Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/03/06
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
_--_2012_--_13.jpg){kind=link}
,_Skulptur_(Nevada-Seite)_--_2012_--_9.jpg){kind=link}
_--_2012_--_12.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(3896800571).jpg){kind=link}
_12.20.36.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
COM:EDUSE Rybec (talk) 02:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: You can just mark these as {{speedy|vandalism}} Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
This artwork has been published before. For example, it's at http://indervilla.com/lion-clean-image-wallpapers/lion-face-hd/ where it's licensed under the GNU GPL. Is it really the work of the uploader and is it really released under a free license? Rybec (talk) 02:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Just mark these as {{Copyvio}} Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
No permission. Sealle (talk) 03:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation. JuTa 20:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
No permission. Sealle (talk) 03:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation JuTa 20:34, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Low quality private image, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 12:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Private image, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 12:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Private image, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 12:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
File:HANS CHRISTIAN JIMENEZ BETTER KNOWN AS HANS JIMENEZ - BORN ON MARCH 19 1988 - WITH A SPANISH JAPANESE DESCENTS- HE IS AN EX MODEL AND CERTIFIED ONE OF THE MOST HANDSOME TEEN GUY IN ASIA- HE IS A FAMOUS HEALER- 2014-03-06 20-27.jpg
[edit]
Private image, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 12:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Just mark these junk as speedy Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
This image is of much too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose. It's out of project scope. Ies (talk) 14:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Please just mark this stuff for speedy deletion. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
As stated on File page, it's clearly not own work it's Circle Anco works at Comiket, source and main page.Aldnonymous (talk) 17:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Addendum per my nom for this deletion, it's using character from anime KissXsis without stating anything about the character.Aldnonymous (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete — Yep, this is definitely a copyright violation, eligible for {{Copyvio}} speedy delete. —RP88 18:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:16, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
No indication that the uploader is the copyright holder. Image was previously uploaded by User:Drc2014, and deleted for the same reason - see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Don Chaffin & Dan Spitz.jpg. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Comment - don't forget File:Screen Shot 2014-02-24 at 4.59.54 PM.png. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 01:38, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvios uploaded by sock. INeverCry 02:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Brazillian flag is on Commons in SVG. Fry1989 eh? 01:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 20:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Poor Quality Hardrockpics (talk) 06:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy Copyvio as this is a promotional frame from the film "Blazing Breast". It is possible that a DMCA notice applies, but there seems little need to investigate in any detail. --Fæ (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Tineye hit: http://www.rk.com/big-naturals/blazing_breast/home.htm Rybec (talk) 21:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy delete It's screenshot from film/porn.Aldnonymous (talk) 11:18, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyright violation High Contrast (talk) 21:41, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Low quality personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 06:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:PORN, unused, possible copyvio Rybec (talk) 09:08, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Info This is a duplicate of File:Strippers strip club Mexico City.jpg. --Fæ (talk) 23:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 19:44, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 07:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 07:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 07:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 07:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Redundant and repetitive and duplicative. :-) --Elvey (talk) 02:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 07:15, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
All three flags are on Commons in SVG. Fry1989 eh? 01:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 21:58, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Self-promotion, spam. Alan (talk) 21:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: file was deleted previously, closing nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:53, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:EDUSE Rybec (talk) 00:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: not clear why this image is free Ymblanter (talk) 04:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This is a drawing of a character from a television show (see http://www.popfun.co.uk/Rekkit-Rabbit), unlikely to be the uploader's own work. The same person uploaded File:Porn 2014-03-05 08-16.jpeg which has a Shutterstock watermark. Rybec (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 04:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Il mio nome è Nessuno.HHH (talk · contribs)
[edit]These are derivative works. Although the design of the labels on these pill bottles is rather simple, the logo looks to me as though it may be above the threshold of originality.
Rybec (talk) 00:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
out of scope Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
cd cover, no own work, maybe copyvio Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
out of scope, copyvio material :http://www.dsuperieur.com/en/list_beds.php , http://www.shang360.com/item/50623/
- File:Product11.png
- File:Product10.png
- File:Product7.png
- File:Product9.png
- File:Product8.png
- File:Product15.png
- File:Product5.png
- File:Product6.png
- File:Product4.png
- File:Product2.png
- File:Product3.png
- File:Product14.png
- File:Product12.png
- File:Product1.png
- File:Product13.png
- File:杂乱.jpg
Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Columbus Café (talk · contribs)
[edit]promotional, copyvio http://www.meltyfood.fr/columbus-cafe-et-co-fete-ses-19-ans-a208505.html
Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
copyvio http://www.chocoversum.de/presse.html Quellenangaben für die verwendeten Bilder und Grafiken: - © HACHEZ-CHOCOVERSUM GmbH - Hamburg Tourismus GmbH, Fotografen/Agenturen: Sven Schwarze, Sridala Swami, Christian Spahrbier
- File:Eingangsbereich des CHOCOVERSUMs.JPG
- File:Produktion der Chocolade.jpg
- File:Chocolade satt.jpg
- File:Chocolade probieren.jpg
- File:Ein Museum zum Anfassen.jpg
Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:03, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Agência Small (talk · contribs)
[edit]copyvio Agência Small Copyright 2013 Centro Auditivo Sonivoxx. All rights reserved.
- File:Sonivoxx Centro Auditivo - Logo.png
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 10.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 9.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 8.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 6.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 7.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 5.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 3.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 4.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 1.jpg
- File:Produto Sonivoxx 2.jpg
- File:Sonivoxxcentroauditivo.png
Wer?Du?! (talk) 00:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:TOYS: puppet may not have been made by the uploader Rybec (talk) 02:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE: unused personal image Rybec (talk) 02:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
derivative work (could be fixed by cropping) Rybec (talk) 02:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
La fotografía la realicé en mi casa a una caja de leche. Ninguna parte de la imagen tiene copyright. El diseño de la información nutricional que se observa ha sido acordado por el gobierno de España.
Por ello no considero que sea motivo de borrado de este repositorio de imágenes.
I have made this photograph with my cam to a milk carton. The picture showed has not copyright. The design showed is approved by the spanish goverment and is common to a lot of food packaging. For this, I do not consider it be cause for deletion from this image repository.
faithfully Ignacio.
- At the bottom of the photo is some artwork (hills and a cloud). That is the only reason for the request.
- En la parte inferior de la foto es un poco de obras de arte (colinas y una nube). Ese es el único motivo de este solicitud. Rybec (talk) 22:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I am agree with you. I will delete the photograph. Before that, i need look for another picture to replace them because there are ortographical errors in the label.
Me parece bien. Quitaré la fotografía en breve. Antes quiero buscar otra pues además de lo señalado; hay faltas de ortografía en la caja como bien se señala en la página de discusión.
faithfully Ignacio.
Deleted: FASTILY 09:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos show recent buildings but there is no freedom of panorama in Belgium (Commons:FOP#Belgium).
Rybec (talk) 03:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE: unused personal image Rybec (talk) 03:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE: unused personal photo Rybec (talk) 03:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE: unused personal photo Rybec (talk) 03:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
See COM:DW Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Appears to be original research for a subject without an article on any project. See COM:SCOPE. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Porque quiero actualizarlo y nuevamente subirlo Estudioz (talk) 04:56, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
porque quiero crear la pagina del artista ya que estos datos tienen publicidad Estudioz (talk) 04:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Blatant copyright infringement: photo was taken by KingYella.com, source: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/19/arts/music/19sann.html Arbor to SJ (talk) 05:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Poor Quality Hardrockpics (talk) 06:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The source given lists the license as "All Rights Reserved". Given that we're dealing with a clearly identifiable person here we should show some basic human dignity and heed that license, regardless of what it used to be. Conti|✉ 19:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete – The source page clearly states "All Rights Reserved", and a quick glance at the uploader's talk page seems to show a problematic past with files being deleted. Senator2029 04:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
Delete – Tendentious calls to "show basic human dignity" aside, if you look on the Flickr page from which this was taken, this is not a Creative Commons image, but is copyrighted with All Rights Reserved: http://www.flickr.com/photos/84747260@N02/8006295845 . Ergo, Wikimedia and Wikipedia are in violation of copyright by using it. There are plenty of open source fellatio images that can be used for the Wikipedia article in question. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iamcuriousblue (talk • contribs) 07:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 23:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
Poor Quality Hardrockpics (talk) 06:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 09:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
personal photo, probably copyrighted, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 06:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No wikipedia article links to this image Bbreeding10 (talk) 06:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Commons isn't only for media used in Wikipedia articles. However, since you uploaded the file and made the deletion request soon after, your wish will likely be honoured. You can add {{speedydelete|uploader}} to a file's description page if this situation arises again. Rybec (talk) 11:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- @Bbreeding10: We would like to
Keep this file because it is useful (think of wikipedias in other languages or wikibooks); but if you like to have it deleted, just tell us and we may comply with your desire. -- Rillke(q?) 21:48, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader req FASTILY 09:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No wikipedia article links to this image Bbreeding10 (talk) 06:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Personal photo, Out of scope, Commons not a photo album Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Personal photo, Out of scope, Commons not a photo album Gbawden (talk) 06:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
One revision is a copyvio [1]. To stop providing that revision, it isn't necessary to delete the file entirely. While the subject may not meet the English Wikipedia's notability guidelines [2] he is a professional musician [3]. Rybec (talk) 11:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
![[1]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/f/f3/20100323075041!Adrian_Visby.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: FASTILY 09:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Personal photo, Out of scope, Commons not a photo album Gbawden (talk) 07:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This is a picture of a room with an image of Brakhage photoshopped in it. Open the image and look at it at 100%. Those edges are too clean to be from a photograph, and the lighting from the flash in the image just doesn't make sense for the rest of the photo. I strongly suspect this is a derivative work, and likely a copyvio (or if not, an improper license).
In light of this uploader's other uploads I further suggest that someone more knowledgeable in Commons policy than I take a look at those uploads. I think it is likely they are mostly or all out of scope and derivative works. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 07:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
blocked user upload, possible copyvio see http://hcm.eva.vn/lang-sao/ngam-top-8-giong-hat-viet-truoc-gio-g-c20a122894.html Motopark (talk) 07:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete /St1995 16:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:04, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
File:A Clockwork Orange film location commemorative plaque at Canterbury House, Borehamwood, UK.jpg
[edit]
This is a photo of a plaque. Freedom of panorama in the UK does not usually apply to 2D works (Commons:FOP#United_Kingdom). Rybec (talk) 07:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Iron Maiden
[edit]Well over the UK threshold of originality, if this and this have been ruled protected by a court then so would the IM logos.
.svg){kind=link}
- File:Iron Maiden Wordmark.svg
- File:Ironmaidenwallpaper.com Banner.jpg
- File:Userbox-im.png
- File:Wordmarks of IM.jpg
LGA talkedits 07:34, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Ed Force One
[edit]Art work and logos are all protected by copyright, a claim of COM:DM fails as the reason for taking the images is the very presence of the copyrighted works.
- File:Astraeus Airlines Boeing 757-200 Iron Maiden Milinkovic.jpg
- File:Astraeus Boeing 757-200 Iron Maiden Milinkovic.jpg
- File:Ed force at Nice Airport 17.5.08.JPG
- File:Ed-Force one 757.jpg
- File:EdForceOne.jpg
- File:G-ojib-ironmaiden.jpg
- File:Iron Maiden's Ed Force One at Keflavík airport in Iceland.jpg
LGA talkedits 07:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Speedy kept, images of these aircraft are fine as long as they don't focus/crop on the artworks. There was no special reason to take images of just this aircraft, many images of this aircraft without artwork available. Denniss (talk) 07:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Reopened. Except for those that would qualify for the {{Speedy}} tag, there is no basis in policy for speedy closes of DRs. As Denniss himself says, "There was no special reason to take images of just this aircraft, many images of this aircraft without artwork available", so that there is no reason to keep these images which infringe on the copyrighted artwork. We have many images of 757-200s, so given that the whole aircraft is covered with the art, a DM argument is not possible and no other argument is available. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- The speedy close was valid, no need to repopen just because LGA whas whining. The images are perfectly valid with the aircraft as object, only if you zoom onto the tail art or the small art near the cockpit it becomes a derivative work. I explained this to LGA as well be he/she refused to understand (not uncommon for this user). The reason for taking the images of this aircraft is the same as every other one, this aircraft at an airport or in the air on a specific date. If you start to argument in this obscure way we would have to delete all images of the Pokemon jets. --Denniss (talk) 21:21, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- You seem also to be overlooking the large IM logo on the side of the plane, which as a UK work is well over that countries threshold of originality as way more complex than this logo that is protected in UK (see this case). LGA talkedits 03:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Derivatives of non-free content are forbidden on Commons FASTILY 09:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Peruvian work, published/created (or sourced with - as indicated) "1973", licensed with {{PD-1996}} + "Peruvian copyright law, signed under the Manuel Prado administration, had a 20 year protection over images starting in January 1, 1962. All images published in Peru prior to 1976, whose protection lasted until 1996 (and by which time a new 70 year protection was imposed by the Alberto Fujimori administration), are in the public domain.". Considering Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Peru the photo may be copyrighted till the end of 2043 due to "The Peruvian copyright law of April 23, 1996, which entered in force on May 24, 1996, states in its transitional provisions that "[works] protected under the previous legislation shall benefit from the longer terms of protection provided for in this law". It is unclear whether that also applies to works where previous shorter terms had already expired."my underline Gunnex (talk) 08:10, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- keep: This photograph, which was published in 1973 (under a 20-year copyright law, established by Peru's Manuel Prado administration in 1962) had its copyright expire in 1993. In effect, this work was no longer "protected under the previous legislation" when the 1996 copyright law came into effect. Therefore, this deletion request is invalid. Best regards.--18:27, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- The 1996 copyright law also makes no mention of imposing retroactive copyright status on images whose copyright protection had expired. There can be no ambiguity of the photograph's status because nothing is mentioned of it. We can't discuss a topic that does not exist. This photograph has been in the public domain since 1993.--MarshalN20 (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
- What about Copyright Law (Legislative Decree No. 822 of April 23, 1996), last page, "Transitional Provisions": "The rights in the works and other productions protected under the previous legislation shall benefit from the longer terms of protection provided for in this Law"? Gunnex (talk) 09:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: To Gunnex's last question -- that means that if a work's copyright would have expired under the old law in, say, 1997. ot noew has the new term. Note that it says "protected" -- present tense -- and nothing about works that were previously protected. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
no description, source, license or permission Rybec (talk) 08:53, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE, unused personal image Rybec (talk) 08:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Speedy as a copyright problem. The underpinning still frame is from The Fog (2007). I have removed the NSDR category, this is odd but not explicit nudity, nor sexual in nature. --Fæ (talk) 09:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
COM:SCOPE, unused personal image Rybec (talk) 08:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, watermarked with "Ph [most likely: Photographer] Daniel A....[illegible]" which does not match with -1-upload-user Blanco1993. Gunnex (talk) 09:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. --Taichi (talk) 08:49, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Asked for release from the copyright owners, they were going to send it, but I never received it. Grashoofd (talk) 10:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Asked for release from the copyright owners, they were going to send it, but I never received it. Grashoofd (talk) 10:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No encyclopedic use: selfie used in self-promoting user page deleted at en:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shyam Durai Raj JohnCD (talk) 10:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No encyclopedic use: selfie used in self-promoting user page deleted at en:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shyam Durai Raj JohnCD (talk) 10:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No encyclopedic use: selfie by uploader whose only edits have been a Facebook-style user page deleted at en:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shyam Durai Raj JohnCD (talk) 11:04, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This one file specifically of the Arfisa uploads should be deleted as it is merely a commercial cover sheet and is outside the scope of Commons.
Note that this doe not apply to the other hardware images of this upload batch. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. Of course should the company be notable to warrant an Wikipedia article, then maybe this logo passes ToO and can be hosted in Commons. -- Tuválkin ✉ 10:43, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. 2 identical images regarding Spanish actress es:Liliana Durán (1932—2006), uploaded in 06.2012, most likely screenshotted from a film szene. May be in PD by other means but relevant info must be provided.
Gunnex (talk) 11:11, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Alejandro J. Nava
[edit]Paintings of Venezuelan painter Alejandro Javier Nava Hernandez (1984—), uploaded by Alberto Ospina Sousa. Copyrighted in Venezuela per COM:CRT#Venezuela +60 pma. Permission from "Alejandro Javier Nava Hernandez" needed.
- File:Alejandro Nava-Felicidad88.jpg
- File:Amor con C-Alejandro Nava.jpg
- File:Ciudad de las Riquezas-Alejandro Nava.jpg
- File:Medico salvando a un paciente de la muerte.jpg
- File:Medicosalvandoaunpacientedelamuerte AlejandroNava.jpg
- File:Nava 123.jpg
- File:Nava alpha.jpg
- File:Perdido por ti-Alejandro Nava.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 11:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Out of project scope (w:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shyam Durai Raj, w:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Shyam Solomon). MER-C 11:49, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
it is the wrong file Radavarga (talk) 12:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Looks very much like a personal photo, out of scope imo Gbawden (talk) 12:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, Out of Scope Gbawden (talk) 12:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
wrong image Radavarga (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
image ist blurry, unidentifiable Thiotrix (talk) 12:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Looks like a personal pic, unused, out of scope IMO Gbawden (talk) 12:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Also nominated:
- File:P-02.JPG
- File:P-04.JPG
- File:P-05.JPG
- File:P-08.JPG
- File:P-011.JPG. Out of project scope (w:Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Venugopalbk). MER-C 12:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- @MER-C: You can use VisualFileChange to handle large batch deletion requests. And I would also advise using bullet point format so it's easier for me to see. In any case, I vote Delete for these images as well as the following ones below, which are in addition potential copyright violations:
- --TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 17:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:05, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
image is blurry Thiotrix (talk) 12:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
copyright violation http://entretenimiento.terra.com/awards-central/fotos-gran-reventon-en-los-kids-choice-awards-mexico-2013,bf9c17ac2eed0410VgnVCM20000099cceb0aRCRD.html Vichock (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Copyright violation / Violación de derechos de autor http://entretenimiento.terra.com/awards-central/fotos-gran-reventon-en-los-kids-choice-awards-mexico-2013,bf9c17ac2eed0410VgnVCM20000099cceb0aRCRD.html Vichock (talk) 05:05, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted recreation -FASTILY 04:46, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
This image is of much too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose. It's out of project scope. Ies (talk) 13:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_--_2012_--_13.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_--_2012_--_13.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unclear legal situation XRay talk 13:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
_--_2012_--_13.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_--_2012_--_13.jpg){kind=link}
,_Skulptur_(Nevada-Seite)_--_2012_--_9.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Skulptur_(Nevada-Seite)_--_2012_--_9.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unclear legal situation XRay talk 13:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
,_Skulptur_(Nevada-Seite)_--_2012_--_9.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
,_Skulptur_(Nevada-Seite)_--_2012_--_9.jpg){kind=link}
_--_2012_--_12.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_--_2012_--_12.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unclear legal situation XRay talk 13:17, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
_--_2012_--_12.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_--_2012_--_12.jpg){kind=link}
No freedom of panorama in COM:FOP#Korea (South). — Revicomplaint? 13:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Contains symbols with possible trademark XRay talk 13:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Нет разрешения автора на свободное использование изображения Dogad75 (talk) 14:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Photograph of a presumably non-free work. No freedom of panorama in Italy. Psychonaut (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- I also assume it is a non-free work, so I guess I have to support your argument to delete this. I guess I should e-mail the Superintendence of Basilicata (which placed the information board there) and ask them for a digital copy of the map in SVG to be released under the CC-license? Also, if they can't provide a digital file, would it be possible for them to simply give permission through e-mail to license the photo under the CC-license? I guess as a last resort I could make a similar map, which could be released under the CC-license by me without a problem. I've also read w:Freedom of panorama which confuses me: the photo of the map is not free, but my photos of the ruins I used in w:Metapontum *are* free? --AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 10:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- Freedom of panorama is an exception to copyright law in some jurisdictions which allows you to reproduce works which are situated in public view. Italy does not have such an exception, which means that if a copyrighted work (such as a map) is displayed in a public place, then you have no automatic right to make copies of it. In your case, the ruins are old enough that they are not under copyright, so reproducing photographs of them is perfectly legal. However, the map you photographed looks like it is a modern work, so it is presumably under copyright and cannot be freely reproduced without permission of the copyright holder. One solution, as you already discovered, would be to contact the copyright holder and ask them to release the map into the public domain or under a free content licence compatible with the ones used for Wikimedia Commons. (But note that there is no such thing as "the CC-license"; the Creative Commons publishes several licences, not all of which are free. Also, the Superintendence of Basilicata may or may not be the copyright holder, but if they're not they can probably tell you who is.) There are probably form letters for this situation posted elsewhere on Commons; I can't find them at the moment but if you ask on one of the help pages I'm sure someone will point them out. Another solution would be to create a similar map entirely on your own and release it into the public domain or under a free content licence. —Psychonaut (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: There is no FOP in Italy FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Substituted by File:Metro-M.svg Friedrichstrasse (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The top left image also appears here and might be a copyright violation. Stefan4 (talk) 15:01, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Comment The middle lower image also appears on that page, including the "Vignobles Bardet" signature. A trace of the signature is visible in the top left image, too. So these images clearly comes from that website. It's quite possible this was uploaded with authorisation from the copyright holder, given the uploader's username (Vignobles) and their claim of permission for a different file.[4] Given the images' earlier publication on that website, however, I believe we'll have to Delete this montage unless confirmation of permission is received from Vignobles Bardet via OTRS. --Avenue (talk) 11:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
copyvio of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 15:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Useless without a description and categories. Seems to be unknown to google 91.66.57.59 15:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Useless without a description and categories. Seems to be unknown to google 91.66.57.59 15:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
very bad and reversed image of file:Maria Josepha of Saxony.jpg see museo del prado Pierpao.lo (listening) 15:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Uploaded with copyvio of same person (see uploader talk/deleted contribs); unused (may be out of scope as non-notable) and copyright holder per metadata is "kimura kumi" which does not match or have similarities to uploader "puchirin" Эlcobbola talk 15:10, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ddddddpppppp (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.
- File:Serra solare estate.jpg
- File:Serra solare inverno.jpg
- File:4 Home.jpg
- File:Copertura.jpg
- File:Copertura e vetrate pieghevoli.jpg
- File:Porch, Veranda.jpg
- File:Wonderful Porch.jpg
- File:Porches design.jpg
- File:GM Morando Giemme System.jpg
- File:Folding Glass door.JPG
- File:Bi Folding Glass door.JPG
- File:Folding all Glass door.JPG
- File:Dining Room closed off with Giemme System.jpg
- File:Dehor.JPG
- File:Bi Folding Glass Doors.jpg
- File:Office movable wall.jpg
- File:All glass sliding door.jpg
- File:Balcony glazing.jpg
- File:Pub and bar fixtures.jpg
- File:Pergola idea.jpg
- File:Front shop door.jpg
- File:Movable wall.jpg
- File:Hotel porches.jpg
- File:Folding glass door.JPG
- File:All glass interior divider.JPG
- File:Front windows shop.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I dont believe that the real Chris Ranney http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2745210/ would upload ridiculous small files as File:Cowboy Chris 3.jpg
91.66.57.59 15:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from toy design.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Looks like collection of TV screenshots, promo photos and newspaper article. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Caterina Stagno.png
- File:Schiave di Caterina Stagno - Il trafficante in carcere.jpg
- File:Schiave gabbia di Caterina Stagno - Covo dove le ragazze sono rinchiuse e piegate alla volonta' del traffico.jpg
- File:Angar schiave gabbia di Caterina Stagno - La storia siamo noi.jpg
- File:Acquisto schiave di Caterina Stagno - La storia siamo noi.jpg
- File:Gigi Riva Caterina Stagno - La storia siamo noi.jpg
- File:Intervista Totti 15aprile2006 di Caterina Stagno - La storia siamo noi.JPG
- File:Francesco Totti Caterina Stagno- La storia siamo noi.png
- File:Campionati del mondo caterina stagno.png
- File:Cristiaan Barnard and Caterina Stagno - Rome 1991.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative work from advertisement. Background should be removed to keep image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unidentifiable thing that may well be copyrighted, in either case out of scope. darkweasel94 15:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal images. Category:Rayner Quintero also would be deleted.
- File:RECUERDOS PELIGROSOS MCMXCVIII.gif
- File:(RIO ETERNO 2011).gif
- File:Rayner Quintero 2013.jpg
- File:Rayner Quintero.gif
- File:Xj95u04rd695h41i07ho.jpeg
.gif&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 15:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Nikotheras (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope, unused self-promotion files.
Jespinos (talk) 15:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files in Category:Epoch Times
[edit]Apparently, not de minimis newspaper covers.
- File:01.HerndonMonroeParkRide.HerndonVA.2September2013 (9712061505) (2).jpg
- File:02.HerndonMonroeParkRide.HerndonVA.2September2013 (9715395174) (2).jpg
- File:03.HerndonMonroeParkRide.HerndonVA.2September2013 (9712162203) (2).jpg
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Jespinos (talk) 15:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Per COM:DW.
Jespinos (talk) 16:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I accidentally uploaded the wrong picture, please delete Anna16 (talk) 16:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This is a close call for de minimis, but I think that this image infringes on the copyrighted text on the plaque in the center forground. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:16, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused file, private image BrightRaven (talk) 16:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Opposed. Shows typical fashion and position. - Joxemai (talk) 17:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Uploader is not the copyright holder of this image and has not obtained license to upload image to Wikipedia Commons. Copyright holder is Nick Heavican/Metropolitan Opera. Met Opera Press Office (talk) 16:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep - The image was released under a Creative Commons attribution 3.0 license by Folkets Hus och Parker through their account on MyNewsDesk. The license has been reviewed and the image is still available at the source under the specified license. If Folkets Hus och Parker does not own the copyright and the copyright owner of the image did not release the image under the specified license, the first action for the actual copyright holder should be to contact Folkets Hus och Parker and investigate why they released it under that license. Folkets Hus och Parker is an umbrella organization for 600 member organizations whose main business is culture and entertainment. I find it unlikely that they would release an image under a CC license without permission. --Bensin (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: It seems highly unlikely that Folkets Hus och Parker -- The National Federation of People´s Parks and Community Centres (in Stockholm) -- would own the copyright to an image taken at the Metropolitan Opera in New York. Note that the file description calls out the Met as the Author. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The subject building was built in 1931. Without further information, there is no way to determine the copyright status of this image and there is certainly nothing to suggest that the copyright holder has licensed it as shown. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Uploader is not the copyright holder of this image and has not obtained license to upload image to Wikipedia Commons. Copyright holder is Nick Heavican/Metropolitan Opera. Met Opera Press Office (talk) 16:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Watermark suggests that the image is likely not own work. Jespinos (talk) 16:36, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_(3896800571).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3896800571).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: the fountain is from 1965. Eleassar (t/p) 16:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
_(3896800571).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_(3896800571).jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by DAVID CUELLA (talk · contribs)
[edit]I tagged one of the uploads of the user asking for evidence of permission, which was not answered. This suggests that the images are likely not own work of the uploader.
- File:Celebració Lliga 2010-11.jpg
- File:TITO A WEMBLEY ..DESPRES CAMPIONS DE LA CHAMPIONS , GRACIES.jpg
- File:PEP GUARDIOLA I TITO VILANOVA CAMPIONS PER SEMPRE...jpg
- File:Campions de lliga.jpg
- File:Eh....em guanyat la lliga nano.jpg
- File:TITO VILANOVA-JORDI ROURA.JPG
- File:La banqueta.JPG
- File:TITO VILANOVA I LEO MESSI (LA PRIMERA COPA DE LA ERA TITO-PEP.jpg
- File:Campions de la CHAMPIONS.jpg
- File:Celebració de la Copa del Rei.jpg
Jespinos (talk) 17:11, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_12.20.36.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_12.20.36.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope, unused personal image. Jespinos (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
_12.20.36.png){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
_12.20.36.png){kind=link}
Low resolution and missing EXIF. The image is likely not own work. Jespinos (talk) 17:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
no need for it. remainings from my upload mistake. Aeroid (talk) 17:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
no freedom of panorama in Italy and buildings, including the one at the centre, look recent Rybec (talk) 17:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Delete. The red and green colors when at first glance give impression russia took over the ukraine. Also, no need to color russia.
This file is a duplicate of File:LocationCrimea.PNG (where someone had added also Russia, but now reverted). Stryn (talk)
- Delete Agreed. It is not necessary to have duplicate maps. The other one was perfectly fine the way it was. Viller the Great (talk) 05:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep The main benefit I see for this version of the map is for Wikipedia:2014 Crimean crisis, which is about a conflict involving Russia. One of the key points of the conflict is that, Crimea is over half ethnically Russian, Crimea was occupied by Russian troops, and Crimea recently asked for reunification with the country. Including Russia on the map alongside Crimea provides context for the conflict, which is helpful for those who are unfamiliar with that part of the world. There are a few other articles that would similarly benefit, such as 2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine, which wouldn't really make sense with a map lacking Russia. -Thunderforge (talk) 07:20, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep The map is needed in many Wikis for the Ukrainian-Russian conflict about Crimea. One party is painted green, the other party is painted red. --Schwarzorange (talk) 08:47, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep Why not have more versions? --Palu (talk) 12:59, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- Please, look at this, although the base of files is not even the same. --85.76.172.58 15:50, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep --RupertD. (talk) 16:26, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep This image is now util, for the 2014 Ukrainia-Russian conflict. --Nerika (talk) 11:37, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep File:Location UK-Crimea-RU.PNG is not identic with the original version of File:LocationCrimea.PNG. File:LocationCrimea.PNG were 10 times overwriten and contains at least 5 substantially different variants of the map. They should by split under 5 different file names. Every new image should be uploaded under new file name. --ŠJů (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep per ŠJů, there is no policy against derivated versions, and it can be vectorized. --Zerabat (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- It is the same as File:LocationCrimea 4.PNG, no? The color of Russia is not the same, that's all, but I don't think it is enough to have two files... SenseiAC (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- Ukraine (with Crimea) and Russia (without Crimea) are two seperate countries, so they should not be painted in similar colors. --Schwarzorange (talk) 06:40, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Keep Useful. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:31, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Widely in use. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:49, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Is she a Russian singer? Or a Wikipedian? Please give more informations 91.66.57.59 17:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jwdietrich2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyvio: operating systems are copyrighted.
- File:Lazarus 1 2 Windows 7.png
- File:Lazarus 1 2 Mac Mountain Lion.png
- File:Simthyr 3 1 open suse linux 11.png
- File:Lazarus 1.0 and SimThyr 3.1 Windows XP.png
- File:Lazarus 1.0 Carbon.png
JurgenNL (talk) 18:01, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
I disagree. These are screenshots of three open-source applications (Lazarus, SPINA Thyr and SimThyr) that are licensed via GPL and a BSD license, respectively. I am initiator and main developer of two of these projects. The screenshots have been made in order to demonstrate compatibility with certain operating systems and restrict the depicted OS-specific parts to the minimum that is necessary to recognize the platform. The small OS-specific regions that remain visible don't meet a minimum threshold of originality.--Jwdietrich2 (talk) 18:28, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: The icons are DM . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
It is a hoax (cover of a book allegedly published in 1934; however, the author has never existed, no mentions in bibliographies and library catalogues). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 18:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
It is a hoax (cover of a book allegedly published in 1934; however, the author has never existed, no mentions in bibliographies and library catalogues). Uploader should be banned. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
It is a hoax (cover of a book allegedly published in 1934; however, the author has never existed, no mentions in bibliographies and library catalogues). The uploader should be banned. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Portrait of an unknown person (uploaded as a part of the hoax, the uploader pretends this picture is portrayed a fictional Russian poet). Andrei Romanenko (talk) 18:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Repost. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Efim Yvrajin 1918.jpg. Andrei Romanenko (talk) 18:51, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 10:35, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
unused user portrait 91.66.57.59 18:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Source given is nonsensical user, map is unlikely to be user's own work, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:08, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bungutebungute (talk · contribs)
[edit]The subjects of these photos are recent-looking buildings in Jakarta. In Indonesia, freedom of panorama does not permit commercial uses (Commons:FOP#Indonesia).
- File:TamanAnggrek.jpg
- File:Uob.jpg
- File:Plazaindo.jpg
- File:Wismamulia.jpg
- File:Peakjakarta.jpg
- File:Kempinskyres.jpg
- File:BCAtower.jpg
- File:Centralparkjakarta.jpg
- File:Cwj.jpg
Rybec (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Overprinting on small, low resolution image shows use for self-promotion. User claims to have created several maps, however prior uploads including this one) show pattern of use of unsourced materials to create derivative works. There is no source given other than "own work" and no metadata on this file, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Without a source given, the license provided cannot be checked, and becomes a possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image from newspaper here, probable COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
unused user portrait 91.66.57.59 18:22, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unused personal photo of the non-notable entry. Out of project scope. ~Moheen (keep talking) 04:24, 15 March 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --George Chernilevsky talk 13:33, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
unused user portrait 91.66.57.59 18:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Andrevruas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Images not of good quality - uploader seems not to understand, that Wikimedia Commons is not a private photo album.
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso13.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso12.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso10.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso11.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso9.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso8.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso7.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso6.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso5.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso4.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso3.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso1.JPG
- File:Schnauzerlhasaapso2.JPG
Marcus Cyron (talk) 18:30, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
useless without a description 91.66.57.59 18:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Small size, no meta data, found all over internet for rental property as stated in the description. Possible COM:COPYVIO and reminding uploader about COM:SCOPE, images are not to be for promotional purposes. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:37, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Low resolution, blurry copy of devotional artwork, unlikely to be users own work, no source, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:38, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be user's own work, this image has no meta data, possible COM:COPYVIO. Note that the article to which it is appended is some kind of resume or obituary containing the same resume information as is here on the Commons description. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Without a location, I don't think this is useful. darkweasel94 18:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Without a location, I don't think this is useful. darkweasel94 18:44, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This image is from Deviant Art, as stated in the source, however the artist at Deviant Art has marked this image "©2012-2014 DragonOfLust". No indication that uploader is same as Deviant Art creator. Image is possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No indication that this image is the creation of the user, no metadata. Image is in use elsewhere on web prior to this upload, see here, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:46, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Nonsensical image, lacking informative description or title is out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image was published in 2008 here, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image previously published, including here, unlikely to be user's own work and possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright status of these things isn't very clear, there's no information on where/what they are. darkweasel94 18:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright status of these things isn't very clear, there's no information on where/what they are. darkweasel94 18:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Image previously published here in 2007, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:56, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- But only the cropped section is published there.
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No camera metadata, black bordering, small size and fuzzy resolution suggest this is not "own work" but a COM:COPYVIO. Several of user's other uploads were copied from other websites. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Small size, low resolution, lack of camera metadata suggest this is not user's own work but COM:COPYVIO. Several of user's other uploads were from the popular press. Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This image is all over the internet and is unlikely to be user's own work: too small, low rez, no metadata and etc. Probable COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unused image of male is all over the internet, possible COM:COPYVIO, no metadata, unlikely to be user's own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unused image of male is all over the internet, possible COM:COPYVIO, no metadata, unlikely to be user's own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ptcnetwork (talk · contribs)
[edit]Promotional movie posters unlikely to be user's own work. Description says they are "upcoming" films. Probable COM:COPYVIOs.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Images of male centered in frame, both hands visible, Name of subject and Name of uploader appear derivative. Can see both subject's hands in both photos, therefore unlikely to be subject of images "own work" and instead a COM:COPYVIO. Suggest that uploader reread COM:SCOPE about Commons not being for self-promotion or storage of personal images.
- File:Dhvanikbhai shah visited rajasthan kumbhal garh 2014-01-08 12-47.jpg
- File:Dhvanikbhai shah visited agra taj mahal 2014-01-08 12-45.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Promotional image all over internet, marked with contact info, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ritu tiwary (talk · contribs)
[edit]User has had previous image deleted for being copyright violation from same page (see: [5]) as these images are also found [6]. Images are in use on self-promoting user page. User has made no other contributions to the project than uploading images of uncertain copyright and editing that user page. Probable COM:COPYVIO and also user please reread COM:SCOPE about how Commons is not for personal promotion.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image all over web, including [7] here, no evidence of user's own work and possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator. Citobun (talk) 10:45, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unused logo outside of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Sidemarking shows original source, but no apparent connection with uploader, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Small file, poor resolution and no metadata suggest COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:22, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image is watermarked and overlain with letters, small size, suggest this is a rephotograph of a poster or screenshot from a display, derivative of the original and not user's own work. Possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Small file, poor resolution and no metadata suggest COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image from [8] here, not user's "own work", possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image all over internet, plus small size, no metadata, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:27, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Image is found on google plus and on youtube, possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:29, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Per COM:PACKAGING. Jespinos (talk) 20:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Magog the Ogre as no license. Well, there is a CC license, but that not own work of the uploader as stated an does not look simple enough for {{PD-textlogo}} or similar. JuTa 20:05, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Self-promotion Fixertool (talk) 20:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
missing permission - possible false claim to ownership Lady Lotus (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hold up I get the impression that it's claimed as a derivative work of File:Fcad3.jpg, which was claimed as an own work of User:Efloch. Commons:Deletion requests/File:Fcad3.jpg gives no reason for saying "missing permission - possible false claim to ownership" and really shouldn't have been closed as "delete" unless it was a simple case of {{Npd}}, in which case the DR was unnecessary. Regardless of what happened, we need more explanation before deleting this image. Nyttend (talk) 04:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Original uploader had either no Exif in uploads or those with Exif where of ~8 different cams - all deleted Denniss (talk) 09:11, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
{{Commons:Deletion requests/File:Jolie-pitt2.png}
Нет разрешения автора на свободную лицензию Dogad75 (talk) 21:13, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
only non-commercial permission, uploader has contributed many questionable images to en.wiki[9] Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:42, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Please revise your comment as it implies that I'm the uploader and has many questionable images. For the record, I was transferring the image from en.wp to here and not the original uploader of said image. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
- Sorry, by "uploader" I meant the original uploader on en.wiki (as linked). Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:07, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
no source for base map Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:00, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
These are pictures mostly taken from either this website or the equivalent from Facebook (e.g. this) and there's no evidence that the photographer/copyright-holder agreed to release these photos under the given license there.
- File:Fer-Arequipa.jpg
- File:Fer2.jpg
- File:Fercito.jpg
- File:Fereyna.jpg
- File:Fer Reyna.jpg
- File:Fer - Pag.jpg
- File:Ferreyna.jpg
- File:Fer r.jpg
TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:06, 6 March 2014 (UTC) Las fotos que he subido son tomadas por nosotros mismo cuando vamos a cada concierto por favor déjenlas subir, gracias
Deleted: FASTILY 09:02, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
The sources include and are alleged to be from The Press Times among other URLs, but there's no indication of them agreeing to release under the given license and the copyright status for this is unclear. As you can see from this Google Image search result the image seems to be distributed amongst any number of other sites. It could be claimed that the image falls under PD-textlogo, but the advanced typeface and location and style of the symbol above "times" leaves me in doubt. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Scope, not providing a realistically educational purpose and Commons is not a private photo gallery. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
taken from this website whose name is also the uploader's; however there's no indication that the subject of the photograph is also the copyright holder as opposed to the photographer, so evidence must be given. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
dubious own work -- uploader has contributed other questionable images at en.wiki[10] Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:24, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
potentially unfree - description does not specify where images for arrowheads came from etc. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:25, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Cezar alex small
Uploaded at 07.2009. Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, mysteriously white/incomplete bordered, cropped from a (watermarked) full version published earlierer via (example) http://beautycontests.blogspot.de/2009/06/karen-schwarz-miss-peru-universe-2009.html (06.2009) = http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mZl6cqifgHA/SkTRq3WP2GI/AAAAAAAAJ6k/WwjIWy5aGQk/s1600/karen11.jpg Gunnex (talk) 22:40, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
I'm not sure how this could be considered realistically useful for an educational purpose under Scope. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 22:50, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, most likely cropped from unknown source. Gunnex (talk) 22:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, I'm DesouzaFerrand. I forgot the password for that old account. Last year I took this photo in her show at the Hard Rock Cafe - Lima. In fact, I cut only the part where she appears, because she was next to her guitarist. The image is my own work. Thank you. DesouzalFerrandd (talk) 02:45, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: apparentl yok FASTILY 09:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- Update
Tagged with copyvio (cropped) via http://peru.com/entretenimiento/musica/hard-rock-festival-exguns-nroses-encabezo-concierto-molina-noticia-135460-518075 (04.2013, credit: "Foto: Diego Toledo / Peru.com") = http://cde.peru.com/ima/0/0/5/1/8/518075/611x458.jpg. Gunnex (talk) 20:38, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Private image - no educational value, ergo out of project scope High Contrast (talk) 23:15, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
File:Amitabh,abhishekh,rakesh,hritik,dcm sir,mithun,hema,dharmendra,raveena,ashavrya,mahesh and anil kapoor.jpg
[edit]
Several images appear in this collage. The source and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient. High Contrast (talk) 23:18, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:51, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Авторство под сомнением, встречается в Интернете уже в 2009 году (http://www.komediaspb.ru/people/svetin.php, http://www.kinokadr.ru/photoes/2005/12/11/svetin/svetin.jpg) Dogad75 (talk) 23:22, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Onur yaşar kartal (talk · contribs)
[edit]There doesn't seem to be any educational value derived from these images under Commons:Scope. Commons is not a private photo gallery.
TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 23:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:41, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg -FASTILY 07:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Kept and Deleted by Fastily, closed by . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:57, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:43, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg -FASTILY 07:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Kept and Deleted by Fastily, closed by . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Photos quite identical : File:Siene River 61 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 62 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 63 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 64 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 65 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 66 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 67 2012-07-01.jpg, File:Siene River 68 2012-07-01.jpg. I plan to keep File:Siene River 69 2012-07-01.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 23:45, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- I’d keep one from each of the three trios of almost identical images: one from 61+62+63 (hand and fender), one from 64+65+66 (boat sailing away), and one from 67+68+69 (no distractions). So, keep three, not one, and delete six, not eight. -- Tuválkin ✉ 02:23, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep 63, 66, 69, per Tuvalkin. I've deleted the rest -FASTILY 07:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Kept and deleted by Fastily, closed by . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:01, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 23:47, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:08, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No La quiero mas en mi WIkipedia Axelsteve91 (talk) 23:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
No la Quiero Axelsteve91 (talk) 23:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation, see Commons:Image casebook#Product packaging. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 23:57, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted -FASTILY 05:52, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
No La quiero mas en mi WIkipedia Axelsteve91 (talk) 23:51, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
No la Quiero Axelsteve91 (talk) 23:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 09:09, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Dubious claim that it is below the threshold of originality. As you can see at COM:TOO#Austria, even simple text logos are copyrighted in Austria. Also, according to w:Adobe Systems, Inc. v. Southern Software, Inc. many vectorisations are copyrightable as computer software, and we don't know by whom the vectorisation was made and we do not have any permission from the person who made the vectorisation. Stefan4 (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- See en.WP NFCR (english) and de:Datei:Wiener Lokalbahn.svg (german). |FDMS 21:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- The German-language Wikipedia often uses very dubious claims of "no threshold of originality" for its local uploads. That's not something we should base decisions on. But I've looked at the two Supreme Court decisions cited in the policy:
- The Bauer decision says that the "partial" arrow with its effect at the rear part is a novel idea worthy of copyright restriction.
- In the Zimmermann decision, no party actually argued that the logo was below the threshold of originality, so the court did not even consider any arguments for that.
- I don't think there is much of a "novel idea" in putting two "arrow ends" together in this way. Certainly less than in the Bauer logo. So, my vote is to Keep. darkweasel94 21:39, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hm, looks like a novel idea to me. You also missed the other problem: we do not know where the vectorisation comes from and what the copyright status of the vectorisation is. There are two questions here: can we keep a raster image of the logo, and can we keep this vectorisation, or do we need someone else to make a new vectorisation of the logo? --Stefan4 (talk) 21:52, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's maybe SVG erstellt mit CorelDraw and SVG erstellt durch Christian Bier (German description page, English description page source is The logo is from the www.wlb.at website. www.wlb.at, also the German Wikipedia) ... |FDMS 21:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- That's not on the file information page on Commons which only mentions English Wikipedia, so I overlooked that. If the file was made by User:ChristianBier and he claims that the file is below the threshold of originality, then do we still need permission from him if it turns out that the vectorisation is above the threshold of originality, or can we treat it as a {{PD-self}}? I'd say that the copyright tag on German Wikipedia only is an assessment of the copyright status and not an implicit permission in any way, so we might need permission from him. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- I think if somebody says themselves "this is PD", then they also relinquish all copyright they may themselves hold on it. But if that is really a problem I can re-vectorize it, should take only a couple of minutes. darkweasel94 22:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- So in the future, I should no longer care about the copyrights of original Wikipedia uploaders and just claim that I created the SVGs of PD textlogos myself? The only way to avoid such DRs is to ignore copyright? |FDMS 22:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Nobody claimed any such thing. darkweasel94 22:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Well, if separate permission for using vectorisation is needed claiming someone else actually created the SVG would be something very stupid to do. |FDMS 22:31, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Nobody claimed any such thing. darkweasel94 22:26, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- So in the future, I should no longer care about the copyrights of original Wikipedia uploaders and just claim that I created the SVGs of PD textlogos myself? The only way to avoid such DRs is to ignore copyright? |FDMS 22:21, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- I think if somebody says themselves "this is PD", then they also relinquish all copyright they may themselves hold on it. But if that is really a problem I can re-vectorize it, should take only a couple of minutes. darkweasel94 22:12, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- That's not on the file information page on Commons which only mentions English Wikipedia, so I overlooked that. If the file was made by User:ChristianBier and he claims that the file is below the threshold of originality, then do we still need permission from him if it turns out that the vectorisation is above the threshold of originality, or can we treat it as a {{PD-self}}? I'd say that the copyright tag on German Wikipedia only is an assessment of the copyright status and not an implicit permission in any way, so we might need permission from him. --Stefan4 (talk) 22:07, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- It's maybe SVG erstellt mit CorelDraw and SVG erstellt durch Christian Bier (German description page, English description page source is The logo is from the www.wlb.at website. www.wlb.at, also the German Wikipedia) ... |FDMS 21:55, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- Hm, looks like a novel idea to me. You also missed the other problem: we do not know where the vectorisation comes from and what the copyright status of the vectorisation is. There are two questions here: can we keep a raster image of the logo, and can we keep this vectorisation, or do we need someone else to make a new vectorisation of the logo? --Stefan4 (talk) 21:52, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
- The German-language Wikipedia often uses very dubious claims of "no threshold of originality" for its local uploads. That's not something we should base decisions on. But I've looked at the two Supreme Court decisions cited in the policy:
- Keep Examples in the Austrian TOO entry are hand-drawn signatures and therefore not "simple text logos". This is not comparable to the basic geometry which this file consists of. Fry1989 eh? 18:04, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
- It also seems that you have misunderstood COM:PRP, which says that we only can keep images if they beyond reasonable doubt are free, whereas you seem to think that images can be kept as long as they are not beyond reasonable doubt unfree. The only examples we have from Austria at COM:TOO are two handwritten logos, and the Austrian supreme court decided to apply a fairly low threshold of originality for such images. We do not have any examples of geometric shapes, so we have to assume that the threshold of originality for geometric shapes also is low. We also do not have any examples of images which are below the Austrian threshold of originality, so we have to assume that there also exist images which are simpler than the examples at COM:TOO#Austria which still are above the threshold of originality. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- It seems that you have no problem repeating old lies about what is or isn't copyrighted in Austria, using the TOO entry of signatures wrongly claiming they are "basic text", even though this has been rejected in multiple DRs in the past, which is why I have had to start an AN about your dishonesty in nominating files for deletion. Fry1989 eh? 17:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- You are talking about some lies above. However, you have not told which lies you are talking about or where to find them. Where do I find out what lies you are talking about?
- Per COM:EVIDENCE, you have to provide evidence that the logo and its vectorisation both are below the threshold of originality of Austria. Please do so. The section COM:TOO#Austria only gives some indications of when things are above the threshold of originality, but no indications of when something is below the threshold of originality. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- If you can't figure out the lie I'm talking about you're either blind or simple-minded, because I've pointed out your claim that a signature is "basic text" is a lie half a dozen times now. I shouldn't have to say the same thing over and over and you still not understand what I am complaining about. Fry1989 eh? 00:10, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
- It seems that you have no problem repeating old lies about what is or isn't copyrighted in Austria, using the TOO entry of signatures wrongly claiming they are "basic text", even though this has been rejected in multiple DRs in the past, which is why I have had to start an AN about your dishonesty in nominating files for deletion. Fry1989 eh? 17:06, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- It also seems that you have misunderstood COM:PRP, which says that we only can keep images if they beyond reasonable doubt are free, whereas you seem to think that images can be kept as long as they are not beyond reasonable doubt unfree. The only examples we have from Austria at COM:TOO are two handwritten logos, and the Austrian supreme court decided to apply a fairly low threshold of originality for such images. We do not have any examples of geometric shapes, so we have to assume that the threshold of originality for geometric shapes also is low. We also do not have any examples of images which are below the Austrian threshold of originality, so we have to assume that there also exist images which are simpler than the examples at COM:TOO#Austria which still are above the threshold of originality. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
- Keep This passes the threshold of originality in Austria. It may not be as readily apparent to distinguish between those that may pass the threshold and those that do not, but at the very least there exists such a threshold of originality. In both previous cases of Commons:Threshold of originality#Austria, the design and placement of the signatures were complex enough to pass the threshold, but in this case I do not believe two arrows pointing in opposite directions can match the complexity of a handwritten signature. As to demonstration of precedence in works that have fallen below the threshold, I believe past Commons deletion discussions can themselves also be used to establish precedence on what the community thinks is below or above the threshold of originality. TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
Apparently ok -FASTILY 06:11, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
