Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/02/12

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive February 12th, 2014
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Obviously inaccurate license: Commercial logo, non-free. Huon (talk) 00:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Speedy deletion based on NFCC Mitch32(Never support those who think in the box) 00:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Group depicted has requested this be removed from Wiki page since a new one has been put in place. Fappadappadoo (talk) 05:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Misunderstandig of how wiki works. No valid reason given. Btw.: User replaces authentic concert photos by a promo image of dubious copyright status. -- Smial (talk) 08:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep no reason for deletion mentioned - good photo, much better than the commercial one -- Achim Raschka (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: speedy kept, no reason to delete (expecially if the replacement is of dubious source/license Denniss (talk) 09:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyvio. http://siemprejuntoacris.blogspot.ru/2013/07/conoce-julian-serrano.html or http://www.mundotkm.com/hot-news-91621-aliados-conoce-a-julian-serrano Juggler2005 (talk) 06:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 07:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: obvious copyright violation Didym (talk) 14:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image is NOT free; it's licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0 - Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic; NOT cc-by-sa-2.0 as the description of the file says. Unless we have an OTRS that explicitly shows this image was dual-licensed under share-alike, it MUST be deleted. (Image source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/idfonline/6832143604/)

The following images are incorrectly tagged and should be deleted:

It should be noted that the uploader IS THE SAME "the administrator or reviewer" that marked the image as reviewed in the {{flickrreview}} template. He should therefore be FAR more vigilant with his licensing inspections. Retraining might be in order.

- 65.78.114.251 11:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For the tenth or fifteenth time: Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Images taken by Israel Defense Force. This should be stopped some how, I am poked every few weeks with such requests. matanya talk 11:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The link you posted further reinforces my claim; It's from 2011. Your upload is from 2012, if they did change their license (I am aware it's irrevocable), it took place well over a year prior to you uploading them. Do you have proof they were licensed as cc-by-sa-2.0 before that? You can't simply assume that ALL the images were previously cc-by-sa-2.0. An OTRS is in order. --65.78.114.251 11:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On a different note, how come there is no template attached to all these images that states the change if it's indeed the fifteenth time a deletion request was brought up? --65.78.114.251 11:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It also has an OTRS ticket as i note now: see at Template:IDF. matanya talk 11:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedykept: per Commons:Deletion requests/Category:Images taken by Israel Defense Force -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source is NOT a free-licensed site or a GNT compatible Yanguas (talk) 15:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyright violation Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

sandbox for deleted template The Haz talk 19:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: unused template Jarekt (talk) 20:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

likely to be self-promotion, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Copyvio - see here Эlcobbola talk 20:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

likely to be self-promotion, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Copyvio - see here Эlcobbola talk 20:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

likely to be self-promotion, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Copyvio - see here Эlcobbola talk 20:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

See COM:Deletion requests/File:Jake_at_his_house_in_Mona_Vale_2014-01-30_17-22.jpg. FDMS 21:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WITHDRAWN by requester. See edit history of this page. Sven Manguard Wha? 21:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Withdrawn by nominator Sven Manguard Wha? 21:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image quite identical to File:Siene River 75 2012-07-01.jpg and File:Siene River 76 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 11:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image quite identical to File:Siene River 75 2012-07-01.jpg and File:Siene River 74 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 11:12, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

obviously not self-made. Might be public domain, but can't be certain without better sourcing. Fut.Perf. 11:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be a photograph of a presumably copyrighted map. Is there any reason to think this map is in the public domain? Jmabel ! talk 02:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: As part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be a photograph of a presumably copyrighted map. Is there any reason to think this map is in the public domain? Jmabel ! talk 02:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: As part of cleanup\ russavia (talk) 03:40, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be a photograph of a presumably copyrighted map. Is there any reason to think this map is in the public domain? Jmabel ! talk 02:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: As part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photograph of a copyrighted poster, freedom of panorama should not apply Ytoyoda (talk) 14:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: As part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:43, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 03:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:13, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo, this is not Facebook. Out of scope. P 1 9 9   21:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as part of cleanup russavia (talk) 04:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a selfie, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 16:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:24, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:25, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:07, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:21, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: See COM:SCOPE Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:22, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This map was clearly coppied from http://www.bonap.org/BONAPmaps2010/Valerianella.html which is copyrighted and no credit is given. Clearly not own work. Nonenmac (talk) 23:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 22:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Adept64 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Screenshots and logos with no permissions from copyright holders.

Sealle (talk) 14:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 19:50, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by AmoghDeshapathi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

unused personal photos, no educational value, out of scope

Mjrmtg (talk) 02:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: 50% of them are copyvios McZusatz (talk) 22:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Chaudhay420 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

uploaded as own work, but are low-res and all the EXIF tags are different; one EXIF says the file was generated by gd-jpeg, which is often used on Web sites

Rybec (talk) 01:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 22:39, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Cheerfulls (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Stock images, not free of rights. example

SamuelFreli (talk) 17:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All should be deleted. There are still two images more, who are stolen from the Web. Marcus Cyron (talk) 17:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cheerfulls (talk · contribs)

[edit]

See Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cheerfulls

SamuelFreli (talk) 19:56, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The soul mate one is from http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-674365-shadow-of-love.php ; I've asked for speedy deletion, as I just did with File:4 Steps to Summon the Love You Deserve.png, File:4 Steps to Summon the Love You Deserve.png, File:Embracing Uncertainty in Life and Love.png and File:How to Spot a Cheater.png, which were all published on other Web sites. Rybec (talk) 11:55, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Love and Fear is based in part on http://depositphotos.com/2595723/stock-photo-Beautiful-woman-in-love.html. Five tips is based on http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-753957-stop-gesture.php?st=0058442. Tabercil (talk) 22:07, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cheerfulls (talk · contribs)

[edit]

other uploads appeared to be copyright violations, because the underlying images are for sale from stock photo services

Rybec (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two of the images are clearly from stock: File:Psychic Dreams.png is based on http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-479476-woman-asleep.php?st=e6dea9e and File:It's All About.png is from http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-3440009-amazing-couple-portraits.php. Tabercil (talk) 22:00, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Cheerfulls (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Again... not considering the warnings

SamuelFreli (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image is based on http://www.istockphoto.com/stock-photo-2564399-human-pretzel.php. Tabercil (talk) 22:04, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay... five images at random checked, all five turned out to be based on stock photos. At this point I'm going to be bold and take a cue from EN - specifically their WP:DUCK policy: "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck...". I'll killing ALL of the images as probable copyright violations, and Mr Cheerfulls just earned himself a 3 day vacation from Commons. Tabercil (talk) 22:15, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, Tabercil (talk) 22:19, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not "own work", may pass COM:TOO. darkweasel94 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not "own work", may pass COM:TOO. darkweasel94 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not "own work", may pass COM:TOO. darkweasel94 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not "own work", may pass COM:TOO. darkweasel94 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not "own work", may pass COM:TOO. darkweasel94 01:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is there any source for a "Lesser arms of Iceland"? If not, this should be deleted. Fry1989 eh? 01:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



I guess it should be called "coat of arms of iceland (shield)". Scoutguy5427


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 02:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused personal photo, no educational value, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 02:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

image too small to be useful to project. Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The licensing (PD-old of life of the author plus 70 years) contradicts the given date and author. There's no source given, only that it is a "scanning" of something. The uploader filled the author field with himself, which is most-likely wrong too considering the previous. Cold Season (talk) 03:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work, no permission from the copyright holder. Dantadd 04:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaced by another updated image 99.231.114.233 04:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaced by an updated image 99.231.114.233 04:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Perhaps this simply needs better indication of who these people are, but otherwise it seems to me to be an out-of-scope personal photo scraped from Flickr. Jmabel ! talk 06:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Perhaps this simply needs better indication of who these people are, but otherwise it seems to me to be an out-of-scope personal photo scraped from Flickr. Jmabel ! talk 06:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unneeded file Leahpetterson (talk) 06:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

It says source "Own work"; however the advertisement is unlikely to be his own work. 65.78.114.251 08:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

uploader is not the author 91.66.152.68 08:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

commercial use is not allowed, see http://www.flickr.com/photos/n3bb3z4r/4344976166/in/set-72157623268954789 91.66.152.68 08:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Stamps from Nicaragua, unfree per Commons:Stamps#Nicaragua. Yellowcard (talk) 09:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurred picture with possible portrait rights problem Judithcomm (talk) 10:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Author Facebook? Possible Copyvio... Wikijunkie (talk) 10:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How can I delete it?


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused user portrait 91.66.152.68 10:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unused user file 91.66.152.68 10:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

commons collects files to illustrate common knowledge - not new theories from users. 91.66.152.68 10:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation; As valuable as this image might be, the image was not created by 'Sharp, Jeremy M.' for the 'U.S. Foreign Aid to Israel' report. It was simply used there with assumed permission from the IDF. The image was created by the Israeli Defense Forces (source: http://www.idfblog.com/2012/03/10/israel-under-fire-gaza/hamas-rocket-ranges-3/ (the image in there is higher resolution as well); http://www.idfblog.com/2012/06/19/in-response-to-rocket-fire-iaf-targets-terrorist-squad-in-the-gaza-strip/).

Additionally, the IDF has a number of very similar works uploaded to flickr whereby the IDF explicitly labled the image license as CC BY-NC 2.0 (Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic) which means it cannot be used on Wikipedia or Wikimedia. (Flickr IDF: http://www.flickr.com/photos/idfonline/6075719889/). There is no reason to believe this image has given any special licensing unless we have an OTRS for this picture, it should be deleted. 65.78.114.251 10:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

veraltet, Schnappschuss -212.66.6.61 11:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free text; the subtitle states that the text was written by Heiner Geza, who was still alive in 1950.[1] Eleassar (t/p) 11:59, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The poem 'Od regulov vremena' was written by János Fliszár who died in 1947; 70 years have not passed yet since the author's death. Eleassar (t/p) 12:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

deze is dubbel Kunstliefdes (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Waar is de andere? -- Deadstar (msg) 16:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Deze foto valt niet onder com:FOP. Binnenshuis. Natuur12 (talk) 14:37, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Written by Joško Maučec in 1932; no evidence that he died more than 70 years ago. Eleassar (t/p) 12:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free text from a modern newspaper. Eleassar (t/p) 12:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Picture of 1956 musical My Fair Lady in Broadway. I doubt it is really own work. Even if own work, is not it derivative work? BrightRaven (talk) 12:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

A poster about a non-notable personality, not used anywhere. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 12:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Logo for a hospital is not self made. Incorrect license, not sure PD-text or similar could apply. -- Deadstar (msg) 12:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurred. No appearent reason to keep it Judithcomm (talk) 13:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurred. No relevant content at all Judithcomm (talk) 13:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurred. No relevant content Judithcomm (talk) 13:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Blurred beyond recognition. Judithcomm (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The file uploaded was not my own one. It was a mistake by myself. Brunhuber (talk) 14:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source: AXA Brochure Raamuitzetters - which likely does not have a free art license attached to it. Incorrectly licensed -- Deadstar (msg) 14:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Taken from here: http://la.eonline.com/mexico/2014/de-lo-sublime-al-horror-en-la-alfombra-roja-de-los-golden-globes/, source unclear Ytoyoda (talk) 14:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Getty Images listed as source: http://www.quien.com/espectaculos/2013/01/24/patricia-zavala-conductora-y-modelo Ytoyoda (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source: AXA Brochure Raamuitzetters - it is unlikely it was published with an art licence. -- Deadstar (msg) 14:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

personal attack 太刻薄 (talk) 15:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

License incorrect - not self made -- Deadstar (msg) 15:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image taken by Marinus Boezem, uploaded by Masha van Vliet (talk · contribs). http://vleeshal.nl/nl/tentoonstellingen/marinus-boezem-space-sculptures does not state art license applies. -- Deadstar (msg) 15:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I am nominating these shortly after I uploaded them. The USC has not made these specifically public domain and thought the material (in particular photographs) are likely to have all been created in 1922, the date of publication is 1923 so there can be no automatic assumption that this is public domain.

This DR applies to all scans of the book found in Category:El Rodeo, 1923 which should be usable even if a red-link. (talk) 15:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, self-created artwork/advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 16:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of scope, del on de Nolispanmo 16:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 16:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal image - we have pictures of this harbour without the lads. -- Deadstar (msg) 16:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Vermutliche Urheberrechtsverletzung, da der Urheber des Bildes nicht mit dem Hochlader identisch ist und auch keine Erlaubniis des Urhebers hinterlegt ist. -- Kleiner Stampfi (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Argentine work, published/created (or sourced with - as indicated) 1974, licensed with {{PD-AR-Photo}}, not in PD in Argentina at COM:URAA-date 01.01.1996 and copyrighted in US till the end of 2069 (+95 years). Btw, the exif indicates to an interview dated with 2000 where es:Adalberto Rodríguez Giavarini was Argentine Minister of Foreign Affairs and Worship (1999-2001) so the file is still copyrighted in Argentina (and elsewhere). Gunnex (talk) 17:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low resolution PNG, based on user's other upload, unlikely that this is free Ytoyoda (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Argentine work, published/created (or sourced with - as indicated) 1976, licensed with {{PD-AR-Photo}}, not in PD in Argentina at COM:URAA-date 01.01.1996 and copyrighted in US till the end of 2071 (+95 years). Gunnex (talk) 17:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, self-promotion, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

License doesn't match one given at Flickr, no Flickrreview to verify whether license was correct at time of upload Ytoyoda (talk) 19:25, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The PD rationale is rather bizarre: PD because "The recording Radio Station was a) public, b) under SMAD (sovjet) post-war administration and c) non existent after 1949". None of that causes this recording to be in the PD of course. The speaker died in 1951, so this in the PD until January 1, 2022 in the EU and until January 1, 1943 in the USA (per the URAA). Rosenzweig τ 19:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


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

This image was uploaded as "copyrighted free use". I don't see any evidence that the author, who is not even named, has granted this. It's quite more likely that the uploader (who uploaded only this single image) simply did not know what he was doing. The depicted person lived 1888–1968 and does not look that young in the image, so it's not overwhelmingly likely that the image is in the PD anyway. Rosenzweig τ 19:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image of non-notable, presumably living individual is outside of COM:SCOPE. Commons is not a social media site. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by Karl Held, who is a co-author of this interview, or his heirs. Rosenzweig τ 19:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality, small size and presence [2] here, marked Copyright 2014, iCubator Labs suggests this is a likely COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the interviewed person, who is a co-author of this interview. Rosenzweig τ 19:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low resolution, small size and lack of useful metadata, plus it's presence [3] © 2014 Soccer Wiki. All rights reserved makes this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:39, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The source of this file is given as the French Wikipedia page, where the image appears, but it is this same image. I question the licensing remark "own work" if the source is claimed to be the Wikipedia. Possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:41, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata make this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The subject of a photo does not own the copyright, this work appears elsewhere, such as [4], marked © 2014Cultural Services of the French Embassy, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Accd. to German law and courts, you simply cannot prove that the author's name was never publicly disclosed anywhere, not even in a newspaper article or a public lecture. Any such obscure mention of the author's name would render the image not anonymous. For that reason, the PD-EU-anonymous template is unsuitable for this 1926 German image. Rosenzweig τ 19:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata make this a possible COM:COPYVIO because it is also found here [5]. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very low resolution, poor quality image, derived in description saying it's from a 2001 book. Suggest this is a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright is incorrect. Image is not owned by NISTResearchLibrary, and is not in the public domain. NISTResearchLibrary (talk) 19:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright is incorrect. Image is not owned by NISTResearchLibrary, and is not in the public domain. Image was mis-uploaded. NISTResearchLibrary (talk) 19:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright is incorrect. Image is not owned by NISTResearchLibrary, and is not in the public domain. Image was mis-uploaded. NISTResearchLibrary (talk) 19:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright is incorrect. Image is not owned by NISTResearchLibrary, and is not in the public domain. Image was mis-uploaded. NISTResearchLibrary (talk) 19:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata make this a possible COM:COPYVIO because it is also found here [6], marked Copyright © 2013 FindFreeGraphics.com - All Rights Reserved. Image is appended to a poorly cited biography. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Th PD is claim is wrong. Technical drawings like this one are protected by German copyright even if they are quite simple (so-called "Kleine Münze"). Rosenzweig τ 19:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image metadata says "Author EMANUELE CICCOMARTINO Copyright holder Copyright Emanuele Ciccomartino 2013", the uploader is claiming "own work" with uploader name totally different than copyright holder name in metadata. Possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The CC0 license may cover the photo, but not the sticker itself. Rosenzweig τ 19:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable presumably living individual, outside of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-notable, presumably living individual is outside of COM:SCOPE. Commons is not a personal photo album. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the interviewed person, who is a co-author of this interview. Rosenzweig τ 19:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:56, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope; not a notable football club in Argentina. Furthermore, the file is not used in any article. - 19:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 19:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

According to the uploader, the picture shows a place somewhere in the middle of river Wiese. I haven't been able to find a location like this on that river (Google Earth, image search). This is the only photograph uploaded by Spirit-Black-Wikipedista (talk · contribs) still online. Judging by his upload history and the image's limited resolution and lack of metadata, I don't trust that this is actually his own work. Many of his other uploads have been deleted in the past as copyvio, as you can see on his talk page. Given the low resolution, the incorrect description and the probable copyright violation, I can't see any encyclopaedic value of this image. Sitacuisses (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The user's other image was from a business website of which this is the company logo with colored image, words and rights reserved marking. Both images are possible COM:COPYVIO, the uploaders use of "our" in the description of the logo implies connection with the company and possible promotion/self-promotion. Commons is not social media or a place for promotion or advertising. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. The image is a DW of the copyrighted drawing. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, poor quality and missing metadata besides being found [7] here, suggest possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in France. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image has no camera meta data and is found [8] as the subject's Twitter user image. Possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not an official work, not part of any law, statute etc. That some state official made it does not mean it is an "official work" in a legal sense in Germany. Rosenzweig τ 20:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image low quality and missing metadata, plus found [9] here, makes it a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The passport photo is protected by copyright. Rosenzweig τ 20:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The passport photo is protected by copyright. Rosenzweig τ 20:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not an official work, not part of any law, statute etc. That some state official made it does not mean it is an "official work" in a legal sense in Germany. Rosenzweig τ 20:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

If this material were needed in a Wiki article, it would be best added as text. This image is of too poor quality to be within COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image is of too poor quality to be within COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This text is neither an official work, nor is it below the threshold of originality. Rosenzweig τ 20:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This text is not an official work, and it lacks the (properly documented) permission of the author, who is certainly not the uploader. Rosenzweig τ 20:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image is found here [10], © 2014 «Спорт-Экспресс в Украине», possible COM:COPYVIO Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata, plus being found here [11], © 2014 TripAdvisor LLC All rights reserved make this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata, plus being found here [12], © 2014 TripAdvisor LLC All rights reserved make this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Small size, low resolution and lack of useful metadata, plus being found here #4 / 24 in slideshow [13], © 2014 TripAdvisor LLC All rights reserved make this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The photograph used by this cover is most likely still copyrighted and most certainly not below the threshold of originality. Rosenzweig τ 20:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Lack of useful metadata, plus being found here [14], © 2008 LitZona.Net. Все права защищены. make this a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality, missing metadata makes this likely not user's own work and a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No educational value. (I accidentally uploaded this along with others in a batch.) Pete F (talk) 20:40, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

no category, no encyclopedic value, unused, out of scope, useless, etc F (talk) 20:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Smaller version of File:Roquebrun vue orb.JPG with false attribution; uploader is sock of blocked account with no genuine contributions. Эlcobbola talk 20:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 20:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems to be a "joke", a blank map identical to the svg Ciaurlec (talk) 20:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sorry, but a bit out of scope … FDMS 21:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:14, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused private image Torsch (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The sculpture is not in the public domain; also not de minimis or in the public space. Eleassar (t/p) 21:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do to leave them in wikipedia? The sculptor Josef Tabachnyk (author of this artwork, German citizenship) took this pictures and gave them to me to use them for wikipedia. Do I need an additional license? Which one?

In the German wikipedia it can definitely stay (since there are no copyright laws against it). In case it can´t stay in the Ukranian wikipedia. What do I have to do so that the picture at least is not deleted in the German wikipedia. *  Keep

Maxim560 (t/p) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: The statue is lacated in the Ukaraine so the Ukrainian law also applies to the statue. This isnot covered by FoP as explained by the nominator. Natuur12 (talk) 14:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


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

Unused private image, poor quality Torsch (talk) 21:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I have another version for this and i want to change it Ardianlumi (talk) 21:37, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused needless crop of a low-resolution version of File:Fplorestan.jpg/File:Fplorestan1.jpg with false authorship and copyright claims. Given the low resolution and distracting watermark, this version is not realistically useful for educational purposes. LX (talk, contribs) 21:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 22:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 22:30, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in the Ukraine, this building was completed in 2000, so the architect is most likely still alive, thus holds copyright. AdmrBoltz 22:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mauvaise qualité atizos (talk) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

An unused image of a non-notable person, not useful for educational purposes. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 22:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 23:50, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

photo is incorrect for historic site 74.192.82.64 22:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC) The Lott House is located at 311 Kilpatrick Street in Mineola Tx and is designated as a historic site. The photo used in the description is of the Noble Manor which is located at 411 Kilpatrick Street which is one block East from the Lott House.[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems like an old photo/drawing of unknown copyright status, not own work; also due to the low res. Eleassar (t/p) 23:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Appears to be a photograph of a presumably copyrighted map. Is there any reason to think this map is in the public domain? Jmabel ! talk 05:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 21:56, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Ronald Ophuis, Execution, 1995, oil on canvas" - this is not self made (uploader name Masha van Vliet (talk · contribs)) -- Deadstar (msg) 15:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 17:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep sorry, file is in use --Indeedous (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: INeverCry 17:44, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Most likely a selfie made by "Sophie Indracusins", a popular musician from Thailand (+1000 selfies available at her Facebook and at related social networks). Gunnex (talk) 15:06, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. INeverCry 23:32, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: Uploaded by FF MM (talk · contributions · Statistics) = "Felipe Méndez" (per user page and e.g. File:Iberia in Asunción Paraguay by Felipe Méndez.jpg), the exif-info indicates to photographer "Ariel Hermosilla" with "C)2010 {ATV}, reservados todos los derechos". Permission needed. Gunnex (talk) 18:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating also (same context)

Gunnex (talk) 18:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

private image, out of scope, user blocked Indeedous (talk) 20:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: 1996 monument, not in the public domain. Eleassar (t/p) 21:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do to leave them in wikipedia? The sculptor Josef Tabachnyk (author of this artwork, German citizenship) took this pictures and gave them to me to use them for wikipedia. This picture is needed for the description in the article about this artwork. Do I need an additional license? Which one?

In the German wikipedia it can definitely stay (since there are no copyright laws against it). In case it can´t stay in the Ukranian wikipedia. What do I have to do so that the picture at least is not deleted in the German wikipedia. *  Keep


Maxim560 (t/p) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: The statue is lacated in the Ukaraine so the Ukrainian law also applies to the statue. This isnot covered by FoP as explained by the nominator. Natuur12 (talk) 14:31, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: 1983 sculptural work. Eleassar (t/p) 21:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do to leave them in wikipedia? The sculptor Josef Tabachnyk (author of this artwork, German citizenship) took this pictures and gave them to me to use them for wikipedia. This picture is needed for the description in the article about this artwork. Do I need an additional license? Which one?

In the German wikipedia it can definitely stay (since there are no copyright laws against it). In case it can´t stay in the Ukranian wikipedia. What do I have to do so that the picture at least is not deleted in the German wikipedia. *  Keep

Maxim560 (t/p) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: The statue is lacated in the Ukaraine so the Ukrainian law also applies to the statue. This isnot covered by FoP as explained by the nominator. Permission from the sculpter is required. Natuur12 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: work of the still living sculptor Josef Tabachnyk. Eleassar (t/p) 21:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do to leave them in wikipedia? The sculptor Josef Tabachnyk (author of this artwork, German citizenship) took this pictures and gave them to me to use them for wikipedia. This picture is needed for the description in the article about this artwork.Do I need an additional license? Which one?

In the German wikipedia it can definitely stay (since there are no copyright laws against it). In case it can´t stay in the Ukranian wikipedia. What do I have to do so that the picture at least is not deleted in the German wikipedia. *  Keep


Maxim560 (t/p) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: The statue is lacated in the Ukaraine so the Ukrainian law also applies to the statue. This isnot covered by FoP as explained by the nominator. Natuur12 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: no evidence that the sculpture is in the public domain, it is modern. Eleassar (t/p) 21:36, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is still relatively modern, and thanks for having provided the appropriate information that should be at the image description page right from the beginning. In any case,  I withdraw my nomination. --Eleassar (t/p) 23:42, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: Withdrawn Natuur12 (talk) 14:32, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: 1980 monument by Josef Tabachnyk (still living). Eleassar (t/p) 21:56, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do I have to do to leave them in wikipedia? The sculptor Josef Tabachnyk (author of this artwork, German citizenship) took this pictures and gave them to me to use them for wikipedia. This picture is needed for the description in the article about this artwork. Do I need an additional license? Which one?

In the German wikipedia it can definitely stay (since there are no copyright laws against it). In case it can´t stay in the Ukranian wikipedia. What do I have to do so that the picture at least is not deleted in the German wikipedia. *  Keep


Maxim560 (t/p) 22:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: The statue is lacated in the Ukaraine so the Ukrainian law also applies to the statue. This isnot covered by FoP as explained by the nominator. Natuur12 (talk) 14:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

We only seem to have permission from the camera man but not from the performer or the composer. Stefan4 (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I had originally asked about this on the Village Pump but I didn't see the reply. To be safe (and to save the video) I'll strip the audio from the file this weekend. czar  23:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Audio removed. I believe the concern has been resolved here (though I could use an admin hand with the revdel). czar  14:38, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, revision deletion is needed. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:45, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Done czar  13:33, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfree revision deleted by someone. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:17, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by 70.24.244.161 as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: photograph of an encyclopedia page, with all text legible, clearly a copyright violation of the 1960s edition of "Bonniers Lexikon" Yann (talk) 07:51, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This seems just a list of facts, which does not get a copyright. Yann (talk) 07:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: PD-ineligible. Yann (talk) 11:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free image; the original licence as given at https://web.archive.org/web/20150716004130/https://mmrda.maharashtra.gov.in/disclaimer does not allow for derivative works. (Besides this, the image was contributed by the sockpuppet of a very prolific serial copyright infringer known to falsify licence information. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mushroom9/Archive for details.) I am aware of the previous deletion discussion, which I believe was closed in error. Psychonaut (talk) 17:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Same as last closing. If we would have follow this course of action we could delete every picture taken by European's since moral rights give the author still the right to resist agains modifications that are derogatory. Natuur12 (talk) 02:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:09, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:14, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:08, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:16, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:06, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Dharmadhyaksha as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The source site says that it should be reproduced accurately. That fails our requirement of allowing derivatives. Yann (talk) 13:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I think that's not a copyright restriction. Yann (talk) 13:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But we strictly have to allow reproduction in derivative forms. It also further states that it should not be used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context. How do we keep check on that? Would Commons accept liability if someone who took the image from here decided to crack a joke about it? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 14:05, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 11:28, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation FaraM (talk) 19:43, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Which photos of them are copyright violations? Taivo (talk) 12:09, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Taivo! most of them are copyrighted, including this, this, this, this, this, this, this, this and this. FaraM (talk) 22:08, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Jameslwoodward! Is this montage ok? FaraM (talk) 04:23, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: First, you cannot take images directly from outside sources and use them in a montage -- there is no way to record the necessary review. Second, unless they are all PD, each image must be listed out separately, with the author's name, the source file, and the license. Finally, I only looked at the first two, but they were both (C) with no license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:39, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The source/license and author information of several images ( File:Azadi Monument.jpg, File:Tall Towers In Tehran.JPG, File:Tehran-International_Tower.JPG and File:ChitgarLake.jpg) used in this collage are missing or are insufficient, compromising the whole file. See also Commons:Collages. Gunnex (talk) 07:18, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Eventually also affected by ongoing Commons:Deletion requests/File:Markazi bank Tehran.jpg. Gunnex (talk) 07:30, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 16:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

Old logo of Roger Dubuis. Definitely not accurate anymore! Alexandre nicolau (talk) 16:20, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Former logo of a notable company. In scope. BrightRaven (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Per above Natuur12 (talk) 15:48, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Taichi as Speedy (speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: out of scope Sreejith K (talk) 08:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete is out of scope - unused private image - Andy king50 (talk) 12:27, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: JurgenNL (talk) 11:11, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

some unknown persons, see description, private picture Motopark (talk) 13:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 21:58, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by AnuragDahiya (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These images are possible COM:COPYVIO, the one with the words under is found [15], © 2013 FanPhobia.com and the other one is from a book or publication due to its small size, low resolution and missing metadata.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in Belgium. All these pictures are bout "Cité moderne" in Berchem-Sainte-Agathe, Brussels, Belgium. The architect, Victor Bourgeois died in 1962.

BrightRaven (talk) 10:42, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in Belgium. The architect, Victor Bourgeois died in 1962.

BrightRaven (talk) 10:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:34, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FOP in South Korea.

레비Revi 04:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't understand reason for deletion request. From the "FOP" link posted: "Although Article 35.(2) of the Republic of Korea: Copyright, Act of 1957 (Law No. 432, as last amended by Law No. 9625 of April 22, 2009) permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies." Since these images have not been posted here "for the purpose of selling copies" I see no conflict or need to delete any of the images in category of Hammering Man, Seoul. Steve46814 (talk) 22:12, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to Copyright law as of 17 October 2013(Korean)/ English translation as of 15 March 2012, you can reproduce when things are not commercial. All media stored in Commons should be able to freely reused, including commercial purpose. Therefore it should be deleted.
Translation from http://law.go.kr

Article 35 (Exhibition or Reproduction of Work of Art, etc.)
(1) The owner of an original of a work of art, etc. or a person who has obtained the owner’s consent, may exhibit the work in its original form: Provided, That the foregoing shall not be applied if the work of art is to be exhibited at all times on the street, in the park, on the exterior of a building, or other places open to the public.
(2) Works of art, etc. exhibited at all times at an open place as referred to in the proviso of paragraph (1) may be reproduced and used by any means, except those falling under any of the following subparagraphs:
1. Where a building is reproduced into another building;
2. Where a sculpture or a painting is reproduced into another sculpture or a painting;
3. Where the reproduction is made in order to exhibit permanently at an open place pursuant to the proviso of paragraph (1); and
4. Where the reproduction is made for the purpose of selling
(3) A person who exhibits works of art, etc. pursuant to paragraph (1), or who intends to sell originals of works of art, etc. may reproduce and distribute them in a pamphlet for the purpose of explaining and introducing them.
(4) A commissioned portrait or similar photographic work shall not be used without the consent of the client.

레비Revi 01:44, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I still see no conflict with Article 35. Section (2) describes the objects photographed in question and I see no conflicts with any of the exceptions listed in subparagraphs 1 through 4. Section 2 Subparagraph 4 seems to me to be where your concerns are. But, again, these photographs are licensed CC-BY-SA-3.0, which would preclude any commercial sale of this work by anyone. I would appreciate your explaining which section and subpapargraph that has you concerned, and explain why in some detail, so I may better understand your motivation.Steve46814 (talk) 21:05, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It violates local law, so although you license them in compatible license, it is in fact unfree. This photo of statue is considered as "Derivative work" or unfree statue, and cannot be in Commons. —레비Revi 00:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - I appreciate your explanation but I still feel your interpretation, at least from what is delineated in Article 35 as you reference, is not appropriate. In the sense you are applying it, every photo could be construed as a "derivative work". Article 35 does not address derivative work. So at this point, we will have to agree to disagree. Thank you for hearing me out.Steve46814 (talk) 02:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See category for related FOP DRs. Sculpture is basically copyrighted by creator, and he has to give permission, or it will be deleted. Again, FoP is local law thing, and it has more priority than your license. You actually do not have right to license this if you are not creator of sculpture. So, it must be  Delete. —레비Revi 02:26, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:Deletion requests/File:광화문 역사박물관 2013-05-12 10-08.jpg gives you basic information about FOP. —레비Revi 02:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'm beginning to see where/how you can define a photograph as a "derivative work". What I am still struggling to understand is why the FOP is concerned with commercially selling said photographs. Please explain how having a photo (derivative work) in the Commons database is making this/these photo(s) commercially available for sale. Although Article 35.(2): permits any reproduction of works permanently installed in "open places", 35.(2).4 specifically states that the rule does not apply "where reproduction is made for the purpose of selling its copies. "This is probably an issue of semantics, but it just is not clicking for me - I'm missing something. Thanks. Steve46814 (talk) 06:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Again, Sculpture's copyright belongs to creator, and it is sure that he did not licensed his work in {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}.(You do not have any permission to license them in CCL) So, it is copyright violation, and it must be deleted. —레비Revi 14:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per above. Natuur12 (talk) 15:49, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No freedom of panorama in South Korea. The statue was built in USA in 1991, no PD tags can be applied

A1Cafel (talk) 03:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep These images that have already been decided to undelete. See Commons:Undeletion requests/Archive/2016-10#Category:Hammering Man, Seoul. Ox1997cow (talk) 16:13, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Also, see this. Ox1997cow (talk) 16:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Per Ox1997cow, and per [16], Korea (South) has rule of the shorter term so any sculptures in the public domain in USA are also entered Korean public domain. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Yann (talk) 15:11, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Derivative work of coins.

Stefan4 (talk) 10:53, 4 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, what is the problem with derivative works of coins ? Lionel Allorge (talk) 00:41, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You are not the copyright holder to the coins, so you can't upload photos of them. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:19, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, after reading COM:EURO, I believe it does not apply to my picture (File:Le beurre et l'argent du beurre.jpg) because the copyright faces of the euro are a very small part of my picture and therefore, De Minimis should apply. Lionel Allorge (talk) 14:04, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
De minimis doesn't depend on the size of the images but on the purpose of the photograph and whether the shown parts are above the threshold of originality. See for example this court ruling from the European Court of Justice. Showing coins is one of the main purposes of the image (the file name even mentions money), and the coins are clearly visible. The coins therefore do not satisfy de minimis. --Stefan4 (talk) 19:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free coins. Some of them are tagged with {{PD-GermanGov}}, but as explained at Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, that template can only be used for text. A coin is not text. Some of the images do not have permission from the photographers, which a coin always must have.

Stefan4 (talk) 15:24, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 20:37, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The undeletion discussion in the following section is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive.

Non-free coin.

Stefan4 (talk) 15:36, 16 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Non-free coin. One of the files can be saved by reverting to the original revision which doesn't contain any coin and deleting only those revisions which show a coin.

Stefan4 (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Reverted one per Stefan, deleted the other. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:38, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unfree coin.

Stefan4 (talk) 11:19, 25 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 00:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-free coins.

Stefan4 (talk) 21:18, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Delted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:36, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:DW.

Stefan4 (talk) 21:27, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:29, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Missing permission from engraver. See COM:CUR#Euro.

Stefan4 (talk) 21:12, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's no problem in using images of the designs of euro coins. I wrote the european central bank and various central banks of europe. The problem is when you use images of an specific web page. I made the photographs of every coin I uploaded. Euro images CAN BE USED because they DON'T HAVE COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS. European central bank even told me that I could use the images in their web page if I cite them as authors of it. That's even written in their web page!! For all those reasons I think that this topic MUST BE INVESTIGATED BEFORE DELETING THE FILES --Philloven (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Only the following reproductions are allowed:
  • reproductions in a format without relief (drawings, paintings, films) provided that they are not detrimental to the image of the euro."
This means that you cannot use images of the coins to create parodies of the Euro or any other derivative work. And that means that they are not free enough to keep on Commons. As you will see above, this has been well established over eight DRs. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Euro coins are more complex than that. There is one common side, shared by all countries. The European Central Bank owns the copyright to this side of the coins and decides the restrictions, and the conclusion on Commons is that the common side is unfree. Therefore, pictures of the common side may not be uploaded to Commons.
There is also a national side, for which the restrictions depend on the country of issue. For the national side of the coins, coins from Latvia are fine per {{Latvian coins}}, while coins from Finland probably are fine per {{PD-FinlandGov}}. Lithuania will introduce the euro on 1 January 2015, and Lithuanian euro coins will be fine per {{PD-LT-exempt}}. The national side of the coins from other countries are not fine, and can't be uploaded to Commons without OTRS permission from the copyright holders. The list above does not cointain any coins from Finland, Latvia or Lithuania. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:59, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I asked if I could use the images to write an article in wikipedia and they answered "yes, you can if it is not detrimental to the image of the euro". The use of the image, as I used it, is not detrimental in ANY WAY to the euro. It's not a parody either. Yes I see it has been discused but I think it's a mistake. It can't be that the BCE itself says that the images can be used and we delete them based on interpretations. --Philloven (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons requires that all images hosted here are free for any use by anybody anywhere. Your WP article may be perfectly all right with the Bank, but that is not enough to keep it here -- they must be OK with any use, even parody, which, obviously, they are not. You can probably use the images on WP:EN for a single article under Fair Use, but they cannot be kept here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:57, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per discussion. --Krd 16:44, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Accd. to German law and courts, you simply cannot prove that the author's name was never publicly disclosed anywhere, not even in a newspaper article or a public lecture. Any such obscure mention of the author's name would render the image not anonymous. For that reason, the PD-EU-anonymous template is unsuitable for this 1929 German image.

Rosenzweig τ 19:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 22:00, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Fontraf (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Obviously promotional material including email address imprint. Uploader name same as company which manufactured this equipment. Suggest out of COM:SCOPE, Commons is not facebook, social media or an advertising platform.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:48, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by FF MM (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: 5x derivated works of covers of es:American News Magazine, a magazine edited by Paraguayan university "Universidad Americana" which need permission + 1x unsourced collage File:Festival del Ovecha Rague de San Miguel Misiones.jpg about a Paraguayan festival.

Gunnex (talk) 18:48, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:46, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Getpowerpad (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Advertisement. Commons:Derivative works from software screenshots.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:47, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Khattak2011 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Dubious "own works" without sources, descriptions, categories

91.66.152.68 14:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Maguilad (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Uploader puts works of other authors into the public domain

91.66.152.68 08:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: I am afraid we need OTRS at the least Ymblanter (talk) 17:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Vivaastara (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:43, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Videet Akoliya (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The image "Kisna - sayaki bhagat" is found [19], Copyright © 2007-2014 HK Jewels. All Right Reserved.

The other image is a logo with colored image, words and rights reserved marking. Both images are possible COM:COPYVIO, the uploaders use of "our" in the description of the logo implies connection with the company and possible promotion/self-promotion. Commons is not social media or a place for promotion or advertising.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 12:15, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Jc2014 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Low quality images of a naked man both in full view (privacy issues of presumably living subject) and as a crotch-cropped penis. The project has sufficient images of better quality that these are outside of COM:SCOPE.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:12, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Masssly (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I strongly doubt these image are own work as claimed, because the uploader tagged as "own work" a lot of blatant copyvio images (grabbed from the internet). Moreover, these files generally lack EXIF data and some are small.

BrightRaven (talk) 13:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree with nominator, these pictures due to size, lacking meta data and other indicators are most likely COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The only picture with metadata is actually copied from Flickr. It can be speedy deleted. BrightRaven (talk) 08:27, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:39, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by MVRS-3000 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Game screenshots, text screenshots. If the information in the spreadsheets is important it can be added to the project as typed text, not an image. Possible COM:COPYVIOs as is.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 17:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Tharusha.dilshan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These images have been altered after photography to include words/letters or clip art drawings. Commons is not a personal photo album, these images would be fine on Facebook, but they're outside of COM:SCOPE.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 14:40, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Replaced by an updated image Abhsn (talk) 03:08, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Request open by uploader. --Metrónomo's truth of the day: "That was also done by the president" not an excuse. 22:43, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 06:25, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This image is small (300 by 200 pixels). File:Rhyolite-banque.JPG and File:Rhyolite.jpg show the same subject from simliar vantage points.. Rybec (talk) 03:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 12:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Substituted by a svg map (File:Milano mappa M2 2011-02-20.svg) Friedrichstrasse (talk) 12:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 12:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redundant duplicate of File:France Kobal.jpg. Eleassar (t/p) 22:44, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 12:51, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

soll ersetzt werden durch neutrales Logo. Dieses Logo ist nur zur internen Verwendung gedacht. MarcEickelmann (talk) 15:49, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep This logo is used on the official website of the city, so it is not for internal use only. BrightRaven (talk) 16:31, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Das momentan auf dieser Seite befindliche Logo wurde durch mich selbst irrtümlich hochgeladen. Es handelt sich um das Logo, das nur durch die Stadt Troisdorf selbst genutzt werden darf. Es soll ersetzt werden durch dasjenige Logo, das auch von ecternen Unternehmen genutzt werden soll. Das Logo der Familien-Angelegenheit ist geschützt. Ein Upload war daher nicht erlaubt.

Imho, this logo is below threshold of originality for Germany. Therefore {{PD-textlogo}} licence is valid and there is no legal problem with keeping this file. BrightRaven (talk) 18:11, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: pd-textlogo Natuur12 (talk) 17:49, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Dougmaguire (talk · contribs)

[edit]

I'm not too happy about what I see here. Complex logos, posters, discs and things which may very well be screenshots from films. Dubious copyright status.

Stefan4 (talk) 19:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are Flickr links the only links you take? Do you take Facebook links as Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike? I am Doug Maguire and I'm the admin on the page...

Dougmaguire (talk)

The problem is that there is no evidence that you control the Flickr or Facebook pages. Also, the file on Flickr has a non-free licence. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:19, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Stefan4, I'm brand new to this and I'm trying hard. Bear with me. I understand things need to be done correctly and I'm doing things like a 2 year old in college. What about this one:


 Deleted, but not by me. Taivo (talk) 14:57, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Anyashy (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Within scope? Some of these badges are used on a dubious en-site: en:Wikipedia:BADGE/allbadges collapse

91.66.152.68 10:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 12:50, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Substituted by a svg image (File:Milano mappa rete metropolitana 2013-02-10.svg) Friedrichstrasse (talk) 13:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

(declined speedy) - There is no FOP in the Ukraine, this building was completed in 2002, so the architect is most likely still alive, thus holds copyright. AdmrBoltz 16:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The architecture plan is the property of the religious community of the village, headed by a priest. I got a permission from the priest to publish photos of the church. By the way, it's not the Ukraine, it's UKRAINE! Oleksandr Hleba (talk) 22:18, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: If you are the uploader, please email COM:OTRS FASTILY 09:08, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I don't see any evidence that the Italian police actually released these images as PD, as the license tag used claims. The paragraphs quoted in the description are standard permissions for the media to use such material in their articles and programs, but not sufficient for Commons, where we want images that are free to be used by everyone for every purpose.

Rosenzweig τ 20:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Those claims are mine verbatim from the following files (which do not match these):

To be clear, I wrote the summary and licensing sections in the uploads and not just the arguments in the deletion requests. Someone is using my original rationales as a copy-and-paste from a few years ago. Is that available as a user's deleted contribs? I note that the user that uploaded the files under discussion is still active here.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 23:28, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)

It seems fantastical to me that a major record label with a multi-million selling album like this has no copyright on its cover —Justin (koavf)TCM 06:12, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am leary of legal reviews containing the word "fantastical". The full rear cover is seen in it full glory (with no copyright notices other than for performance) at http://www.flickr.com/photos/12998963@N03/3021504077/sizes/l/in/photostream/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ubergeek11 (talk • contribs)


Kept Seems correct. If I remember correctly, the lack of copyright notice was a somewhat notorious oversight. -- Infrogmation (talk) 13:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Although the last deletion nomination suggested that the rear cover did not have a copyright notice, there is no indication that there was none on the inside cover or inserts. If " the lack of copyright notice was a somewhat notorious oversight", as the closing admin suggests, is true, then there should be a reliable source pointing to this.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:33, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 09:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ugly map with some mistakes Friedrichstrasse (talk) 12:23, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It contains some mistakes: the Passante line and the people-mover to San Raffaele should not be included in the metro system. Also the interchanges with the railway network are not correct, and it isn't clear the date to which this map is referred.--Friedrichstrasse (talk) 20:16, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Passport photographs are not official works as claimed, but copyrighted by their photographer. Rosenzweig τ 20:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Question: Did passport holders in East Germany normally submit photographs, or were the photographs done by the East German government? (Not knowing a lot about East German history, I am presuming that a large amount of work was on behalf of the state.) --Closeapple (talk) 23:02, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. But it doesn't matter here, because the fact that some state official made a photograph does not mean it is an "official work" in a legal sense in Germany. --Rosenzweig τ 18:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
see Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Elli_Barczatis.jpg#File:Elli_Barczatis.jpg Maximilian (talk) 14:20, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 08:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as no permission (no permission since) Yann (talk) 07:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The license is CC-BY on Flickr, but this is a new account with only one picture. I doubt that this license is valid. Regards, Yann (talk) 07:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When I had tagged it with no-permission, the source was said to be instagram.[21] Thereafter the uploader changed it to Flickr[22]. However, the upload to Flickr happened the same day, when it was uploaded here, which makes it very likely Flickr-washing. --Túrelio (talk) 12:04, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Одно загруженное изображение говорит о том, что я не пользуюсь сервисом "Flickr". Кроме ссылки на Flickr были приложены ссылки на официальные страницы данного человека в социальных сетях, где везде установлена данная фотография. Эта фотография установлена и в сервисе Instagram. Согласно правилам сервиса (http://instagram.com/about/legal/terms/) загружая фотографию на Instagram пользователь передает ее сервису и в том числе третьим лицам. Если Вам нужно какое-либо подтверждение, кроме моих слов, то я готов его предоставить. Antsmir (talk)

Deleted: probable license laundering FASTILY 08:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No properly documented permission by the speaker. Rosenzweig τ 20:29, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

i interviewed kai several times in the 1990ies, mainly for public radio germany. so the interview (me holding my mike, kai sitting next to me) took place in an environment setting where the publication purpose was clear. kai knew and still knows this context and certainly doesn't have a problem with it. if he does, he knows how to contact me. here's my user discussion board in the german wikipedia. Maximilian (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If this was an interview made for the radio, the interviewed person knew about this and you could presume he gave you permission you use it there. But Wikimedia Commons is not radio, we only want files that are free for everyone and every purpose, including commercial purposes. So we need an explicit permission by every author, and the person that is interviewed is the co-author of an interview. Providing said permission is the duty of the uploader. --Rosenzweig τ 13:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: missing evidence of permission FASTILY 08:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The painting which forms the basis of this poster was first published, with a copyright notice, by the Saturday Evening Post. When Rockwell granted permission to reuse the painting, the copyright did not go to the OWI... they merely licensed it for reuse. As Rockwell and/or the Saturday Evening Post retained copyright to the painting, the only way this poster could be PD would be if the painting is de minimis (which it clearly isn't). At best the text itself is PD.  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this a case where a file got mistakenly moved from WP to Commons. The file was originally at WP where it should be under claims of fair use. Just move it back.--TonyTheTiger (talk) 15:14, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is no FOP in Belgium. The architect, Victor Bourgeois died in 1962.

BrightRaven (talk) 10:45, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Je doute que cela vaille la peine de consommer de l’encre virtuelle à plaider une affaire dont l’issue est connue d’avance, savoir : la suppression de l’image. Que faudrait-il pour infléchir le cours de l’affaire ? Ceci : produire une autorisation en bonne et due forme des héritiers et des ayant-droits de l’architecte concerné. Or c’est impossible, j’en serais incapable, autant dire donc que l’image sera supprimée, par l’application aveugle d’une consigne générale.

Il me semble pourtant que la raison, une attitude pondérée, devrait conduire à laisser les choses en l’état, attendu que personne à ce jour n’a soulevé la moindre objection contre la présence — depuis près de six ans ! — de cette misérable photo que j’ai mise sur Commons, et que la probabilité de tribulations juridiques à son propos peut être considérée comme très proche de zéro pour cent. De plus, le même édifice, qui de surcroît est un bâtiment public, mieux : le siège d’une institution démocratique, est visible sur Streetview de Google, qui est une entreprise commerciale, qui donc fait une exploitation commerciale des images produites et mises en ligne, sans que nul jusqu’ici n’en ait pris ombrage. Du reste, si par extraordinaire cela devait advenir aujourd’hui, si quelqu’un menaçait de porter l’affaire devant les tribunaux, il serait encore temps de retirer illico la photo incriminée, sans autre conséquence pour wikipédia. La mesure de suppression immédiate est donc prise en dehors de toute nécessité. Ne rien faire pour l’heure, mais se tenir prêt pour réagir (par la suppression) à la moindre alerte — c'est-à-dire, me semble-t-il, une interprétation pondérée du droit de panorama : retrait de l’image dès qu’il y a réclamation —, eût été une attitude raisonnable. Ce raisonnement vaut pour la photo ici en litige et pour beaucoup d’autres.

Inutile de m’appesantir, car tout cela, vous le savez. Ne dites pas que vous n’avez pas le choix, en répétant comme un perroquet : « droit de panorama ! droit de panorama ! » ; le choix, vous l’avez bien : entre soit une application mécanique et indiscriminée, soit une mise en œuvre judicieuse et différenciée de la loi — ou entre l’esprit et la lettre de la loi. Je compte sur vous pour prendre la décision qui convient, c'est-à-dire, en l’espèce, de passer votre chemin. Merci de votre attention.Torsade de Pointes (talk) 14:07, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dans le cas de Google Street View, le principe de minimis est d'application, un peu comme pour cette photo, que je n'ai pas proposée à la suppression. BrightRaven (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Décision inepte. Mes arguments, pourtant rationnels, n’auront servi à rien. Qu’on cesse de dire qu’on n’a pas le choix, et qu’il faut appliquer la loi. La probabilité que cette photo donne lieu à réclamation est quasiment nulle, et si, par extraordinaire, cela devait arriver, il serait encore temps de l’enlever dare-dare. On a donc parfaitement le choix de décider de laisser la photo ou de l’effacer.
Mais décidément, nous sommes dans l’irrationnel. Pour expliquer, il faut faire intervenir la psychologie. Quelles sont les motivations profondes ? Je laisse à d’autres le soin de répondre, quoique j’aie ma petite idée là-dessus.
Du reste, si cette photo doit être supprimée, ce sont encore au moins une centaine de mes photos qu’il faudra zigouiller, en plus de milliers d’autres téléversés par d’autres utilisateurs en Belgique — soit de nombreux moments d’intense volupté en perspective pour les zigouilleurs.Torsade de Pointes (talk) 18:16, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: There is no FOP in Belgium FASTILY 08:53, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The author is not equal to the uploader and no permission data. Per the desc the author claimed is one of depicted people. BaseSat (talk) 18:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I didn't notice that there is some stuff about a permission in source field but anyway personal emailing is not a kind of permissions we accept. --BaseSat (talk) 18:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There was a misunderstanding by Rainer Staudte, as Thomas Brand only allows non-commercial use. His e-mail is forwarded to OTRS. Lovuschka (talk) 20:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I confirm the facts. I deleted the wrong license I wrote.--RainerStaudte (talk) 21:00, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Lucy Christopher (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused logo outside of COM:SCOPE, the project does not need four copies of same logo in different sizes and with or without "boxes". No indication this is user's owner work.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:21, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. I have duped three of them. The last one is in use @ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rehabilitation_for_Addicted_Prisoners_Trust&action=history --McZusatz (talk) 20:17, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Thank you! Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved -FASTILY 08:58, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very blurry. A clearer picture is available. Briarfallen (talk) 07:32, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jointly, we asked Nikon experts why its sensor and flash produce blurry pictures and orbs in churches and other places. They defended their camera which they alleged had been tested on trembling by old photographers, by shaking and other movements. The auto mode they said fixes the speed such that perfection is achieved. Jointly we consulted experts on parapsychology and even spirit questors in a prime college. They opined that blurry is not bad picture since there are unexplained by science but perfect shots with mysterious or mystic coding of the entry of outer space beings in existence, many of those enumerated in Wikipedia. We examined many of the mystic photos of this uploader and editor and we found no explanation why the mystic should blur the camera shutter speed. take for example the San Luis Batangas Crucifix, `the Kawit church cloud photos and more importantly the blue image in the Userpage. Considering that there is yet no scientific explanation why the shutter speed did blur, we have no option but to suggest the deletion. Note further that this editor has blue orbs in some of his photos, which we found to be so rare if not rarest in photography. So, delete.--112.210.182.66 13:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:55, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Per COM:FOP#Ukraine: no evidence that this sculpture is in the public domain. Eleassar (t/p) 21:28, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: apparently ok FASTILY 08:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sculptures by artist who died too recently (1994) for open license on the art. Taking a photograph of an article which is copyright to another doesn't make it "own work", instead a COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:26, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not a picture of one scuplture but a picture with several sculptures in a room of Hamburg Kunsthalle. I don't see any need to delete this picture. --R.P. Braun (talk) 22:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 CommentTaking a photograph of several sculptures isn't better than taking just one, the artist's heirs still own copyright to his works. Ellin Beltz (talk) 20:43, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Commentok, maybe you're right; I'm not an expert on this question. I have no special interest other than bringing this artist a little more to light (if this is the right expression). Should I ask at the Museum where I've taken the pic?--R.P. Braun (talk) 23:06, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 CommentI'm going to defer to the more expert Wikicommons editors for a final word on this, but I think you have to get permission from the artist's heirs, not the museum. Let's say what the seniors say. I know your confusion, my involvement in Commons deletions began when a photo I was *sure* was *fine* got deleted! Ellin Beltz (talk) 02:00, 14 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 08:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Exhibition ended. Impressions of the upcoming exhibition will be available within one month-Wuerthag (talk) 07:50, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No valid reason for deletion. Rgds   • hugarheimur 09:14, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 CommentUploader's name "Wurthag" is a homophone of this gallery name. Possible promotional material based on nominator's remark? Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:50, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader req FASTILY 08:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The photograph gives the author as Ian Oliver Martin; it also claims that Ian Oliver Martin is in the centre of the picture; it doesn't look like a time delayed photograph (being held at head height), making it unlikely that the photographer is indeed Mr Martin. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:46, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is my photograph, taken with my camera.

Hi - you're editing from an IP address, so it's hard to tell who's speaking here! :) The user who uploaded the photograph is also called IanOliverMartin, who says that they took the photograph. Are there two different IanOliverMartins? (perhaps a father and son, which would explain the confusion) If not, it's hard to see how IanOliverMartin took a photograph of himself standing at a formal function. In terms of copyright, the ownership of the camera at the time isn't an issue; the actual photographer owns the copyright unless they've formally transferred it to someone else, and still needs to be listed on this file as the author of the work. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:00, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is my photograph, taken with my camera. Who took the shot for me, I do not remember. But it is one else's image!

Deleted: If you are the uploader, please email COM:OTRS FASTILY 08:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Passport photographs are not official works as claimed, but copyrighted by their photogrsapher. Rosenzweig τ 20:07, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Question: Did passport holders in East Germany normally submit photographs, or were the photographs done by the East German government? (Not knowing a lot about East German history, I am presuming that a large amount of work was on behalf of the state.) --Closeapple (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. But it doesn't matter here, because the fact that some state official made a photograph does not mean it is an "official work" in a legal sense in Germany. --Rosenzweig τ 17:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
this photo (like the one showing karl laurenz, elli's lover) was taken by the person depicted here, in this case elli herself. she and karl were executed by the east german justice system back in 1955. i found the photos in the massive archive of the BStU, a government organisation. the authorities there gave me a) the right to use the images for my public radio/website work as well as b) for wiki commons. i actually paid for the scans for that purpose. it's all long ago and too tedious to find all the information. plus: permissions @ commons works due to staff shortage extremely slow.
side note: the barczatis/laurenz case will be in the german media in march 2014. tv teams will film the passport photos, wdr.de will use them on their website etc. there's an audio book on the case with the passport photos on the cover.
after the deletion of so many files i had uploaded in the last couple of years i'm a bit tired to fight.
Maximilian (talk) 14:18, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If Elli Barczatis herself, who died in 1955, was indeed the author of this photograph (which does not seem likely, but is possible) it is still protected in the EU until January 1, 2026. In the USA, it will be protected even longer. The rights are held by her heirs, which are most likely not identical with the BStU. So the "permission" the BStU gave you to use the photo is meaningless as far as copyright is concerned. Yes, those photos may have historical value. But historical value is not enough to keep a file here, it also needs to be free per the Commons project scope. --Rosenzweig τ 20:27, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyright status. Unless we have definitive, explicit written and/or textual, tangible evidence from a credible, verifiable source naming this file as freely licensed under a Commons compatible license, we simply cannot host it on Commons FASTILY 08:56, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]