Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/07/17

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 July 17th, 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.

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: This is a derivative of a non-free map. russavia (talk) 08:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/File:First man on the moon.jpg

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
175.195.137.153 07:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no reason for deletion given. JuTa 21:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 used, unnecessary Fetx2002 (talk) 19:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: look like a notable person, no reason to delete. --Krd 16:40, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hier word de Naam Agnes de K van Stichting de kring noord genoemd en dat is tegen haar privacy. Zij heeft geen toestemming gegeven deze te voeren. Wat er staat zijn nog leugens ook. Per direct verwijderen. 86.87.28.238 19:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep To overturn the official release from 5 years ago (ticket:2009022110021588) would take a bit more than this nomination which itself provides no evidence, nor explanation that would be easy to follow-up. -- (talk) 19:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: speedy kept, nonsense/troll nom Denniss (talk) 21:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright infringement NearEMPTiness (talk) 19:09, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Image is here, etc. Unambiguous copyvios may use {{Copyvio}}. Эlcobbola talk 21:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 filename, replaced by File:20140716 Groenewoudse Tocht2.jpg Gouwenaar (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

marked as a duplicate. Gouwenaar (talk) 13:20, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . JuTa 17:05, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. Design of the grave is probably also derivative. COM:FOP#Canada may also apply.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: There is no COM:FOP in Canada for such things, and this is a modern plaque with at least some copyrightable text on it. russavia (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

EXIF shows copyright holder is ArcSoft, Inc., not our uploader. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:54, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly -- ArcSoft is the copyright holder. Since, as both you and I have said, it is not related to the uploader, the image is a copyvio. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:23, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 23:15, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 this or another similarly sourced image. Peripitus (talk) 23:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Copyvio Pleclown (talk) 17:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photograph or scan of album cover, therefore copyrighted Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:23, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Album released in 1981, still under copyright.--Auric (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]




Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 18:02, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 HVL as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Copyright. Own load. --HVL talk 02:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC) McZusatz (talk) 16:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by McZusatz. Yann (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 HVL as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Partial copyright. Own load. --HVL talk 02:20, 17 July 2014 (UTC) McZusatz (talk) 16:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by McZusatz. Yann (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 HVL as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Partial copyright. Own load. --HVL talk 02:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC) McZusatz (talk) 16:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by McZusatz. Yann (talk) 18:05, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is this the title page of a book. If so, it might be protected by copyright NearEMPTiness (talk) 19:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Krd. Yann (talk) 18:06, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright Infringement: (c) Playboy NearEMPTiness (talk) 21:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Steinsplitter. Yann (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright infringement NearEMPTiness (talk) 21:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bonjour, Je possède les droits de cette photographie utilisée pour mon livre : elle m'a été fournie par le service de presse de Sony France en tant que rédacteur en chef du magazine Starfan. Amicalement daniel


Deleted: by Steinsplitter. Yann (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright infringement NearEMPTiness (talk) 21:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 18:07, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Obviously not the uploader's copyright to release freely - a lower resolution image is available from the group's record company website as well as different resolutions images on several of their Facebook pages. Ww2censor (talk) 23:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is a downscaled version of this whose source page states all-rights-reserved Peripitus (talk) 23:34, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 18:08, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 COM:FOP#Japan for modern 2D artwork in Japan and copyvio. Vantey (talk) 00:24, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm counting on you for this. but, The poster isn't located permanently. --Benzoyl (talk) 11:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
example, at the same place
But, Difficult for me. --Benzoyl (talk) 11:05, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Not permanently" (modern 2D artwork) is copyvio ?
If that's the case, It is my mistake. sorry. --Benzoyl (talk) 11:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:34, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Bad and unnecessary image. --HVL talk 02:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The image do not illustrates the place where I really wanted to show when I took the picture. File:Vista parcial B. Caladinho e região, Coronel Fabriciano MG.JPG is older and was took from other place, but represents the same neighborhoods of the image proposed for deletion. --HVL talk 02:26, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Those are different enough that the one does not seem to be a substitute for the other. OK, it's not the picture you think you should have taken, but I don't see that as a reason to delete. - Jmabel ! talk 03:18, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The trees hinder the focus, that would be the neighborhood (bad image, low quality). And since the image I mentioned above represent the same neighborhood, this becomes redundant. Please, consider Commons:Courtesy deletions. This file in not irreplaceable and the quality is not the best, as mentioned problems. --HVL talk 12:49, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Commons is generally very reluctant to delete images that have been here for several years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:35, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Bad and unnecessary image. --HVL talk 02:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Commons is generally very reluctant to delete images that have been here for several years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 uploader states its her own work, but the description says its a photo from The Daily News by photographer Andy Holzman, which would indicate that it is not her own work. Safiel (talk) 02:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Image unimportant. --HVL talk 02:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Commons is generally very reluctant to delete images that have been here for several years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Image unimportant. --HVL talk 02:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Commons is generally very reluctant to delete images that have been here for several years" (Jameslwoodward). Take a photo of the sky over your head or of a corner of your street and load on Commons. Would greatly help in the project. --HVL talk 21:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Commons is generally very reluctant to delete images that have been here for several years. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:37, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, appears to be an altered version of the flag of the former Dutch Antilles. Out of scope. Fry1989 eh? 02:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. Signage is also probably derivative and questionable under COM:FOP#Canada.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per Binksternet & Ryulong, I see no real value to this photo. Horvitz's photo here as mentioned above is not useful in any way, it is part of his "Art Project" and only serves to facilitate his disruption of Wikipedia. --WPPilot (talk) 03:02, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep within scope, reasonable resolution even if the focus might have been better on the foreground. -- (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    How is a man standing in a tree within scope?—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 14:25, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, it could be used to illustrate en:Hide and seek … --El Grafo (talk) 09:09, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    So is he hiding or seeking? If he's hiding, then he's not doing a great job of it! Green Giant (talk) 10:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Didn't say he was good at hiding, but I think that resembles about the amount of hiding young children are able to do. Probably didn't watch en:How Not to Be Seen – I'm really tempted to put it in there as an example ;-). Jokes aside: I think the potential copyright issue raised below is the best argument for deletion so far (however, he might just have used tripod + timer). The intention behind an upload doesn't really matter as long as it's useful and not against policy. --El Grafo (talk) 11:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah I see, so he is hiding like that because he is childlike! :). Yeah, joking aside, I agree there is a copyright problem but like Ryu and Binkster, I think this and the similar files fall under the first part of COM:D#Self-promotion or vandalism/attack. His stated intention is to sneak these photos into Wikimedia projects rather than openly saying to us "I'm doing an art project with these photos, which could be useful to Wikimedia, would you like to have copies?" Instead he and/or his associates have created a myriad of accounts to hide the photos. For what it's worth they would have been in scope if he'd just kept himself out of them. He could also have had a couple of personal photos, even if he was facing away in them. Just a missed opportunity in his part. :( Green Giant (talk) 12:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete per nominator. This person is clearly not here to help build free educational resources. Green Giant (talk) 13:08, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:43, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. COM:FOP#Canada also applies.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:37, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:21, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment The nominators reasons are IRRELEVANT to us on Commons.  Delete As a derivative of non-free works -- the signs. russavia (talk) 08:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I say keep the image, unless someone comes up with another one. Regardless of the individual in the shot, it's not like he's clowning around or anything. I assumed the man in the photo was simply a customer.  Keep Constablequackers (talk)
Regarding the area covered by the printed signage, I’ve measured it with a Adobe area function and it covers not more than 20% of the total image area (16.09 in^2/ 81.47 in^2)--Nowa (talk) 17:06, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One-fifth of an image does not sound like de minimus. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 00:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You are right, it may not be de minimus. I was merely trying to make sure we were accurate.--Nowa (talk) 01:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:15, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of several photographs uploaded by the artist David Horvitz in which part of his body is intentionally in the shot as part of an ongoing disruption of Wikipedia projects and the Wikimedia Commons. —Ryūlóng (竜龙) 04:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment The nominators reasons are irrelevant for Commons.  Keep This is one of only three images we have of this beach]] and the only one which is looking across to the buildings. Until we have something better, this is in scope of this project. russavia (talk) 08:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    If there are other photos then this one serves no extra purpose, particularly because it is one of several photos that features the unknown subject and has been uploaded to disrupt the Commons.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 13:43, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't care for what purpose the upload was made. It's a useful image for the reasons I've mentioned above and we aren't in the habit of deleting useful freely licenced images simply because of who uploaded it. russavia (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    If its intentions were malicious or at the least mischevious why should it be retained? Just because it's free doesn't mean it should stay. Hell we don't even know if it's actually free to use.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 18:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no question as to licencing here, you simply want to delete it because of what the person has done on English Wikipedia. We don't do that on Commons. russavia (talk) 12:31, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    There is no knowing whether or not the uploader is the copyright owner when we know that this is part of a pattern of disruption.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 20:33, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Horvitz is a sockpuppeteer and serial disruptor. Horvitz has uploaded far too many photos in which he shows himself in the shot. I believe that any such photos should be deleted out of hand. Binksternet (talk) 02:38, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nominator and per Binksternet. This person is clearly not here to help build free educational resources. Green Giant (talk) 13:05, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete unclear (c)status --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Although Russavia is correct that the image is probably in scope as a good image of the beach, the copyright status is questionable becasue the uploader is a known bad guy and he appears in the image. Who actually took the picture? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

As per the last page of this document Fifa claim copyright over the logo, The curves are also beyond what could be considered simple geometric shapes. LGA talkedits 05:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:42, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 penis upload. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very bad quality. Nick7cool (talk) 04:59, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 used, unnecessary 175.195.137.153 05:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:39, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 logo does NOT only consists of simple geometric shapes and/or text. The TV and Face are well over any COM:TOO for protection in the US. LGA talkedits 05:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this tv channel is unknown for a lot of people just name is enough.--EEIM (talk) 16:34, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 17:40, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is more than a simple geometric shape. LGA talkedits 05:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this is same logo File:Direct tv channel.svg same simple geometric shape.--EEIM (talk) 16:28, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That should also b deleted or the same reason. LGA talkedits 23:48, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per discussion Krd 17:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 International Tennis Federation is a UK based body, this logo is over the UK threshold of originality and is not the own work of the uploader. LGA talkedits 06:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

you OK.--EEIM (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 used, unnecessary 175.195.137.153 06:09, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, self-created artwork BrightRaven (talk) 07:26, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Unused personal. Out of scope.

Meisam (talk) 12:31, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Out of scope: unused files, self-created artworks

BrightRaven (talk) 07:28, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, private image BrightRaven (talk) 07:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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: no educationally useful; uploaded only to vandalize jv:Museum lan Galeri Seni Derby. Not even useful to illustrate "child drawing"; it doesn't look like a child's drawing. Lupo 07:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is a derivative file I no longer need (kind of an experiment gone wrong). Λeternus (talk) 07:58, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:49, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

After recently identifying around 40 uploads as copyvio (grabbed from different Panoramio-/Facebook-accounts, blogs etc., details at User talk:Isaacvp) it´s difficult to believe that these remaining files would be own work: IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material (small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent exif) so these ones (per COM:PRP) can't be believed either. All kinds of resoltions available, uploaded either with an arsenal of digicams (+15 different models including the already deleted ones counted) or without meta-data. Usually the uploader cropped the files doing nasty acts like removing watermarks. Most of the files were grabbed from several Facebook-accounts of cities located in Puebla, a state of Mexico.

Examples:

Some files mysteriously watermarked:

by the original photographers
A variety of different watermarks available at

Disregarding photos taken with a "lge LG-P970" and HUAWEI Y300-0151 which - per exif-data - were uploaded (mostly) shortly after taken-date. Some of these files needs additional info as they are reproductions of unknown artworks with unclear copyright status.


Gunnex (talk) 09:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, COM:PCP Krd 17:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low resolution of File:Max Köhler 2014.JPG diba (talk) 09:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Comes from Google imagery : not free. kvardek du (la plej bela nombro) 11:35, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete: From Google Maps. To avoid copyright violations, please consider to use w:OpenStreetMap

Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:47, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:45, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not remove forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not delete forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 out of project scope Motopark (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Please do not delete forklift


Deleted: per nomination Krd 17:46, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 works of copyrighted characters shown Gazebo (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted images on magazine covers shown Gazebo (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted models shown

Gazebo (talk) 10:14, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted artwork and banners shown

Gazebo (talk) 10:20, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:00, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 01:30, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cancel request - now being used on a page. --Mjrmtg (talk) 11:21, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 00:06, 30 June 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted per nomination --Krd 18:07, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 01:43, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 11:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 picture, personality rights Catfisheye (talk) 18:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 16:54, 9 September 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.

Personal non-notable photo, out of scope. Fry1989 eh? 14:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination --Krd 18:06, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 filename, replaced by File:20140716 Groenewoudse Tocht1.jpg Gouwenaar (talk) 14:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Krd 18:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 foccus. Unnecessary image. Own work. --HVL talk 14:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use, no reason to delete Krd 18:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 self portrait. Out of scope. Mippzon (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 file 91.64.223.17 18:45, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 file 91.64.223.17 18:47, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 file 91.64.223.17 18:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

authors request (mobile upload experiment) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikos (talk • contribs) 2014-07-17T08:51:02‎ (UTC)


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Unused, personal picture(s), out of Project Scope.

Amitie 10g (talk) 21:42, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 picture(s), out of Project Scope. Amitie 10g (talk) 23:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: in use Krd 18:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image appears to be a frame from a youtube video - see here. No evidence that the origional souce image is freely licensed. Peripitus (talk) 23:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:02, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

commercial logo. I think that the image is beyond the scope of being too simple for copyright Peripitus (talk) 23:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by Krd, closed by .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted artwork shown

Gazebo (talk) 09:49, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted toys, figurines and models shown

Gazebo (talk) 10:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted images on video screens seem to be prominently featured

Gazebo (talk) 10:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:26, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

permission changed Crazyben2013 (talk) 15:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

great expression on her face... good documentation of orgasm... should be kept (as adult only pic)


Deleted: uploader request, out of scope Krd 18:25, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

permission changed Crazyben2013 (talk) 15:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request, out of scope Krd 18:25, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

permission changed Crazyben2013 (talk) 15:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request, out of scope Krd 18:25, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 has been uploaded by w:User:Chance encounter on enwiki (as w:File:SharonGlotzer2.jpg) and User:Pfd1986 here, both claiming to be the copyright holder. This is also appears on Flickr as all rights reserved [4] credited to Laura Rudich/Michigan Engineering. Clarification and evidence of permission per COM:CONSENT needed. January (talk) 18:40, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The picture was taken by University of Michigan photographer Laura Rudich with the solely goal that this photograph could used for public release. Both the photographed User:Chance encounter and the university hold the right to use it, for that matter. I apologize if the "copyright type" is not correct but those distinctions are honestly quite confusing. Please advise on what is the proper way of using this image at the referred page. Pfd1986 (talk) 18:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've amended the description page based on your response. The copyright holder should send confirmation of permission by e-mail ideally using the suggested wording in COM:CONSENT, that page also has the e-mail address. Alternatively the licence at Flickr could be amended to CC-BY or CC-BY-SA. January (talk) 19:55, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . Krd 18:23, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 delete version: "09:45, 17 juni 2010", "6:24, 16 august 2010" and "16:28, 16 august 2010"; They do not have same "design" as the current version; + A1 is drawn wrong. Also please delete version "21:18, 16 novembar 2011"; same as version "17:38, 17 novembar 2011". — Preceding unsigned comment added by DzWiki (talk • contribs) 2014-07-17T18:01:31‎ (UTC)

No I'd like to keep them cause somone could need it.--Sanandros (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I whould not recommend anyone to use the A1-route in this version: "11:45, 17 juni 2010" (couse it's incorrect), but if anyone wants to use the map they should probably use the original file: "File:Bosnia and Herzegovina location map.svg. Same thing for version: "18:24, 16 august 2010" and "18:28, 16 august 2010",, instead use: File:Roads in Bosnia and Herzegovina.svg... I whould also like to request deletion of this version: "16:13, 11 juli 2014", File: File:A1-BIH-2014.svg, I accidentally upload the wrong width of the image. --DzWiki (talk) 16:52, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no reason to delete Krd 18:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is a promotional photo from RCA Records taken in 1997/1998 and there is no indication that they have relinquished full rights to it. —Justin (koavf)TCM 15:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Dubious authorship claims. For example:

  1. File:IKEA Kungens Kurva 5.gif = [5]
  2. File:Ikeakungenskurva 473.jpg = [6]
  3. File:Pressekonferanse 10 large.jpg = "Foto: Erlend Aas / SCANPIX" (see EXIF)

Stefan4 (talk) 21:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:18, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Central element of flag appears to be a copyright violation. Malpass93 (talk) 22:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:17, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 for sculptures in the US. BrightRaven (talk) 08:42, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:55, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted images prominently shown on the video screens Gazebo (talk) 09:34, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:16, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

picture collection must collect from local picturs, out of scope Motopark (talk) 10:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

advertisement. out of scope. Meisam (talk) 12:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 description given (false date of photography, false source - it's not own work, false author of photography), cannot be sure whether this work is free 31.175.227.153 12:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 description given (false date of photography, false source - it's not own work, false author of photography), cannot be sure whether this work is free 31.175.227.153 12:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Own work"-iem jest tu oczywiście fotokopia tego zdjęcia. Jest ono publikowane w tak wielu miejscach i publikacjach - I każdy powołuje się na swoje zbiory - że nie sposób dojść gdzie znajduje się oryginał. AusLodz (talk) 06:54, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 evidence of author's permission 95.60.96.43 16:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 poster ViperSnake151 (talk) 16:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 indian stamps are copyright for 60 years per Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates, so this 1987 stamp is a copyright violation and the licence provided is false. Ww2censor (talk) 16:52, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 there is no evidence the Indian Post office released this stamp into the public domain. Indian stamps are copyright for 60 years per Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates. Ww2censor (talk) 16:54, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 the copyright for this stamp is owned by the Indian Post Office not the uploader, so they cannot release it freely. Indian stamps are copyright for 60 years per Commons:Stamps/Public domain templates so this 2001 stamp is a copyright violation. Ww2censor (talk) 16:57, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:58, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. The file is not longer variable on flickr. Refora77 (talk) 18:19, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you believe that it is a copyright violation? LX (talk, contribs) 19:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: THe fact that it is no longer available on Flickr is not important, since we know that it was freely licensed on Flickr with an irrevocable license. FOP is irrelevant -- FOP applies only to the copyright for the buildings, not the image. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:57, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

The source/license and author information of every image used in this 2 collages of Mexican city Veracruz are missing or are insufficient, compromising the whole file. No related uploads by user.

Gunnex (talk) 20:25, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 18:54, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 parts mounted on top of the vehicle appear, as a whole, to be more artistic than utilitarian Gazebo (talk) 09:36, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted model shown Gazebo (talk) 10:18, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In which country is it? Looks like FOP could apply? --Krd 18:29, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Both temporary and in San Diego, so it fails FOP on two different grounds. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 movie poster or book cover, not "own work". That said, I cannot read the script. Sitush (talk) 18:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: If it is own work, then it is out of scope personal art; if not, then it is a copyvio. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:05, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pleae check whether this is a copyright infringement NearEMPTiness (talk) 19:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: The media form Missing People, according to the website policy, are not free to distribute. Needs an OTRS permissions for use them on Wikipedia.



Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:04, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Waker / logs. All uploads on 01.03.2009 - despite this one - were copyvios. This is the last remaining file. Gunnex (talk) 20:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:06, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate of File:Google Chrome icon (2011).png. Wider background and inferior image format of the same is not in scope of Commons. → User: Perhelion (Commons: = crap?) 07:16, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:56, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 evidence of authors' permission 95.60.96.43 16:00, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 evidence of author's permission 95.60.96.43 16:03, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:58, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 evidence of author's permission 95.60.96.43 16:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 09:59, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 HVL as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Bad image. Own work. --HVL talk 13:32, 17 July 2014 (UTC) McZusatz (talk) 16:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jameslwoodward, please, the resolution is very bad and this is a criterion for speedy deletion (the same to Commons:Deletion requests/File:Vista noturna B. Santa Helena, Morro do Carmo e Centro - Coronel Fabriciano MG.JPG). I took this photo when I had 12 years old (!) using a celphone whose camera had 2 megapixel and I had no idea of what is photography (if I have today rs). --HVL talk 02:31, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: We do not generally delete images that have been on Commons more than a few weeks at the uploader's request. We have no idea whether third parties have used the image and are relying on the license here to do so. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:00, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 copyright tag. The copyright term in Spain is life+80 years (and the term seems to be the same regardless of whether the author is anonymous or not). We are missing evidence that the photographer has been dead for at least 80 years. Stefan4 (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:01, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 copyright tag. The copyright term in Spain is life+80 years (and the term seems to be the same regardless of whether the author is anonymous or not). We are missing evidence that the photographer has been dead for at least 80 years. Stefan4 (talk) 22:08, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory#Spain doesn't mention anonymous works that are not from a collective work where individual authors are not identifiable, but doesn't Spain follow EU law? Assuming of course, that this actually is an anonymous work and not a case of "the website I got it from doesn't mention the author so it must be anonymous" – haven't checked that. --El Grafo (talk) 10:13, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: "Unknown" is not necessarily "Anonymous" and, in any event, Spain was 80 years until recently. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:03, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Very low resolution, no EXIF data, usually would indicate the image has been taken from elsewhere. russavia (talk) 11:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Although this does not appear elsewhere on the web, the small size suggests strongly that it is not "own work" as claimed. It is this uploader's only edit on Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:36, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image is a derivative work of this profile image which does not appear to be freely licensed Peripitus (talk) 12:41, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Heavily manipulated image, and, as the nom says, a copyvio. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

SVG version exists as File:Flag of Cunday.svg. Fry1989 eh? 14:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

SVG version exists as File:Flag of Cunday.svg. Fry1989 eh? 14:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploaded twice by user, superior version exists as File:Escudo Cunday.png. Fry1989 eh? 14:02, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 and unnecessary image. Own work. --HVL talk 14:09, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We do not generally delete images that have been here for more than a few weeks solely because the uploader requests it. Also, this image is in use. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:40, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

We have an SVG file of the Macau SAR emblem, this file is missing the stars. Fry1989 eh? 14:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Fry1989 eh? 14:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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. Fry1989 eh? 14:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

We have an SVG file of the emblem of Hong Kong, this file is missing the stars. Fry1989 eh? 14:13, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted logo. Fry1989 eh? 14:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted logo. Fry1989 eh? 14:15, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 08:36, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 is a picture of me and I don't want the image in the text. While the photographer did get my permission, I want it down now. I don't need this promotion. 77.187.99.172 08:04, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 12:17, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyrighted artwork is the main subject Gazebo (talk) 09:33, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 12:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

From what one understands, the bear image on the flag is from the Fallout video game series and is likely copyrighted Gazebo (talk) 09:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 12:11, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 description given (false date of photography, false source - it's not own work,, false author of photography), cannot be sure whether this work is free 31.175.227.153 12:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 12:09, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 as merely promotional and also a copyvio from http://www.metalexcompressors.com/profile.html. -- Túrelio (talk) 15:38, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It can be speedy deleted as a copyvio. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 evidence of uploader being original artist of this image, or of permission from him as free-licensed. See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Troll face.svg for one of many previous for this image, which also includes authorship trace. DMacks (talk) 20:48, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 12:08, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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:Review of Precautionary principle, it is not permitted to upload files which are unfree in the United States. Stefan4 (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 07:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Test case, awaiting some reasonable explication by uploader. The whole upload list by Airvillanueva (talk · contributions · Statistics) consists of photos in 99,99 % Facebook resolution with doubtful origins. No exif available. Most of the files were used for illustrating es:Anexo:Monumentos de Veracruz. Veracruz is a city in Mexico.

This file, uploaded in 10.2012, here with a minor res) was previously published (even slightly cropped) via http://www.mexicodesconocido.com.mx/fotos-de-la-semana-palacio-municipal-de-el-oro-estado-de-mexico.html (Copyright © 2010, Impresiones Aéreas, S.A. de C.V. Todos los derechos reservados., credit: "Foto: México Desconocido") = http://www.mexicodesconocido.com.mx/assets/images/notas_2012/febrero_2012/palacio-municipal-el-oro-estado-mexico.jpg (per file path: 02.2012, last modified: 02.2012)

Per above, nominating also:

Gunnex (talk) 21:05, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No sé utilizar esto correctamente, pero México Desconocido utilizó fotos de mi autoría que compartí en su página de Facebook para "Fotos de la semana", es por eso que en la página de México Desconocido aparecen fotos mías que a su vez he compartido en WikiCommons.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.248.4.251 (talk • contribs)

Are you able to (re-) upload 5 photos of your recent uploads in significant higher resolutions than 960xX? For example, your lastest uploads: File:TecatePuebloMágico.jpg (12.2013) and File:Angangueo.jpg (01.2013)? Gunnex (talk) 22:08, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 07:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 copyright tag. The copyright term in Spain is life+80 years (and the term seems to be the same regardless of whether the author is anonymous or not). We are missing evidence that the photographer has been dead for at least 80 years. Stefan4 (talk) 22:07, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment From the file description it looks like this might be a case of If […] it is a collective work where individual authors are not identifiable, this work would be on public domain after 70 years since the date of publication. Or does this only apply for authors who died after December 7, 1987? That would be strange becaus how can you determine the date of deathfor an unknown autor … --El Grafo (talk) 10:03, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In that case {{Anonymous-EU}} would probably fit. --El Grafo (talk) 10:07, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: unclear copyright status FASTILY 07:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 photographs have been uploaded by myself from the Flickr stream of AusAID/Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. The Flickr stream was relicenced to CC-BY after a request by myself. These photographs have been taken by various personnel of the Australian Department of Defence, and may not be under a free licence. I will make contact with Defence and will ask for permission to keep them under the CC-BY licence, with attribution to the Defence. This may need a little longer than the normal 7 day period we have for DRs on Commons, so I am requesting this be kept open for a 2 week period.

russavia (talk) 11:53, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: see here FASTILY 04:33, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]