Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2014/09/15

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 September 15th, 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.

Previously published elsewhere on the web (e.g. [1]), no evidence for permission; also, the claimed date is obviously wrong. HaeB (talk) 00:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Blatant copyright violation, false claim of own work. Martin H. (talk) 09:29, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This townhall is very recent ans has an architectural originality. No FoP inFrance. Llann .\m/ (Lie 2 me ...) 21:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: No FoP in France Pymouss Let’s talk - 21:42, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Its a test page. Mr Wiki Pro (talk) 17:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:32, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Picture of a copyrighted artwork. Léna (talk) 19:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyrighted indeed! I must have missed it when preparing this batch upload FASTILY 05:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Picture of a copyrighted artwork Léna (talk) 19:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyrighted indeed! I must have missed it when preparing this batch upload FASTILY 05:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Picture of a copyrighted artwork by still alive artist in a country with no Freedom of Panorama. Léna (talk) 19:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nom russavia (talk) 06:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

http://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/109g.html <- taking pictures of the insides of an german miliary base isn't allowed, without permission, by the german law Grunpfnul (talk) 18:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I don't think that there is anything secret on this picture. --Leyo 20:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about a secret areal, military is enough as the law says --Grunpfnul (talk) 22:56, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
„Wer von einem Wehrmittel, einer militärischen Einrichtung oder Anlage oder einem militärischen Vorgang eine Abbildung oder Beschreibung anfertigt oder eine solche Abbildung oder Beschreibung an einen anderen gelangen läßt und dadurch wissentlich die Sicherheit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland oder die Schlagkraft der Truppe gefährdet …“. --Leyo 18:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
§ 109g StGB ist nicht berührt, weil das zweite Tatbestandselement offenkundig nicht gegeben ist. Einschlägig könnte aber § 5 (2) Schutzbereichsgesetz sein, weil dort bereits das Fotografieren eines Schutzbereichs untersagt wird und eine Ordnungswidrigkeit darstellt. Nur: Wir fotografieren ja nicht, wir stellen nur eine Fotografie bereit. Das ist durch das Schutzbereichsgesetz nicht verboten. Keep. (Mal ganz abgesehen davon, dass nationale Fotografierverbote hier im Gegensatz zu nationalen Urheberrechtsregelungen generell ignoriert werden, was auch durchaus sinnvoll ist.) --Rudolph Buch (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Abs. 4: Wer in den Fällen des Absatzes 1 die Abbildung oder Beschreibung an einen anderen gelangen läßt und dadurch die Gefahr nicht wissentlich, aber vorsätzlich oder leichtfertig herbeiführt, wird mit Freiheitsstrafe bis zu zwei Jahren oder mit Geldstrafe bestraft. Die Tat ist jedoch nicht strafbar, wenn der Täter mit Erlaubnis der zuständigen Dienststelle gehandelt hat.
s.a.http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=123360
Danach ist das Fragezeichen beim ersten Tatbestandsmerkmal zu machen, da der Sportplatz keine militärische Anlage ist.--Oursana (talk) 21:27, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dieser sich aber auf einem militärischen Bereich befindet. Zitat: "...einer militärischen Einrichtung oder Anlage..." - es steht nicht dort, dass es die geheime Fahrbahn für den Leopard 3 sein muss, ein Sportplatz auf einem militärischen Gelände dürfte ebenfalls ausreichen, abgesehen davon dass hier noch nicht einmal die Panoramafreiheit greift, dementsprechend auch schon so eine Genehmigung für die Fotografie vorhanden sein müsste. --Grunpfnul (talk) 23:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Da hilft jetzt nur der Blick in den Kommentar, den ich vorläufig nicht in Reichweite habe. Im übrigen sehe ich hier keine Begrifflichkeiten aus dem Urheberrecht. Der Sportplatz weist ja wohl auch keine Schöpfungshöhe auf.--Oursana (talk) 02:15, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, Tatbestand nicht erfüllt, kein rechtliches Problem erkennbar. h-stt !? 08:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Es mangelt definitiv am Tatbestand "wissentlich die Sicherheit der Bundesrepublik Deutschland oder die Schlagkraft der Truppe" zu gefährden. Damit kein Löschgrund gegeben. Um mit dem BGH zu sprechen: Belanglose Abbildungen von Kasernen oder Teilen davon, reichen nicht aus, um den Tatbestand zu erfüllen (vgl. Urteil des 3. Strafsenats vom 10. Oktober 1970, Az.: 3 StR 4/70 II). Bei dem Urteil ging es um eine relativ konkrete Zeichnung einer Kaserne, die ein Soldat an die DDR weitergegeben hat und schon da sah der BGH keine konkrete Gefährdung der Sicherheit oder der Schlagkraft. Ein Bild des Sportplatzes reicht dann garantiert nicht, um eine Verletzung von § 109g StGB konstruieren zu können. --Mogelzahn (talk) 16:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

information needs updating Tsairlin (talk) 06:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The page needs updating Tsairlin (talk) 06:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Out of Commons:Project scope. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:41, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

bad author PointsofNoReturn (talk) 20:45, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Krd 13:15, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

copy of web site photo 1sfoerster (talk) 18:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyright violation an no license at all. JuTa 03:53, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Previously published elsewhere on the web (e.g. [2]), no evidence for permission. Original appears to be from 1955, photographed by . HaeB (talk) 00:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Massach (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Own work claims are highly suspected per contribs. Takabeg (talk) 00:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope promotional material Sarah (talk) 00:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Version with superior resolution as File:DPW-LOGO.jpg. Fry1989 eh? 02:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

dubious personal work El Funcionario (talk) 02:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

License given does not equate to public domain dedication. ViperSnake151 (talk) 04:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Spam, contains copyright notice. ViperSnake151 (talk) 04:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Supposedly released under free licensing, but description contains a strict "all rights reserved" copyright notice. Non-notable subject ViperSnake151 (talk) 04:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 04:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 04:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unlikely to be own work; versions of this circulated already in June 2013, several months before the upload here.[3][4] Lupo 05:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 05:17, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused screenshot of quiz game. Lupo 05:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dvorak died 1969, so copyright is not expired yet! Kurator71 (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No sufficient Copyright StabsstelleDirektion (talk) 07:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Upload by accident StabsstelleDirektion (talk) 07:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a very blurry image. Of doubtful use to Commons project. Leoboudv (talk) 07:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete I don't mind if it is erased. I uploaded it from a group of photos from Flickr, so I didn't notice its bad quality. Best, --Warko (talk) 02:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Contenu non encyclopédique Kyah117 [Let's talk about it!] 08:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image that can exist in form of text. Nothing encyclopedic anyways. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:18, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal CV, not encyclopedic. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 09:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is obviously a photo of a printed photo in a local paper. Copyvio. Pleclown (talk) 09:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please remove this photograph I have uploaded. I learned that Belgian laws are very strict about protecting someone’s privacy (see “Wet van 30 juni 1994 betreffende het auteursrecht en de naburige rechten “ http://www.jeugdwerkregels.be/sites/default/files/regelgeving/w1994_auteursrecht_en_naburige_rechten.pdf) It could be illegal to publish a recognizable portrait. Jules Grandgagnage (talk) 10:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please delete this photograph I have uploaded. I learned that Belgian laws are very strict about protecting someone’s privacy (see “Wet van 30 juni 1994 betreffende het auteursrecht en de naburige rechten “ http://www.jeugdwerkregels.be/sites/default/files/regelgeving/w1994_auteursrecht_en_naburige_rechten.pdf) It could be illegal to publish a recognizable portrait. Jules Grandgagnage (talk) 10:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dubious personal artwork. Orphaned. Out of scope. Stuchka (talk) 11:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Non-educational image, out of scope. P 1 9 9   13:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo, out of scope. This is not Facebook. P 1 9 9   13:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:56, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pandaravadai (talk · contribs)

[edit]

As explained here on the Commons Village Pump, there was concern that these photos would fall outside of COM:SCOPE and so I'm bringing it to DR so as to have some community review.

TeleComNasSprVen (talk) 23:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete all. To extend what I mentioned on Commons Village Pump linked above, these images all have visible watermarks promoting the uploader's websites. The images have only ever been used in userspace (and occasionally cross-userspace, either sock-puppets or pure spam, don't care which) or dumped en masse onto en.wp articles (in violation of their gallery style-guide and due to the seeming spammy nature of user blanketing articles with images promoting his own website). DMacks (talk) 03:50, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: 5 of them are used in an article so I kept those and deleted the others. Natuur12 (talk) 17:57, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Now orphaned (except userspace):

Someone with an admin bit might want to gather the usernames of the uploaders of these files. There is probably a nice sockdrawer full of various spellings. DMacks (talk) 20:12, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Now orphaned (except userspace):

DMacks (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 10:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Pandaravadai (talk · contribs)

[edit]

As many times before, Commons is not a private photo album or for images advertising your website in-image. Here's a new batch uploaded today:

DMacks (talk) 13:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DMacks (talk) 20:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

DMacks (talk) 19:57, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. INeverCry 01:02, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Part of galleryspam by various puppet accounts. DMacks (talk) 04:34, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 08:40, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Recreated by same editor with same problem. DMacks (talk) 13:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted. INeverCry 01:01, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused tiny and fuzzy personal photo, out of scope. P 1 9 9   14:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikicommons request untagged Photos. However, this photography ioncludes a commercial tag of the photographer CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 07:41, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete As the uploader even after being informed makes no step towards cropping the photo or uploading a new version, I strongly recommend the deletion. Regarding the growing amount of watermarked photos in wikicommons, it is not a good idea to expect, that "someone" will take the time for doing that work. We also need to set a signal against the abuse of commons. Uploading watermarks is definetly an intentionally infringe on the provisions. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 06:58, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Denniss (talk) 08:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo, out of scope, and personality rights issue. There was no rationale at all why it was kept in the previous deletion discussion. P 1 9 9   14:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is little educative purpose or possibilty in this image. It is technically a poor image and the individuals rights are unclear. Richard Avery (talk)


Deleted. INeverCry 01:04, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal photo, disparaging filename, and personality right issues. P 1 9 9   14:20, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused personal artwork, out of scope. P 1 9 9   14:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unusable vanity personal photo. Out of scope. Orphaned. Stuchka (talk) 14:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unusable vanity personal photo. Out of scope. Orphaned. Stuchka (talk) 14:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unusable vanity personal photo. Out of scope. Orphaned. Stuchka (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unusable vanity personal photo. Out of scope. Orphaned. Stuchka (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unusable vanity personal photo. Out of scope. Orphaned. Stuchka (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, advertising or self-promotion BrightRaven (talk) 14:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

File description indicates that it is from the "Handbook of Nuclear Knowledge Management" from the IAEA, which is not licensed under Creative Commons as claimed. Ahecht (talk) 15:03, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

some unknown person, home gallery picture Motopark (talk) 15:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope: unused file, text contribution (history of a political group) BrightRaven (talk) 15:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! The Photographer (talk) 17:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted -FASTILY 08:47, 9 December 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.

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! The Photographer (talk) 15:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias, espero que esto pueda hacerse --The Photographer (talk) 17:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted. INeverCry 01:06, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unused, poor-quality pesonal vanity photo. Outside the project scope. DAJF (talk) 05:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 17:27, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 image / serves no purpose 1989 (talk) 03:32, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 16:55, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope. According to his description, it is a personal photograph uploaded for proselytizing purposes. It has no encyclopedic value. Metrónomo's truth of the day: "That was also done by the president" not an excuse. 17:16, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete per nom.  Strong support for deletion and permanent lock to the highest possible level. Repeatedly deleted and reuploaded. Taylor 49 (talk) 17:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --IronGargoyle (talk) 18:38, 16 September 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.

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 15:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:04, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Contributions only in the userpage on wp es. Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


EDIT BY PICTURE'S OWNER: Picture on the articule is my job, in a public space. As uploaded on Wikipedia, i accepted to put no copyright on it. Picture or article is not self promotion, is promoting a nacional actor. Morvotron (talk) 16:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I dont underestand you. Please, could you write in your native language, I underestand spanish perfectly. Thanks --Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 17:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:09, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Self promotion with little or no educational value. Commons is not Flickr. COM:NOTSOCIAL Commons is not a social network and uploaded images COM:PS#Must be realistically useful for an educational purpose. Sorry to have marked your photo/s for deletion, but Wikimedia Commons is not a personal photo album! Please read up on COM:SCOPE to find out more about what is and what isn't a file which can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. I hope you read up on all this and add some more photos of your own! Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 16:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Personal photo with no indication of importance. Out of scope. Malcolma (talk) 11:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 22:14, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Lowest quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:21, 15 September 2014 (UTC) This photo is for user:sanjit.khulal pages[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this image is to use in user page so please do not delete.

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 violation. Image comes from this general site: http://www.arengadeportiva.com.ar/ in which the entire site is copyrighted. PointsofNoReturn (talk) 17:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete source website has clear copyright notice. Ww2censor (talk) 16:07, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyright volaghe Meysam (talk) 18:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Stolen from https://www.facebook.com/marathonmannband/photos/a.266022600120607.65156.201890659867135/761958803860315/ 85.181.13.168 18:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Ich bin Urheber und das Bild wurde lediglich auch bei Facebook verwendet.


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

There is some sort of copyright declaration under 'Metadata' which appears to limit the use of the image. Richard Avery (talk) 18:44, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Claimed as own work yet readily available on multiple websiest (e.g. http://ffemagazine.com/ms-universe-philippines-mj-lastimosa-finally-gets-true-love/) Ponyo (talk) 18:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Inferior (222k vs 12k) unused duplicate of File:MTOR illustration.svg Fred the Oyster (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copyright violation. Url for the organization states that its images can't be used commercially. http://www.gvshp.org/_gvshp/about/about-site.htm PointsofNoReturn (talk) 19:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

looks like cell phone picture of screen .. not work created by the uploader 1sfoerster (talk) 19:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

cell phone picture of someone else's work 1sfoerster (talk) 19:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image can't be found at the source MGA73 (talk) 19:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Little Shepherd Poster.jpg GUIMish (talk) 19:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:12, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Picture of copyrighted artwork from still alive artist Joana Vasconcelos in a country with no Freedom of Panorama. Léna (talk) 19:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Unverifiable licence: 404 on Flickr. EXIF sources the image to Russian social network VKontakte. Previously deleted as copyvio in Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Preacher lad. Stefan4 (talk) 20:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Tabular data in PDF format; contents already present at w:en:Arabic verbs. -- Tuválkin 20:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Essay about a given style of poetry in a given province of Cuba: Off scope as such (txt in PDF file) for Commons. Maybe resubmit in the Spanish language Wikipedia or Wikisource. -- Tuválkin 20:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Off scope. -- Tuválkin 20:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

One of the people did not want to be photographed — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabian Tompsett (WMUK) (talk • contribs) 2014-09-15T10:42:39‎ (UTC)


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Uploaded without a meaningful name, description, author or categories. Possibly personal artwork, possibly a copyvio.    FDMS  4    21:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:13, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

site does not allow commercial usage for its images. www.deportesmisiones.com.ar PointsofNoReturn (talk) 21:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Probably spam, promotional image: see description. Paperoastro (talk) 22:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

A fonte de que a imagem foi tirada não explicita o consentimento dos detentores dos direitos autorais nem quem os têm. A fonte não é fiável, alegando licenças claramente falsas para outras imagens. Outras fontes fiáveis não confirmam a autenticidade da licença apresentada neste carregamento. Juliothren (talk) 22:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

I am the owner of this image and I don't want it to be here. 23.241.194.236 23:13, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment: There is an OTRS permission archived. If you really are the copyright holder and/or the subject in the picture, please follow the OTRS process. You don't are the copyright holder,  speedy keep. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: INeverCry 01:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

facebook image, copy violation (not even a flickr image?) PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

copyright violation from http://www.sbngs.it/italia/media-gallery--fotogallery--musica--italiani PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)  Delete Website is copyright and there is no specific indication this is a freely licenced image. Ww2censor (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

copy right violation of namespedia: http://www.namespedia.com/details/Djoudi PointsofNoReturn (talk) 23:57, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Video has been deleted from YouTube, so we can't check if this is a valid license. JurgenNL (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, without source it cannot be validated, no objection to deletion. --Nabak (talk) 17:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per discussion Ymblanter (talk) 18:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mein eigenes Photo möchte ich löschen ! Hagenkunst (talk) 13:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader's request. Note that I will delete both the photo and the redirect. Ymblanter (talk) 18:16, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Duplicate image. The same image, with Quality Image status exist here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014_K%C5%82odzko,_ratusz,_%C5%BCyrandol.jpg The author has agreed to this. Halavar (talk) 11:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Duplicate. Yarl 19:48, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

May be a derivative work and a document that fall out of scope. Mys 721tx (talk) 09:20, 30 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"The NIV text may be quoted in any form (written, visual, electronic or audio), up to and inclusive of five hundred (500) verses without express written permission of the publisher, providing the verses do not amount to a complete book of the Bible nor do the verses quoted account for twenty-five percent (25%) or more of the total text of the work in which they are quoted."
Since the quote is 100% of the words in the work in which they are quoted -- the photo -- they are an infringement.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 16:04, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nom Trycatch (talk) 11:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Photo from the 1970s, previously published elsewhere on the web (in a different scan [5]), no evidence for permission HaeB (talk) 00:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Actually, that is not the case. The name has been used three times. The first was an automobile and the problem was that the photo was not licensed. The second (DR above) was an image of the NIV, a copyrighted version of the Bible. This one is an image of a band. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: copyvio --Krd 17:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Already exists a similar image File:XB-47-1 300.jpg Rodrigolopes (talk) 00:33, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: I think this one is better. Yann (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Out of scope.    FDMS  4    02:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Russavia: I doubt any North Korean woman (especially if she is an employee of state railways) would pose for a photo of this kind. She rather looks like a girlfriend of the photographer from anywhere in eastern Asia to me …    FDMS  4    22:56, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Looks like a derivative work.    FDMS  4    02:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Not quite sure what the issue is here. The image was taken by me and uploaded with proper copyright status hence there is no reason for it to be deleted.

Superfast1111 (talk) 04:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but taking a photo of a photo does not make you the copyright holder of the original photo. Please see COM:DW.    FDMS  4    21:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see what your confusion is about so let me explain. Every image barring one (Bombay railnetwork.jpg) has been taken by me. Every image is an original work. The only difference for the 12431 Rajdhani Express is that it was taken by a different camera phone that i was using in 2008. So let your mind be at peace. Its a Superfast1111 original.

Superfast1111 (talk) 16:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:DW. Yann (talk) 17:31, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Trade Mark Rights 이강철 (talk) 04:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Loueshan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Nothing than what we already have. Delete per COM:PORN.

§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:54, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to believe that File:Woman pee.jpg is a copyvio, based on it being significantly better quality than any of the other images. However, I would point out that as part of the white middle-class male bias that wikimedia has, we have surprisingly few photos of non-caucasian penises. -mattbuck (Talk) 06:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Files uploaded by Loueshan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

What Commons is still missing in explicit images area?

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to believe that File:Woman Pee.jpg File:Pissing.jpg is a copyvio, based on it being significantly better quality than any of the other images. However, I would point out that as part of the white middle-class male bias that wikimedia has, we have surprisingly few photos of non-caucasian penises. -mattbuck (Talk) 06:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC) 17:18, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Kept, per Mattbuck. Big photos with EXIF data. Taivo (talk) 09:29, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

[edit]

Four COM:PENIS and additional personal image, outside of COM:SCOPE.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • As before, I don't believe the woman urinating is own work, but the others probably are, so per my previous arguments about white middle class bias,  Keep the others. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:31, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

 Deleted, and kept as before. Taivo (talk) 12:11, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


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

El presente escudo no pertenece a la población. Yriel (talk) 08:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Could you add the link to the village website to see the current logo? Fma12 (talk) 22:28, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment http://massamagrell.es/, Original form of the shield: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Escudo_de_Massamagrell.svg
 Keep The nominator attempted to overwrite the file with a different rendition (which although artistically different, is essentially the same design), which suggests this is a nomination based on artistic differences and not based on this image being a fake. Fry1989 eh? 17:10, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Esta bandera carece de referencias y no pertenece a la población. Yriel (talk) 08:08, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep per Here. Fry1989 eh? 17:10, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

None official flag of Massamagrell. TentingZones1 (talk) 04:33, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. If the flag is wrong, use an appropriate template in the File page. Ruthven (msg) 12:26, 23 September 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.

Porque no es el escudo correcto del Ayuntamiento de Tavernes de la Valldigna. Visitar web del Ayuntamiento www.tavernes.org. Gracias. Gabinetalcaldia-tavernesvalldigna (talk) 08:16, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Este no es el escudo correcto. Usar el escudo que he subido en:

File:Escudo tavernes valldigna.jpg
www.tavernes.org

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Escudo_tavernes_valldigna.jpg

Desde el Gabinete de Alcaldia del Ayuntamiento de Tavernes de la Valldigna les pedimmos que sustituyan en tota la wikipedia cualquier enlace al fichero actual, el cual no sabemos cual es su origen. Nos encantaria saber de donde se ha sacado la imagen del escudo incorrecta. Envien correo al gabinetalcaldia@tavernes.org. Muchas gracias. Gabinetalcaldia-tavernesvalldigna (talk) 08:32, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep
English: The shield SVG describes contemplated in emblazoned. Additionally, not for commons choose the image to be in a Wikipedia article
Español: EL escudo SVG describe lo contemplado en el blasonado. Adicionalmente, no corresponde a commons elegir la imagen que va en un artículo de Wikipedia
--Wilfredo R. Rodríguez H. (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep
English: The shield in svg format is correct because it is a graphic reproduction emblazoned that's all official. The version used the town hall as well as corporate image is copyrighted and should not be in commons
Español: El escudo en formato svg es correcto porque es un reproducción gráfica del blasonado que es lo único oficial. La versión usada como imagen corporativa del ayuntamiento además tienen derechos de autor y no debería estar en Commons
--Miguillen (discursión) 19:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This version of this coat of arms is an heraldic representation of a blazon (descriptive text of a coat of arms). Heraldry is an art that allows different interpretations for the same blazon. Consequently, the reasoning that this file should be deleted just because it is different to that of the council town is wrong. In fact -in the countries with heraldic tradition-, the coats of arms used in the council towns rarely coincide to the versions that you can find in wikimedia commons, and they are correct all the same. This rendition is based on the blazon: Escut ibèric. En camper d’atzur, una torre torrejada d’or, aclarida de gules i maçonada de sable. Damunt de la torreta una bandera de gules. because a coat of arms is always described by a text, never by a picture. This kind of "deletion request", for example this [6] usually ends keeping the file. --Xavigivax (talk) 14:32, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 17:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

A fonte de que a imagem foi tirada não explicita o consentimento dos detentores dos direitos autorais nem quem os têm. A fonte não é fiável, alegando licenças claramente falsas para outras imagens. Outras fontes fiáveis não confirmam a autenticidade da licença apresentada neste carregamento. Juliothren (talk) 22:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 17:43, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Japanese Symbols and Flags uploaded by User:Mti

[edit]

All these files were nominated by User:Mti. Those DRs were incomplete. His reasoning was

  • Unused duplicate of <the file itself>--if there are any differences, they do not affect the quality of the resulting raster rendering. on the file description pages, and
  • mtiです。こちらのファイルの削除をしたいのですが議論よろしくお願いいたします。 / 依頼者票- on the incomplete DR pages.

I'm just completing those DRs and grouping them together into one request.

JuTa 21:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • ありがとうございます。この画像はライセンス違反があったことが判明しましたので、削除しても大丈夫です。今日以降もライセンス違反があった画像を追加していきますのでよろしくお願いいたします。--Mti (talk) 22:52, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep According to Mti's above statement, the deletion requests are based on his supposition that there's been a "license violation", though what license and how it is violated is less clear...as is Google Translate. It seems to me that these symbols are not copyrightable due to their simplicity and use of simple shapes. It would be interesting if a Japanese speaker could get in conversation with Mti and see what the deal is. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 00:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(追記)このURL:[7]からのサイトで私、mti自身が転載しているというもので、即刻削除を要請されています。--Mti (talk) 09:39, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So if I have it correctly? The owner of the said website has taken exception to your bulk upload of their artwork to Commons, even though the website says clearly at the bottom "All Rights Reserved"?? Whilst I understand them being a tad pissed at that, ultimately they don't have any rights to reserve. The symbols upon which their files are based are public domain due both to their simplicity and their age. Therefore their files are derivative works of public domain images, and unless they have added artistic flourishes etc then the public domain status carries on down to the derivative works. So in other words they can do bugger all about it. But, in order to save your neck, and for us to have an easier life (with better quality images) I propose that this deletion review be stretched out enough to allow enough time to convert the above looooong list of images to SVG. That way we have good images and the crappy, low-quality images can go back to their 'owner' and the world is a slightly happier place. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 10:45, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • お返事ありがとうございます。このサイトの管理者の方は市町村章の管理者でありかつ掲載している人であるのでコモンズに掲載されている各都道府県の旗と紋章を絶対に削除して下さいと申しておりますので、削除しなければいけません。--Mti (talk) 11:55, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another bulk of images nominated by Mti by the same reasons:

--JuTa 20:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • 確かにあなたのお気持ちはわかります。しかし、Mti自身、このサイト[9]の管理者から許可を得ずに転載し、削除要請がありましたので、削除しなければなりません。強く指示されています。--Mti (talk) 20:57, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
They can ask or demand as much as they like, the fact remains that these emblems and flags are in the public domain and as such the site owner doesn't have the right to demand their deletion. Anyone can write "All Rights Reserved" on the bottom of a webpage, that doesn't mean that they have the legal right to do so. The website owner may well have created those files, he/she, however, didn't design the emblems or flags. Therefore they don't have any rights to reserve, and as such they don't have the right to demand that you delete them. In any case even if they did, it's their responsibility to ask for their deletion, not yours. Nevertheless, you've shown that you are trying to be responsible and accede to their demands by bringing these deletion requests to light. If it is eventually decided to keep them, then that's not your fault. You've responded with due diligence. You have done what was asked so you can now tell the person to go away in jerky movements with no sense of guilt or responsibility. Meanwhile I shall go back to converting them to SVG... it seems I may be gone a while (spot the quote :D )! --Fred the Oyster (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • こちらは追加分です。こちらの方も削除要請が出ていますので削除していただきますようよろしくお願いいたします。 ‎--Mti (talk) 23:08, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here the bulk of images nominated by Mti by the same reasons. PS: @ Mti please could you try to create complete deletion requests in future, as allready asked you on your talkpage. Especially link your requests to the daily deletion request log page. I'm busy since days just to clean up your mess. Please read Help:Nominate for deletion and Commons:削除依頼 (Googleの翻訳). --JuTa 23:43, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    • お返事ありがとうございます。お疲れ様です。mtiです。Fred the Oysterさんが私のことを削除する悪い人だと言われることは事実であり、真摯に受け止めています。svg化に貢献することは非常に感謝していますし、旗と紋章の質を日に日に高めていくことに対して非常に感謝しています。しかし、誠に残念ですが、削除しなければいけません。--Mti (talk) 13:10, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • At the moment it seems to me that Google translate is failing dramatically to get the nuances of this conversation. As best as I can figure out the owner of the chikipage.com website has asked/demanded that all these images be removed. At least I think that is who is asking. But so far I don't seem to have got yhe gist of WHY they must be removed. After downloading a whole load of these images over the last couple of days it appears that none have come from the chikipage website and most have been sourced from official sources. So again I fail to understand what the rationale is for their deletion. So in synopsis, they are public domain, they aren't taken from any particular website and they are accurate to official sources. Admittedly most are so low-quality as to be next to impossible to convert, but am I missing something here with regard to why this image cull must go ahead. I know Mti has left several 'pleading' messages but again, there has been no salient reason given for their deletion. So as of this juncture I'm of the opinion that they should either all be kept, or at the very least only keep the ones that haven't been converted to vector. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 14:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And the next bulk of images nominated by Mti for the same reasons:

I realy hope this story will ever come to an end. @Fred there are even about 90 more. On Sunday I listed them indiviualy to Commons:Deletion requests/2014/09/14. Just in case you like to convert them too. --JuTa 19:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... and the next (small) bulk of images:

--JuTa 18:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... and the next bulk:

--JuTa 10:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have some questions that haven't really been answered in detail, in addition to the obvious "when will these listings ever end"?.
1. Who actually created the image files that were uploaded?
2. Who is actually complaining of the copyright violation?
3. Who actually owns the copyright on these symbols (as I was given to understand that due to simplicity and age these were public domain)?
4. Who has complained to Mti, and how?
5. Who is actually demanding that they be deleted?
6. Why now? And what is the rush if we can say that they will be deleted after conversion?
7. If the conversions are okay to stay then why can't the originals?
8. So which contains the copyright violation, the replication of the symbol or the actual raster implementation?
9. Why specifically these files when there are lots of others that haven't been listed for deletion?

--Fred the Oyster (talk) 11:10, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • ご質問、お応えいたします。こちら(旗と紋章)のファイル削除は以前に述べたとおり、某サイトの管理者から削除依頼を出されていますので削除している最中です。そして、削除しているものは投稿せずにsvgファイルで投稿してくださいと指示が出ました。--Mti (talk) 11:38, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Admittedly Google translate made a mish-mash of your comment: "Question, we will meet. It is in the middle you are removing As mentioned previously, so we issued a deletion request from the administrator of a certain site of file deletion (emblem and flag) here. And, the instructions came out and please post in the svg file without post what is deleted." But from what I can see your comment doesn't give specific answers to any of my questions. --Fred the Oyster (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • お返事ありがとうございます。Fred the Oysterさんがコモンズにsvg化に貢献していることに対して非常に感謝しています。しかし、申し訳ございませんが、わたしがupした画像は削除しなければいけませんことをご理解してもらえると嬉しいです。--Mti (talk) 12:12, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

... and the next bulk:

--JuTa 22:54, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • お疲れ様です。一応こちらで全部ですので削除の方をお願いいたします。— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mti (talk • contribs)
  • お疲れ様です。mtiです。さて、サイトの管理者の方から、削除できなければ削除しなくてもよろしいと言う返事をいただきましたので削除は無理にしなくても結構です。第三者には多大なるご迷惑を掛けたことをこの場でお詫び申し上げます。

@Howcheng: as a ja-2 capable admin, please advise. --Krd 06:07, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Request has already been withdrawn (Mti's comment above, 06:39, 23 September 2014 (UTC)), and no other reason has been provided to delete the all images systematically (and I don't have one). Some might have be copyrighted by local governments, but most seem not because of COM:TOO or {{PD-Japan}}. Individual deletion requests should be raised on those few images, if necessary. whym (talk) 09:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
日本語: @Mti: なお、再度削除依頼される場合は、創作性がないのではないか、十分古いために著作権が切れているのではないか、原作のデジタル化は原作を忠実に再現するものであり著作権が発生する創作性のある表現が追加されていないのではないか、といった点も考慮されるべきだと思います。一方で、代替となるSVG画像がアップロードされれば、JPG版は重複として順次削除できるようになっていくと思います。 whym (talk) 09:24, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per whym Krd 09:38, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP indoors in Germany

* File:Berlin, Innenansicht der Kaisergalerie 1881, Foto von Hermann Rückwardt.jpg - a tad too old to be deleted--Denniss (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This photo is by Hermann Rückwardt, who died in 1919. The architects of the Kaisergalerie, Walter Kyllmann and Adolph Heyden, died in 1913 and in 1902, respectively. Copyright really shouldn't be an issue with this photo. --Beek100 (talk) 23:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* File:Hamburg und seine Umgebungen im 19. Jahrhundert., F. G. Bueck, 1844, S. 337.jpg - a tad too old to be deleted--Denniss (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Krd 05:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removed two old images, some more could be filtered out because they show no copyrightable design elements. --Denniss (talk) 08:37, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are really no copyrightable elements on these photos. Krd maybe does not know that no FOP does not mean a general no-photography-rule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.7.239.7 (talk • contribs)


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:27, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

No FoP indoors in Germany

--ACBahn (talk) 08:10, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are really no copyrightable elements on these photos. ACBahn may not know that no FOP does not mean a general no-photography-rule. If commons goes to this direction, there are thousands of pictures from Germany to delete. And by the way: which german high court decision tells us that there is "no FOP"? --Korrekturen (talk) 12:39, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: and kept some as below com:TOO. I know that this is a bit subjective and therefor I believe that those borderline cases should at least have their own DR. Natuur12 (talk) 16:31, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two files restored, as per [10]. Yann (talk) 19:18, 13 January 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.

I question whether this logo can be considered as a "simple shape and text" only, and therefore fall to the public domain. First of all, the font used is not by any means generic font, but seems to be specially designed for this logo. Second, the logo itself (round object) in my opinion passes the treshold of creativity, as not only simple geometric figures were used. Masur (talk) 08:24, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete Agree. This doesn't look very simple to me. – Philosopher Let us reason together. 22:50, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bad quality better files Category:Self-Portrait With a Bandaged Ear (F529) Oursana (talk) 09:06, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Zu hohe Auflösung, ist in 4Kx4K vorhanden unter https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HN-Sontheim_Mathaeuskirche-8913-25Dv2-4K.jpg Wkynast (talk) 12:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

A higher-resolution and better-quality (not blurred) crop from the same source exists: Sancy (diamond) black.png DmitTrix (talk) 16:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

A higher-resolution and better-quality (not blurred) crop from the same source exists: Stormogul (diamond) black.png DmitTrix (talk) 18:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

O detentor dos direitos autorais é American Broadcasting Company. Tonelada (talk) 00:17, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-text logo .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

I think it's copyrighted, as en:File:American Broadcasting Company 2013 Logo.png is in fair-use at english wikipedia and the logos are similar Dudek1337 (talk) 18:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: tough one but I would call this pd-textlogo. Natuur12 (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Deletion requests/Flag of Toyoura Niigata.png

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

Warning Warning, this page isn't perfect.

There is no policy saying every creator must have its own creator infobox, and I guess creating one for non-notable artists (like me) is even discouraged.    FDMS  4    21:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: FASTILY 07:00, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

با توجه به کوه موجود در عکس این عکس مریوط به آبادان نیست آخه اطراف آبادان اصلا کوهی وجود نداره Alisu33 (talk) 00:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Flagged npd -FASTILY 07:01, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image can't be found at the source MGA73 (talk) 19:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Author of this photo is en:User:Frjohnwhiteford ~ Чръный человек (talk) 04:23, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: kept, looks valid to me Krd 18:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 user Sigra35 has been uploading lost of things that violate copy right. This is one more such file. For example, it is only a slightly moddified version of this map, [11] which does not allow one to post it as such here on wikimedia per [12] . (Lilic (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)). Lilic (talk) 02:35, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 01:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

This file was already deleted for copyright violation. It was undeleted by mistake. The user in point has posted the undeletion request here - [13] , but he ignores that his supposed base map is in fact another violation of the exact same thing, here, [14] . Varjarcic never puts his maps under free licenses, it is a blatant infringement on copyright. Such maps like the one up for deletion have been floating around the internet for a very long time, they're all copyright infringing derivatives. The main issue is that in the former yugoslavia people feel that if someone is online it is automatically free for editing, but no, things do not work that way. Lilic (talk) 05:12, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to note that this user has a history of uploading many images which are not encyclopediatic, which have little value, which are frauds, and which have been deleted. The user has done that a number of times, it is more than clear that the user has a poor understanding of copyright. One of the best and most blatant examples was here, [15] . But, what troubles me the most is how this user proceeds to keep making derivatives which are not used anywhere, except on forums where he and his nationalist buddies discuss how to divide bosnia-herzeogvina. That's what his maps amount to, they are mostly useless fantasy derivatives of this image which is up for deletion. (Lilic (talk) 05:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)).[reply]
One more comment. In theory there is no such thing as an objective map. They can be more or less on a scale. However, considering that many villages on this map up for deletion are not mentioned, and those that are small have a mere pixel, it is fair to say that the objectivity of this map is highly questionable. For example, notice the number of polygons in the kalinovik municipality here [16] (and notice how so many corresponding dots are missing on the file in question in that same area) , we can see a serious lack of them on this map up for deletion. So, basically there is a load of settlements, missing, and on top of that many are labeled in wrong locations. This sort of dot map can be good, sure, but hey, this particular one is not. (Lilic (talk) 05:28, 15 September 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

This is silly. It is clear that I used base map that has free licence. That base map has been used by a lot of people a lot of time. This Lilic guy who keep making DR has a lot of maps that use same base map. See here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Lilic If that is the problem then 99% of his maps should be delated. This is clearly personal as this guy has some agenda. My base map has free licence and I had a lot of work (months) to make my map.--Sigra35 (talk) 06:25, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For my own maps I tend to do a lot of tracing in which maps are in fact of different appearance in border than the original base for mine. Hence I avoid that problem. I take copyright very seriously. For example, I have been working on a boundary map of all the settlements of Serbia. I have been drawing it for years on and off (it has not been a priority as central serbia is kinda boring in terms of the eventual mapping).
Your map is in total violation of copyright. Sure, online many people use various stuff, and they do so without legality, for their own personal use especially. This site is not supposed to be a site for own personal use.
Pity you spent so many months to make something that is still so very flawed. What is however noteworthy is that you may want to take some time to look into ESRI's GIS software. Using that software can result in you making such a map in less than 15 minutes rather than spending so many months. (Lilic (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)).[reply]

Kept: as stated here the underlying map is public domain. --JuTa 10:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

The image, while sourced from Flickr, is originally from http://soundcheck.walmart.com/Content/images/artists/selena-gomez/2013/photos/picture_02.jpg?width=806&height=386. It's use violates the Walmart.com Terms of Use which state "You may access, view, download, and print the IP and all other materials displayed on the Walmart Sites for your personal, non-commercial use only; provided, however, that you (1) retain all copyright, trademark or other proprietary designations contained on all IP; (2) do not modify or alter the IP in any way; and (3) do not provide or make available the IP to any third party in a commercial manner." As originally uploaded to Commons it was a copy of the original image but the uploader cropped it, violating the sections of the TOU that state "you [must] retain all copyright, trademark or other proprietary designations contained on all IP" and "do not modify or alter the IP in any way". Additionally, the image was not downloaded for the uploader's "personal, non-commercial use only". Uploading to Wikipedia is not personal use. The license under which the file was uploaded to Wikipedia is incompatible with Walmart.com's Terms of Use and I'm concerned that the uploader has seen fit to review his own image[17] after I clearly nominated it for speedy deletion, explaining the TOU violation,[18] especially after FlickreviewR had been unable to confirm the license conditions. AussieLegend () 14:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - First and foremost, the rights do not fall under Walmart, yes they own the rights to the high resolution image but the company, namely Lunchbox LP is the media agency incharge of holding and hosting the events and thus they own the rights to those image as well. ..Since the image they upload to their flick stream is a low-resolution "promotional" image and has been released under a CC2.0 licence by the company themselves, it qualifies to be included on wikimedia commons..and also, if you haven't, please read this oh and p.s, Flickr Reviewer bot has been "broken" for the last 3 months and refuses to "review" most images, thus the backlog and also, I waited 24 hours for its review and technically, had i uploaded it via Special:UploadWizard, i would not need to get it reviewed as its done automatically, but that feature currently has bugs so the image was uploaded manually via Flickr2Commons which as i mentioned above is broken...--Stemoc (talk) 14:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The image you uploaded was sourced from Walmart.com's website. In fact it was watermarked as such. Lunchbox LP is licensed by Walmart and while they may have their own licenses, we can't just ignore the licencing conditions of the company that actually owns the images. If Walmart claims copyright on images here we can't justify use by saying "Oh we got it from Lunchbox" any more than we can justify the use of images by saying "Oh, we got them from Google". Would we be having this discussion if you had directly copied the file from Walmart's website, which is where it came from anyway? As for your excuses about reviewing it, as the uploader you're an involved editor so you really shouldn't be reviewing your own images. At best it's a conflict of interest. --AussieLegend () 14:42, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You still refuse to read the link i provided and follow up on what has already been decided, its to my decision, the commons admins made that decision and if you have a problem with that, take it to them..and also, I only 'reviewed' it myself because i was intent on using it on an article and i prefer all images be fully reviewed before its used i nay articles or it usually gets removed after failed reviews and also as mentioned above, had i uploaded it via "normal" channels, it would have been reviewed anyways and its not a COI. The image is not directly from the Walmart website, if you have any problem with this, I urge you to contact Lunchbox LP directly and then if they claim its not allowed for use, prove it via OTRS and then bring it up to the admins, follow the proper protocol please..--Stemoc (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've read the link. It doesn't change anything. That was a very limited discussion from 2 years ago that didn't address the details Walmart.com's Terms of Use. The file being discussed here was clearly sourced from Walmart.com, so its Terms of Use apply. It isn't a low resolution version of that file as you implied are uploaded by Lunchbox. As I indicated, Lunchbox is licensed to use the images but licenses are generally not transferable and it doesn't mean we can violate the image owner's Terms of Use. --AussieLegend () 15:19, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Because the source of the image was given as Walmart, and the image was watermarked Walmart at Flickr, I am deleting the image due to Walmart's terms & conditions as stated in the foregoing discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:23, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • After deleting the file, per the rationale above, an appeal by the uploader resulted in the file being restored and a discussion is now underway on the admin's talk page.[19] However, the admin has had to withdraw temporarily because of dental surgery.[20] Since the deletion of this of this file is still being discussed it seems prudent to reopen this discussion rather than continue discussion on the talk page of an absent editor. If this is not approprate then I'm more than happy to renominate (which really shouldn't be necessary) as the discussion there contains some flawed claims. --AussieLegend () 10:56, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Arguments on the admin's talk page are that Lunchbox LP created the image, but this has not been proven. The image clearly contains a Walmart watermark and is clearly from the Walmart website,[21] pointing to ownership of the image by Walmart. User:Stemoc provided a link to a deletion discussion that supposedly justifies retention of this file but there are flaws in that reasoning. For example, in the discussion is the claim that "Lunchbox Studios clearly owns the rights to these images". This is not clear at all. In fact Lunchbox's rights in relation to this infobox are not clearly defined anywhere. Another comment is "Lunchbox took the image, as proven by the lists of artists here" but that is not proof at all. That site says nothing about images but simply says "Artists we've worked with". It doesn't say they produced the images anywhere. The only proof is that the image is from Walmart. --AussieLegend () 11:05, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Questionable copyright status. COM:OTRS permission from the rights holder is needed to host this file FASTILY 19:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Undeleted and kept It is well known that Lunchbox LP runs the Soundcheck platform. No need to doubt their imagery. russavia (talk) 21:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Copy of http://www.flickr.com/photos/lunchboxstudios/9345756702/ Patrick Rogel (talk) 21:22, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick Rogel (talk · contribs) You probably didn't read the drama above you?, just randomly decided to nom an image for deletion?..because had you actually done that, you would have actually come with a MORE viable reason than it being a "copy" of an image which is actually where its "sourced" from...jeez...--Stemoc 22:27, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The original reasons for deletion still apply so the nominator's rationale can be excused. --AussieLegend () 10:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delete Despite the assertions above and elsewhere, nobody has actually proven that Walmart does not own the copyright in this image and the Walmart ToU prohibit its use here. I specifically asked Russavia for evidence that Lunchbox owned the copyright and he was unable to supply any. Saying that it's "well known" is not verifiable evidence. Arguments that Lunchbox created the image have not been proven. All we have is an image with a Walmart watermark and some personal opinions that carry no weight. COM:PCP clearly applies in this case as Fastily indicated when he deleted the image. --AussieLegend () 10:20, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What is that based on? The file is originally from Walmart's website and the Terms of Use of that website have been violated by its use here. --AussieLegend () 11:05, 6 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

kept Lunchbox seems to be a part or subcompany of Wallmart. When they decide to publish an image under CC, it seems fine to me. --JuTa 09:49, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]