivo. JurgenNL (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
There is no indication on the linked web site that the image is released in the public domain. discospinster (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom Natuur12 (talk) 15:05, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Low quality penis image JurgenNL (talk) 15:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
![15:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2014/01/20#c-JurgenNL-2014-01-20T15:34:00.000Z-File:"circumcision_jpg".JPG){kind=link}
- we have enough dicks of much better quality, so delete this one. - Andy king50 (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
![19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)](https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Archive/2014/01/20#c-INeverCry-2014-01-27T19:00:00.000Z-File:"circumcision_jpg".JPG){kind=link}
Image of en:Carrasco International Airport (Montevideo, Uruguay). Licensed with {{PD-USGov}} as it is sourced with uruguay.usembassy.gov ("posted: March 4, 2008", only as archive available) and described with "Montevideo's new "Aeropuerto Internacional de Carrasco" as it will look upon completion". But: This is an architectural model of the "Construction of the facility designed by Uruguayan architect Rafael Viñoly " as the aiport was inaugurated in 2009. Image already circulating before 03.2008 via (example) skyscrapercity.com. Unlikely {{PD-USGov}} and most likely work of Rafael Viñoly Architects PC. Permission needed. Gunnex (talk) 09:22, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
useless without a description 91.64.241.40 08:16, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:59, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
COM:FOP#France. 84.61.157.189 09:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Pour le maintien: Cette image montre l'équipe de football de l'OGC Nice et le public niçois lors de l'évènement de l'inauguration. Le stade que l'on ne voit que très partiellement et en arrière-plan, n'est pas le sujet principal et l'image peut donc être conservée comme pour une photo montrant un bâtiment soumis au droit d'auteur dans une photo montrant un panorama. Supprimer cette photo reviendrait à interdire la prise de photos dans le stade, ou la photographie de l'équipe de Nice ou du public, ce qui serait gravement anormal.--Mirasol (talk) 13:58, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: The architecture is incidental, and therefore de minimis. Yann (talk) 14:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
massive infestation with watermark stuff that cannot be removed, we should not have such low quality stuff. Andy king50 (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
COM:TOYS JurgenNL (talk) 16:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- took the first thing I found to test the android app and forgot basic rules, shame on me, I approve the deletion. Symac (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
very poor quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
derivative work, photo of photo. Subject died in 1965. Suspected copyright violation Taivo (talk) 11:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Commons is not facebook. But really "es muy buena y bonita" :) Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:45, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
I do not like to say it, but this is copyrighted design. Taivo (talk) 11:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
This image has a Commons:URAA problem. In the US its still copyrighted until end of 2075 (95 years after publication). - Fma12 (talk) 15:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Delete per delete for all other derivative images in same category. No FoP in US for statues and monuments. See Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Georgia Guidestones Ww2censor (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:56, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The source/license and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. No related uploads by user who his infinite blocked. Gunnex (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Venezuelan work, published/created (or sourced with - as indicated "C. 1940s" or "midle 1950s."), licensed with {{PD-Venezuela}}, not in PD in Venezuela at COM:URAA-date 01.01.1996 and copyrighted in US +95 years since publication. Gunnex (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
The uploader says "own work" but it's pretty clearly a copyrighted logo. Unless she/he owns the copyright I think this has to go. Incidentally, the company itself was the subject of a failed AfC on the English Wikipedia (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Naseej). Mackensen (talk) 12:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:01, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Uclear copyright status and most likely not own work. Uploaded on 11.09.2007 but previsously published via http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=5816111&postcount=15 (2005, by "zid") = http://img392.imageshack.us/img392/1433/policia032qq.jpg (last modified: 2005, but no exif) Gunnex (talk) 14:53, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Image from the 1980s about es:Salvador Garmendia, a notable Venezuelan author, awarded in 1972 with the National Prize for Literature, sourced with a Venezuelan link (which actually is unobtainable), author = unknown but licensed with {{PD-AR-Photo}}, valid for Argentine works. Anyway: If Argentine work, not in PD in Argentina at COM:URAA-date 01.01.1996 and copyrighted in US (+95 years since publication). If Venezuelan work, not in PD (+60 years since publication or author´s death). Gunnex (talk) 15:28, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:00, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Sculpture on temporary exhibition, so freedom of panorama doesn't apply. --ghouston (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment What temporary exhibition was this? Tm (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Apparently "Susan the Straw Fox" was on display from 23 April 2011 to 23 September 2011[1] when the Southbank Centre in London celebrated the 60th anniversary of the Festival of Britain.[2][3] Artists were Mike de Butts and Alex Geldenhuys; the sculpture was officially called "Urban Fox". But see Commons:FOP#Permanent vs temporary: what was the "whole natural lifetime" of that straw sculpture? As it was made of straw, I doubt it would have survived the following autumn/winter anyway. So an argument could be made that the sculpture was, despite the clear announcements of an end date, placed "permanently" as far as FOP is concerned as it was placed there for its whole natural lifetime. What does UK jurisprudence say about that anyway? In Germany, there is a decision of the Supreme Court (Bundesgerichtshof, Urteil vom 24. Januar 2002, Az. I ZR 102/99, Verhüllter Reichstag: paragraph [10]) that states so. Lupo 15:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- No, it survived this exhibition and was installed elsewhere: http://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/latest-news/giant_fox_kicks_off_secret_garden_party_arts_initiative_1_1130462 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghouston (talk • contribs) 22:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Ah, OK. Thank you for finding this information. There at least it seems to have been installed "permanently". Quoting from that link: Artistic curator Tess Acheson said it would remain in Huntingdonshire “for the foreseeable future”, but would need regular maintenance to get it through a wet winter. So, if I understand COM:FOP right, photos from the temporary installation at the Southbank Centre are not OK, but photos of the subsequent permanent installation on Lord de Ramsey’s Abbots Ripton estate would be fine, provided they are taken from a public place. Lupo 07:11, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- No, it survived this exhibition and was installed elsewhere: http://www.huntspost.co.uk/news/latest-news/giant_fox_kicks_off_secret_garden_party_arts_initiative_1_1130462 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghouston (talk • contribs) 22:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: seems to be fine Ymblanter (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC) Deleted, has been taken to AN, there was consensus for deletion.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Not sure where this is, but apparently it's the US so no Freedom of Panorama for sculptures. Looks to me like a presumably copyrighted sculpture figures pretty majorly here, so I think we probably have to delete this as a copyvio. Jmabel ! talk 02:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- This looks like one of Dan Webb's "Short Cut" sculptures near Pike Place Market in Seattle, WA.[4][5][6] Interesting idea, and interesting photo, but yes, no FOP for sculptures in the U.S. Lupo 15:51, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment It is in the public domain if erected prior to 1977, and there is no copyright mention on the statue itself. See Commons:Hirtle chart for details. Yann (talk) 14:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
подложная лицензия kosun (talk) 09:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC) Фото уже не нужно в статье, смело можно удалять. Dariia Rusanova (talk) 18:57, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader agreed with the deletion Ymblanter (talk) 21:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of AlexFBP
[edit]User AlexFBP has uploaded these images:
They are both unused images with unclear purpose. They are out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of Alexdeybi
[edit]User Alexdeybi has uploaded these images:
- File:Firma Afrovall e-mails JPEG.jpg (logo of non-notable site)
- File:MiniAlexdeybi.jpg (so small photos are worthless. Also note, that the uploader is not photographer, but person depicted in photo.)
They are both unused and out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:37, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of Mister-Kyle
[edit]User Mister-Kyle has not done anything in Wikipedia except self-promotional userpage in en.wiki and uploading six photos (four of them now deleted), which are used nowhere except the userpage:
The user's whole activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:45, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Ivan Marchenko
[edit]Most files, uploaded by Ivan Marchenko, are deleted as copyright violations or promotion materials. These are left:
They are all out of project scope as logos and signature of non-notable musicians. Taivo (talk) 12:59, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:30, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Jamshade Ali Khan
[edit]- File:Family Tree.pdf (unused)
- File:Mr. & Mrs. Khan.JPG
- File:Royal Danish Army Denmark.jpg (probably copyright violation, not own work as claimed)
Jamshade Ali Khan (talk · contribs) has not done anything in Wikipedia except userpage in en.wiki and uploading seven files (four of them now deleted), which are used nowhere except the userpage. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:29, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Nacasma
[edit]Nacasma (talk · contribs) uploaded a lot of logos and claimed them all own work. Logos are over threshold of originality:
- File:Centrogeo1.jpg
- File:Logo UPCHiapas.jpg
- File:Sinagoga Brit Brajá.jpg
- File:Unicah.jpg
- File:UniversidaddeEstudiosSuperioresdeTuxtla.jpg
- File:UniversidaddeEstudiosSuperioresdeTuxtla2.jpg
The user has been blocked for uploading copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 12:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:PRP Alan (talk) 01:41, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Nasir Malik
[edit]
Nasir Malik (talk · contribs) has not done anything in Wikipedia except promotional userpage in en.wiki and uploading three images, which are used nowhere except userpage. Two of them are book covers and copyrighted by cover artists. They need OTRS-permission. All his activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:33, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Ramjchandram
[edit]Here are all files, uploaded by user Ramjchandran:
- File:Achante baalyam cover page.jpg
- File:Cammunist manifesto malayalam cover page.jpg
- File:Leo Tolstoy krithikal.jpg
- File:Lokaththe pidichukulukkiya paththu divasangal.jpg
- File:Manushya vamsayathinte ulpathi.jpg
- File:Marx Engels Theranjedutha krithikal.jpg
- File:Manushyan maha sakthanaaya katha.jpg
- File:Sauravatham.png
- File:Veluththa rassian1.jpg
First group. Book covers, copyrighted by cover artists.
- File:Adalodakam.jpg
- File:Air bladder of fish.jpg
- File:Apple green.jpg
- File:Bitter gourd-seed.jpg
- File:Flower arrangements4-Kerala -Onam festival.jpg
- File:Rain harvest.jpg
- File:River Pampa2 Kerala,India.jpg
- File:Sambr cheera.jpg
- File:Shoe flower- hibiscus rosacinensis -stigma wth spores-botany.jpg
- File:Sublimation6.jpg
Second group. Small photos with no metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 13:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom Alan (talk) 01:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Russell Meehan
[edit]User Russell Meehan has not done anything in Wikipedia except userpage in en.wiki and uploading three photos, which are used nowhere except on the userpage:
- File:Russell Meehan.jpg
- File:Russell with his winning painting 'Pathways'..jpg
- File:'Trawalla' (Wild Waters).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
I think, that his whole activity in Wikipedia is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 12:24, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Zorro389
[edit]Here are last files, uploaded by Zorro389 (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:
Two of them are small photos with no metadata and I suspect copyright violation. One is logo, in my opinion over threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:32, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gabriel Gagliardini (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images which would appear to be out of scope.
- File:KIMUGAN DEFENSA PERSONAL.jpg
- File:ESCUELA DE KIMUGAN.gif
- File:KIMUGAN ARTE MARCIAL.gif
- File:KIMUGAN.jpg
russavia (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Motopark (talk) 18:02, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted by JurgenNL Natuur12 (talk) 15:27, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal file of user without other useful contribution except self-promotion (en:User:JINENDRA SHAH/sandbox).
Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:03, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jordigelabert (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Example: File:SDI.jpg (uploaded 12.2011) = grabbed from (example) http://www.neutrik.de/de-de/bnc/reartwist-kabelstecker/nbnc75btu11 (© Neutrik® Vertriebs GmbH - Alle Rechte vorbehalten) = http://www.neutrik.de/website/uploads/images/04/660x/nbnc75b-2.jpg (last modified: 10.2011). Related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:UDI123.jpg.
- File:Videoinout.jpg
- File:Conectorbnc.jpg
- File:UDI2.jpg
- File:Sdi5.jpg
- File:Sdi3.jpg
- File:Sdi4.jpg
- File:Sdi2.jpg
- File:SDI.jpg
- File:UDI.jpg
- File:Hdmi.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 23:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete I add for deletion File:Taulaserieparalel.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 12:53, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Justinstart1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook. Personal files of user without other useful contribution.
Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook.
Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Majed2006p (talk · contribs)
[edit]advert, out of project scope
- File:مكتب باشافعي 5.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي 4.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي 3.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي للسفريات و السياحة و تشغيل الايدي العاملة.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي 2.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي.jpg
- File:مكتب باشافعي.gif
- File:مكتب باشافعي للسفريات والسياحة و تشغيل الايدي العاملة.jpg
- File:-تأسست مجموعة مكاتب باشافعي للسفريات والسياحة والحج والعمرة وتشغيل الأيدي العاملة في عام 2000م على يد الشيخ هادي احم 2014-01-19 03-24.jpg
- File:تأسست مجموعة مكاتب باشافعي للسفريات والسياحة والحج والعمرة وتشغيل الأيدي العاملة في عام 2000م على يد الشيخ هادي احم 2014-01-19 03-23.jpg
Didym (talk) 18:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mrsmartinfo (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of book covers. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Book Album for children IX.jpg
- File:Book Pieses VI.jpg
- File:Book concert N3 for two Kanun.jpg
- File:Book Pieses for kanun rapsodia n2.jpg
- File:Book Songs for voice and piano.jpg
- File:Book School Album.jpg
- File:Book Etud an Pies for Kanun.jpg
- File:Book Pies Collections for Kanun.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete I add for deletion File:Book Concerts and Rapsodias for Kanun.jpg due to same reason. Taivo (talk) 11:48, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio JurgenNL (talk) 08:37, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:Betibarcelona
[edit]Here are both photos, uploaded by user Betibarcelona and not yet presented for deletion:
There is no freedom of panorama for 2D artworks in Argentina. Taivo (talk) 15:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by User:Saeedmadarshahi
[edit]User Saeedmadarshahi uploaded these files:
- File:250F 02.jpg
- File:Cable-spider.jpg
- File:GonbadMina-AlumGlass-645x483.jpg
- File:GonbadMina-AlumGlass-92-645x380.jpg
- File:Narges-AlumGlass-645x483.jpg
- File:Sazefelezi-spider.jpg
- File:SpiderX.JPG
- File:Webplantarium.jpg
They have all different cameras in metadata and some have no metadata at all. Some have prominent watermark in lower right corner. They are all copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 12:14, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Эрик Эдуардович (talk · contribs)
[edit]All images seem to be taken from flyaurora.ru or other associated sites. I will ask people at Aurora in UUS to supply logos, etc, but in the meantime these images should go.
- File:Логотип Дальневосточного авиаперевозчика "Аврора" (новый).jpg
- File:Airbus 319-100 Авиакомпании "Аврора" (бортовой номер VP-BWK).JPG
- File:Единая Дальневосточная авиакомпания "Аврора".jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
russavia (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
TopFashionPhotographer
[edit]- File:Wedding Photographer Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Modeling Portfolios by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Nude Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Portrait Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Modeling Portfolio.jpg
- File:Fashion Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Fashion Editorial photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Fine Art Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Fashion Photographer Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Editorial Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Commercial Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Black and White nudes.jpg
- File:Editorial Photographer Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Beauty Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Advertising Photography by Shaun Alexander.jpg
- File:Advertising Photographer Shaun Alexander.jpg
"All Copyrights reserved by Shaun Alexander photography for any usage please contact http://www.shaunalexander.net" should be on its own enoug for deletion because of misleading licensing. CC license does not provide for this.
Also uploads are very clearly a try to abuse commons for promotion purposes of uploader. All images are intentionally uploaded in a such low resolution that prevents any reuse (he seems not primarily interested in cost free use by anyone, including commercial reuse as it is policy at commons). Instead of posting good pictures this professional limits himself to low res pictures with promotional user name, promotional picture titles and file description. We should discourage doing so by deletion. --Andy king50 (talk) 18:08, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:02, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Sculpture on temporary exhibition, so freedom of panorama doesn't apply. --ghouston (talk) 02:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Comment What temporary exhibition was this? Tm (talk) 03:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: GIant straw sculpture of an urban fox at the South Bank Centre London as part of an exhibition to celebrate the 60th anniversary of the 1951 Festival of Britain. Designed and built by Pirate Technics . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:45, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
подложная лицензия kosun (talk) 09:30, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence that this license is correct. Yann (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
подложная лицензия kosun (talk) 09:40, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: No evidence that this license is correct. Yann (talk) 06:10, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Not big photo, no metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Invalid copyright tag: the painting is not below the threshold of originality. It is presumably not trademarked either. The painting might be old, though. Stefan4 (talk) 13:19, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Also nominated: File:Eurocopter EC-665 Tiger ARH A38-001.jpg
Turned out to be Flickrwashing (thanks to Nick-D for notifying me). These images were originally published by the Autralian MOD without a free licence [7]. De728631 (talk) 16:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete we also have a heap of other images which were posted to Flickr by this person: [8]. All should be deleted, and this should be added to the blacklisted Flickr accounts given that his standard practice is to upload copyright-protected images he doesn't own under CC tags. Nick-D (talk) 10:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- File:Helicopter over flooded Central Mozambique.jpg was in fact a work released by the US Air Force. I have updated the attribution and changed the licence to PD. De728631 (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- File:Aircraft Fighter Jet F-111 AFTI NASA 0.jpg is from NASA, updated to PD. De728631 (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- File:3rd Infantry Division M2A2.jpg was originally from the US Army and has apparently been rescaled by mashleymorgan. The original is here but there is a persistent error in the high-res download function. That said, I think a simple rescaling does not create a new copyright so we should re-attribute the image and remove the Creative Commons licence. If something is in the public domain you can't republish the original work under a different licence. De728631 (talk) 17:49, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- The same goes for File:USS Philippine Sea (CG 58).jpg (US Navy). De728631 (talk) 17:52, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- File:Matt Morgan 040724-F-5586B-094.jpg has proper exif data pointing at US Air Force photographer James M. Bowman and also the VIRIN seems to be ok (ID No. 5586B for Bowman [9]), but I can't find the image at either Defense Imagery or the USAF website. De728631 (talk) 20:46, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Permission appears to be for Wikipedia use only. January (talk) 17:07, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment But the file jhas also CC license. Taivo (talk) 12:57, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's from a published magazine, we would normally need OTRS permission for a CC licence. January (talk) 16:17, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:48, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Contrary to the description, this is not a flag but the logo of Région Île-de-France. See the Regional Council website here. Or here where it is described as well as past logos of the Regional Council. As any logo, this one is subject to copyright. Superbenjamin (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- May be {{PD-textlogo}}, depends on how original one may find the star. Jcb (talk) 22:23, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- As you can see here, the star is taken from the previous logo (which is obviously a logo). --Superbenjamin (talk) 22:42, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep PD-textlogo. Fry1989 eh? 03:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 06:25, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by MoSchle as Speedy and the most recent rationale was: Da der Maler Julius Wohlers 1953 gestorben ist, darf das Bild wohl so nicht stehenbleiben. JuTa 22:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- "Speedy" vielleicht nicht, aber "Copyvio". User:MoSchle hat das selbst kurz vorher hochgeladene Bild zur Löschung markiert, nachdem ich hier darauf hingewiesen hatte, dass das Gemälde sehr wahrscheinlich nicht gemeinfrei ist. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 07:17, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 11:33, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Xavholic as Speedy and the most recent rationale was: It was for personal use and I regret.
- Well CC-licenses are not recoverable. JuTa 23:06, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Xavholic as Speedy and the most recent rationale was: It was for personal use and I regret.
- Well, CC-license are not withdrawable. JuTa 23:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- but is there any useful use for this ad hoc comilation? No --> delete - Andy king50 (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:49, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- This file was initially tagged by Hazmat2 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Majority of image is composed of a plate with text and images created by a private organization: http://www.liefering.at/kulturwanderweg-3/. The author's license refers to the photograph. I think this actually is probably covered by both German and Austrian FOP, unless there's reason to believe this isn't permanently exposed. darkweasel94 23:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's Austria. The images on the plate may fall under Austrian FOP, but the text shouldn't as it's not considered "bildende Künste". Hazmat2 (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Text is FOP in Germany but not Austria. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
No support for license; image does not appear at source. Mere creation in 1916 is not equivalent to publication, the latter being the requirement of the PD-US license. Эlcobbola talk 23:46, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- One might also point out that since this is not a photograph, all we really know is that it was created in 1916 or later, which doesn't really help. —LX (talk, contribs) 06:59, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-UK-unknown. Yann (talk) 06:43, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Mangoman88 as Speedy and the most recent rationale was: I uploaded this photo, but I may not be the author and therefore can't give a license for its use, needs to be deleted.--Mangoman88 (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Uploaded 2008, thats worth a regular deletion request. JuTa 22:38, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept|the file is properly licensed and in public domain. Taivo (talk) 10:49, 29 January 2014 (UTC)}}
I am reopening the deletion request. The rational given 29 January 2014 for keeping this file is that it is "properly licensed and in public domain." I, the original uploader, mistakenly uploaded this as my own work, and released it into the public domain. But I am not the original author of the photograph, and thus can not legally give a license for its use. The public domain license is not valid, thus this file needs to be deleted.--Mangoman88 (talk) 19:41, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - closing admin should look at the history of the image description page - Jcb (talk) 01:25, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - Yes, on old versions of the image description page you'll be able to see when I uploaded the image I did so with a public domain license. But since 2008 I have learned I am not the author of the photograph, so I can't give that license for its use (so I deleted the license from the description page). Basically someone had given me a copy of this image and I later mistakenly thought it was my own work and I uploaded it. But it is not my original work, thus the public domain license is not valid, and no other license has been given for its use by the author.--Mangoman88 (talk) 03:46, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
kept The license is irrevocable and your claim that this is now not your own work is not credible. Don't do this again or you will be blocked. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:28, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
This page suggests that the image appeared on another website already back in 2007, but it wasn't uploaded here until 2008. Stefan4 (talk) 23:56, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
deleted it should have been deleted on the first nomination as COM:PRP. But now it is sure that the uploader is not the copyright holder. russavia (talk) 09:07, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
COM:URAA problem. Created in 1948 (during the Siege of Jerusalem) so it became PD in Israel in 1999, after the URAA date of 1996. Copyrighted until 95 years after publication, which appears to be at least 1952. This can be undeleted in 2048. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 17:41, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- In practice, that means that no image from Israel can be in the public domain given to be in the PD in the USA, it means it should have been taken 51 years before 1996, ie in 1945, before the creation of Israel...
- The same reasonning apply for images from the British Mandate, (Trans)jordan and many other countries of the Middle East at the time.
- Note that I deeply regret this "law" given I created the category in question and filled it with hundreds of pictures...
- Ceedjee (talk) 20:58, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- User:Pluto2012, why are you signing as someone else? This is not allowed at all. Pluto2012 requested this nomination at User_talk:Ramaksoud2000#RfD by the way. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 21:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I do so to refer to the fact I created that category. By the way: [10]. Pluto2012 (talk) 22:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oh OK. I understand. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 23:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- It seems illogical, since no one owns the copyright and no one can sue for the copyright infringement. However, I am not a lawyer and cannot oppose this illogical rule. Ykantor (talk) 21:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- The creator owns the copyright and can sue by the way. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- It seems crazy. That means, that the creator who already lost the worldwide ownership, is getting back the worldwide ownership, except of the Israeli rights. Ykantor (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't like the law myself either. Nobody does. A lawsuit over the law was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court but the law was held by them to be constitutional. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- There is no need to delete the picture. It is legal since it is older than 62 years. That is the law in Israel! Ovedc (talk) 06:16, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't like the law myself either. Nobody does. A lawsuit over the law was taken to the U.S. Supreme Court but the law was held by them to be constitutional. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- It seems crazy. That means, that the creator who already lost the worldwide ownership, is getting back the worldwide ownership, except of the Israeli rights. Ykantor (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- The creator owns the copyright and can sue by the way. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- It seems illogical, since no one owns the copyright and no one can sue for the copyright infringement. However, I am not a lawyer and cannot oppose this illogical rule. Ykantor (talk) 21:16, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Oh OK. I understand. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 23:25, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- I do so to refer to the fact I created that category. By the way: [10]. Pluto2012 (talk) 22:55, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Please look at Letter_to_the_BoT_regarding_URAA. Ovedc (talk) 09:11, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- User:Pluto2012, why are you signing as someone else? This is not allowed at all. Pluto2012 requested this nomination at User_talk:Ramaksoud2000#RfD by the way. Ramaksoud2000 (talk) 21:20, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:49, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
- Restored per COM:DIU after request on COM:UR. --Alan (talk) 12:45, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
This map has been a source of incorrect information for several years now. Pleas to correct this map have not resulted in any adequate action. The map has been deleted from the larger WIKIs such as the English one, but continuous to linger on smaller ones due to anonymous IPs reinserting this map . I am fine if this stays provided data sources are added. Despite several attempts on the talk page , no improvements have been made. Grsd (talk) 11:13, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Look file page, there is well written, what is wrong with it. Taivo (talk) 12:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: per request Ymblanter (talk) 19:36, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Xavholic as Speedyand the most recent rationale was: It was for personal use and I regret.
- Well, CC-licenses are not withdrawable. JuTa 23:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- If it was intended to be a user coat of arms and userpage image, and has no real usefulness outside of that context, then there's no particular reason why it couldn't be deleted on uploader's request... AnonMoos (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- + delete - Andy king50 (talk) 20:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- If it was intended to be a user coat of arms and userpage image, and has no real usefulness outside of that context, then there's no particular reason why it couldn't be deleted on uploader's request... AnonMoos (talk) 00:01, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:53, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Asadkhan101 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Outside of COM:SCOPE: commons is not facebook (en:User:Asadkhan101, [11]). I do not think that young man's autograph is the most valuable in his village.
- File:AsadKhan101`s Signature.png
- File:AsadKhan101`s Website Backgroung image.JPG
- File:Asad Khan Without Mustache.jpg
- File:Asad Khan on His 17th Birthday.JPG
- File:101 Street Saleh Khana Baand.jpg
Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment Two first and the last image are used in userpage in en.wiki. Everybody is allowed to have some personal images in userpage. Asadkhan is mostly interested about his userpage, but not only, he has made some useful edits in en.wiki also. Taivo (talk) 14:07, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, this user uploaded two useful photos of pakistani village, so I could not requests to remove two of his personal photo. But I confident that the loading of own not artistic graffiti is out of scope. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:55, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: 3, used; Deleted: 2, not used. Yann (talk) 06:28, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Unsupported license; no evidence for date of publication, the criterion for the PD-US license. That this was first published in the US is extremely doubtful; more likely is that copyright status would be based on pma +70. Who is the author? When did s/he die? (For what it's worth, uploader has contributed nothing but copyvios and even this image has been cropped to remove a watermark).
Эlcobbola talk 23:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-UK-unknown. Yann (talk) 06:44, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
This image may have to be deleted per this village pump statement on this image's copyright Leoboudv (talk) 19:01, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: This is a strange case. The image appears to be the flickr account owner's photo and he has several thousand images on his account but for this specific image, he makes a clear reference to the 'Getty Images license'. There is some ambiguity here. Best Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 08:41, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete The photo is "Copyright 2013 NBAE", according to both our file description page and the source Flickr page, so we would need OTRS permission from NBAE to keep it. A photographer who has assigned their copyright in a photo to someone else can no longer license that photo as CC-BY. Only the copyright holder can do that.
- BTW, this photographer's works have been discussed at length before, e.g. Commons:Village_pump/Copyright/Archive/2013/07#What_if_a_Getty_Images_photographer_gives_his_own_photos_free_license_on_Flickr? and Commons:Deletion requests/NBA photos by Danny Bollinger. --Avenue (talk) 12:40, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Rightfulness of release under cc-by is doubtful. Lymantria (talk) 15:29, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - This author has released his work under two different licenses: The GettyImages license and the CC license. It's not important whether the author would still agree with the CC license, it's not revocable. At Commons we do accept files with multiple licenses, as long as at least one of them is an allowed license. Jcb (talk) 17:31, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - Pretty obvious, from the EXIF data: NOTE TO USER: User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement. Mandatory Copyright Notice: Copyright 2013 NBAE (Photo by Danny Bollinger/NBAE via Getty Images). Jcb, since Danny Bollinger took the photo as an employee of/contractor to to Getty Images and NBAE, he never had the right to license the image himself. Ytoyoda (talk) 18:39, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete: The Flickr user's own page shows copyright by someone other than the Flickr user, and then contains contradictory license messages with no stated provision for a user to make their own choice. No COM:OTRS from the photographer for 6 months after being e-mailed. Plenty of evidence to cause deletion, especially considering the Commons:Precautionary principle:
- The source itself on Flickr says that someone other than Danny Bollinger is the copyright holder. Only the copyright holder can be the source of licenses. Canoe1967 (talk · contribs) speculated, in previous discussions (Commons:Deletion requests/File:Rodrigue Beaubois layup over Kevin Seraphin.jpg, Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2013/07#What if a Getty Images photographer gives his own photos free license on Flickr?) that Danny Bollinger may be a freelancer who then licenses his images to NBA Entertainment rather than giving up copyright. But on the source page itself, the Flickr user has placed "Mandatory Copyright Notice: Copyright 2013 NBAE" not "Copyright 2013 Danny Bollinger". When a user explicitly places a copyright message naming someone other than himself, it's difficult to argue that the same user actually thinks he retained copyright.
- The source itself references two contradictory licenses, and goes out of the way to mention the non-free one without mentioning whether the two licenses are an error or the intent is to allow the user to choose. The source page contains the explicit phrase "User expressly acknowledges and agrees that, by downloading and or using this photograph, User is consenting to the terms and conditions of the Getty Images License Agreement." The alleged CC-BY-2.0 license is a checkmark item traditionally labeled just "Some rights reserved" on Flickr, and, if I remember, can be set as a default. The Getty Images license addresses NBA Entertainment images specifically: see the particularly non-free §10.5 of the Getty Images Editorial, Rights-Managed and Rights-Ready Image and Video License Agreement (pointed out by Psychonaut (talk · contribs) at the same Village Pump discussion above). And, when combined with #1 above (Flickr user says NBAE is the copyright holder): What are the chances that NBA Entertainment, which has the longest section of the Getty Images license just for itself, intends to dual license as CC-BY-2.0 and let the user choose?
- No COM:OTRS from the photographer/alleged Flickr user after being contacted directly. 6 months ago, at the end of the Village Pump discussion (Commons:Village pump/Copyright/Archive/2013/07#Inconsistent DR results?), Canoe1967 claims to have e-mailed Danny Bollinger. There is no evidence that Bollinger ever responded.
- All Danny Bollinger photos with similar NBAE conflicts were eventually deleted; some that were kept for a bit were later deleted in Commons:Deletion requests/NBA photos by Danny Bollinger. --Closeapple (talk) 19:31, 21 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: I suppose these other images are OK for Commons though right? The NBA is not mentioned anyhere so presumably it is Danny Bollinger's own personal image...is that correct?
--Leoboudv (talk) 03:12, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, I would assume that his other photos are OK, unless we discover some special trouble with them. He has a website at http://www.dannybollinger.com/ with lots of subjects; it appears that he has plenty of work that is not assigned to NBA Entertainment. --Closeapple (talk) 07:50, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Keep :I contribute to Getty Images. The photographer always retains copyright unless the image goes through a buyout. If the images were bought out they would likely have been removed from Flickr. Getty only accepts images on an exclusive basis and would not tolerate images they represent being made available elsewhere with CC-BY. The text in the info box is likely a copy paste and is not valid when made in conjunction with a CC license. All CC licenses include a commercially standard clause making clear that there are “no other understandings, agreements or representations” not specified within the licenses themselves relating to use of the work. It certainly isn't enforceable since the EULA is not made available. Later additions to his photostream of games do not have this caveat yet are similarly licensed as CC-BY. In summary you can't dual license a work like this. Only the CC license is a valid license in this case. Saffron Blaze (talk) 03:48, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input. Though I'm wondering if NBAE, who is the copyright owner and uses Getty as a distributor, has a different policy from Getty. And I'm curious about the text in the info box being copy-and-paste (which I'm convinced it's not - when you upload a Getty image to Flickr, the EXIF text automatically shows up as the image descriptor), since the same text appears on the gettyiamges.com. Plus, there are a LOT of obvious Getty Images photos on Flickr, with the original descriptions and EXIF data intact, so I don't know that the photos' presence actually justify their licensing status. Ytoyoda (talk) 05:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- What Getty demands of their photographers is an issue with the photographers. If the photographer releases an image under CC-BY that is a legal thing for him/her to do, even if it violates the photographer's contract with Getty. It's a contract issue not a copyright issue. I have many images that were released as CC-BY-SA on Commons before they were selected by Getty. Getty only asks that I not continue to license that image on my own, which I comply with. The NBA issue is a separate one in that there is usually a restriction placed on the tickets for a game that says something like: "The Holder further acknowledges and agrees that he/she will not record, transmit or aid in transmitting any description, account, picture or reproduction of the game or any portion thereof." Even professional photographers must agree to terms with the NBA to gain access. However, this too is an issue between the photographer and the NBA. Again, a contractual issue not a copyright issue. Neither the NBA nor Getty owns the copyright for these images. The photographer does and he is saying he is making them available as CC-BY. Saffron Blaze (talk) 22:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Thanks for your input. Though I'm wondering if NBAE, who is the copyright owner and uses Getty as a distributor, has a different policy from Getty. And I'm curious about the text in the info box being copy-and-paste (which I'm convinced it's not - when you upload a Getty image to Flickr, the EXIF text automatically shows up as the image descriptor), since the same text appears on the gettyiamges.com. Plus, there are a LOT of obvious Getty Images photos on Flickr, with the original descriptions and EXIF data intact, so I don't know that the photos' presence actually justify their licensing status. Ytoyoda (talk) 05:43, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- OK, I have to ask: How do you explain Danny Bollinger himself putting "Copyright 20xx NBAE" on his own uploads? Are you saying that Bollinger really owns the copyright even if he himself says otherwise? (We're talking about basic copyright here, which can be reassigned or sold, not the moral rights that are inalienable in some countries.) And you understand the difference between (1) a Flickr image that was relicensed to Getty through Flickr's process, and (2) a work that was possibly already licensed through Getty by some separate agreement with different terms, and just then happens to also be uploaded to Flickr, right? --Closeapple (talk) 23:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- The fact is he doesn't do that on all his "NBA" uploads. Regardless, I take it you are assuming he was a work for hire and the copyright is indeed owned by NBAE. Other than that notice on the image page, which is more an attribution requirement imposed by Getty, what evidence do you have for that? What is in evidence is the photographer has licensed the image on Flickr as CC-BY. It is also likely that he has a contract with Getty where they license the images on his behalf and some kind of royalty is paid to NBAE as part of another agreement. I get that both Getty and the NBA might be pissed he is releasing images that are under contract to them but I am not convinced that is our problem. Unless of course he was a work for hire where it was stipulated any images he took of NBA games had copyright transferred to NBAE. I have written to the photographer on Flickr to see what his actual intent was with these images. I wouldn't hold my breath as the last time this came up he did not respond (as far as I know). If we get no answer we have three options: AGF and accept the CC-BY is valid. Assume the photographer is dual licensing his works outside of a contractual obligation not to do this. Assume idiocy or malfeasance and the photographer granted a license on an image he does not own. It is only in the third case we need to delete the image. Saffron Blaze (talk) 00:23, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- The third case (granting a license on an image he doesn't own) seems quite likely to me, at least for his images that have a statement saying "Copyright NBAE", although I'd imagine it's due more to ignorance or carelessness than "idiocy or malfeasance". The evidence we have certainly raises significant doubt about the validity of the CC license, so according to COM:PRP we should delete this photo. --Avenue (talk) 12:30, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: Keep the other images but delete this single image above which makes reference to the NBAE since we don't know who owns the copyright. --Leoboudv (talk) 23:30, 22 January 2014 (UTC)
- Delete See http://www.flickr.com/help/gettyimages/#425795 Getty accepts images previously have a CC license but " if you proceed with your submission, switching your license to All Rights Reserved (on Flickr) will happen automatically. Any image selected to be part of the Flickr Collection on Getty Images that had been in Creative Commons will automatically be designated for Royalty-Free licensing." Here the image is not relicensed in Flickr; not it part of a royalty free collection. From the EXIF, we can assume it was first uploaded to Getty and then later to Flickr. So per his contract with Getty he probably lost his rights (only because Getty's terms with NBAE); so he is no more eligible to license this work. If this is not a work involved in such "10. Collection Specific Terms and Conditions", he can post it in Flickr but with a NC license. Jee 03:00, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- Jee I went to Getty and previewed their watermarked image then looked at the metadata. It does look like the image was uploaded to Getty first. More so for the fact the image description on Flickr is a copy paste from the image description at Getty. Nevertheless, I would like confirmation that the photographer has given away his copyright before we disrespect the license on Flickr. I have seen Getty pull some rather nasty tricks on photographers. Saffron Blaze (talk) 04:43, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
- It will be nice if the photographer respond to us. I too contacted him yesterday; didn't get any reply so far. As the author himself mentioned "Copyright: 2013 NBAE" in the EXIF, we can consider the license is invalid as only copyright holder can grant a license per CC terms.
- Another issue is that the uploader is a US citizen with disclosed ID. So Getty can sue him for violating the Getty terms? Jee 05:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Per previous discussion and per above. There is an reasonable doubt and the email to the photographer has been send six days ago and there is no response yet. Their are some major issue's with this file. And especially Jee's statement above. Since there is no evidence that this file is free I decided to deleted this. Natuur12 (talk) 12:59, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope, too crude. FunkMonk (talk) 00:31, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Keep used --Simonxag (talk) 00:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- On the author's userpage, is that enough? FunkMonk (talk) 00:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- Users are allowed to upload a small number of personal images. --Simonxag (talk) 02:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Kept per discussion -- Infrogmation (talk) 13:37, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Too crude for use, out of scope. FunkMonk (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept: The file is still in use. No reason to delete this. Natuur12 (talk) 12:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
Not really scalable svg, just wrapper around raster image. DMacks (talk) 09:43, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
- Also I think it's misnamed...en:Aldol condensation says Knoevenagel is specifically the aldol-condensation using an amine base rather than Lewis-acidic or other enol(ate)-forming conditions. "Nitroaldol"? DMacks (talk) 09:54, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
Kept, the file can be in wrong format and wrongly named, but it is used in en.wiki. If a better image appears and the present image is not used anymore, then it can be nominated for deletion again. Taivo (talk) 11:23, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
No longer used (replaced by file:Furfural nitroaldol condensation.png that solves all problems noted in original nom. And also the alkene geometry is incorrect (DOI:10.1021/jo00033a045 says should be E) DMacks (talk) 12:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 21:43, 30 January 2014 (UTC)