Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/04/20
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
https://www.flickr.com/photos/88989972@N02/12460033734/ 189.143.40.117 18:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 23:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I can release the picture from under no more valid license. Furthermore no side uses this file. I would like this this file is deleted. JohannesErwinEugen.R (talk) 22:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept, no license revocation permitted and not showing a living person so fails courtesy deletion as well Denniss (talk) 23:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
I withdraw my tag & closed this DR. Thank you --Aftab1995 (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Aftab1995 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the rationale was: "non-free biographical images". Converted to regular DR to allow the user to specify why he thinks it is not free. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Unused family photo - out of project scope. XXN, 17:34, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
J'ai donné le même nom à trop de photos Carmillon49 (talk) 23:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Pas de problème de nom puisque vous avez donné un numéro aux autres photos et que ceux qui voudraient en ajouter pourront faire de même. Cordialement --Quoique (talk) 06:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Raemundcruzzz (4 uploads = 3x copyvio) + indefinite blocked at enwiki = sock of Roughvenboy (talk · contribs) = indefinite blocked at Commons (uploading unfree files after warnings: and re-upload of deleted copyvios). Gunnex (talk) 15:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator. Too many copy vio issues. --Leoboudv (talk) 01:20, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio: http://airlinenewsphilippines.wordpress.com/2013/12/15/tigerair-philippines-eyes-davao-international-airport-as-new-hub/ Yann (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted poster/photograph. No de minimis. Lymantria (talk) 05:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator. --Leoboudv (talk) 18:09, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Derivative work -- Meisam (talk) 08:40, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Clear case. com:DW Natuur12 (talk) 07:08, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
double upload, please delete this file and let File:Fenamidone USA 2011.png Kopiersperre (talk) 03:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Duplicate, request by uploader. Leyo 13:26, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Das ist der Weg zum Frieden - die Feinde wollen es so! Darum zeichne Kriegsanleihe! LCCN2004665832.tif
[edit]This file was initially tagged by Martin H. as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Poster by Lucian Bernhard (http://www.vads.ac.uk/large.php?uid=25976) d. 1972, not public domain Fæ (talk) 00:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- This is part of the collection of Rehse Archiv materials at the Library of Congress that were seized after the Second World War by the Allies. As I am sitting in the UK, I am able to reuse these as expired Crown Copyright which would apply to seized material making them public domain here. In the US, where our servers are, they are also public domain per the licence used on the image page. This particular official poster was published by Dr. C. Wolf & Sohn, during WWI, to promote War Loans. It is not clear to me why the Estate of Bernhard would have a claim for a poster made on commission to the state which at that time (as a War Loan poster) would have been created under orders of the German High Command and been used and printed as state property. I would appreciate some evidence as to case history for counter-claims for WWI artwork of this type. --Fæ (talk) 06:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thats arguments answered by COM:PRP. The work is not public domain in the country of origin, Commons policy requires that it is (Commons:Licensing#Interaction of US and non-US copyright law). Content that is PD in the US under Allien Property Custodian isnt accepted on Commons as long as it is not PD in the country of origin. Even if nobody is known to us who will claim copyright. I see no reason why you take exactly this file as an example request to challenge Wikimedia Commons core princinples. If this is your intention you may ask at COM:VPC but not challenge a request to delete a file that clearly is not inside Commons:Licensing and that you under our policy should never have uploded in the first place. Especially not blind in a batch upload that you apparently not checked before uploading. --Martin H. (talk) 11:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Rather than challenging core principles, I am asking for better case histories. If there has ever been a case under German Law of WWI period artwork produced for the German High Command having a claim of copyright for the artist, or associated case law, then this would be excellent to reference. If no such case has ever been pursued, then considering the 100 years that have elapsed, there may be good reason for it under German Law and the "significant doubt" part of PRP may apply in our favour. --Fæ (talk) 07:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Germany is a civil law country. The fact that this file is in copyright is codified in the copyright law. The law is your reference, a codified general principle that is binding for all and that anyone can refere to. I dont know what any case law would help here, especially given that a case in one court has no binding or precedencial character for any other court. --Martin H. (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Rather than challenging core principles, I am asking for better case histories. If there has ever been a case under German Law of WWI period artwork produced for the German High Command having a claim of copyright for the artist, or associated case law, then this would be excellent to reference. If no such case has ever been pursued, then considering the 100 years that have elapsed, there may be good reason for it under German Law and the "significant doubt" part of PRP may apply in our favour. --Fæ (talk) 07:28, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Thats arguments answered by COM:PRP. The work is not public domain in the country of origin, Commons policy requires that it is (Commons:Licensing#Interaction of US and non-US copyright law). Content that is PD in the US under Allien Property Custodian isnt accepted on Commons as long as it is not PD in the country of origin. Even if nobody is known to us who will claim copyright. I see no reason why you take exactly this file as an example request to challenge Wikimedia Commons core princinples. If this is your intention you may ask at COM:VPC but not challenge a request to delete a file that clearly is not inside Commons:Licensing and that you under our policy should never have uploded in the first place. Especially not blind in a batch upload that you apparently not checked before uploading. --Martin H. (talk) 11:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: THe burden of proof is on the uploader. Since the law reads the other way, it is up to the uploader to cite a case that modifies the statute. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
looks like an unused private image Indeedous (talk) 00:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no license (No license since) ... which was correct. Reviewing user's other uploads, I find this same image two times more
Makes claim of PD-ineligible for same image, but with no source.
has a Russian description, same source, author doesn't match uploader, but license is given as PD.
They're all obviously the same image, attached to multiple world-wide articles about "EXNESS". Of interest merely as a curiosity, those articles have - in some cases - been tagged, or are orphans.
I will be nominating the other two images for deletion next. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Clearly copyrighted Mattythewhite (talk) 01:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
image of myself I uploaded for project but was unhappy with. sorry CutOffTies (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
No source, no claim as to what specific declaration this refers to, and no specified date as to when this vote might have taken place. Trinitresque (talk) 01:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
inapropiado 186.84.207.4 01:57, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Error en la elección de licencia Cony Aracena (talk) 02:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Poor quality, no cats, no date . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
personal photo, file seems corrupt Mjrmtg (talk) 02:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:36, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This image is supposed to be by the artist Jose Bautista but he is still alive. This image needs COM:OTRS permission by him. Is there any proof that this flickr account is Jose Bautista's account? Leoboudv (talk) 02:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC) Estimados amigos me parece un lío impresionante todo esto de las licencias. He puesto esta foto bajo la licencia CC-BY-SA 2.0 que es lo que diecn en otro post y también dicen de borrarala. Me puede decir alguien que licencia tengo que poner porque el nombre en los diefrentes lugares cambia un poco. Si puede ser con Siglas y en ingles y español. Gracias--CarlosAguacate2014 (talk) 10:37, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Needs permission from the artist. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:37, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
There is a dominating 3D sculpture in the picture but the USA has no FOP for sculptures. Leoboudv (talk) 02:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:38, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Iceland has no Freedom of Panorama for modern buildings or sculptures. Leoboudv (talk) 05:43, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:42, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Alex Spade as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This map doesn't conform to term 3 of PD-LV-exempt
Converted by me to DR, as this merits a bit of discussion. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Comment This is not map determined by regulatory enactment (or such regulatory enactment must be clearly specified). This is ordinary travel map. Alex Spade (talk) 08:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Lobo as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: COM:PACKAGING
Converted by me to DR, as the file is on Commons since years. However, the deletion rationale seems to be valid to me; so Delete. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:43, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering mass copyvio (details at User talk:Mareto1), eventually a reupload which was deleted before. Gunnex (talk) 06:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Leoboudv as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: This image is supposed to be by the artist Jose Bautista but he is still alive. This image needs COM:OTRS permission by him. Is there any proof that this flickr account is Jose Bautista's account?
Converted by me to DR, as it's not unlikely that the Flickr-account belongs to the artist. However, I would recommend asking the account-holder[1] for a confirmation to OTRS. -- Túrelio (talk) 06:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:44, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Doubtful if "they took this pictures on (1969-77)" + {{PD-Iran}}, as it looks like an actual photo, considering (taken from - as indicated) from https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150697305839462&set=pb.264006329461.-2207520000.1397977281.&type=1&theater (03.2012). May also be COM:FOP#Iran-related, considering constructed in 1977 by living Iranian architect en:Kamran Diba (1937—). Gunnex (talk) 07:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Marcus Cyron as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: ofcourse copyrighted material.
Converted to DR, as this merits some discussion per the statement on the file-talkpage. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:34, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for considering this. As an artist I should be able to upload my own work. -- En-cas-de-soleil (talk) 05:31, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: This map was made for a copyrighted game. While we are told that that the game is out of print and the game company no longer exists, the copyright still does and is probably not owned by the hired artist. There is also the question of whether the work of this artist is in scope. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:53, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Undoubtedly uploaded in good faith, but the photograph of the model isn't covered by the Swedish right of panorama (which I believe only covers models/3D artwork located outdoors) or any US right of panorama, so I believe that this is still under copyright in both countries. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete It's a shame we have to do this, because I know it's the museum will likely never, ever complain about it. But the nomination is completely correct. But the loss won't be too bad since we now have this very practical replacement. Many thanks to the Hchc! :-) Peter Isotalo 13:14, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This is a logo design which is not necessarily the uploaders to re-license. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 08:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Personal unused. Out of scope Meisam (talk) 09:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Advertisement. Out of scope. Meisam (talk) 09:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Advertisement. Out of scope. Meisam (talk) 09:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Silly recording that keeps being bot-added to Wiktionary. It's funny in a BJAODN sort of way (and in fact it's listed there), but unless there's some way to keep bots from putting it on a serious page (and I'm told there isn't), it's probably best to delete it. Perey (talk) 09:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete --Achim (talk) 20:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Derivative of non-free work. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Agree, no problem :) Sorry! BertSeghers (talk) 20:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
{{PD-AR-Photo}} clearly does not apply. I'm guessing the uploader intended to use {{PD-self}} or similar, but we can't really make that kind of assumption. —LX (talk, contribs) 09:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Tolentino12 (4 uploads = 3x copyvio). Most likely grabbed somewhere from Facebook. Gunnex (talk) 10:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
The source/license and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. Uploaded in 06.2012, previously published via http://www.hia.rwth-aachen.de/index.php?id=29 (Copyright © 2008 - hia) = http://www.hia.rwth-aachen.de/uploads/pics/HIA_1973_und_HIA_heute.png (last modified: 05.2012) or (only the b&w-part) http://www.hia.rwth-aachen.de/index.php?id=29&L=1 = http://www.hia.rwth-aachen.de/uploads/pics/HIA-Goethestrasse-1978_01.jpg (last modified: 2010). The "new" (coloured) part was uploaded locally at de:File:Hia aachen.jpg in 2006 but is tagged with "unclear licensing" and a "Do not move this file to Commons"-alert. Gunnex (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
It is a copyrighted image of ZoomSchool.com (as the image shows and as used here) Mikenorton (talk) 10:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely be own work and has no EXIF 151.247.136.73 11:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely be own work and has no EXIF 151.247.136.73 11:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:21, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
The licensing claim "PD-shooter" by uploader User:Katyo meow is without evidence and rather questionable, considering that this is a professional promo-shot, which per the EXIF-data has been created using the highly expensive studio camera Sinarback eVolution 75. Of course, the uploader might have obtained the image from the producer of the Whisky, but that needs evidence. -- Túrelio (talk) 12:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Same situation with:
- File:10yo canvas.jpg
- File:Packshot ahtamar.jpg (shot using a Canon EOS 5D Mark II)
- File:20yo.jpg
- File:Jameson 18 YO bottle 03.jpg
- File:Jameson 12 YO bottle 03.jpg
- File:Heritage OJD PotStills.jpg
- File:Jameson VisitorCentre5.jpg
- File:Jameson Rarest Vintage bottle 03.jpg
- File:Jameson Gold bottle.jpg
- File:Jameson bottle shot white 01.jpg
- File:Nairi outer.jpg
- File:5stars outer.jpg
- Comment - That is one hell of a beautiful photo, but it does smell suspicious. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:14, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:00, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Out of scope: Text file which contains anonymous original research D.Lazard (talk) 14:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Original research is not prohibited on Commons, but text files are. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:02, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
I own this picture and I don't want it to be online anymore. In the future I might add a similar picture to this topic, but till that I want it to be deleted S.fuer (talk) 14:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: We do not generally delete properly licensed images at the uploader's request, particularly when they are in use. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:04, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Answer: I own this picture and I do not want it to be online anymore. Anyways it is my property, so I think I have the right to ask for deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by S.fuer (talk • contribs) 07:48, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
- NO. You gave up the right to have it deleted from Commons (or anywhere else) when you licensed it with a CC license. That license is irrevocable -- it cannot be changed by you. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Deleted per ticket:2014051910013701. --Krd 17:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
Undeleted following to Old revision of Commons:Undeletion_requests/Current_requests . It seems obvious that this is derivative work based on a map and that tdhere is no source provide for the map. Without information on the map and the maps copyright status we cant host it. Also this seems to be a travle route or something, a proper descriotion is not given and without a description it remains unclear why this file should be usefull for educational purposes. Therefore out of scope. Martin H. (talk) 15:03, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:04, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
unused private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 15:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete unused personal -- Meisam (talk) 08:47, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:04, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
The source/license and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. Gunnex (talk) 15:22, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:04, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
The source/license and author information of every image used in this collage is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file. Gunnex (talk) 15:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Sculptures under copyright Trizek from FR 18:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Annalilysophie is a self established blog- Its members go by the names Anna, Lily and Sophie- -They include a waffle blog and a future youtube which may include parodies and music- -Their blogs are --annalilys 2014-04-20 14-10.png
[edit]Out of project scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
File:Cameron Marino is an amazing athlete with a ton of humor and energy! 2014-04-20 09-09.jpg
[edit]Out of project scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Poor reproduction of original logo (that has a trademark and doesn't should be copied into Commons) Sfs90 (talk) 21:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Text contribution, out of project scope. Martin H. (talk) 21:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:10, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
This image has been marked as public domain due to not meeting the threshold of originality. However, it appears that the boat in the centre of the logo could possibly meet the threshold of originality, thus making copyright law applicable. Orthogonal (talk) 22:18, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:14, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 22:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:14, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
The image is clearly under copyright by the Institute. The uploader falsely claimed ownership of it. José Gnudista (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Complex logo. Kathisma (talk) 21:09, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
bad name - replaced by correct File:Rég de Bourgogne 1667.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader's request Ymblanter (talk) 19:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
bad name - replaced by correct named File:Rég de Bourgogne Col.png L' empereur Charles (talk) 13:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader's request Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Scan from book or brochure. тнояsтеn ⇔ 15:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 19:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Out of project scope/ Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 16:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
No COM:FOP#Japan for modern 3D artwork in Japan. Vantey (talk) 22:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:14, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: modern architecture. Eleassar (t/p) 23:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:16, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Though the license on Flickr is formally o.k. (CC-BY), the image-caption states "photo: Nathalie Boulouch". So, the Flickr-user is the depicted person, not the photographer and thereby his licensing of this image is questionable. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Dear sir what do you propose more? This gentleman gave his camera to be photographed to this lady, who hasn't objected onFlickr to the change of license! Regards, Fatie 34. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fatie 34 (talk • contribs)
- How do you know this? Anyway, it doesn't matter. The photographer is the author, not the camera-owner. You may ask the depicted per Flickr-email to confirm directly to OTRS (permissions-commons@wikimedia.org) that he has got permission by the photographer to distribute his portrait under a free license which allows any kind of us (including commercial) and creating derivatives. --Túrelio (talk) 07:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Túrelio Hello! you have the reply of the image owner and a series of well justified arguments in French which I have translated in English! Regards! Fatie 34 (talk)
J'ai vu la discussion sur la proposition de suppression de cette photo au prétexte du respect du droit d'auteur (l'identité de l'auteur de la photo, indiqué par mes soins en légende, différant de mon identité de titulaire du compte). Etant simultanément le sujet et le propriétaire de l'image (mais aussi spécialiste de la question du droit des images), je me permets d'indiquer que cette discussion est mal fondée, car elle part du principe que cette photographie est une œuvre et relève du régime de la propriété intellectuelle (une telle appréciation suppose notamment l'originalité de l'image, qui se démontre par des marques apparentes et revendiquées de la personnalité de l'auteur). Cet a-priori est contredit 1) par le fait que ni l'auteur (Nathalie Boulouch) ni le propriétaire (moi-même) de l'image n'ont d'activité commerciale photographique, 2) par la diffusion libre et gratuite de cette image sur Flickr, 3) par l'application d'une licence CC qui autorise sa réutilisation. Tous ces facteurs constituent en revanche des indications convergentes pour interpréter cette image, non comme une œuvre relevant du droit d'auteur, mais comme une photographie personnelle. Dans ce cas, l'usage constant identifie le propriétaire de l'appareil comme propriétaire de l'image (appareil éventuellement prêté pour la réalisation d'un portrait en situation, voir le cas du selfie des Oscars 2014, dont l'auteur a été identifié comme Bradley Cooper, sans pour autant modifier la propriété de l'image, reconnue comme celle d'Ellen DeGeneres, propriétaire de la camera). Comme le montrent les autres photographies diffusées sur Flickr datées du même jour (qui comprennent également un portrait de Nathalie Boulouch réalisé par mes soins), il s'agit en l'occurrence d'un usage testimonal personnel à l'occasion d'un colloque. L'usage de licence CC me paraît donc pleinement justifié dans ce cas. Il est à noter qu'il n'existe aucune manière formelle d'attester qu'une image relève de la photo d'amateur. Contredire l'autorisation d'usage par voie de licence CC au nom d'une mention d'auteur distincte du titulaire du compte revient à nier qu'il existe une pratique distincte de la production protégée, ce qui est évidemment problématique. André Gunthert, 21/04/2014.
In English=
[edit]I have followed the discussion regarding the deletion of this photo under the argument of copyright protection (since the id of the photographer, indicated clearly by me in the metadata, doesn't match my id as the Flickr account holder).
Being the subject, as well as the owner of the photo (but also a specialist on the question of image copyrights), allow me to suggest that your argument is unfounded, since you claim that this photo is a work and therefore, it falls under the category of intellectual property (such valuation is based on the originality of the image, clearly identifiable through distinguishable and acclaimed indicators regarding the personality of the owner).
Such rationale is challenged firstly, by the fact that neither the photographer (Nathalie Boulouch), nor the owner (myself) of the image are engaged in commercial photography. Secondly, by the unrestricted and free of cost circulation of the photo on Flickr and thirdly, by the Creative Commons license which authorises it reuse. All the above stated facts help in interpreting this photo, not as a copyrighted work, but on the contrary, as a personal photo!
In this case, the consistent use identifies the camera owner as the owner of the photo (camera, obviously given to the photographer so that the portrait could be shot for the occasion, also as in the case cas du selfie des Oscars 2014, in which the photographer was identified as Bradley Cooper, without challenging the ownership of the selfie, which is attributed to Ellen DeGeneres, cellphone owner). As it can be judged by other photographs, taken the same day and circulated on my Flickr account (in which a portrait of Nathalie Boulouch, shot https://www.flickr.com/photos/gunthert/8729044461/ by me, can also be found]), this photo falls under a personal and testimonial use, taken during an academic conference. The use of CC, in my view, is therefore fully justifiable in this case.
It should be noted that there is no formalised procedure to verify whether an image falls under the category of amateur photography. Restricting permission to use a photo, under the CC licence, simply on the basis of a difference between the photographer's and the Flickr account holder's identity, is to deny the fact that there exist other practices different from copyrighted production, which is evidently problematic!
André Gunthert, 21/04/2014.
Deleted: The long explanation in French is nonsense. All photos are copyrighted, not just professional ones. While we accept "assume good faith" with respect to our own editors, we do not extend that to outsiders, so without a license from the photographer, this cannot stay. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:48, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files of User:Leonidasrockit
[edit]- File:Daan Jordens in school.JPG
- File:Daan Jordens lip biting.JPG
- File:Daan Jordens Shirtless with Sunglasses.JPG
- File:Daan Jordens shirtless.JPG
- File:Daan Jordens at the Mountain.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens Smile.JPG
- File:Daan Jordens White.png
- File:Daan Jordens Looking weird.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens before the wedding.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens Twitter icon 2014.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens from the vine.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens angry.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens In love.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens with glasses.jpg
- File:Daan_Jordens_with_Angel_Wings.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens looking with an open mouth.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens looking.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens in the winter.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens sitting.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens with sunglasses.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens's profile picture 2012.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens Wedding.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens in the train.jpg
- File:Daan Jordens laughing.jpg
Seems to be a large collection of selfie images which are out of the Commons scope. Additionally, the uploader has uploaded some images which are highly likely to be copyright violations since some have professional photographer watermarks on the images. --Lewis Hulbert (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Uploaded in 2012. Artworks (3 paintings + 3 sculptors) of Polish surrealist artist (painter and sculptor) en:Bolesław Biegas (1877–1954), per User:Piotrus/PolishCopyright (70 pma) copyrighted till the end of 2024. Photos of the sculptors were most likely (as indicated: "Biegas.pl") grabbed from a gallery of biegas.pl (Copyright biegas.pl, archive from 2011). Permission needed.
- File:Palac Atlantydy.jpg
- File:Taniec uśmiechu.jpg
- File:Sfinks, Zagadka.jpg
- File:Gadziny.jpg
- File:Gadziny życia.jpg
- File:Walka z wampirem.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 09:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Related: Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Boleslas Biègas,Sphinx, circa 1920, huile sur toile, 22x18 inches, coll.priv..jpg. Gunnex (talk) 09:28, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:57, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
No EXIF, low resolutin, unknown dates, etc point to copyright violations
- File:Grupo de discusión previo a Convencion de Cambio Climatico, sede del MINAE.jpg
- File:René Castro como profesor universitario..JPG
- File:René Castro exponiendo.jpg
- File:René Castro y Laura Chinchilla durante la Asamblea Nacional del Partido Liberación Nacional en el año 2009..JPG
- File:Ministro de Ambiente y Energía.jpg
russavia (talk) 23:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Auro University (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Uploaded in a row on 04.06.2012, all files most likely grabbed from (examples) http://aurouniversity.edu.in/residential_infrastructure.aspx or http://aurouniversity.edu.in/academic_infrastructure.aspx (Copyright © 2012 - 2014 AURO University, archives from 02.2012 available). Permission needed.
- File:Student Classroom.jpg
- File:Learning Resource Center.jpg
- File:Reseption.jpg
- File:Student Lounge.jpg
- File:Kitchens.jpg
- File:Lab Computer.jpg
- File:Auditorium AURO University.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 10:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bibliosensei (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, most of the files mysteriously edited (cropped, black border, text byline) and most likely grabbed from http://slsu.edu.ph (Southern Luzon State University Copyright © 2013. All Rights Reserved, archived since 2008), considering this screenshot: File:SLSU website banner.jpg
- File:University Gymnasium.jpg
- File:SLSU Residence Hall.jpg
- File:SLSU Library.jpg
- File:SLSU Gate.jpg
- File:SLSU Field.jpg
- File:SLSU CTE AVR.jpg
- File:SLSU Coam Auditorium 2.jpg
- File:SLSU COAM Auditorium.jpg
- File:SLSU Classroom.jpg
- File:SLSU website banner.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 20:13, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:09, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by BP47Dhorifah (talk · contribs)
[edit]No indication that uploader has permission to upload these files, probable COM:COPYVIOs.
- File:Sadra.jpg
- File:Pembagian Proposisi.jpg
- File:Dfefinisi Istilah.jpg
- File:Kelas Kata.jpg
- File:Linguistik Abdul Chaer.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:40, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:34, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Crushednote (talk · contribs)
[edit]Both uploaded as own work but have different authors/copyright holders credited in the metadata, File:Gloria- Campaner 1.jpg is also watermarked.
January (talk) 15:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by JörgNeumann (talk · contribs)
[edit]Categorized under Category:Vodka consumption this files have nothing to do with Vodka consumption. The name "Vodka-Harms" is the artists name of this non-notable artist who in December 2011 wrote an article in de.wikipedia (deletion discussion at de:Wikipedia:Löschkandidaten/25._Dezember_2011#Vodka-Harms_.28gel.C3.B6scht.29). As personal pictures of a non-notable individual the files are out of scope.
- File:Vodka-Harms Greenwood.JPG
- File:Vodka-harms2.jpg
- File:Vodka-Harms Greenwood 1.JPG
- File:Vodka-Harms Greenwood2.JPG
Martin H. (talk) 22:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- +delete. agree. --Achim (talk) 10:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jrobzaleta (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF.
Gunnex (talk) 21:29, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Katya meow (talk · contribs)
[edit]Varying EXIF, varying photographers, varying cameras, likely copyvios.
- File:Packshot ahtamar.jpg
- File:Nairi outer.jpg
- File:20yo.jpg
- File:10yo canvas.jpg
- File:5stars outer.jpg
- File:Jameson Rarest Vintage bottle 03.jpg
- File:Jameson Gold bottle.jpg
- File:Jameson bottle shot white 01.jpg
- File:Jameson 18 YO bottle 03.jpg
- File:Jameson 12 YO bottle 03.jpg
- File:Heritage OJD PotStills.jpg
- File:Heritage OMD Warehouse.jpg
- File:Jameson VisitorCentre5.jpg
- File:Jameson LABEL.jpg
russavia (talk) 22:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:13, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Julia.tretyakova (talk · contribs)
[edit]Makes claim of PD-ineligible for same image as File:Logo1000.jpg, but with no source.
has a Russian description, same source, author doesn't match uploader, but license is given as PD.
They're all obviously the same image, attached to multiple world-wide articles about "EXNESS". Of interest merely as a curiosity, those articles have - in some cases - been tagged, or are orphans.
- - English
- - Bengali
- - French
- - Indonesian
- - Malaysian
- - Thai
- - Vietnamese
- File:Exness logo 200.png
- File:Logotype of EXNESS.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:31, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:29, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Obviously copied from newspapers; not the uploader's own work.
—LX (talk, contribs) 09:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:54, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Uploaded on 04.06.2012. Unclear copyright status + unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. File:Wcie2.jpg --> http://leblog.wcie.fr/2011/01/03/w-cie-quitte-clichy-pour-boulogne-billancourt/ (2011, © W&CIE all rights reserved) = http://leblog.wcie.fr/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/aurelium1.jpg (exif available: "Copyright: Cyril Sancereau"). File:Wcie3.jpg --> (example) http://www.lesarchivistes.net/quelle-place-pour-les-marques-aujourdhui-interview-de-denis-gancel-et-gilles-deleris-auteurs-decce-logo-et-presidents-de-wcie/ (01.2012, © 2012, Les Archivistes) = (even watermarked) http://www.lesarchivistes.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/agence3-copie.jpg (high res version, exif available). Permissions needed.
Gunnex (talk) 10:56, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:58, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rustik1266 (talk · contribs)
[edit]The source/license and author information of every image used in these collages is missing or is insufficient, compromising the whole file.
Gunnex (talk) 22:33, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by QuecyKeith (talk · contribs)
[edit]After today identifying around 10 low res uploads as copyvio (details at User talk:QuecyKeith) it´s difficult to believe that these remaining low res files (small/inconsistent resolutions, missing exif) would be own work. Normally, user uploads high res files with +/- consistent exifs (despite File:Sta. Maria Municipal Hall.jpg, per exif attributed to photographer "Jojie Alcantara", tagged with no permission).
- File:USeP Campus Feild.jpg (redirect) + File:USeP Campus Field.jpg
- File:University of Southeastern Philippines.jpg
- File:Road to Malita, Davao del Sur.jpg
- File:Municipal Hall of Malita.jpg
- File:The Province of Malita.jpg
- File:Coastal Scenery.jpg
- File:Province of Malita.jpg
- File:Malita, Coastal View.jpg
- File:Butterfly Sanctuary, Malagos Garden Resort.jpg
- File:Malagos Garden Resort, Calinan District.jpg --> logo, unlikely "own work"
- File:A Nipa Hut where farmers used to take rests.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 16:47, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 06:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Homework pictures, not terribly useful, except for the one's that are probable copyright violations. See COM:SCOPE.
- File:LAR11.JPG
- File:LAR10.JPG
- File:LAR9.JPG
- File:LAR8.JPG
- File:LAR7.JPG
- File:LAR6.JPG
- File:LAR4.JPG
- File:LAR5.JPG
- File:LAR3.JPG
- File:LAR2.JPG
- File:LAR1.JPG
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 17:19, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope -- Meisam (talk) 08:53, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:08, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Incorrect attribution Gsdpics (talk) 11:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Keep, no valid reason for deletion. Fix it yourself?!Nothing to fix, everything correct. FDMS 4 12:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)- Keep everything seems to be okay. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Apperantly okey Natuur12 (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
This does not appear to be the logo of the club -- it does not appear on the club's web site. It is therefore out of scope. However, if it is, in fact, the logo of the club, then a license is required, using the procedure at Commons:OTRS. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:27, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Can the Commons community decide if this image is a copy vio? There is only 1 image on this flickr account which was created in 2009. The uploader has only 1-2 images on Commons. Leoboudv (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Taken with an Iphone, it doesn't seem to be a professional photograph. Low numbers are not enough reason to doubt copyrights IMHO. Lymantria (talk) 05:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Lymantria's statement sounds plausible Natuur12 (talk) 13:50, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
no permission 91.65.69.129 17:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Extremely low resolution makes me wonder if this is a copyvio, perhaps from a twitter icon or similar. -mattbuck (Talk) 15:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- It's her icon in Google and other places: https://plus.google.com/114691803731123832865/videos . Google images finds a lot of occurrences of the image: [2] --Pere prlpz (talk) 15:05, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
I doubt that this image may not be eligible for copyright protection (Commons:Threshold of originality), mainly it's globe due to some complexity of the university's logo. Varied Surf Igloo (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
unused user file 91.65.69.129 17:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Unless I am mistaken, "İzinsiz kullanılamaz" is Turkish for "Used without permission". Since that phrase was added by the uploader, unless a clear explanation is forthcoming from that uploader this should be deleted. Jmabel ! talk 17:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Sreejithk2000 as duplicate (dup). Please note that deleting superseded images requires consent. Indeedous (talk) 15:52, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- This image has been uploaded "For technical reason". Wikibooks uses dynamic templates that need to have all the images with the same format of name. It used to use the following images:
. But the order of the colours wasn't good. The issue is that those images are widely used so we can't change them. So we started to upload new versions with a name like xx percent.svgbut one of the names was unusable so the new images have been uploaded again with names likexx percents.svg. So Wikibooks will be broken if you delete it. It would be more suitable to remove the images with a name likexx percent.svgor manage to use this format of name for all the images. ftiercel (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
_(2561073111).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_bigger.png){kind=link}
_(2561073111).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2561073111).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_(2561073111).jpg){kind=link}
_(2561073111).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Hmm okey. Kept for now. Natuur12 (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by XenonX3 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://bridal.longines.jp/img/page05_montre1.png Lobo (howl?) 11:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Collection of non-free images. Each and every one of these covers is copyrighted, and as such this becomes a mosaic of non-free derivative works. De minimis does not apply in this situation as the copyrighted covers are the focus of this photograph, rather than one or two covers being incidental to an image of a bookstore or similar. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Doublon créé par oubli et erreur (le nouveau fichier est de meilleure qualité) Voir la nouvelle version : https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Gargantua_en_r%C3%A9volutionnaire.jpeg&action=submit Zythème (talk) 14:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:48, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
A Wikimedia-only permission is not acceptable on Commons; we need a universal release of the logo under the state licences for the file to be hosted on Commons (see COM:OTRS for more information about the exact process, etc.) odder (talk) 19:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
This is the coat of arms of a school, unlikely to be the work of the uploader. Underlying lk (talk) 16:55, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
copyvio of 2d artwork not covered by fop in the UK and probable text copyvio Oxyman (talk) 16:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
useless without a description and categories 91.65.69.129 17:16, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
unused user file 91.65.69.129 17:09, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
В источнике, на видео указано AFP (Agence France-Presse), материалы которого несвободны. Dogad75 (talk) 17:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Yokohama1998 (talk · contribs)
[edit]These files all come from http://www.mod.go.jp. They are marked with {{Attribution}}, but the website clearly states all rights reserved. Most, if not all, are not old enough for {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}.
- File:JS Harukaze (DD-101).jpg
- File:JS Chikugo (DE-215).jpg
- File:JS Minegumo (DD-116).jpg
- File:JS Asagumo (DD-115).jpg
- File:JS Makigumo (DD-114).jpg
- File:JS Yamagumo (DD-113).jpg
- File:JS Kitakami (DE-213).jpg
- File:JS Ōi (DE-214).jpg
- File:JS Mogami (DE-212).jpg
- File:JS Isuzu (DE-211).jpg
- File:10ED JS Murasame JS yudachi JS Harusame.jpg
- File:JS Motizuki (DD-166).png
- File:JS Harusame (DD-109).jpg
- File:JS Yudachi (DD-108).jpg
- File:JS Murasame (DD-107).jpg
- File:JS Onami (DD-111).jpg
- File:JS Takanami (DD-110).jpg
- File:JS Uranami (DD-105).jpg
- File:JS Ayanami (DD-103).jpg
- File:JS Inazuma (DE-203).jpg
- File:JS Ikazuchi(DE-202).jpg
- File:JS Yukikaze (DD-102).jpg
- File:JS Akebono (DE-201).jpg
- File:DD-164 TAKATSUKI.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 21:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - it appears the uploader has removed the deletion notice, but has also added something of importance in the permission field. I am not fluent enough in Japanese to read the citation, though, and check that it is compatible with Commons. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 15:25, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Low resolution image without EXIF, unlikely to be own work 151.247.137.176 20:06, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Parsi Aaraai (talk · contribs)
[edit]These are all derivative images of Windows and Chrome, not to mention we know nothing of the source of the images inside the frame. And what is the point of the images anyway?
- File:تاریخ ایران و بزرگان ایران.JPG
- File:تاریخ ایران.JPG
- File:آموزش زبان پارسی بخش جمله سازی.JPG
- File:آموزش دستور زبان پارسی.JPG
- File:فرتورنما یا موزه.JPG
- File:باستانشناسی.JPG
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 17:10, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete It was used for advertisement article fa:پارسی آرای which is deleted now. User is also blocked. [3] -- Meisam (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:47, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
picture is bugy.. Sreejith K (talk) 06:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Kept: mediawiki problem with embedded color profile Denniss (talk) 06:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
No permission, See exif: Credit/Provider - ©GRAZTOURISMUS / Copyright status - Copyrighted --Steinsplitter (talk) 14:07, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep The uploader's name matches with the credit provider. I am assuming they both are the same. --Sreejith K (talk) 14:09, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:PCP, we need COM:OTRS permission (imho).--Steinsplitter (talk) 14:17, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete permission must be obtained through COM:OTRS (in that case we can easily undelete it) -- Meisam (talk) 08:45, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Delete Taken most likely by professional photographer Hans Wiesenhofer and most likely grabbed from an earlier version of http://www.graztourismus.at/de/gut-zu-wissen/social-media-co/bilddatenbank/offener-bereich (still with +/- 20 photos of him) Gunnex (talk) 10:23, 22 April 2014 (UTC)
deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:49, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Impossible to use it in any project, due to lack of informations Ciaurlec (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
13 kb. "Own work" ????? 91.65.69.129 17:42, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
image sous copyright http://www.gouvernement.fr/gouvernement/christiane-taubira voir aussi File:Christiane Taubira devant la presse à sceaux par C. Montagné.jpg Tiraden (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Out of project scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 21:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 13:46, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Skopiowane bez zgody autora z internetu (nie wykonane "własnoręcznie") LoMit (talk) 13:04, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:30, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Low-quality, probably a copyvio ViperSnake151 (talk) 19:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:11, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
нарушение авторских прав: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/68871923 Zugr (talk) 12:08, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 06:13, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:30, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Creator of digital image claims copyright Gsdpics (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Max von Stephanitz died 1936... so its old enough to be public Domain. --Wikijunkie (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: PD-old. Yann (talk) 06:12, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
erreur sur le titre OSMGARD (talk) 17:05, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Renamed. Yann (talk) 06:15, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
Isn't this kind of obvious, like "you can help Commons by contributing to it"? It does not even have a maintenance category, and non-english categories can easily get redirected or deleted. FDMS 4 15:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 08:39, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: copyrighted architecture and interior design. Eleassar (t/p) 18:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:41, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Also :
- File:Dallas Cowboys stadium - championship banners.JPG
- File:Dallas Cowboys stadium championship banners 2.JPG
- File:Dallas Cowboys stadium championship banners 3.JPG
- File:Dallas Cowboys stadium championship banners 5.JPG
DW of posters, taken to show off posters. LGA talkedits 05:24, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- KeepI think it is a very close call whether these have a copyright in the USA -- there is not enough text for a literary copyright and almost no original art. The typography does not have any copyright. I'm not closing this as keep because I think we need at least one more opinion. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:41, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: As I said above -- it's been a week and no one disagrees with me. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:38, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Pointless SVG rendering of JPG image already available at File:VU_Meter.jpg 82.43.248.83 20:28, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:42, 4 May 2014 (UTC)
Cette image a un copyright http://www.justice.gouv.fr/la-garde-des-sceaux-10016/ Tiraden (talk) 20:30, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation Ezarateesteban 22:11, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by FDMS4 as duplicate (dup) and the most recent rationale was: both are factually inaccurate, but this is one is more (different colour) Superseeded images have to be discussed in a deletion request. Indeedous (talk) 19:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Keep In use. Fry1989 eh? 01:32, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
- Well, of course Keep for now, but I am not sure which one (the other one is File:Tvn_kr.png) is the correct version. After I have found out, please Delete 1 out of 2. FDMS 4 16:06, 29 April 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per Fry1989, we cannot delete a file in use if "inaccuracy" (of the color) is the only reason to delete. whym (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
no need to file — Preceding unsigned comment added by Endcunda (talk • contribs) 2014-08-24T17:03:38 (UTC)
- Comment: Really? The file is currently used in several pages in WMF projects.
- Keep Per last. Fry1989 eh? 17:56, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep Per above. - Fma12 (talk) 17:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Per above.
_bigger.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_bigger.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no license (No license since) ... and while I don't dispute that at all, it is a duplicate of File:Flag_of_Vladivostok_2012.jpg which would make the uploader's statement of "wikimedia files" correct. However, I think the other one is really bigger, and am nominating this to let the community decide to retain this one or delete as duplicate. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:12, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
_bigger.png){kind=link}
Deleted: The file slightly differs from the widely used one, but it still may be considered a duplicate, and it is less than the original. Also the nominated file is not used anywhere. Niklem (talk) 18:28, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
_bigger.png){kind=link}
Sostituita da un file svg (File:Pavia mappa tranvia.svg) Friedrichstrasse (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 20:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
I doubt that some of these logos may not be eligible for copyright protection (Commons:Threshold of originality) due to some complexity of the logos. Seeing the user's talkpage, I noticed that the logo of Universidade Atlântica was previously deleted, also the logo of Universidade Nova de Lisboa (UNL).
- File:Iscsp-logo.svg
- File:Fcsh-unl-logo.svg
- File:Ulusiada-logo.svg
- File:Ulisbon-logo.svg
- File:Uatlantica-logo.svg
- File:Unl-logo.svg
Varied Surf Igloo (talk) 12:49, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
- Comment I just saw that File:UNL.png has an OTRS permission, the logo of Universidade Nova de Lisboa. Varied Surf Igloo (talk) 16:53, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: FASTILY 20:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Diplomas uploaded by Bmpm
[edit]The recipient is not the copyright holder.
- File:Diploma-licenciatura-estudos-europeus-universidade.jpg
- File:Dip-Mestrado-UNL.jpg
- File:Diploma-Mestrado-UNL-UA.jpg
- File:Diploma-licenciatura-ciencias-sociais-universidade-aberta.jpg
- File:Diploma Pos Graduacao Parte Curricular Mestrado.jpg
- File:Diploma Carta de Curso Grau de Licenciado.JPG
- File:Diploma de Especialista Universitario de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid.jpg
— JJMC89 (T·C) 05:35, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
- It looks to me as if the wrong tag has been applied, but that these diplomas are probably {{PD-ineligible}} rather than under copyright as they merely convey information and don't show evidence of creative input. Robminchin (talk) 08:47, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: all diplomas have at least an artistic border, sometimes seals that are an integral part of the diploma. --Sebari – aka Srittau (talk) 16:32, 27 September 2019 (UTC)