Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/03/23

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 March 23rd, 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.

This page was created by mistake. It has been replaced with this. I am sorry Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 11:01, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Housekeeping -- please use {{Speedy}} for this kind of mistake -- it uses less human and computer resources than {{Delete}}, .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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'm fed up with this edit warring from the so called authors. One links to this file from wikipedia and all it does is reflects this page. Both claim that it was transferred from wikipedia. There is no proof that it was transferred from there and therefore has no source. Flickrworker (talk) 14:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: User:DerHexer can confirm that the exactly same version is on enwiki. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incorrect chemical structure. Should be a benzisothiazole ring. See Category:Perospirone for comparison. Ed (Edgar181) 18:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As it was amenable to a quick-and-dirty fix, I’ve uploaded a new version—better? (The thumbnail still showed the old version, last time I looked, but the SVG displays correctly; I presume the servers will catch up soon.)—Odysseus1479 (talk) 19:57, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. Every size of thumbnail except the 228- and 120-pixel-wide ones displayed on the page have been re-rendered. I‘ve tried just about all the suggestions at Help:Purge#Advanced manual thumbnail purging, but those two sizes seem to be nailed down in the cache.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
P.P.S. I uploaded a slightly enlarged version, which seems to have fixed the main thumbnail (now 240 px), but the small one in the history table is still wrong … weirdly, the 120-px thumbnail of the previous version now looks right! At least the first rendering one sees has been updated; I hope this will be sufficient for the image to be  kept now.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 20:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Request withdrawn. Thanks for the quick fix, Odysseus1479. It looks fine at every size to me. Ed (Edgar181) 22:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Eventually, a mistake was found in this file. The island marked is not the one called Chamili. The mistake was fixed in the relevant Hebrew Wikipedia article and this file is no longer needed. Ldorfman (talk) 01:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Kept, file was renamed and is now used in 4 projects. So quality is not a reason to delete. But I delete misleading redirect. Taivo (talk) 10:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ldorfman (talk) 12:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 04:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, by Russavia due to out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 10:58, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 04:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, by Russavia due to out of scope. Taivo (talk) 11:00, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 04:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, by Russavia due to out of scope. Taivo (talk) 11:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Poor format. Have both .png and .svg alternatives available. DMacks (talk) 05:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, unused, superseded by File:Selenourea.svg. Taivo (talk) 11:05, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 original photographer of this image asked me to delete it because he considered it as non-free image. SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 07:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to the filedesc you are the photographer, and according to COM:CSD an uploader requested deletion is only possible if the file is less than a week old (or in a DR, where I guess there should be other arguements for deleting).    FDMS  4    12:04, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, courtesy deletion: small size, missing metadata, bad quality, unused. Taivo (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{PD-Brazil-media}}-fail (only for audiovisual and photographic works), considering 1941 artwork (drawing) from (as indicated) pt:Alvarus (1904—1985), a Brazilian caricaturist. Copyrighted till the end of 2055. Gunnex (talk) 09:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating also (same context/uploader)

Gunnex (talk) 10:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's fair, this image can be deleted, it isn't in public domain. My error! Shaitan (talk) 23:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, uploader also agrees to delete. Taivo (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 09:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, all his uploads are so obviously out of scope (unused personal photos with big text about how unhappy he is), that I delete them all speedily. Taivo (talk) 13:18, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 09:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, yes, and out of scope also. This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{PD-Brazil-media}}-fail (only for audiovisual and photographic works), considering 1930 artwork (drawing) from (as indicated) en:Lasar Segall (1881—1957), a Brazilian Jewish painter. Copyrighted till the end of 2027. Gunnex (talk) 09:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, my error again, this image is copyrighted, so don't belong to the Commons yet!Shaitan (talk) 23:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, the uploader also agtees to delete. Taivo (talk) 13:53, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Obs.: Uploaded in 2006. Tagged since 2011 with {{Disputed}}. Grabbed from http://www.museusegall.org.br/mlsObra.asp?sSume=21&sObra=38. {{Copyrighted free use}}-fail, considering 1939-1941 artwork by (as indicated) en:Lasar Segall (1881—1957), a Brazilian Jewish painter. Copyrighted till the end of 2027. Licensed based on arguments of Art. 46 which does not affect original copyrights (allows press media to reproduce copyrighted works). Gunnex (talk) 10:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, the uploader is indefinitely blocked since 2006 for copyvios and I do not believe his claims, that artist has released this work into public domain. So the work is copyrighted and will be undeleted in 2028. Taivo (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in Russia. OTRS-permission from poster copyright holder is needed.

В России нет свободы панорама. Нужно получить разрешение от владетеля авторских прав плаката. Taivo (talk) 12:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • На фото изображен утвержденный предвыборный плакат ЦИК РФ для выборов президента 2008 года[1][2] и может рассматриваться как документ, т.е. является общественным достоянием (PD-RU-exempt) --Sasha Krotov (talk) 22:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, quite strange government document, but nevertheless government document. I changed the license.

Довольно странный документ правительства, но всё-таки документ правительства. Я изменил лицензию. Taivo (talk) 10:45, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 16:16, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 16:19, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 16:07, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

promotional facebook adress Motopark (talk) 10:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 15:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{PD-Brazil-media}}-fail (only for audiovisual and photographic works), considering 1932 artwork (drawing) from (as indicated) pt:Alvarus (1904—1985), a Brazilian caricaturist. Copyrighted till the end of 2055. Related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Caricatura de İsmet İnönü.jpg. Gunnex (talk) 10:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's fair, this image can be deleted, it isn't in public domain. My error! Shaitan (talk) 23:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, the uploader also agrees to delete. Taivo (talk) 16:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 11:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, by Túrelio with reason "Screenshot of copyrighted software, title has nothing to do with the actual content, not useful for WP's purposes". This is the uploader's only contriburion. Taivo (talk) 15:20, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 within the project scope; besides doubtful source information about the used images in the collage High Contrast (talk) 12:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



 Deleted, clearly out of project scope, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

please do use the svg Antemister (talk) 13:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, superseded by File:Flag of Haiti 1791.svg. Taivo (talk) 10:26, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

cette photo est inappropriée et je doute qu'elle respecte les droits d'images de la personne concernée Psklolmdrntm (talk) 14:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, small selfie without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Téléchargé par erreur. Uploaded by mistake (author request) Florent Pécassou (talk) 14:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep An interesting file uploaded a long time ago. - Olybrius (talk) 23:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, the file has been in Commons 5½ years and free licenses are irrevocable. In addition, this is the best photo in Category:Villa antique de l'Ormeau (Tarbes). Taivo (talk) 11:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, blurred, small => no educational value Torsch (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, failed upload: description says "Example of metadata", while there is no metadata. Also, so small photos (119×103 pixels) are useless. Taivo (talk) 11:32, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 at all useful, link can also be found on the category page.    FDMS  4    15:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, empty gallery page. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

superseeded by svg Antemister (talk) 17:01, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, redundant to File:Flag of The Federal Republic of Southern Cameroons.svg. Taivo (talk) 12:16, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Isnt needed any more. Also isnt up to date. Already requested the uploader and the person in the picture and got their agreement. Thank you :) Brainmandolo (talk) 19:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Didym (talk) 00:26, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 isnt needed anymore in articles, also the quality is bad and there are a few other pictures of the event uploaded. there wont be a need in future Brainmandolo (talk) 08:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC) Also the headline has wrong informations[reply]


Kept As above, these are not reasons for deletion. Please do not waste our time with multiple nominations of the same file for the same reasons. If you nominate this again, you will be blocked. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

really use the png Antemister (talk) 17:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, redundant to File:Netherlands and Belgium hybrid.png. Also, 21×15 pixels are not enough. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Redirect unnecessary ♫♫ Leitoxx ♪♪ 17:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, author's request on creation day. Taivo (talk) 11:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose. It's out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, so small penises ‎(365×429 pixels) are out of scope. Taivo (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of much too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose. It's out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, so small penises (121×195 pixels) are out of scope. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Incorrect chemical structure. Should be a benzisothiazole ring. See Category:Perospirone for comparison. Ed (Edgar181) 18:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, correct is, for example, File:Perospirone2DACS2.svg. Taivo (talk) 12:30, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Poor quality image and unused. There are better alternatives in category:cup trophies in art. Angelus(talk) 20:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, 16×13 pixels is really too few. Taivo (talk) 12:49, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Poor quality image and unused. There are better alternatives in category:cup trophies in art. Angelus(talk) 20:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, 16×13 pixels is really too few. Taivo (talk) 12:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Poor quality image and unused. There are better alternatives in category:cup trophies in art. Angelus(talk) 20:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, 16×13 pixels is really too few. Taivo (talk) 12:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bad quality, very low educational value. Uploader has uploaded several quite similar photos of better quality.    FDMS  4    21:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 13:25, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unidentifiable  B.p. 22:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How many possibilities are there? I notice it's in use on cs-wiki, is it easy to replace those uses? --99of9 (talk) 00:27, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep: Even if the bird depicted on this, otherwise interesting, photo were indeed of an «unidentifiable» species, it would still be pretty in scope — it would make it really very much in scope, as a taxonimical oddity. It however was shot in a zoological garden, its date and exact loaction documented. Identification is therefore not only possible, but even trivial. (No, I don’t know if this is really a Milvus milvus, or what it is. But there are knowledgeable people to be asked.) -- Tuválkin 02:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please people take a look at the photo’s discussion page, its history, and also the similar photo File:Milvus milvus (portrait).jpg (a quality/valued image, nonetheless!). It turns out that other users decided that this is probably a Milvus milvus × migrans hybrid and therefore unsuitable to illustrate the typical species phenotype; after that, the ptotographer, Hans Hillewaert, a.k.a. user Biopics a.k.a. B.p. (yes, the nominator of this DR) renamed both photos from "Unidentified Milvus" to "Milvus milvus", and now is asking for deletion. This configures problematic behaviour — at least pertaining to COM:OWN, and maybe even a cloaked atempt at revoking of a CC-license under false pretenses. -- Tuválkin 03:04, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I'm watching these files for almost a month now since I noticed the edit war regarding the ID. Last week I tried for a mediation when the war become severe; requesting the help of Jimfbleak. He commented at File talk:Milvus milvus (side).jpg; and from his comments, I think it is close enough to consider as Milvus milvus. So I'm requesting the help of him once again.
My opinion is to either keep them as Milvus milvus or make a courtesy delete. I know both Bp and MPF; both are good contributors here, though very perfectionists, probably due to their professions. (:D) So what we can do is to cool both of them down instead of parting with one side. I too an animal photographer; I know every photo can't be identified to species level. But there is nothing wrong in calling it to the sp. level unless clearly challenged. Otherwise we don't have any photos of live specimens of true bugs and true flies identified to the species level. Jee 03:24, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I've given my opinion on this bird, that it's either milvus or very close. I think you would need to see the live bird to be able to completely eliminate migrans, since, excellent as the photos are, they don't show all the features, and in particular, the flight shot doesn't have the right angle for tail or wing details. It seems a pity that there is a dispute on this, although I can understand why. What about posting on bird forum or getting a definitive opinion from world expert Dick Forsman? (dick@dickforsman.com) Jimfbleak (talk) 07:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I remain of the opinion that this is most likely a hybrid, as it is completely lacking in rufous tones in the tail that even a juvenile M milvus shows, but also as Jim says, it does not match pure M. migrans. Hybrids are very common among captive birds, and particularly so among taxa used for falconry. As I've mentioned elsewhere, just because its identity is as yet uncertain is no reason to delete; it could be useful to illustrate articles on birds in captivity, or articles about Pairi Daiza where it is kept. I had wondered about asking on Birdforum, but they specifically bar queries on captive birds "Please do not post photos of eggs or captive birds for identification". Jim - would you like to ask Dick? I know of him, but don't know him personally so would hesitate to approach him myself. Alternatively, Pairi Daiza may have documentation on its origin (though zoos don't always know if their stock is hybrid or not). - MPF (talk) 10:57, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know him personally either, but I'm happy to do that, probably tomorrow. I might try a couple of other raptor gurus too—see if they agree with each other (: Jimfbleak (talk) 11:42, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thanks! Found some other pics that might be of interest, a known Red × Black at Gauntlet Birds of Prey at Knutsford in Cheshire Flickr, and a bird at the US National Aviary identified as Black Kite, but showing characters of a hybrid scroll down to 'Then it was time for KITES' and comment on it. - MPF (talk) 12:16, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
that's a weird bird. Underparts look like an adult Black Kite (some are quite rufous), but the upperparts are redder than any migrans I can recall Jimfbleak (talk) 17:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Guys, please! :-) Birdwatching is wonderful and I appreciate it a lot (having been a Biology student at university level for longer than I should have!), but please develop and archive that discussion thread in the photo’s talk page, where it started and where it belongs. Here now we should be discussing whether this image should be deleted; I am guessing that we all agree that it should be kept — so lets vote. -- Tuválkin 15:17, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've sent a few emails, let's see if anyone replies! Jimfbleak (talk) 11:29, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep There is no reason to delete this file. There, in COMMONS, a large amount of images where the caption is nonexistent or so bad that the image is unusable. Must ask ourselves their deletion? I do not think so. --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 13:04, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Dick Forsman has commented via email that it is a juvenile Red Kite with typical body plumage "but it would have been good with views of the open underwing to show the pattern and wing formula". if it's good enough for the guy who wrote the book... Jimfbleak (talk) 17:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks Jimfbleak; such helps are always highly appreciated. And I think some efforts to resolve the disputes are useful, even-though they are time consuming. Thanks all. (And  Keep; of-course.) Jee 02:59, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I'm happy to defer to Dick Forsman and have removed the 'disputed taxonomy' tags, and placed the pics in Category:Milvus milvus (captive) - MPF (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep: The identification has apparently been firmed up, but even if we aren't sure of the exact species, this can still be a useful image, and indeed it has been used. It's certainly in scope and legitimately licensed. Jonathunder (talk) 14:16, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard&oldid=120028729 -- Steinsplitter (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 isnt usefull or up to date anymore. There is no need in the future of this pic. Also the person which is in der picture would like the picture to be deleted. Thank you :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brainmandolo (talk • contribs) 2014-03-23T21:01:31‎ (UTC)


Deleted: This file has never existed. JuTa 21:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 "CH2" at the top should be "CH3". There are other higher quality images in Category:Thioridazine Ed (Edgar181) 22:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:50, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Superseded by a similar SVG version (see here) - Fma12 (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exists a similar SVG version. This file (PNG) is obsolete. --Moskato (talk) 01:07, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images quite identical : File:Ab plant 1511.jpg, File:Ab plant 1512.jpg, File:Ab plant 1513.jpg, File:Ab plant 1514.jpg, File:Ab plant 1515.jpg, File:Ab plant 1516.jpg. I plan to keep File:Ab plant 1514.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:49, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images quite identical : File:Ab plant 1511.jpg, File:Ab plant 1512.jpg, File:Ab plant 1513.jpg, File:Ab plant 1514.jpg, File:Ab plant 1515.jpg, File:Ab plant 1516.jpg. I plan to keep File:Ab plant 1514.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images quite identical : File:Ab plant 1511.jpg, File:Ab plant 1512.jpg, File:Ab plant 1513.jpg, File:Ab plant 1514.jpg, File:Ab plant 1515.jpg, File:Ab plant 1516.jpg. I plan to keep File:Ab plant 1514.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images quite identical : File:Ab plant 1511.jpg, File:Ab plant 1512.jpg, File:Ab plant 1513.jpg, File:Ab plant 1514.jpg, File:Ab plant 1515.jpg, File:Ab plant 1516.jpg. I plan to keep File:Ab plant 1514.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:54, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Images quite identical : File:Ab plant 1511.jpg, File:Ab plant 1512.jpg, File:Ab plant 1513.jpg, File:Ab plant 1514.jpg, File:Ab plant 1515.jpg, File:Ab plant 1516.jpg. I plan to keep File:Ab plant 1514.jpg Tangopaso (talk) 22:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:55, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 in use anymore Antemister (talk) 22:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 12:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

L'auteur souhaite supprimer ce fichier, il est de plus inutile. Nico.buj (talk) 22:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader requested deletion of unused file. This is the uploader's only contribution. In addition, not big and no metadata. Taivo (talk) 13:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 in use anymore Antemister (talk) 22:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, superseded by File:Flag of Turkestan ASSR (1919-1921).svg. Taivo (talk) 12:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

please so use the svg Antemister (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Speedy keep. In use. Please stop nominting files which are in use. Natuur12 (talk) 14:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

but now completely replaced Antemister (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, superseded by File:Flag of the Secretary of Defence of the Netherlands.svg. Taivo (talk) 10:23, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

use the svg Antemister (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep The SVG is incomplete. Fry1989 eh? 21:28, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: In use Natuur12 (talk) 16:05, 16 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

having replaced any use, it can be deleted Antemister (talk) 16:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, superseded by File:Naval Ensign of South Africa (1951-1952).svg. Taivo (talk) 12:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 User:Tn59150

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by Tn59150 (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

So small images (50×50 pixels) are useless. And, really, they are unused. Taivo (talk) 17:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Ellin Beltz (talk) 05:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

FOP in Scotland does not cover 2D artwork. LGA talkedits 01:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 project scope - articles should go on Wikipedia. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

com:DW McZusatz (talk) 22:25, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 07:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to replace them (as you told Marcus Cyron) you can use this link: [3].    FDMS  4    11:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, the problem is: I've lost the image I want to use as the replacer. I don't want this file here anymore, because it is a low quality image. SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per COM:FOP#Indonesia Storkk (talk) 15:48, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 18:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad quality SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 07:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to replace them (as you told Marcus Cyron) you can use this link: [4].    FDMS  4    11:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nah, the problem is: I've lost the image I want to use as the replacement. I don't want this file here anymore, because it is a low quality image. SpartacksCompatriot (talk) 15:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per COM:FOP#Indonesia Storkk (talk) 15:48, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Metrónomo as Speedy (Speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright violation: http://cfp402moreno.blogspot.com.ar/2011/11/lo-sabias-el-escudo-de-la-ciudad-de.html IMHO PD-Logo, just simple shapes. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 21:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The shapes are simple, if taken one by one, but so much simple shapes altogether create own copyright. Taivo (talk) 11:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Restored: Apperantly PD-AR-Gov. Per my talk page. Natuur12 (talk) 05:03, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 18:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 wide spread image, not likely to be own work Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 00:43, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Building by Jean Nouvel (with Architecture-Studio), still alive, but no FOP in France, sorry. Myrabella (talk) 08:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 a capture from TV. -- Túrelio (talk) 21:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A screenshot from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uF16uJwIE0U around 1:49. The uploader made a screenshot or created this copy by other technical methodes (photo, etc.), but its a copy, not own work. --Martin H. (talk) 22:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm inclined to block the uploader for bald-faced lying about it. Good faith says he might not know better, but I seriously doubt it. Even the most seriously uninformed about copyright understand that "own work" doesn't mean "I copied it off Youtube." (even the side of the screen from Youtube is present). Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Commons:Deletion requests/Images of Korean War Veterans Memorial. This is a copyright-protected art work William Avery (talk) 18:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 18:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, but I'm not sure /St1995 21:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Subject is an entirely non notable individual. Safiel (talk) 04:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is a reason to keep an otherwise off-scope image, but lack of notability of the main subject is not enough reason to delete an image. If you really want to have this image deleted you could just crow «Children! Privacy! Personality rights!», and puff, it gets deleted in a whoosh. -- Tuválkin 01:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep: I for one find this photo to be extremely interesting, as it depicts a subjective contrast between school uniforms (percieved as elitist in some countries) and very shabby classroom furniture — it would be a great illustration for a blogpost or online news outlet article (not big enough for paper media) about those subjects. -- Tuválkin 01:01, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete The quality is good, but the file is not big, it has no camera data and this is the uploader's only contribution – typical for copyright violations. Taivo (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right: This photo, in a much bigger resolution, is used for a Twitter account with the same name. Authorship and licensing are therefore doubful. -- Tuválkin 11:22, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 21:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{PD-US}}-fail. Artwork of en:Emiliano Di Cavalcanti (1897—1976), Brazilian painter. Still copyrighted in it's source country till the end of 2046. Gunnex (talk) 22:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Per above. - Fma12 (talk) 22:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 photo shows a building in Paris. I think I see in the building "a harmonious combination of its composing elements" which could put it above the threshold of originality. There is no freedom of panorama in France (Commons:FOP#France). Rybec (talk) 13:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Taivo (talk) 10:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 09:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I add for deletion his other unused files due to same reason:



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:14, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image which is not used on any Wikimedia project - very likely not useful for educational purposes. See also Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host. High Contrast (talk) 09:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I add for deletion his only other upload File:Rahul Prajapati 2.jpg. Taivo (talk) 11:26, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:14, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 21:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

self-promotion, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Characteristic feature of a building by Jean Nouvel (with Architecture-Studio), still alive, but no FOP in France, sorry. Myrabella (talk) 08:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Flickr uploader says that they "came across this on the net", so their licensing of the image on Flickr can't be assumed to be correct. The image also has no obvious use in any Wikimedia project - it's either a crude photoshop or a joke photo with no encyclopaedic value. Nick-D (talk) 01:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:12, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 description of this file, or how it's relevant (see COM:SCOPE) Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 00:47, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unclear copyright status: COM:DW: Indoor/interior shots*** (as indicated: "exibit in the Museum Afro-Brazilian") of 19 wood sculptures ("19 esculturas em madeira") by en:Carybé (1911—1997), a Brazilian artist, copyrighted till the end of 2067. Per http://www.aratuonline.net/noticia/23601,exposicao-carybe-comemora-setenta-anos-de-chegada-a-bahia.html ("(...) que emprestará 19 esculturas de divindades africanas para a exposição do MAM (...)", apparently a permanent part of the archive of that museum (nevertheless, these 19 wood sculptures were exhibited also at other locations). Most likely not covered by COM:FOP#Brazil, considering the indoor shots, as "logradouros públicos" (original law text) is IMHO too broad translated in "public spaces" (which could be everything). In Brazil, "logradouros públicos" usually are associated with "avenues, streets, squares, gardens, parks, ...". Note also that for public interiors the COM:FOP#Summary table concerning Brazil = "?" but I can't imagine that a 1998 law would fail in adapting the en:Berne three-step test. In 2011 the en:Superior Court of Justice (Brazil), the highest appellate court in Brazil for non-constitutional questions of federal law, condemned Telemar, a Brazilian telephone provider, to pay R$ 250.000 (around US$ 126.000 today) to artist Sival Floriano Veloso for publishing on a telephone card images of Veloso's sculptures (located at a public square in a Brazilian municipality), considering the commercial aspect as Telemar sold these cards for R$ 6/US$ 3,00 = COM:FOP#Brazil = most likely ✘ for 3D-works. Details: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Museu Municipal Carlos Nobre.

***Assumption by myself, considering the material (wood) and other aspects.

Gunnex (talk) 21:53, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 18:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

self-promotion, bad quality, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 18:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment. Small size, bad quality, lack of metadata, and it being the uploader’s only contribution are reasons to suspect copyvio and delete this photo through COM:PRP. It is however sad that the nominator (freshly upgraded to admin status) managed to miss all those reasons but one, and saw offscopeness in a photo whose filename includes a direct reference to an established category. -- Tuválkin 15:07, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Per above Natuur12 (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 23:09, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 14:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 14:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Needs permission from the painter. Yann (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 creator nemd, not a date of creation - not a real name. There is no evidence, that this is really a free image. And that it was published on Flickr I did not see too. Marcus Cyron (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you see need for discussion here? Tagging as No permission would have been sufficient …    FDMS  4    00:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Copyright violation -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 14:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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: unused test image. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, just a black image. Not even pure black, just an image taken in the dark. Lewis Hulbert (talk) 15:59, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: --Steinsplitter (talk) 23:17, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 18:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 14:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 socpe Indeedous (talk) 18:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:47, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 description or information, useless as it is, therefore out of scope. Yann (talk) 18:04, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, the uploader's last remaining contribution. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 11:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Needs permission from the painter. Yann (talk) 18:05, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 12:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:27, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Raj28sharan

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by Raj28sharan (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

They are all claimed own work, but I doubt. The photos are not big and have no metadata. The logos surpass threshold of originality. The rest files are unusably small. Taivo (talk) 12:19, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:PCP -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Againme (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

[edit]

Hi, dear EugeneZelenko. These pictures are authorized. I wrote to Agostinelli himself as I was willing to write the article on him, which we lacked, and he offered this images assuring me that they could be used. If needed, I can show proof. Thank you for your concern! --Againme (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I'm afraid, that you must show the proof. Please send an OTRS-permission and explain there. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again. Yes, EugeneZelenko kindly explained to me how to do it. Agostinelli wrote to me saying that he was going to sent the permission. Thank you, guys! --Againme (talk) 20:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Author granted permission for every picture but File:Epystemologist Damian Beanato.jpg. Ralgis (talk) 20:20, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 images on these cards are copyrighted.

russavia (talk) 15:32, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

These cards are copyrighted, and still in copyright, so need to be deleted.

G-HYYM (talk) 17:25, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Kept two per discussion. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 16 February 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.

out of COM:SCOPE; mere promotional. -- Túrelio (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 BHillman81 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Collection of promo photos and book covers. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 private image and would be out of scope than Indeedous (talk) 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:50, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Afonso Brandão (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Afonso Brandão (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

out of COM:SCOPE; mere promotional. -- Túrelio (talk) 16:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Xtechi no sama

[edit]

Xtechi no sama (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

These photos are not big and they have no metadata. Resolution is always different. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 15:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Pleas send permission to COM:OTRS -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Ak182007 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 14:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 REYLATINA (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 User:Davide mammi.97

[edit]

Davide mammi.97 (talk · contribs) uploaded these files:

They are small and have no metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 14:48, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: no permission -- Steinsplitter (talk) 11:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Hintguled (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Collection of promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Pablito4991 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Political posters with historical photos of unclear origins.. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Suicidal Angels (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Collection of promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Vasiantor (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Collection of advertisement of company with questionable notability. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 NoahThePorscheGuy (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:SCOPE

Rybec (talk) 11:03, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Taivo (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Delete Quite obviously out-of-scope. Ubcule (talk) 15:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 11:26, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork and text not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork and text not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 15:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See File:IMAG014211111.jpg --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

deleted: This one is unused. Natuur12 (talk) 13:37, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

{{PD-Brazil-media}}-fail (only for audiovisual and photographic works), considering 1920s artwork (drawing) by "desconhecido"/unknown. May be in PD by other means, but relevant info must be provided. Gunnex (talk) 10:42, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wrong license. In the submitted source I don't see confirmation of cc-by-sa 3.0. Maybe PD, but I'm not sure. Also, lacking author information /St1995 10:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think so too, that this image is not free - but I was unsure. Marcus Cyron (talk) 11:07, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

False authorship claims - the uploader is very likely not the photographer of this image. Maybe some PD license applies? High Contrast (talk) 10:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Namoroka as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Use for Other site. Non-free use logo. [5] Text Logo -> PD. BUT: Scope? Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Think not Natuur12 (talk) 13:29, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 has no proper source, because I tend not to believe own work. Maybe work of NASA? Taivo (talk) 10:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Flickrreviewed photo by Brazilian Ministry of Culture showing copyrighted artwork by Brazilian painter pt:Romero Britto (1963—). Obs.: I cropped the file via File:Flickr - Ministério da Cultura - Romero Brito e presidenta Dilma Rousseff (cropped).jpg. Gunnex (talk) 16:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Ty for cropping the file Natuur12 (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 tend not to believe own work. May be in public domain due to age, but without author and date cannot be sure. Taivo (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Valessio, per user page "Valessio S Brito" which does not match with author = "Cloves Sousa". Permission needed. Gunnex (talk) 13:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating also:

Gunnex (talk) 13:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 likely not the uploader's own work. It appears to be an old military file, and there's some sort of logo superimposed in the middle of it. The uploader also claimed File:GENERAL SALAAD GABEYRE KEDIYE.jpg as his/her own work, when it was apparently taken from another website [6]. 174.93.177.252 17:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Newspaper scan, wrong license. Yann (talk) 18:02, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 vagina, only 480×640 pixels Taivo (talk) 11:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, Michel Polak died in 1948. BrightRaven (talk) 15:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in Latvia. I suspect copyright violation. OTRS-permission from copyright holder of poster is needed. Taivo (talk) 11:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the uk Oxyman (talk) 17:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in Italy. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:32, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in Belgium. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 was uploaded by a vandal, and used only in a vandalism article on English Wikipedia. It seems unlikely that it will serve any useful purpose. It is also doubtful whether the copyright claim is valid. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep One of the best Category:Reflections on sunglasses we have. Taivo (talk) 12:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: Natuur12 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 14:36, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 KeepI have to agree with the previous deletion request, which kept this image. It's a pretty good illustration of a reflection in sunglasses, which can certainly be used for an educational purpose.this comment is of User:Philosopher who forgot sign --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 23:33, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 01:43, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: No new reasons, as previous DR Indeedous (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is Jose Jimenez, but uploader PhoenixBerlin claimed it own work. Explanation is needed about how this is possible. Taivo (talk) 11:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 did not find source for upmost photo. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 11:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Taivo I can't say anything about the very top picture as I took it from what was already on wikipedia since last year. by doing a quick google search, after I failed to find it on wiki (apart from that previous source). [7] --Lilpiglet (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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) 18:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep: Has the nominator any reason to believe that this photo does not show a BBC World Service radio presenter at work, as its filename and contents suggest? If so, please share it with us. If not, please explain how a photo showing a BBC World Service radio presenter at work could be deemed even remotely off-scope. -- Tuválkin 01:55, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment If you enter the name on google, there is no match which proves that someone with this name works as a radio presenter. So there just remains a very bad image of someone sitting in a radio studio. --Indeedous (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


You are argueing that the subject of this photo is a non notable person, but a photo showing Mr. Nobody in at work as a BBC World Service radio presenter is still in scope. Not only because BBC World Service is a notable institution (where the work of non-notable staff is therefore notable), but also because the scope of Commons is much more vast than mere illustration for notability:
This photo shows a right side view of a dark haired man with moutache wearing headphones and gesturing while he speaks to an overhead microphone in a professional radio studio. We need this photo, or even a dozen such to chose from, and hundreds more with differing permutations of these and many other topics. Notability is a reason to keep, but lack of notability is not a reason to delete.
(Also, googling using an Arabic-to-Latin transcription is inaccurate. Maybe his name is spelled in some webpage as Muhammad or Mehmet, or Waleed… Cannot even be sure of non-notability.)
-- Tuválkin 21:03, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I did google this fellow. Found this:
-- Tuválkin 21:13, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No consensus for deletion Natuur12 (talk) 13:45, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 copyrighted material High Contrast (talk) 09:52, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 in scope, not used logo. Uploader has created http://wikigames.tuxfamily.org/ which uses another logo. Furthermore, according the other uploads and the style of the logo, uploader isn't a graphist (JPEG choice for a logo, poor quality of typography and colors) so the controller could be from another, uncredited source. It would be nice if the uploader could indicate here the source or confirm he designed himself the controller. Dereckson (talk) 16:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Own work seems to be unlikely. Does any PD license fit? High Contrast (talk) 09:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: Seems fixed Natuur12 (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Нет подтверждения разрешения на размещение в Википедии под свободной лицензией Dogad75 (talk) 21:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep I changed the license. In my opinion, this is a textlogo. Taivo (talk) 11:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: pd-textlogo Natuur12 (talk) 18:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Video Peter Coffin, photo Nick Cheung, but uploader Dommeruk claimed this own work. OTRS-permission is needed. Taivo (talk) 11:54, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Plain text raster rendering for "སྡིག་པ་ཅི་ཡང་མི་བྱ་ཞིང། །་དགེ་བ་ཕུན་སུམ་ཚོགས་པར་བྱ། །རང་གི་སེམས་ནི་ཡོངས་སུ་འདུལ། །འདི་ནི་སངས་རྒྱས་བསྟན་པ་ཡིན།།", with no particular rendering issues; not used. -- Tuválkin 17:33, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 User:By Malik

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by By Malik (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

They are out of project scope and unused. Taivo (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Lushess (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These photos show jewellery and tapestries displayed for sale in shops in Turkey. Freedom of panorama exists in Turkey for artworks, but only when they are permanently displayed on public streets, avenues or squares (Commons:FOP#Turkey).

Rybec (talk) 12:28, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Artworks of fr:Eduardo Dhelomme (1922—2006), French/Brazilian painter, copyrighted till the end of 2076.

Gunnex (talk) 22:44, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating also (same context)

Gunnex (talk) 22:46, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Artwork File:Unkown title painted by Eduardo Dhelomme.jpg is my personal property. Do I not have the right to display my own personal property? Ergozoom>

 Comment Displaying and publishing under free license are different things. You do not have right to upload a photo about your property into Commons without permission from author, if the property is copyrighted. Taivo (talk) 13:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Hachehelene (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. File:Dhelomme-Metamorphose.jpg ("Sculpture exposée au Musée d'Art Moderne de Paris 1962") = artwork of fr:Eduardo Dhelomme (1922—2006), French/Brazilian painter, copyrighted till the end of 2076 = COM:FOP#France ✘. Related: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Eduardo Dhelomme

Gunnex (talk) 22:57, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Habi92

[edit]

Habi92 (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

There is no freedom of panorama in Bulgaria. Who are the architects and when did they die? Habi's other photos show also often architecture, but these buildings are probably too old for copyright. Taivo (talk) 14:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:35, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 User:Shayanabbasi

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by Shayanabbasi (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

They are small photos without metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 User:PreetGora

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by PreetGora (talk · contribs) and not yet deleted:

They are all out of project scope as unused personal photos. Taivo (talk) 16:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in the Ukraine (Commons:FOP#Ukraine). Is the monument in the public domain? Rybec (talk) 11:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I don't know is the monument in the public domain or not. I uploaded the photo for "Wiki love monuments" - the project of Wikimedia WLM. I know that the competition was complete, but it's still open for uploading the photos of monuments according to the list of monuments The list of monuments of the certain region in Ukraine. So I think if it contraries to Ukrainian laws the organisators of WLM would close the list of monuments for uploading. Banbanner (talk) 15:58, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: There is no fop in the Ukraine and there is no evidence that this file is pd Natuur12 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Yogesh singh jestha

[edit]

Here are both photos, uploaded by Yogesh singh jestha (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

They are small and have no metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:42, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:MrErgashev

[edit]

MrErgashev (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

The first photo is small and has no camera data, it is inadequately described and categorized, so copyright violation is possible. The other photos should be deleted, because there is no freedom of panorama in Uzbekistan. Taivo (talk) 16:45, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Zoama

[edit]

Here are last files, uploaded by Zoama (talk · contribs) and not yet presented for deletion:

They are out of project scope as unused personal photos. Taivo (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 logo is not own work and in my opinion surpasses threshold of originality (this is neither circle nor ellipse, the letters JIR are not in standard font). I suspect copyright violation. The uploader has been blocked for uploading copyvios. Taivo (talk) 11:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:33, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

no source no name of author Gunduu (talk) 07:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: After some digging I've found a source; author is challenging, but PD seems a reasonable claim. James F. (talk) 18:06, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Commonwealth Games Federation is a UK based organisation and this is way over the COM:TOO for the UK (and most of the rest of the Commonwealth) given the rulings of the UK courts in relation to other logos for example this one. LGA talkedits 01:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Derivative (in this case, deliberate copy) of an in-copyright UK logo. James F. (talk) 18:01, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 15:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also File:Darehbid freidan.jpg. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:14, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The latter image is being used, although it might have been better without the person in the foreground so richly enjoying the scenery. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep Nominated file, because it is a very beautiful photo :). I see the ice on the lake (?), rocks and mountains. A person occupies a small part of this photo.  Delete File:Darehbid freidan.jpg because a person occupies a large part of this photo. /St1995 10:11, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep But now both files are used in fa.wiki. They seem to me quite out of scope, so let's wait until end of week and look, are they still used then. Taivo (talk) 11:53, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep both files. Per Taivo /St1995 14:57, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Natuur12 (talk) 13:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 /St1995 18:21, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep: It is obviously in scope. Other images of this user are pending a DR on licensing doubts, but to say that a photo depicting a well known Italian television documentarist posing with two local youths while at work in a remote Venezuelan amazonian village is off scope is not correct considering what scope is. -- Tuválkin 02:12, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentThe image is said to have been taken in 1989 but has metadata for an Apple iPhone which was not invented until much later. The size is small and the quality poor. There is no description whatsoever, so there is no clue that the white male is a "well known Italian television documentarist". Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 GianniBarcelloni (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Photos of photos, authorship unlikely, needs confirmation.

-- Tuválkin 19:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 looks like a scanned piece of paper, unusual for this Flickr user's works. I doubt the Flickr user is the photographer. darkweasel94 21:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep In my opinion, the photo is made through tram window. The main object of the photo is signs on window. I categorize the file accordingly. Taivo (talk) 13:14, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: / Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:52, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unclear copyright status. {{PD-Brazil-media}}-fail (only for audiovisual and photographic works) considering derviated from an artwork (painting) by (as indicated) en:Lasar Segall (1881—1957), a Brazilian Jewish painter. Copyrighted till the end of 2027.

Related:

It's the cover of a newspaper published in 1928. What's unclear about it? Dornicke (talk) 20:09, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Have you not read my concerns? --> The newspaper reproduced an artwork copyrighted by en:Lasar Segall (1881—1957) till the end of 2027. Gunnex (talk) 21:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 09:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, personal photo /St1995 18:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Tuválkin linked into another deletion request, where Ellin Beltz explained, why she deleted a similar photo. Due to the same reason I delete this photo also. Taivo (talk) 13:01, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Marina Del Ray

[edit]

Here are all files, uploaded by Marina Del Ray (talk · contribs) and not yet deleted:

They are small unused photos without metadata. I suspect copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 16:04, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep. Missing metadata is no proof of copyvio. In fact, looking at the photos, I actually think that they are NOT, because of the personal nature of the photos (all of 1 trip) and the consistent image sizes. -- P 1 9 9   18:43, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Private holiday trip photos can be out of project scope also. Taivo (talk) 11:06, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: uploader Marina Del Ray is most likley related to the marina service agency "Lombok Marina Del Ray" (http://lombokmarinadelray.com/about-marina-del-ray/), offering boating facilities and other touristic services in Lombok/Indonesia. Some files (if not all) were previously published on related sites. Examples: File:Kids Indonesian Yacht Charter.jpg (03.2014) versus Facebook (2013), File:Gili Gede looking south east small.jpg (03.2014) versus Google or http://lombokmarinadelray.com/about-marina-del-ray/gallery/ = http://lombokmarinadelray.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/Gile-Gede-looking-South-East1.jpg (last modified: 2012) or Facebook (2013), etc. Most likely not "private holiday trip photos" but more related to advertising or self-promotion and it is unclear if the photos were taken by "Lombok Marina Del Ray"-personnel or by the tourists. Gunnex (talk) 07:22, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: COM:PCP - questionable, unclear copyright status FASTILY 09:44, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. --Norden1990 (talk) 14:13, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Taivo: : could you please remove the template from the nominated files or ask a bot to do so? Thanks — NickK (talk) 20:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There are a lot of files, but I do not know, where to request a bot. Taivo (talk) 20:15, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, this was not a good request. The nominator was depressed, because his own photo about election poster was deleted as derivative work, and then nominated all photos about election posters for deletion. Most of them are free, either due to age or de minimis or some other reason. The posters should be examined one by one and not presented for deletion all together. Taivo (talk) 18:34, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image, out of scope Amada44  talk to me 17:19, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I agree, but also wrong license, no educational use... Luispihormiguero (talk) 21:26, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. ZooFari 00:20, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image has a low pixel count and there are no valid EXIF information. It is highly likely not the uploader's own work. High Contrast (talk) 19:11, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 13:30, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

de:Wikipedia:Bildrechte#Panoramafreiheit: „Die nebenstehende Aufnahme des Berliner Olympiastadions ist erlaubt, weil sie das Stadion von einem öffentlich zugänglichen Platz aus zeigt. Ein vom Glockenturm aufgenommenes Bild müsste aus der Wikipedia gelöscht werden.“ The architect was Werner March who died in 1976 and has the rights of the architecture of the Olympiastadion, so this photo is not free in Germany, cause the place from where the photo has been taken, is not publicly reachable. October wind (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg is another photo which wasn’t taken from a publicly reachable place. --October wind (talk) 18:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose deletion of the latter image: Low-res image, no copyrightable architectural ideas can be seen when looking at this image. --UV (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Oppose Shows less details than: File:Olympiastadion berlin denis apel.JPG--Mfranck (talk) 19:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keepthe aerial image. Imho that is a publically reachable place. All you need is an aircraft that brings you there, just like you need car to reach a service station on the autobahn (since walking there is not an option) or a boat to bring you to that island you want to shoot. No trespassing involved, this isn't even a low altitude photo flight below the de:Sicherheitsmindesthöhe that would require a permission from the authorities. --El Grafo (talk) 13:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can you all please tell me, why German Wikipedia rules explicitly state: „Ein vom Glockenturm aufgenommenes Bild müsste aus der Wikipedia gelöscht werden“? What means: A picture taken from this tower has to be deleted. This is such a picture taken from this tower and it shows nothing else but this stadion, so please tell me, why that rule shouldn’t be applied. And also the photo File:Olympiastadion berlin denis apel.JPG has to be deleted, because it also hasn’t been taken from a publicly reachable place, but from the air.
Photos from the Glockenturm: You even have to pay to get onto that tower, it’s not freely reachable.
Maybe, in File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg it’s just a piece of the whole photo, so that could be another case than those photos which only show the stadion. Then, De minimis should apply as for the Louvre pyramid shown there, but the picture of the pyramid has other licences which explicitly state that parts of the picture are copyrighted (copyright warning). And {{De minimis}} has to be added to this picture then. --October wind (talk) 15:41, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, looks like my personal understanding of "public space" is wrong: [8]. --El Grafo (talk) 11:18, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also File:Olympiastadion berlin denis apel.JPG has to be deleted. For this air photo, FOP doesn’t apply at all. And the architecture got quite a few prizes: de:Olympiastadion Berlin#Auszeichnungen für den Umbau. --October wind (talk) 15:48, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

El Grafo, de:Wikipedia:Bildrechte#Panoramafreiheit says as follows: „Der Aufnahmestandort muss zudem allgemein ohne Hilfsmittel zugänglich sein. Eine Leiter – auch wenn sie nicht dazu dienen sollte, über ein Hindernis hinwegzublicken – ist demnach genausowenig zulässig wie ein Hubschrauber. Auch die Aufnahme von einem anderen Gebäude aus ist nicht zulässig, selbst wenn eine Genehmigung für das Betreten des Aufnahmestandortes vorliegt.“
So, you have to get there without any aircraft or helicopter („genausowenig zulässig wie ein Hubschrauber“), even without ladders („Leiter“). And it explicitly states that even if you take a photo from another building with permission for that, that isn’t a FOP case (the last sentence). de:Panoramafreiheit#Kriterium „öffentlich“ says:
„Die Aufnahme muss von einem öffentlichen Weg, einer Straße oder einem Platz aus gemacht werden.“
So, it has to be a photo taken from a public way, a street or a place, but not from a building.
„§ 59 UrhG gilt jedoch nicht für Privatgelände, auf dem zwar Publikumsverkehr stattfindet, das aber durch Zäune oder Kontrollen vor ungehindertem Zutritt geschützt wird. […] Die Aufnahme von einem anderen Gebäude aus ist nicht zulässig, selbst wenn eine Genehmigung für das Betreten des Aufnahmestandpunktes vorliegt […]“
This is clear, it’s no FOP case. --October wind (talk) 16:14, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In http://www.fotorecht.de/publikationen/gebaeude.html it states: "Wenn sich jedoch ein Autor wissenschaftlich, und sei es nur populärwissenschaftlich, mit der Architektur eines Gebäudes, einschließlich der Innenarchitektur, auseinandersetzt, darf er zu diesen Zweck in seinem Artikel bzw. Buchbeitrag zur Erläuterung eine Außen- oder auch Innenaufnahme des besprochenen Bauwerkes abbilden. Dies ergibt sich aus der urheberrechtlichen Schranke des Zitatrechts, § 51 Ziff. 1 UrhG." and also: "OLG Oldenburg, vom 12.10.1987, 13 U 59/87, NJW-RR 88, 951 Fotografieren von Privateigentum, Verbreitung von Luftbildaufnahmen ist auch ohne Zustimmung der Gebäudeeigentümer zulässig; das Eigentum ist durch das Überfliegen nicht verletzt und das Persönlichkeitsrecht nicht verletzt, da die Eigentümer nicht identifiziert werden können."--Mfranck (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In w:Luftbildfotografie#Rechtliches it states: "In Deutschland galt bis 1990 eine Genehmigungspflicht für Luftbildaufnahmen. Nach Artikel 37 des 3. Rechtsbereinigungsgesetzes ist diese Genehmigungspflicht für Luftbildaufnahmen entfallen."--Mfranck (talk) 01:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but that restriction was for aerial photography in general (because of military cold war stuff) and had nothing to do with copyright. Concerning File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg, I'd go for low resolution/de minimis. --El Grafo (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Meiner Ansicht nach ist auf File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg (geringe Bildauflösung!) kein architektonisches Werk so genau dargestellt (de:Schöpfungshöhe!) dass Urheberrechte von Architekten berührt wären. Die Frage, ob hier ein Fall von Panoramafreiheit vorliegt, stellt sich daher gar nicht. (Denn die Panoramafreiheit müssen wir nur dann heranziehen, wenn architektonische Werke mit Schöpfungshöhe dargestellt werden.) Ich bleibe daher bei  Keep für File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg.

In my view, in File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg (a low-res image), no en:Threshold of originality in architectural works can be discerned when viewing this low-res image. Therefore, no architect can assert any copyright in this image, and we do not need to enter the question at all whether FOP applies or not (we need to invoke FOP only if an image is covered by copyrights of the authors of the depicted objects, which is not the case here). Therefore, I see no reason not to maintain  Keep File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg. --UV (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted File:Bundesarchiv Bild 146-1973-031-43, Berlin, Olympiastadion.jpg, File:Olympiastadion berlin denis apel.JPG: Taken from a non-public location, FOP does not apply. Derivative of copyrighted architecture.

Kept File:Berlin Olympiastadion 2009 from 5000 ft height Henrik Pohl.jpg: While this is also taken from a non-public location and FOP does not apply it does not show architectural features that could possibly be copyrighted. All that is visible is the typical stadium ellipsis which is below the threshold of originality (after all, every stadium has them). --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 09:03, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

strange flag, educational use rather impossible Antemister (talk) 17:31, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Really strange, but I am not sure in impossibility of educational use. I ask for help. Taivo (talk) 11:42, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well this file is used as someone's personal image. The uploader uses it to illustrate a userbox. The top and bottom stripe are parts of the Dutch flag, the middle part and the lion are parts from the flag of Flanders. There have been some debates about splitting Belgium. The idea was that Flanders joined The Netherlands and Walonia joined France. There have been some Partition of Belgium more scenario's or course. Some flags where made bit as far as I'm aware there never has been an original flag or a original proposal. Only some flags as souvenirs or to print on T-shirts. I think this file should be kept as a personal userfile but I see less educational value. I's a possible combination and it is unsourced. Natuur12 (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep In use. Fry1989 eh? 19:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Personal file, in use. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 08:56, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

delete this oen a keep the more accurate one Antemister (talk) 17:23, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Fry1989 eh? 02:03, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep - for starters FOTW can't tell what is "accurate" here. –Be..anyone (talk) 04:34, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep - as per above - --Oren neu dag (talk) 12:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: There are several renditions of the flag. Unless somebody can point out why this is incorrect it is as good as the others. No reason to deleted. ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 08:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Artwoks of en:João Fahrion (1898—1970), Brazilian painter, copyrighted till the end of 2040. Concerning the indoor shots (File:Sala João Fahrion .JPG + File:Sala João Fahrion.JPG) see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sculpture Carybé = most likely  Not OK (COM:FOP#Brazil)

Gunnex (talk) 23:16, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Português: o arquivo File:00226-João-Fahrion-MARGS.jpg foi carregado com autorização da direção do museu detentor dos direitos autorais, na época em que eu coordenava o setor do acervo. a situação, portanto, é legal, mas não foi feito nenhum documento formal naquela época, e atualmente já não trabalho no museu. tetraktys
(talk) 23:29, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sala João Fahrion

[edit]
Português: Paz e bem!

Os murais encontram-se em sala de acesso público, pertencente à Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, uma instituição pública; assim em parece que está cumprida a exigência legal do Artigo 48, da Lei 9.610 de 19 fev. 1998.

Além disto seia obra encomendada/executada pelo governo brasileiro (federal, estadual ou municipal) antes de 1 de janeiro de 1983 {{PD-BrazilGov}}
Eugenio Hansen, OFS (talk) 06:40, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
http://boaebelavida.blogspot.de/2012/07/sala-joao-fahrion.html gives an insight of "Sala João Fahrion" (= ~ "Room João Fahrion") and it looks like there are exhibited many artworks of João Fahrion. The question I raised is: Are indoor shots covered by COM:FOP#BRazil? And per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Sculpture Carybé I doubt that. Concerning {{PD-BrazilGov}} you mean that all artworks by João Fahrion exhibited in this rooms were "(...) commissioned by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) prior to 1983"? In other words: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul paid João Fahrion for creating these artworks prior to 1983? For this claim, we need an evidence. Gunnex (talk) 08:02, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Português: Paz e bem!


João Fahrion faleceu em 1970 (cf. https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jo%C3%A3o_Fahrion ) assim necessariamente produziu obras antes de 1983.
Eugenio Hansen, OFS (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Agree. Per Gunnex. It is obvious to me that a copyrighted artist do not intend to forfeit his rights over his own work when he exhibits it in a Brazilian museum. But I do defend that churches, cathedrals and the like are "public spaces" (as intended in COM:FOP#Brazil) albeit "indoors". José Luiz disc 00:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please pay a bit of atention to the lay-out of DR's this looks like two seperate DR's. Natuur12 (talk) 13:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:33, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

unclear to which entity this file refers to. Anyway, it is unused - you cannot find in those to articles mentioned below Antemister (talk) 15:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why keep it?--Antemister (talk) 09:29, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is the previoous flag of the city (maybe still official) — worth keeping even if in less than ideal quality. It is different from the current/unofficial one and from the flag of the city. If I were to request the deletion of all files that are unclear to me, Commons would have much less less than 20 million files. -- Tuválkin 11:04, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 08:32, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:Roni ment

[edit]

Roni ment (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

These files have source and license problems. Without proper source and license they should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 15:27, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Oppose File:כיכר המניין הראשון בנס ציונה.jpg & File:כיכר 'המניין הראשון' בנס ציונה.jpg. The text is not a poem, this is only list of names of people and the year they died. nothing originally there. Hanay (talk) 17:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please describe both files in English and then they can be kept. Taivo (talk) 18:26, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I already described: list of names and a year: the first one is: Reuven & Moshe Lerer and their family - 1883. all other are the same etc etc... Hanay (talk) 18:35, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The command «Please describe both files in English and then they can be kept.» is highly problematic and seems to stem from none of Commons’s and Wikimedia’s policies and guidelines. Taivo, I’m sure you meant rather to say «We need a trusted Hebrew speaker to confirm that assertion.», or even «Oh, it is just names and dates? Silly me, I thought it was a poem.» -- Tuválkin 01:31, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not the first, but more the second option you pointed out. But it's better, when somebody describes the files in other language than Hebrew, otherwise maybe somebody wants to nominate them for deletion in the future again. I can do this even myself, but I need to know, what kind of object is it. Is it a gravestone and all these people are buried into the same grave? Taivo (talk) 08:41, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is a square sign a memorial and to honour the people that founded in 1883 the city Nes Ziona. This is a list of families names that came to Nes Ziona between 1883-1890. They belonged to a movement called Bilu. The name of the square is "The first Minyan" (Minyan is the quorum of ten Jewish male adults required for certain religious obligations) and the sign mention 10 families. I hope that as administrator in He:wiki and OTRS volunteer I can be trusted by Tuvalkin as a " Hebrew speaker to confirm that assertion". Hanay (talk) 14:08, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This attitude @ hanay is somewhat not very friendly, to say the least. @ Taivo regarding your concerns :
  1. First image is from Ghetto Fighters' House, it is a drawing of the gate to the ghetto of Kaunas. Needs discussion.
  2. The second picture is a person killed by the Nazi's in 1942. Also present at Ghetto Fighters' House, The person who took it was killed as well, by the same time.
  3. The forth and fifth are as hanay said.
I deleted the third and last, 100% copyvio.
Please seek for a native speaker before rushing to a DR, in order to clarify the suspected status. Thanks matanya talk 14:30, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hanay, my call for a “trusted” Hebrew speaker was ironical; per COM:AGF I trusted when you said the first time that it is not a poem. שָׁלוֹם -- Tuválkin 15:42, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I thought that you mean that I can not be trusted. You can always ask me when you need help with pictures in Hebrew. Hanay (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I crossed two items and I try to describe them. Taivo (talk) 17:06, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The description is OK. Hanay (talk) 17:23, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Following the discussion Natuur12 (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 of User:HelenOnline

[edit]

HelenOnline (talk · contribs) uploaded these photos:

There is no freedom of panorama in South Africa. These posters are not de minimis and in my opinion they surpass threshold of originailty. Taivo (talk) 17:17, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The owner of the posters is the Electoral Commission of South Africa, hence the {{PD-South-Africa-exempt}} template. HelenOnline 17:40, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I was not enough clear. Texts are free, yes, but here are not texts, but drawings. They are apparently official government documents, but are the drawings also covered by copyright exempt? Taivo (talk) 17:51, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I do not believe such simple drawings would pass the threshold of originality (simple typeface, geometric shapes, shape of Africa)? HelenOnline 20:06, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the graphical elements are too simple to pass the originality threshold. Dodger67 (talk) 10:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Some parts of the sing are com:TOO Natuur12 (talk) 18:27, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 freedom of panorama in the Ukraine (Commons:FOP#Ukraine). Is the monument in the public domain? Rybec (talk) 11:56, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know is the monument in the public domain or not. I uploaded the photo for "Wiki love monuments" - the project of Wikimedia WLM. I know that the competition was complete, but it's still open for uploading the photos of monuments according to the list of monuments The list of monuments of the certain region in Ukraine. So I think if it contraries to Ukrainian laws the organisators of WLM would close the list of monuments for uploading. Banbanner (talk) 15:59, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Maybe the sculpture does not surpass threshold of originality? Taivo (talk) 13:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Unclear copyrightstatus and there is no FOP in the Ukraine Natuur12 (talk) 18:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Best version uploaded (File:Cathédrale Notre-Dame-de-la-Sède - nef.JPG). Florent Pécassou (talk) 11:09, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


 Kept, the other photo is much smaller and they are too different. I like your photo more and therefore I am not going to delete neither of them. Taivo (talk) 11:59, 21 November 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.

Téléchargé par erreur. Uploaded by mistake (author request) Florent Pécassou (talk) 14:22, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A short while ago you wanted this deleted because a better version had been uploaded and now you are saying this was uploaded by mistake? I'm afraid you will have to elaborate a bit more before people will believe you. Regards, --ChrisiPK (Talk|Contribs) 08:50, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy deletion of unused file -FASTILY 09:01, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

While this file was created by the US Government, the information was classified until it was illegally published by a non-US Government source. I believe PD-USGov required publication from the government, not just creation. Secondly, this file includes logos that are non public domain and would not pass PD-textlogo or PD-simple and was quite likely published and created without their consent. -- TLSuda (talk) 14:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me, that PD-USGov does not need publishing, creation is enough. But I'm afraid, that if kept, the logos should be cropped out. Taivo (talk) 10:37, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Taivo is correct. Creating as such is protected. Anon (talk) 17:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even if creation is protected, the US Government does not own those logos, and therefore those still retain original copyright. -- TLSuda (talk) 01:38, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: unclear copyright status/possible deriv of non-free content FASTILY 09:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 personal image ♫♫ Leitoxx ♪♪ 18:41, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:54, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]