Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/08/12

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

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

You can visit the most recent archive here.

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

Probably out of scope. It shows a child with her full name too, and it also might be a copyright violation, about the diploma's design. UAwiki (talk) 06:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per COM:PRP: the design looks complex enough to be above COM:TOO. INeverCry 07:13, 12 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.

Dubious case of an "animal selfie". For one thing, is this actually a macaque? And if it's to be considered public domain, the animal needs to take a picture without any actual human involvement. I am highly skeptical that the monkety actually took the camera by itself, framed the picture and clicked away. To me, it looks like an animal reaching for a camera or smartphone held by someone. The Brazilian source doesn't appear all that reliable here. I don't see the merit of assuming that any image with an animal's face and outstretched arm is automatically public domain.

Peter Isotalo 07:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The source claims it was from an advertising campaign of a Turkish Airline. The video is here. They never claim it was a selfie by the ape: the whole story claims it's a selfie by Messi. And given that it's from a professional ad campaign, it's probably not a selfie at all. BTW, most cameras have the button top right. This ape is stretching his right forelimb to the left. Besides, it's a small ape; it wouldn't be able to hold a camera or smart phone with one hand and take a photo. Simple copyvio from that ad campaign. Lupo 09:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: obviously a modified image Denniss (talk) 10:50, 12 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.

Duplicate of File:Calicoan_Island_(aerial_view).jpg as uploader refused to copy over the top of the existing image. Will have to leave this type of thing to the bot next time. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: You can mark these with {{dupe|name.ext}} Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:08, 13 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.

Copy of http://gta-source.fr/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/X-Men-Days-Of-Future-Past-Logo.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by User:Otourly. JuTa 18:22, 12 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.

Copy of http://benoit-et-moi.fr/2014-I/images/gendres.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 12:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by User:Otourly. JuTa 18:22, 12 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.

Copy of http://seeklogo.com/images/J/James_Bond_007_Quantum_of_Solace-logo-A70CB4556E-seeklogo.com.gif Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:37, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by User:Otourly. JuTa 18:21, 12 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.

Copy of http://blog.local.fr/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/fiston-affiche.jpg Patrick Rogel (talk) 13:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by User:Otourly. JuTa 18:20, 12 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.

flight plans 173.209.211.206 15:43, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Not sure what "flight plans" means, this is part of a historic architecture survey. Can this be speedily closed, please? --jnkyrdsprkl (talk) 16:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy kept: No valid reason given. File in the Public domain. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)[reply]

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

I just moved this from en: but am now doubting my decision as this is a mural in the US (even though it no longer exists), and would not be allowed under FOP. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC) -deleted--KTo288 (talk) 09:55, 14 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.

Can find no evidence of CC licence at the source site. russavia (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is an old press photo. We have updated the site since the photo was uploaded, so the URL is changed because of another CMS. The new site (where I just added the CC license text is on http://www.ssu.se/nyheter/press/ . We have also updated the press photo, so this old one is not visible anymore on our press site, but it's still according to the same license.

--Ssu1917 (talk) 07:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Thank you User:Ssu1917 I have made the notation on the file and will close this according. Regards. russavia (talk) 18:44, 14 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.

Taken from some pinterest pins. Original source, author, year, date and place of publication are all unknown. Without such information, impossible to ascertain that this is an Ethiopian work and whether the license tags are valid. Delete unless such information is provided. Lupo 15:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are correct. It is true that the author, year and date of this photograph are unknown, however from the setting of the photograph we can make an accurate educated guess as to where the photo was taken. When examining many different photographs we can assert that this photo was in fact taken inside the Emperor's Jubilee Palace in Ethiopia. The high ceilings, massive curtains and plush furniture are a match to other photos of the interior of the Emperor's Palace. Furthermore, His Majesty's rehearsed stoic pose is indicative of public Ethiopian work. Although this may not be enough to ascertain license tags and solidify a copyright policy it should be taken into consideration nonetheless, thank you. {{PD-Ethiopia}} — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czar Petar I (talk • contribs) 18:06, 12 August 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps. When I first saw File:Haile Selassie Field Marshal Uniform.jpg, I also thought exactly along your argument.... only to discover that it was a LIFE photo taken in Jamaica: http://gty.im/150824630 and not an Ethiopian work at all. So I'd like to see some evidence that this is an Ethopian work and not another photo taken by some press photographer and then published elsewhere. Lupo 19:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Just to show what I mean: [1] is a photo taken of Haile Selassie in his Jubilee Palace, Addis Abbeba, Ethiopia. But it's not an Ethiopian work, it's a press photo © Genevieve Chauvel/Sygma/Corbis. We need evidence that File:Cb9838a7388ab3b6b1dbdac86e069de4 (1).jpg is not such a case. Lupo 19:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I cannot provide such evidence at this time. Also, you make a good point with your example of the Corbis press photo. I pledge to be more diligent in my posts and I will try my best to get more complete and accurate information on the images I upload. We should all be striving to prevent copyright infringement. Thanks again and keep up the good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czar Petar I (talk • contribs)


The photo has been found to be dated 1960 published by "Emperor Tewodros Ethiopian Library Washington D.C." which only publishes Ethiopian sources so this would fall under the Ethiopian license tag. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czar Petar I (talk • contribs)

Needs to be sourced twofold: first, to the precise publication, and second, that this library publishes only Ethiopian sources. On [2], I see quite a few publications first published elsewhere.
I presume as for the claim that the image was published by that library (which has awfully few google hits, essentially all going to the same blog...) is [3] linked at [4]. It is rather clear, though, that neither that blog nor the "Emperor Tewodros Ethiopian Library Washington D.C." is the original source or copyright owner; and that blog contains numerous pictures evidently just taken from some books. It also does not seem to be a reliable source. For instance, on the page I linked, they claim for one image "This photo was taken by the Swiss Sven Tillge-Rasmussen in 1930 in the book Abessinien I Krig. The author was from a group of Red Cross regiment provided by the Swiss during the invasion of Ethiopia by the Fascists in 1936." Two problems with that: first, Sven Tillge-Rasmussen and Abessinien I Krig were both Danish, not Swiss, and second, how can the picture be published 1930 when the author was in Ethiopia only later (1936)? (The latter date appears to be correct; the book was published 1936.) We really need to know who took that photo, and when and where it was first published. Lupo 07:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On an auction website [5] a signed black and white version of the photo is listed as the "Official Ethiopian Ministry of Information Portrait, signed in fountain pen, “Haile Selassie 1971.”... A historic photo from near the end of Selassie's reign."

This could very well be true knowing that many documents were destroyed during the 1974-1975 Communist revolution. Selassie, H.I.H. Prince Ermias Sahle. The Wise Mind of H.I.M. Emperor Haile Selassie I. Published by Research Associates School Times Publications and Frontline Distribution International Inc., 2004. ISBN-10:0-94839-086-7

Also would explain why there is so little information about the photo. In any instance, I myself have marked the photo for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Czar Petar I (talk • contribs)

  • IF you have a look here Looks a b&w derivative of the image in question. Signed and Imperial Ethiopian Government backstamp. That would make it PD, even when published (autographed DW would suffice) 1975. IMHO PD Ethiopia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hedwig in Washington (talk • contribs)
    Good find. Finally an independent source that provides some statement that this was an Ethiopian work. At least a work distributed by the Ethiopian government. A pity this auction site doesn't provide a scan of the backside. But OK, let's  Keep this. Lupo 04:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is a second auctioneer who has a copy of that photo: [6]. Signed and dated 1971, and according to that site an "official Ethiopian Ministry of Information portrait". Lupo 19:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per above. Lupo 20:47, 14 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.

Files uploaded by Samba rubina (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Fotos taken from somewhere, all with the face photoshopped. Copyvios and out of scope.

Lupo 16:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: McZusatz (talk) 20:02, 15 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For this and the other three files: maybe the author can upload a better resolution. If not, they can be deleted. Too small to use them for an article or somewhat Wiki-Project --Saviour1981 (talk) 07:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:35, 16 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:34, 16 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:35, 16 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:36, 16 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:36, 16 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.

Unlikely authorship. Low resolution, lack of metadata. · Favalli01:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio uploaded by sock of User:Milanopablojavier24. INeverCry 23:37, 16 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.

logo : non free Supertoff (talk) 07:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: by User:INeverCry. JuTa 23:38, 16 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.

Copyvio. Not sure how UK FoP law overrides US copyright law? In the US these characters are copyrighted. I've always been under the impression that media has to be free in both the country it's in and in the US where Commons is hosted. All images used in articles about the Alien franchise on en.wiki are under non-free use for example. INeverCry 17:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep FOP's are one of the expeptions of the Commons general roles. US-FOP only covered builings, never more. Eg. every modern monuments somewhere in the world is copyrigted in US. So, if we go with yours thinging of FOP, there is no sense to keep on Commons eg. Category:Monuments_and_memorials_in_Poland because more of them are copyrigted in US but they are covered by Poland-FOP. So, if you of that opinion you should change the Commons roles, on the firts... Gniewko, syn rybaka (talk) 23:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Gniewko, syn rybaka's example is uninformed and misses the point entirely. The issue is United States works abroad (e.g. US works installed in Poland); it has absolutely no bearing on Polish works in Poland, German works in Poland, or any non-US work in Poland. On the Commons, images must be free in the US and country of origin. The image here is indeed free in the UK under that country's FoP provision. The photograph, however, is a derivative of a fully copyrighted US work. Mere installation in the UK does not dissolve that copyright. Indeed, per tar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc. 153 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 1998), the applicable law for determining infringement is the location of the harm. Use of this image in the United States would only be expected to harm a US author and in that same jurisdiction (US) - thus it is not free in the US for our purposes. Alternatively, in the absence of case law dealing explicitly with international application of FoP, COM:PRP prevails. Эlcobbola talk 14:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per discussion Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:11, 17 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.

not own work http://www.kapanlagi.com/foto/berita-foto/asian-star/cantiknya-jun-ji-hyun-dengan-gaun-strapless-di-baeksang-awards.html Fetx2002 (talk) 00:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:19, 19 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.

not own work Fetx2002 (talk) 00:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:19, 19 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.

From a blog, http://7upmusic.tumblr.com/post/81089912296/tiesto-turning-it-up-on-main-stage-last-night-at - questionable claim of own work ViperSnake151 (talk) 02:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:19, 19 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.

Copyright violation (logo of Hello project trainees (Japanese idol group)) Banku (talk) 02:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are really sure of copyrigh violation or it's only a guess? --Saviour1981 (talk) 07:40, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Same logo appears here. [7]--Banku (talk) 21:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 07:19, 19 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.

Copyright violation, not text logo (Japanese company) Banku (talk) 02:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:19, 19 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.

These images have been taken by David Plas, and the EXIF notes that he is the copyright holder. Having dealt with David in the past on another Flickr stream, he is not willing to have his photographs made available under a free licence. Hence all of these images need to be deleted.

russavia (talk) 03:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I checked the flickr-license of some an found allways a {{Cc-by-2.0}} license. This means he published the images under this license -->  Keep. --JuTa 18:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, more likely this means only that the user who uploaded to the EPP account on flickr did not pay attention to the copyright status of the photos from different photographers he uploaded. Unfortunately, these situations happen quite frequently with flickr accounts users who upload other people's photos. If Russavia has already corresponded with this photographer about this kind of issue and the photographer has confirmed that he does not allow his photos to be freely licensed and that they had been wrongly tagged by a flickr user, then it should be assumed that he is telling the truth and that his photos are not freely licensed, unless he specifically makes an explicit statement that he releases them. (Or, alternatively, if the organization associated with the flickr account sends to ORTS an explicit statement to the effect that the organization has contractually acquired from the photographer the right to freely license his photos. But the odds of that are low, as from experience when these situations were checked it generally turned out that it was the organization who had made a mistake by wrongly tagging the photos on flickr without having obtained the right from the photographer.) -- Asclepias (talk) 22:06, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I didn't noticed that the flickr uploader isn't the fotografer. That changes the situation. --JuTa 22:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete per nomination. I tried to flag these on Flickr, but..their tools..I guess we aren't the only media site with problems! -Pete F (talk) 22:12, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 07:38, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Ximfel1 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

The linked source page states in finnish: Sivuston tekstiaineistoa voi käyttää ja siihen voi linkittää, kunhan lähde mainitaan. Aineiston käytöstä kaupalliseen tarkoitukseen on aina sovittava erikseen Kelan kanssa.

Which google translates to: The text materials can be used, and it can link to, as long as the source is acknowledged. Material for commercial purposes must be agreed separately with Kela.

Which is a non-commercial restriction and makes the files not usable for commons.

JuTa 09:15, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:51, 19 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.

Copied from http://estaticos03.marca.com/imagenes/2014/08/01/futbol/2adivision/1406844789_extras_portadilla_1.jpg LMLM (talk) 09:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:52, 19 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.

This is a very much off color poor quality detail from file:Retrato del Barón de Carondelet - Anónimo (siglo XIX).jpg. It is not in use. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:52, 19 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.

Copyvio. It is from project presantations http://vodafonearena.com.tr/gallery.html Sayginer (talk) 10:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 07:52, 19 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.

Outside of COM:SCOPE. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 10:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 07:52, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Mollaevtk (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal files. There is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:53, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Boycoa12 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal files. Self-promotion is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:53, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 11:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:53, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 11:36, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:53, 19 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.

Non free licence poster Aga (d) 11:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

some unknown persons, see dwescription, private picture Motopark (talk) 11:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

some unknown persons, see dwescription, private picture Motopark (talk) 11:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: the shrine is dated to 1936. Eleassar (t/p) 11:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

Out of scope (no educational use), possible copyvio (other sources on the internet). ireas (talk) 12:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

‘permission to reprint and distribute parts of this FAQ in order to warn people about Darwin and his cult’ is not a free license. Please send a permission to publish this file under a free license to OTRS. ireas (talk) 12:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

Very low quality, no educational use. ireas (talk) 12:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

Possible copyvio: seems to be a TV still; no EXIF information ireas (talk) 12:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

Out of scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 12:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

No evidence that the image is free. Please provide more imformation about the time of creation and the author. ireas (talk) 12:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:54, 19 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.

A bit too blurry even compared to the crappy photos Nemo uploads. Nemo 12:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I agree Gordo (talk) 13:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

contract = copyright Remy34 (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

Out of scope: unused personal image ireas (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:55, 19 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.

http://images6.fanpop.com/image/photos/36300000/Chloe-Lukasiak-image-chloe-lukasiak-36361449-644-696.jpg ireas (talk) 12:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:56, 19 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.

low quality, out of scope ireas (talk) 12:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 07:56, 19 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.

Based on the url on the photo I doubt that this is own work Gbawden (talk) 13:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:56, 19 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.

Available on many sites; also used in the Ecyclopaedia Britannica: [8] Original source unknown, no info about year, publication,or author. Delete unless such information is forthcoming. Lupo 13:54, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 07:56, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Oke4allcom (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Logos and text documents of questionable notability.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:57, 19 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.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:58, 19 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.

Com:penis 192.145.119.228 01:47, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope. --George Chernilevsky talk 11:17, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Niepotrzebny Ty239 (talk) 18:33, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: Uploader's request. --Achim55 (talk) 18:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

I realized it is bad for his privacy. Also Com:Penis 186.173.21.82 18:36, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Possible G7 (you should have signed in) but if not, F10. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 01:39, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 14:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:59, 19 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.

Personal work, unlikely the real badge (that does not have stars, as seen on Club's website). Out of scope. - Fma12 (talk) 14:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:59, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 07:59, 19 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.

image is derived from the deleted image File: EYE and tower Overhoeks Amsterdam.jpg, the original image with my license is also removed, so should this image also be deleted Gouwenaar (talk) 05:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: derivative of copyrighted material Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 19 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.

No freedom of panorama in Belarus. The object in the photo is a piece of modern 3d art made in 2000s. 195.50.31.213 05:12, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No valid reason for a deletion. But the file can be renamed, that should not be a problem. --Saviour1981 (talk) 07:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Here is your reason: [9]. Sculptor is Олег Куприянов (Kupryyanau Aleg; born in 1966; still living[10]); project sculptor is Елена Хараберюш (Kharaberush Alena; born in 1951; still living[11]). Without proper permission from both authors one cannot publish the photos under a free license. Best regards, 217.21.43.22 14:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: no FoP in Belarus Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 19 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.

Author died in 1988. Geagea (talk) 07:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation Ymblanter (talk) 18:43, 19 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.

Le fichier Oletta monument.jpg mal nommé est un doublon du fichier Poggio-d'Oletta monument.jpg. Un nouveau fichier sera importer sous le nom de Oletta monument.jpg après la suppression effectuée. PierreB (talk) 12:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader's request Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 19 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.

Unused personal file. Self-promotion is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Book cover under Copyright Yiyi (talk) 15:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Dimnbass (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal files. There is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 08:07, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 08:06, 19 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.

License violation (claimed own-work, but it appears to be a copy of File:Peptide_Synthesis.svg that has a different author). And low-quality (not large, scaling artifacts from converting vector into raster for no reason) DMacks (talk) 06:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:36, 19 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.

Small, some unusual bond-angles and atom-labels that overlap bonds. Unused, have high-quality File:Pracinostat.svg DMacks (talk) 06:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:36, 19 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.

Unused and low-quality (size; in-image border presumably due to copy-paste from uncited original (uploader has copyvio problem)); have File:Rigosertib.svg DMacks (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:36, 19 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.

clearly a scan, no source, no permission Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 06:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keine Erlaubnis notwendig, ist ein Abzeichen einer Polizeieinheit in Österreich, wie alle anderen in der Category:Police patches of Austria --K@rl (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Still no source. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 19:37, 19 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.

Weird angles and label-spacing; Unused, have File:RepSox.svg DMacks (talk) 06:58, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:37, 19 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.

This was originally uploaded to w:File:SteveCarlton.jpg in 2009, where it is sourced to Flickr and claimed to be licensed under CC-BY-SA 3.0, a licence not normally used on Flickr as Flickr uses version 2.0 of the Creative Commons licences. It may or may not have been under a free licence back in 2009, but it is not currently listed under a free licence there, and we have no way to prove that it once was listed under a free licence. The file therefore has to be treated as unfree. Stefan4 (talk) 12:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:37, 19 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.

Files uploaded by Dm2972 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal file. Self-promotion is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:38, 19 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.

Unused personal file. Self-promotion is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:23, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:38, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 15:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 19:38, 19 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 20 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.

Author's nick, and the inscription on the picture do not match. Without metadata. Questioned the authenticity of the "own work" Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:06, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 20 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.

Contentless, unmantained and obsolete haphazard gallery; its uses are much better served by Category:Ocypus and by its subcategories. -- Tuválkin 16:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:10, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 16:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 22:44, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 09:47, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused file, author requests deletion. benzband (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 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.

Unused file, author requests deletion. benzband (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 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.

Unused file, author requests deletion. benzband (talk) 16:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 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.

very poor quality Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete looks like a test upload. -Pete F (talk) 22:13, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 20 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.

Cropping of File:Bagnères-de-Bigorre - maison à colombages.JPG with wrong information. The account was blocked on frwiki for sockpuppetry. This file was created to make people believe it was a legit account. Elfix 17:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 20 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.

Cropping of the first version of File:Tour des Jacobins (Bagnères-de-Bigorre).JPG with wrong information. The account was blocked on frwiki for sockpuppetry. This file was created to make people believe it was a legit account. Elfix 17:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 20 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.

Given the last two files uploaded by this user Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bagneres de bigorre maison duzer5240.JPG and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bagneres de bigorre tour des jacobins5239.JPG, it is very likely that this file also is a copyright violation, that it's also been created to give people the impression that this account is legit. (Sockpuppet blocked @ frwiki.) Elfix 17:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 20 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.

Given the last two files uploaded by this user Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bagneres de bigorre maison duzer5240.JPG and Commons:Deletion requests/File:Bagneres de bigorre tour des jacobins5239.JPG, it is very likely that this file also is a copyright violation, that it's also been created to give people the impression that this account is legit. (Sockpuppet blocked @ frwiki.) Elfix 17:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 20 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.

According to Commons:Currency: "a photograph of a coin has two requirements before it can be included. The first is that the design of the coin itself is not copyrighted, or permission has been obtained. The second is that the photographer agrees to license it under a free licence." This image was obtained from this website, and its terms of use say: "The content of the Site may be used as a shopping and educational resource. Any other use of the Site, including the reproduction, modification, distribution, transmission or display of the content, is strictly prohibited." (I.8)

I was thinking, this could be in the public domain, but in this policy it says it doesn't. UAwiki (talk) 17:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:58, 20 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.

Usually I would't even transfer a derivative work like this, but Grey is a close friend of the MinutePhysics guys, and he does seem to know about derivative work in his own work and in the day before when he uploaded this photo without a CC license. Vera (talk) 17:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:58, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Bernandus (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal files. There is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Belluco (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal file. Self-promotion is only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Unused personal file. Self-promotion is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:00, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:59, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Вова Абрамов (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused personal files.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 17:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:00, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Marco Morales Allendes (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Questionable authorship claims based on the low resolution, lack of metadata and apparent age of the photos. The apparent age of the photos, however, is not sufficient to conclude that they are in the public domain without knowing when and where they were first published.

LX (talk, contribs) 18:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:00, 20 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.

very poor quality. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:00, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Kent Evans (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All files by User:Kent Evans: Out of scope: Commons is no private photo album

High Contrast (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]


The webmaster at Kentevans.net uploaded photos of the Author Kent Evans to be linked with the Wiki page on him. These photos include appearances at bookstores, the red carpet for Beasts of the Southern Wild, and several that have been released to the public domain. You have requested to delete all photos that have been uploaded because "Commons is no private photo album". Since Kent Evans is a public figure this does not apply and we request you remove said deletion request.


Deleted: FASTILY 23:19, 23 May 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 01:07, 20 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.

I uploaded a better picture by the name of File:Roman road Maastricht-Nijmegen (Ferraris).png. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wimpi (talk • contribs) 2014-08-11T21:22:07‎ (UTC)

  •  Oppose The history of the file shows one that isn't oval cropped. This seems superior to both the current and proposed replacement, as the oval crop one is much harder to use on standard Wikipedia layouts compared to a rectangular crop, since using [[File:foo.jpg|thumb|Caption]] - the most common way to use files - puts a square box around it. As such, we shouldn't delete the version with the file history. INeverCry 01:18, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 01:18, 20 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.

Has the looks of a copyvio of a photo grabbed from the internet: small, no metadata, previously published on the net. See for example a larger version present there, with a notice of copyright, in 2004, before the upload to en.wikipedia in 2007. -- Asclepias (talk) 18:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 20 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.

Copyrighted logos; not simple textlogos. I would delete. If kept, larger version available under the same license and from the same author from Flickr. Lupo 18:44, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 20 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.

This file was initially tagged by JuTa as no license. Uploader added {{PD-US-1978-89}} later. I find it hard to believe that a film of the musical group village people (thats the source) has been pulished without a copyright note. That shoul be proved. JuTa 18:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 20 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.

Outside of COM:SCOPE. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 18:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep This is not a simple selfie or a poor shot. This photograph is by the well established LGBT artist Kargaltsev, see this magazine article as an example. The photograph itself is good quality of a handsome man with rather nice sharp focus and useful for illustration, especially as there is no possible doubt about the model release. -- (talk) 04:28, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 01:09, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:09, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 20 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.

Unused personal image (previously marked as a copyvio as I hit the wrong button :-/) ireas (talk) 19:13, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 20 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.

Unused personal file. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 20 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.

es wurde ein falscher text eingefügt, blick geht nicht zum großen arber, sondern nach südosten Rosa-Maria Rinkl (talk) 19:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosa-Maria Rinkl: ich hab die Bildbeschreibung korrigiert [12]. Das kannst du auch selbst machen, dazu oben bei einem Bild auf "Bearbeiten" klicken und den Text in der Zeile mit "description" ändern. Jetzt kann das Bild doch bleiben, oder? Holger1959 (talk) 22:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, das ist super! Vielen Dank!

 Keep after the above unsigned commont by the author, the deletion request is obsolete. Holger1959 (talk) 18:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 01:19, 20 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.

Advertising. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:30, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:19, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:19, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 19:39, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:19, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:01, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Unused personal file. There is only user contribution. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:19, 20 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.

Not an "own work" (at least, the uploader did not prove he is the author). This is the logo of Club Universitario of Tandil, Argentina (See official Facebook). Furthermore, this badge (IMO) should not be here due this is above the threshold of originality. - Fma12 (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Author unknown. Source link dead. How can this be PD? Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 20:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Not part of the Anefo set released under CC-BY-SA. Tekstman (talk) 20:31, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:21, 20 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.

Unused personal file blocked in enwiki sockpappet. Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Nisarghande (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Files used in User:Nisarghande. User pages in only user contribution.

Ю. Данилевский (talk) 20:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Only 3 of the expected 4 oxygen atoms are shown. Either the image is incorrect in leaving out one oxygen, or the 3D structure is oriented in such a way as to hide the existence of the oxygen atom (which defeats the whole purpose of the 3D structure). In either case, File:Pertechnetic acid 3D ball.png is a suitable alternative that can be used in its place. Ed (Edgar181) 21:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete per nom. Looks more like a special perspective with the fourth oxygen hidden, but this perspective provides no useful information and is indeed confusing. DMacks (talk) 02:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 01:20, 20 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.

Copyright violation (School emblem of Minami-Arima Junior High in Japan) Banku (talk) 02:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All Japanese school's logos (or emblems) have to be PD (PD-old or Simple shape) or not. I can't find authentic evidence to be PD.--Banku (talk) 23:35, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 01:32, 20 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.

Copyright violation or not notable Japanese music band [13] Banku (talk) 02:17, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All your reasons for deletion are simply insufficient. If there are copytigh violation, we have to prove. "Non notable japanese bands" should not bother within Wikimedia Commons since Wikipedia must care for notability of bands. We just deliver files. If i might be wrong with my opinion, someone can explain me what's the right way. --Saviour1981 (talk) 07:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think this logo is not simple text logo of Japanese. Its original shape of characters are 「わごむ」. I'm not sure the uploader has copyright. --Banku (talk) 21:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 01:32, 20 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.

Files uploaded by Yours JC (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Doubtful own work claim, all other uploads copyvios.

Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 22:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

I've uploaded a full sized image as L42A1-Large.png this image was too small. Sergei Meerkat (talk) 22:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

The photo is uncategorized and the subject isn't clear, educational purpose? Ezarateesteban 22:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

the photo in uncategorized, the subject isn't clear, educational purpose? Ezarateesteban 22:48, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

COM:Derivative work, copyrighted label Josve05a (talk) 22:49, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

uncategorized, no description provided, not clear subject so out of scope Ezarateesteban 23:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No information or context, has not been used, poster leaves no contact. It probably relates to the Pakistani paper of the same name. Richard Avery (talk) 18:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:34, 20 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.

J'ai un client qui souhaite acheter ma photo mais en contre partie qu'elle ne soit plus publier sur wikipedia David (talk) 12:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: The image is in use. The license is irrevocable. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:49, 20 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.

J'ai un client qui souhaite acheter ma photo mais en contre partie qu'elle ne soit plus publier sur wikipedia David (talk) 12:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: The image is in use. The license is irrevocable. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:50, 20 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.

Freedom of panorama rules in Germany, Romania, France, Italy do not allow for these pictures.

LGA talkedits 04:21, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in this case. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:45, 14 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.

Freedom of panorama rules in Spain only allow for works "permanently located in parks or on streets" these are indoors and Poland and England only allow it for "are permanently exhibited" they are not.

LGA talkedits 04:02, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 DeleteWith regards the photo I took I didn't think of it as sculpture/object d'art when I took it so did not consider the copyright of the trophy when I took it, however there are too few made and impractical to be considered utilitarian, so I guess that it is art however minor, with all that that entails.--KTo288 (talk) 14:14, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 NeutralThat's really poor because football articles in german wikipedia often use the trophies in club articles to illustrate their success... there is already no illustration of the cup winners cup and the uefa cup anymore, which were used in many articles. But what can you do? Seems like nothing. --SamWinchester000 (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If we accept that the cups are art, and the precedence of previous deletions is that they are, then they have to go however much we would like to keep them.--KTo288 (talk) 09:13, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:27, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Freedom of panorama rules in Spain only allow for works "permanently located in parks or on streets" these are indoors

LGA talkedits 03:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. INeverCry 17:54, 20 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.

Chemical mistake: solvolysis of silyl ether with iPrOH without H2O present would give trans-etherification to OiPr rathe than free silanol (see image annotation). doi:10.1021/jo060699c (cited at en:Stetter reaction) Scheme 7 agrees with silyl-ether as product. File:Silastetter Reaction.png is the corrected one. DMacks (talk) 08:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete - I moved this one from en-wiki. I've notified the origntor at en:User talk:Edamato Ronhjones  (Talk) 20:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Wrong scheme; not used. Masur (talk) 09:08, 21 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.

Archivo mal nominado, Puerredón en lugar de Pueyrredón. Sin uso. Reemplazado por File:Escudo de General Pueyrredón.svg Girardelli G.Escucho 19:02, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: If the filename in incorrect, please request the renaming instead of reuploading them. This is an official Commons policy. Then,  Delete delete this file and please consider the above. --Amitie 10g (talk) 22:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Duplicate. Please next time request a renaming. It is handled faster and with less bureaucracy. Cecil (talk) 12:49, 21 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.

Unfortunately Sri Lanka no longer has Freedom of Panorama for sculptures and buildings unless the artists who built or designed them died 50 years ago. Leoboudv (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Leoboudv,Its my mistake,However I would like to drop down some info regarding this - Independence Square (Hall & neighboring Artifacts) were majorly designed by Architect Mr Shirley De Alwis,These buildings and artifacts are Hugely inspired by Kandyan architecture.and this man was an Architect respected that school of art.Further he is the man who designed University of Peradeniya.He died on 21st September 1952.and the First Prime Minister of Ceylon Rt.Hon Don Stephen Senanayaka (Our Subject) died on the same year but 5 months earlier (22st March 1952) to the demise of this renowned Architect Mr Shirley De Alwis.In my thinking Mr Shirley should be this designer of this Statue as well.

2014-1952 = 62

Thanks --MediaJet talk 11:14, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: FASTILY 06:35, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Jpsrivas1985 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of scope - promotional images

INeverCry 07:20, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:SCOPE. King of 06:43, 22 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.

les résidences isolées sont aujourd’hui victimes de nombreuses agressions. > Cette photo ne peut être considérée comme étant la “propriété de celui qui l’a > prise”. En effet cette photo a été prise à l’intérieur de ma propriété. Le > photographe est entré sans autorisation, car il n’y a aucun chemin public menant à > cette propriété. L’endroit d'où a été prise cette photo est situé à l’intérieur > même de ma propriété. 82.125.201.147 08:33, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep. No valid reason for deletion. Peter17 (talk) 10:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: We cannot verify your claims. King of 06:45, 22 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.

After uploading the image, I realise it says Copyright 2006 Mark Langford in the EXIF details. en:User:Charou has uploaded a number of images of the Aztec theatre, all in Category:Aztec Theatre, San Antonio. Some taken with a Canon (which I think are self made), some with a Nikon (which I also think could be self made)? This is the only one with copyright details in the exif. -- Deadstar (msg) 15:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Questionable copyright status. King of 06:48, 22 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.

This file was initially tagged by Albert Yam as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: reason for deletion-no more using this file INeverCry 19:28, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unused recent upload, deletion requested by uploader. King of 06:49, 22 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.

no permission 217.186.90.132 20:52, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Egyptian copyright expires after only 25 years. King of 06:50, 22 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.

нарушение авторских прав: pic.twitter.com/6Qye2dXECu 176.65.110.198 23:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Appears to meet criterion (a) of Ukrainian copyright law. King of 06:52, 22 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.

нарушение авторских прав 176.65.110.198 23:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no significant doubt. The licensing for this bit checks out. RGloucester (talk) 22:46, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Appears to meet criterion (a) of Ukrainian copyright law. King of 06:52, 22 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.

Copyright violation Banku (talk) 02:00, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment There are only simple shapes. --McZusatz (talk) 13:26, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete While I'm not a lawyer and would defer to a more expert opinion, this does not seem to me to be a mere collection of simple geometric shapes. -Pete F (talk) 18:41, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep I tend to think this is comparable to File:Olympic_flag.svg which is not protected by copyright in Japan: Commons:TOO#Japan. whym (talk) 21:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Simple shapes. INeverCry 21:50, 22 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.

Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: not an official sign in the sense of Art. 9 of the Slovene Copyright Act. Eleassar (t/p) 22:18, 21 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 19:30, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 the same reason as before: not an official sign. There is no evidence that the image of the hair dryer is in the public domain. Eleassar (t/p) 15:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. INeverCry 21:52, 22 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.

OTRS permission is for "usage in Wikipedia context", no specific license was mentioned. JurgenNL (talk) 11:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-ineligible (License in file is changed) Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:24, 23 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.

Not sure how UK FoP law overrides US copyright law? In the US these characters are copyrighted. I've always been under the impression that media has to be free in both the country it's in and in the US where Commons is hosted. All images used in articles about the Terminator franchise on en.wiki are under non-free use for example.

INeverCry 17:05, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep FOP's are one of the expeptions of the Commons general roles. US-FOP only covered builings, never more. Eg. every modern monuments somewhere in the world is copyrigted in US. So, if we go with yours thinging of FOP, there is no sense to keep on Commons eg. Category:Monuments_and_memorials_in_Poland because more of them are copyrigted in US but they are covered by Poland-FOP. So, if you of that opinion you should change the Commons roles, on the firts... Gniewko, syn rybaka (talk) 23:07, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral The WMF, in it's action over the Oldenburg DMCA request in November 2012 show only that they were not willing to forgo the safe harbor protection of the DMCA over works covered by FoP in Germany. There are, in my view, two competing legal views to how a US court would treat a foreign FoP case; firstly they could take the view that the rights-holders, by agreeing to the copyright work being displayed in such a place they knew (or should have known) the work could be captured in derivative works free of restrictions and that they implicitly agreed to those derivative works being created and therefore there is no protection to be afforded in the US; alternatively the court could rule that the the foreign FoP only applies to derivative works in that foreign state. Until we have some relevant US case law to guide us we are free to treat each case on it's merits. LGA talkedits 07:06, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Gniewko, syn rybaka's example is uninformed and misses the point entirely. The issue is United States works abroad (e.g. US works installed in Poland); it has absolutely no bearing on Polish works in Poland, German works in Poland, or any non-US work in Poland. On the Commons, images must be free in the US and country of origin. The images here are indeed free in the UK under that country's FoP provision. The photographs, however, are derivatives of fully copyrighted US works. Mere installation in the UK does not dissolve those copyrights. Indeed, per tar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc. 153 F.3d 82 (2d Cir. 1998), the applicable law for determining infringement is the location of the harm. Use of this image in the United States would only be expected to harm a US author and in that same jurisdiction (US) - thus they are not free in the US for our purposes. Alternatively, in the absence of case law dealing explicitly with international application of FoP, COM:PRP prevails. Эlcobbola talk 14:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleted. Precedent e.g. (Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Alien (franchise) films) is that we delete.--KTo288 (talk) 22:33, 23 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.

Needs a release via COM:OTRS, or we might decide it was PD-Textlogo despite the graphics on the right. Lupo 19:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: NO permission since 8/12/14 Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 23:25, 23 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.

This file was initially tagged by Hedwig in Washington as no source (No source since) It is just a scan of an old postcard so if the postcard is PD then the scan is PD. We do not need to know who scanned the postcard. MGA73 (talk) 15:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But we need to know a source. Otherwise one essential information is missing. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 19:53, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: No evidence that this file is PD Natuur12 (talk) 12:00, 24 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.

 Info The files' author now added the attributions and credits to both files. I wish to withdraw my DR.  Keep --Martina talk 23:08, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See also File:Multimedia Vision 2016.pdf

The video does not show any authors nor the specfic licences of the used images. The descripton page shows a random, incomplete and unspecified list of image authors, abbreviated to "and others", and incorrectly states a multi-license (CC-by-sa and CC-by) for all of them.

If content is licensed under CC-by-sa, authors (and/or a given other party) have to be clearly named with every image; a copy of, or the URI for, the applicable license version has to be included with every copy; the titles of all works (if supplied) have to be displayed; an URI for each licence legalcode has to be provided; all notices that refer to the applicable licenses have to be kept intact; a hint if the image was retouched and a link to the original source are required; the URI, if any, that licensors specify to be associated with the work, has to be shown; a credit identifying the use of the work in the adaptation is required.

These requrements are not met. Thus the files violate the licence terms; the rights granted by the licences terminate; the files are copyright violations. Martina talk 13:42, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

None of the media used for this clip are attributed which makes this clip a copyright violation. Take the first image for example. It comes from flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/pedrosimoes7/6872425924/?rb=1 and the license is CC BY 2.0. Lets quote the license:
Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
Neither in the clip nor in the info template does this information appear edit: the name of the author appears in the description. But the source says: Wikimedia Foundation which is not correct. I have pointed this out a long time ago and still nearly all media in this category are lacking correct attribution. Of course I could go and fix this in every image but I think as an organization handling millions of creative commons images 'we' should attribute files on our own servers correctly.
Now I am not going to vote for deletion but I want to vote for fixing the attribution. For example the sparrow used in many mock ups for the media viewer is licensed under the CC BY 2.0 license. In the info template all the attribution is missing and below the image it says the image is licensed as cc-by-sa 3.0. (example). This change of license is not permitted. Amada44  talk to me 13:47, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, if WMF corrects the mistakes and adds all required information and links properly, I would withdraw my deletion request. --Martina talk 14:27, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I uploaded the video but I didn't create it (I converted it to a free video format on behalf of the author). I agree that the credits at the time of the upload were insufficient, and that's why I reached out to the author and his colleagues to ask them to add the required credits. They are in the process of adding them; please just give them a little time. guillom 15:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As the author already had been pointed to this issue in november: How long is a little time? --Martina talk 15:20, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say no more than a few days, since they have already collected most of the credits, but are unlikely to work on the week-end. I've sent them another e-mail pointing to this DR as well. guillom 15:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think every admin can wait a week before making a decision. --Martina talk 17:03, 11 January 2014 (UTC) PS: I had also left a notice at Fabrice's talk page[reply]
Dear Martina and Amada44: Thank you so much for pointing out this oversight and for kindly outlining how to fix this error. I sincerely apologize for this mistake, for which I am solely responsible. :( As a relatively new employee at the Foundation, I was not fully aware of the detailed attribution requirements on Wikimedia Commons, particularly for multi-image presentations like this one.
Now that you and guillom have clarified what needs to be done, I am preparing all the required information now on this spreadsheet and plan to wikify it, then post an update to the file's description, hopefully within an hour or two. Please let us know if you see any errors, and feel free to make any necessary improvements, either on the spreadsheet or in the description, once I post it. I thrive on feedback!
In the meantime, I would respectfully ask that you not delete this file, which is strategically important to the foundation and to many community members who helped us create this vision. Amada44, I am sorry that I didn't see your request in November, as I was away on vacation when you posted it and it got lost among hundreds of other emails. Once we finalize license info for this WebM video and companion PDF slides, we plan to focus on all the mockups, but this could take us more time, given the number of files involved -- so we would be grateful if you could give us another week or so for those mockups.
Going forward, our multimedia team is planning to work with Wikidata and the Commons community to build a 'structured data' system so that all this license info could be made 'machine-readable' and automatically cross-posted properly, to reduce the amount of manual labor required to give proper attribution in cases like these. This is a long-term effort, which many community members have been asking for, and which will probably take through the end of 2014, but seems much-needed. This particular incident has sensitized me even more to the importance of this issue, and given me greater clarity on all of the license fields we need to support in this system (note that my spreadsheet already has 18 different fields, and may still be missing a few :).
Again, I really appreciate your helpful guidance and clear recommendations -- and I am deeply sorry for any inconvenience I may have caused to you and to the photographers who so generously contributed their work to the free culture movement. I will post again in an hour with a link to a proposed solution to this issue and will be available through the weekend to help resolve this effectively. Thanks for your patience and understanding :) Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 17:48, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Fabrice, for your understanding and all efforts to repair the credits in your publications. Please let me know when it's done so that I can then immediatly withdraw this DR. --Martina talk 18:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Martina: You're very welcome -- and many thanks for so kindly helping me fill in some of the info on the spreadsheet ! It's really fun and informative to work with an experienced user like you -- and you taught me a lot :) And I particularly appreciate that you took so much time to coach me on a Saturday evening.
I have now posted detailed license information in the video page's description, with links to images, authors and licenses, as well as special notices where appropriate. I would be most grateful if you could take a look at the description -- and recommend or make any edits you think are still needed. I kept the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license for the overall video, audio, design and images other than photos and maps, which seems like the right thing to do, but I will double-check this with our legal team on Monday.
For now, I would be grateful if you would remove the deletion notice for this file and its companion slides, as any remaining issues can be sorted out collaboratively in coming days. I don't want this to impact our overall discussion about the proposed vision, so that participants can focus on the big picture: how do we want to share knowledge and collaborate through multimedia in coming years?
Thanks again for being such a gracious collaborator, I am really enjoying working with you on this project :) Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 23:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As regular user (without extended rights) I am afaik not allowed to remove the DR tags from the files. But I asked an administrator to close this DR and remove the tags. It is after midnight in Germany but I am sure that he will do it tomorrow morning. --Martina talk 00:15, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, attribution issues have been addressed.Geni (talk) 00:59, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Multimedia Vision 2016.pdf

This file incorporates the now deleted 'Mrs Nixon meeting with Big Bird' file that was batch deleted on July 19, 2014. WMF staff uploads should be scrutinized since some are unaware of basic Commons policies 172.56.9.221 03:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please allow me a week or two to deal with this issue. I am currently in London, following the Wikimania conference, and am not in a position to address your concerns right away. But I intend to address them as soon as I can. Please do not delete this file, which is important to us and to the many community members who work with our team. Thanks for your patience and understanding. Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 12:26, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In order to deal with this issue, I think you will need to secure agreement from the Children's Television Workshop to release any copyright claim on this depiction of Big Bird under a free license; or else delete that image from the PDF and re-upload. @Fabrice Florin (WMF): can you at least state which of those avenues you intend to pursue? -Pete F (talk) 22:16, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
For convenience of anyone following along, I found where this image is used -- slides #22 to 24 in the slide deck. -Pete F (talk) 22:21, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: can you work your PDF magic on this one? -Pete F (talk) 03:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've blanked the image out in the PDF, although please note that the PDF isn't 'flattened' and so with the right program (Apple Preview / Adobe Acrobat) the blanking can be easily undone. I can't figure out how to flatten a PDF on a mac without changing the page size at the same time... I can't do anything to help with the video, I'm afraid. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Aha, I think I've found a way to flatten the PDF and keep the page size the same! It required setting up a new 'Paper Size' of 1024x768mm, and then 'printing' to a PDF file. I've uploaded a new version - please can the anon editor check to see whether the blanking/covering can still be removed with Adobe Reader? It does increase the resolution of the file, but this doesn't seem to have an effect on filesize at all. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:26, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Just to check: does it now need Adobe Acrobat to do this, or can Adobe Reader still do it? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:49, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've downloaded a copy of Adobe Reader to see if I could reproduce this, but can't. If this is still a problem, then please let me know the steps you're taking to extract the blanked image from the file. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:14, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Pete and Mike: Thanks as well for addressing this issue on the PDF. Now that I am back in the office, and if the blanked image issue is still a serious problem, I could make a change to the original Google Presentation file to replace the Big Bird image with another image that would *look* like a copyright violation (to illustrate the scenario), but wouldn't actually be a real violation (suggestions welcome).
Then I could re-export the PDF and overwrite the other file, which can all be done in about 30 mins. Fixing the WebM file is another matter, that would probably take a couple hours, all said and done.
But before we jump through all these hoops, are we absolutely convinced that all this work is really needed? With all due respect, it seems that we may be going overboard, in a situation that looks like fair use to me. I am quite familiar with licensing issues, having made a living from licensing for much of my career: I personally signed hundreds of licensing agreements with major brands (Garfield, Dilbert, South Park, etc.), negotiating on both sides of the table, often with millions of dollars at stake. Given that professional background, a lot of the current nit-picking seems excessive to me, given that we are not exploiting these properties for commercial gain. I can't imagine the licensing agent for Big Bird seriously coming after us for this minor use of their image for demonstration purposes. I certainly wouldn't if I were in their shoes. I will respect the community's policies and do that work if it is deemed absolutely necessary, but had to express my personal view on this point, for the record.
Thanks again for all your help in attempting to preserve this important document on Commons. Your generosity is much appreciated. :) Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 21:59, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete I note that the pdf file contains two images that are sourced from Flickr, not Commons. This raises two questions.
First, why did the creators of these files decide that they would be better served by going to our competitor rather than using images from Commons? That seems very strange, particularly since, as I understand it, these are intended to become showpieces for WMF. To be sure, the two could become Commons images, but why didn't anyone bother to do that before using them in an apparently important WMF document?
Second, although the Flickr images are currently freely licensed, that can change at any time. If the images had been uploaded to Commons, they could have Flickrreview tags, but that doesn't work for constituent images.
Finally, I am very much surprised and disappointed by the remarks from Fabrice Florin above. Saying
"I can't imagine the licensing agent for Big Bird seriously coming after us for this minor use of their image"
goes directly against our core values as expressed at Precautionary Principle #1. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:37, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Brief comment - I've copied one of the two flickr images to Commons and updated the link in the attribution. I'm having difficulties moving the other one over for some reason - am out of time at the moment to debug that though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 08:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Done "Kangas portrait" Jee 09:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Fabrice Florin (WMF): I do think it is ideal, especially for such an official document, if you could go back to the source file and make the changes that bring this into compliance with Commons policies in whatever way you see fit. I think it's less than optimal that an uninvolved volunteer like @Mike Peel: should have to approximate this, for a few reasons:
  • It's an unnecessary drain on volunteer resources
  • It projects an image that WMF does not care about its projects' licensing policies
  • The judgments Mike makes may differ slightly from yours; @Jdforrester (WMF): recently described a similar case as being dishonest, in that (if I understood him correctly) it resulted in a PDF that didn't accurately reflect what was presented to staff; it's better if the author can determine the best way to walk that line using his own judgment, rather than having somebody else guess.
  • As has been discussed on other DRs, it is difficult or maybe impossible to fully remove the copyrighted file from the PDF once the PDF has been generated.
I see that nobody else has pointed out, "fair use" is not an acceptable rationale for keeping a file on Wikimedia Commons. This is due not merely to the local policy of Wikimedia Commons, but due to a Resolution passed by the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees in 2007. -Pete F (talk) 20:54, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete The image has to be replaced or removed, blanking is not sufficient if it's still possible to extract the affected image. This de-facto unlicensed image renders the document's cc-by-sa license invalid. This DR should be kept open until end of August, editing the Video (or trying to get a permission from CTW) may take some time. --Denniss (talk) 07:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per discussion and WMF should really start respecting the copyright of our uploaders and they should starting to respect Commons policy. Plenty of time to fix this has been given and Commons simply cannot hoste file which are against Commons Policy because somobody has a busy scedule. 12 days have been given to fix this file and it simply didnot happen properly. "Please do not delete this file, which is important to us and to the many community members who work with our team." if that's really true you would have fixed it in time. Natuur12 (talk) 11:47, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Undeleted the PDF since Mike Peel found a a way to really blur out the image. If anyone can still extract the copyrighted image, please let him know and tell him how you did it. Natuur12 (talk) 18:48, 24 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.

These files (like those here: Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Mockups for Multimedia Project - Wikimedia Foundation) contain photos that are freely licensed, but not attributed. If anybody wants to take the time to properly attribute each photo per the requirements of the CC license used, this problem can be resolved; if not, the files should be deleted.

Pete F (talk) 00:50, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Pete. I've gone through them and added attribution where I can track down the original files. I'm still working on a couple of them. Rather than nominating files like these for deletion, please could you either spend a bit of time adding the attribution (where it's obvious - in this case, the reused image was mostly attributed in the file itself) or add a template that would put them in a category of images that need improved attribution? It's rather difficult for non-admins to add attribution to files that were lacking it but have since been deleted... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk)
Thank you for taking the time to do that, @Mike Peel: -- certainly preferable to deleting the files. For a brief response -- due to a number of considerations, at the moment I am not willing to put my time into that, but am willing to reconsider if the uploader follows through on statements that he will participate in fixing these problems. I am willing to work alongside him, but I am not willing to do the substantial work of fixing his many mistakes for him. If you'd like to discuss further, my user talk page might be a better venue. -Pete F (talk) 20:49, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, fair enough. But ping me if similar issues arise elsewhere? It's better to solve the issues rather than deleting the files, and I'm willing to spend some of my time fixing this sort of issue if needed. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Will do (and already done :) Thank you. I've withdrawn those you completed above from the nomination, and will update those file's pages as well. -Pete F (talk) 16:55, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(came here via Wikipedia article talk page, where Jkadavoor pinged me). I'm disappointed that a WMF employee doesn't understand the basic requirements of CC BY licensing -- the need for attribution -- and the need for care when adapting other people's works. Some training needed perhaps? I'm not convinced that adding attribution to the file-description page is sufficient. This is a PDF, a self-contained document. Any images embedded within it should have their licence requirements met within the document as one would expect from any normal printed publication -- attributed in-text. This is also true of the original slideshow presentation, but that's in the past. The cheetah image should preferably be removed as using it (and adapting it into screenshots) requires the PDF to contain the full GFDL licence text (and, indeed, for the original slideshow to have included the GFDL licence text for the audience to enjoy!) The mocked-up screenshots of the cheetah would be GFDL too (since the CC licence used for them is NC and so of no interest to us). Unlike the screenshots, the PDF itself is not a remix but an aggregate. I believe it is valid for WMF to host a work that contains some GFDL and some CC licenced material -- that is what Wikipedia is after all. But it would need to be declared that the document contains text and images under different licences. If Commons has a policy that aggregate works need to have homogeneous licencing I'd appreciate if someone can correct me.

So in summary, if the licence terms were met (attribute and full GFDL text embeddeed in document and indictated on file-description page) and the complex licence situtation explained on the file-description page, then the document could be kept with the cheetah screenshots. And this is the responsibility, ulimately, of the uploader. But really, it would be better to replace the screenshots with a CC BY-SA adaptation. -- Colin (talk) 07:49, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Colin: Does PDF a collection or adaptation? If collection, I think we can mix incompatible licenses as you suggested. I think a video is any way an adaptation. Jee 08:24, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is a collection or aggregation, not an adaptation or derivative work. A PDF can be though of like any printed book or journal. Our CC or GFDL images can be reused in such a work without forcing that work CC or GFDL (i.e., these are not viral licences). The aggregate work has multiple components each with various licence requirements. If the contents of a PDF are from varied sources (rather than a single-author work) then it is very likely that a mix of licences (and licence versions) will be involved. I'm surprised if Wikimedia Commons or Creative Commons hasn't already considered this and got some guidance for documenting the licence situation for a mixed-content aggregate work. The screenshot mock-ups are adaptations. -- Colin (talk) 09:45, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Colin for correcting me. Pete, so we can keep it too although the credits are not "injected" inside the PDF itself. Jee 10:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as pointed out above, the document misleads as to the uploader/author in the screenshots. I think the author of the PDF thought, like many, he could just acquire some free images from Commons and do what he liked with them. So really the document needs a lot of work and perhaps the author no longer sees any value in spending that work on an old doc. So it may yet end up being deleted and a little lesson to WMF staff that the rules apply to them! -- Colin (talk) 10:36, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Delete this file, on reflection, yes -- the mistaken attribution and license info in the PDF are really a significant problem. Thanks for all the analysis above @Colin: . (I've taken the liberty of adding your name to your signature BTW, oversight I assume.) -Pete F (talk) 14:38, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The GFDL image has now been blanked. I think that was the only mistaken attribution/license info in the document? If so, then if the old version is deleted then we should be able to keep the blanked version? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:43, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Pete, Colin, Jkadavoor, Mike Peel and others: Thank you all so much for your invaluable help in finding missing attributions for these files! I am very grateful that you took the time to find the proper credits: I couldn't have done this myself in the past few weeks, due to an intense work schedule and extensive travel (including a memorial service for my late mother last week). Now that I am back in the office and have a bit more time to work on this, could you please summarize for me what remains to be done to salvage these files? I saw a note above about attribution for the author of the team photo, which was taken by Quim Gil at my request, under my direction, using my camera. Any other images that need attributions at this time?
I would also appreciate your advice about what to do with the slides for the 7 roundtable discussions and sessions I hosted at Wikimania this year, as well as the many photos I took of the conference -- and my ongoing series of ideas on how to improve Wikipedia. I think most of the photos are OK to post on Commons, provided they have no third-party images in them. But the slides are another story, and they are likely to require hours and hours of attribution work, which I cannot invest at this time, due to all the pressures of my current job. So I am now inclined to leave them as Google Presentations and not attempt to bring them to Commons, as much as I would like to. What do you think? Is it worth it to try to bring them to Commons, from your standpoint? If so, would other community members be willing to help me as you have here, so the work is not so overwhelming for me?
Thanks again for going out of your way to help with the current files, which was very generous of you: I am deeply grateful for your contributions. Fabrice Florin (WMF) (talk) 21:31, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Fabrice Florin (WMF): It's difficult for me to know what to make of your approach, when you accuse me of harassing you in some places, ignore my requests that you retract those statements, and then you seek my input in other places. I am sorry to hear about your loss. I do not know what else to say. -Pete F (talk) 21:44, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I've struck my comment above, since @Fabrice Florin (WMF): has nicely addressed the core issue here. Thank you. -Pete F (talk) 19:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Fabrice Florin (WMF). I'm not sure you understand the issue here. It isn't about Commons vs. Google/Flickr. It's about following copyright law, the legal requirements of the Creative Commons licenses, and respecting the wishes of those that chose to (or not to) release their images under a free license. If you are not willing to do that, then you should not use the images - full stop. It doesn't matter whether you're posting them to Google/Flickr rather than here - you're still breaking the law.
I'm willing to help you sort out some of the attributions, and to remove images where needed, but that is only a temporary measure - you must start providing the attribution at the time when you make use of the images, not some indeterminate time later. It doesn't take that long to do - most of the time we're spending now is figuring out the locations of the images rather than anything else. I'm sure there are people at the WMF that can teach you how to do this efficiently while you're putting the presentations and mockups together. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:29, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved - offending images have been removed -FASTILY 01:08, 25 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]