Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2015/01/29
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
I meant to overwright the original image rather than create a new one sorry Ballofstring (talk) 00:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Closed and changed to Speedy: Just upload a new version in the original file. --Amitie 10g (talk) 01:07, 29 January 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
Pains me, as I uploaded this, but the frame is 3D, and thus PD-Art does not apply. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: I cropped off the frame, so it should be OK now Jarekt (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Due to worng posture. Forgot the password of the author Sattriyadance critic. Pls delete this file from wikipedia commons. 223.176.25.97 17:36, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Do you have a valid email address? If so, can you use it to reset your password and get back in to your account? DLindsley Need something? 18:12, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: No reason to delete. Yann (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
Pls delete this photo from Wikipedia commons. Forgot the password of user id. As the posture is wrong it is hampering the artiste reputation. Request you to delete the file Sattriya critc (talk) 18:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: still no reson to delete. DR reopened withouth any new arguments. Natuur12 (talk) 19:04, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
Pls delete the file from Wikipedia commons. Repated request given . Deletion required as the posture is wrong and it is hampering the artist reputation. Request by artist. 182.66.18.150 18:03, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
Keep: Three DRs, two from an unidentified IP address. If you really are the uploader, please try to recover the access to your account first. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:00, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: as above. Yann (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
File:Doc6ihfg6b2ybsrprvi2nk 800 480.jpg Iggorek 13:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Speedy delete Copyvio of [1] Thibaut120094 (talk) 13:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Thibaut. Green Giant (talk) 00:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Delete Potential copyvio: http://historiadenuestroperuydelmundo.blogspot.com/2009/05/fotos-de-renzo-schuller.html
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 00:03, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Probably a photo done in some child educational institution. If it's uploaded by a parent or a grown child, it's copyvio. If it's uploaded by the photographer, then it's the problem of a photo of identifiable child photo being used without permission. As it exists now, it's not useable.
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 00:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:11, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal image. Out of COM:SCOPE. Eurodyne (talk) 03:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:Jak nauczyć się języka obcego? 45 ekspertów językowych zdradza sekrety efektywnej nauki języków.pdf
[edit]some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed, need OTRS-permission ? Motopark (talk) 04:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed plenty of posters and pictures with unknown author Motopark (talk) 04:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Already deleted. Green Giant (talk) 00:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Already deleted. Green Giant (talk) 00:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Already deleted. Green Giant (talk) 00:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- What do you mean this "can be written to some wikipedia if needed"? I see no problem with the file. It's totally in free domain and harms no one actually. --Edjoerv (talk) 20:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of COM:SCOPE. INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Promotional, some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Promotional, some homepage material, can be written to some wikipedia if needed Motopark (talk) 04:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
promotional, out of scope Motopark (talk) 04:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Already deleted. Green Giant (talk) 00:18, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aardwolfau (talk · contribs)
[edit]promotional material, out of scope
- File:Aardwolf Mono Mechanical Vacuum Lifter.jpg
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment.pdf
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment end.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page13.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page12.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page11.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page10.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page9.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page8.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page7.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page6.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page5.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page4.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page3.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment cover.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page1.png
- File:Aardwolf Forklift Equipment page2.png
Motopark (talk) 04:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Already deleted. Green Giant (talk) 00:18, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Looks like an out-of-scope text document. --ghouston (talk) 05:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
watermarked "fotolia" which seems to be a non-free stock photo site. --ghouston (talk) 05:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Jee 06:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy delete, because there is a {{License review}} on the page, and the two reviewers above agree on "delete".
–Be..anyone (talk) 14:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread at COM:VPC and COM:PCP. — Revi 05:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Definitely too low res to be 'own work'. I believe this is the source (copyvio, then). Gyrostat (talk) 06:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted image. Felviper (talk) 05:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: copyyvio PierreSelim (talk) 06:43, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Definitely too low res to be 'own work'. This might be the source ([2]) Gyrostat (talk) 06:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, by Magog the Ogre on 1 February. Green Giant (talk) 00:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The metadata indicates that this is a digital photograph of another image. Uploader has a history of uploading non-free images to English Wikipedia YSSYguy (talk) 06:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Is it useful for an educational purpose? Juggler2005 (talk) 06:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status and unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF. Uploaded in 2010 (6 files) + 2008 (3 files) it seems that all files were taken from http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/genbianzano.htm + gallery http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/galleriabianzano.htm and other related sites from http://www.cortedeisuardo.com which are available as wayback to 2006/2007. http://www.cortedeisuardo.com is " Tutti i diritti riservati - 1999/2014". Examples:
- File:Panoramica da croce.JPG (2010) versus http://web.archive.org/web/20071010063631/http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/galleriabianzano.htm (2007) = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/images/bianzano/IMG_0156.JPG
- File:Torre Castello.JPG (2010) versus above = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/miniaturebianzano/100_1846.JPG
- File:Chiesetta.jpg (2010) versus http://web.archive.org/web/20060507165435/http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/raccolte.htm = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/100_1783.JPG
- File:PanoramicaBianzanoLago.jpg (2010) versus above = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/100_1821.JPG
- File:Signorù.JPG (2008) versus http://web.archive.org/web/20071029002504/http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/genassunta.htm = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/100_0426.JPG
- File:Santuario Assunta, navata.JPG (2008) versus above = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/IMG_0079.JPG
Nominating also
derivated by @Luigi Chiesa: from an upload by Suhardian in 2008 (overwritten?) which was deleted but is originally coming from http://web.archive.org/web/20071010063631/http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/galleriabianzano.htm = http://www.cortedeisuardo.com/images/bianzano/IMG_0158.JPG (exif available)
- File:Sponde lago.jpg
- File:Panoramica da croce.JPG
- File:PanoramicaBianzanoLago.jpg
- File:Da strada cimitero.JPG
- File:Torre Castello.JPG
- File:Chiesetta.jpg
- File:Santuario Assunta, navata.JPG
- File:Signorù.JPG
Gunnex (talk) 07:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
copyrighted, watermark has been cropped http://www.quimper.maville.com/of-photos/2008/09/26/qm_2422616_1_px_501__w_ouestfrance_.jpg Buff (talk) 08:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Derivative work of copyrighted images. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: self-created artworks, self promotion. Only used on the talk page of a fr.wikipedia user without useful contribution to the project.
BrightRaven (talk) 09:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Logo uploaded with the claim "Tous droits réservés" (All rights reserved) in the description, which contradicts the claimed CC-BY-SA license. The image is unused anyway. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Frame with the three lamps and the standing man comes from some photo manipulation app; compare [3]. Lupo 10:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete speedy per nom
Deleted: Per nom and Lupo. Green Giant (talk) 00:23, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:Juste une photo pris de moi pour savoir si j'ai la chance d'être mannequin 2013-12-27 23-45.jpeg
[edit]Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 10:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. Photograph by professional photographer Joana Choumali. No evidence of permission. Probable copyvio. -- Asclepias (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Right. Didn't see the watermark bottom right. Lupo 19:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
The image should be deleted as copyvio, but the fact that a professional photo has been proposed as unused personal picture out of scope clearly shows how damaging are a lot of "out of scope" deletion requests.--Pere prlpz (talk) 17:48, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
A blurry photograph with no educational value. Robert Weemeyer (talk) 10:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:This is CEO- Founder - -Pavle Stanimirović TWIN VAPE -LLC--Opening two Stores in North Miami Beach and he is the creator of Twin Vape E-Juice that is for human consumption through Inhalation of vapor it is th 2013-12-29 12-24.jpg
[edit]Out of scope: unused personal logo; advertisement. Lupo 10:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Advertisements. Moreover, published elsewhere before the upload here, for instance File:眼的神韻，眼要有神3800就是便宜 2013-12-29 23-36.jpg includes a crop of [4].
- File:基隆飄眉。芭莎飄眉～就是自然，就是便宜5800-不分男女2428-5787 2013-12-29 23-39.png
- File:眼的神韻，眼要有神3800就是便宜 2013-12-29 23-36.jpg
- File:飄眉5800不分男女，繡眉3000，繡眼線3800不分粗細，繡唇15400，雷射洗眉3000包到好，娃娃燙睫499～就是便宜 2013-12-28 02-12.png
- File:芭莎是紋繡的專家，飄眉-繡眉-繡眼線-繡唇-雷射洗眉-娃娃燙睫 2013-12-28 02-09.png
- File:芭莎專業紋繡解決您眉毛的問題- 2013-12-28 02-02.jpg
Lupo 11:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 11:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:OF SCOTLANDHIS ROYALL HIGHNESS SCOTLAND SOS KING ERNESTO I WITH ON HIS LAP HIS WIFE HER ROYALL HIGHNESS SCOTLAND SOS QUEEN NOEMI I OF SCOTLAND.jpg
[edit]Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 11:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal propaganda. Lacking sources for alleged facts. Would be better done as text with sources in relevant Wikipedia articles. Lupo 11:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Comment I think that it could potentially be made into an educational image, if somebody were to provide sources for the numbers. If it were done, i'd say Keep... otherwise i guess deleting is warranted.
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope. Thibaut120094 (talk) 11:19, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:40, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Eldarmarchenko (talk · contribs)
[edit]Paintings by a living artist -- no evidence of permission.
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Eldarmarchenko (talk · contribs)
[edit]Scans of newspapers, books, and advertisements, all of which have copyrights. No evidence of permission.
- File:Arabuli11.jpg
- File:Lelo11.jpg
- File:Sarbieli11.jpg
- File:Elguja11.jpg
- File:Sambo11.jpg
- File:Alfa vector.png
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Images seem promotional, out of project scope.
Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:28, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No author, no source, no indication why it could be licensed as CC-BY-SA-2.5 WolfD59 (talk) 14:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unused document of questionable notability, out of project scope. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Stephanbartl (talk · contribs)
[edit]Missing EXIF data and permissions. Can be found on many websites.
Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:29, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jayvijay Unagar (talk · contribs)
[edit]Content seems promotional, out of project scope, possibly unfree, missing EXIF
Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete solely promotional and out of scope. --Herby talk thyme 15:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom and COM:PRP. Green Giant (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Don't think these are the user's own work. Missing permissions.
Jianhui67 talk★contribs 14:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom and COM:PRP. Green Giant (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aommy The Cat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:ป่าป๊าจงเจริญ.jpg
- File:Students ugly.jpg
- File:สติ๊วเดนท์ อั๊คลี่.jpg
- File:Students Ugly band.jpg
- File:Students Ugly.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
These are obviously commercially created images and therefore are unlikely to be "own work" in any sense of the word. While interesting I'm not certain that they are within the scope of the project either appearing somewhat promotional maybe.
- File:Web-Logokcg.png
- File:KW018AL.png
- File:KW018AL(2).png
- File:KW018AL(1).png
- File:KW017AL.png
- File:KW017AL(3).png
- File:KW017AL(2).png
- File:KW016AL.png
- File:KW016AL(2).png
- File:KW016AL(3).png
- File:KW015AL.png
- File:KW015AL(3).png
- File:KW015AL(2).png
- File:KW014AL.png
- File:KW014AL(3).png
- File:KW014AL(2).png
- File:KW013AL.png
- File:KW013AL(3).png
- File:KW013AL(2).png
- File:KW012AL.png
- File:KW012AL(3).png
- File:KW012AL(2).png
- File:KW011AL.png
- File:KW011AL(3).png
- File:KW011AL(2).png
- File:KW010DY.png
- File:KW010DY(3).png
- File:KW010DY(2).png
- File:KW009DY.png
- File:KW009DY(3).png
Herby talk thyme 15:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Collection of advertisement. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:KW009DY(2.png
- File:KW008DY.png
- File:KW007DY.png
- File:KW008DY(3).png
- File:KW008DY(2).png
- File:KW007DY(3).png
- File:KW007DY(2).png
- File:KW006DY.png
- File:KW006DY(3).png
- File:KW006DY(2).png
- File:KW005DY.png
- File:KW005DY(3).png
- File:KW005DY(2).png
- File:KW004RY.png
- File:KW004RY(3).png
- File:KW004RY(2).png
- File:KW003RY.png
- File:KW003RY(4).png
- File:KW003RY(3).png
- File:KW003RY(2).png
- File:KW002RY.png
- File:KW002RY(1).png
- File:KW002RY (2).png
- File:KW001RY.png
- File:KW001RY(5).png
- File:KW001RY(3).png
- File:KW001RY(2).png
- File:KW001RY(1).png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused small resolution photo of domesticated dog. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Calgonbe/logs. File:PTL aerea.png is a crop from this higher res image https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-CdZnOTlH1lM/VMoYgPWNw7I/AAAAAAAAAAc/TPkbCYi7s5s/w1035-h787-no/photo.jpg and is sourced with the non-existent template "Junta de Castilla y León" (see also the deleted files) which indicates that the file was most likely taken from official site http://www.jcyl.es/. Same procedure for the image in nearly thumb-size File:Ceei.JPG.
Gunnex (talk) 15:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:صحفي عراقي الجنسية اعمل في جريدة اليوم الاخر ومدير سابق لهيئة الاعلام والصحف العراقية المستقلة 2013-12-30 20-51.jpg
[edit]Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 15:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused small resolution photo of domesticated dogs. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: red gradient; not educationally useful & unused. Lupo 15:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:32, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Pasuyavski (talk · contribs)
[edit]Collection of historical images and symbol. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Psalmanazar's Formosan Map.jpg
- File:Psalmanazar 真人角色扮演.jpg
- File:Psalmanazar 1705 Carte.jpg
- File:Tamsui紅毛城與歷代統治者旗幟.jpg
- File:YellowTiger-New.jpg
- File:TwPreHistory.gif
- File:TwMap大渡太陽王國全盛期AA.jpg
- File:Sword仙劍奇俠傳(小說).jpg
- File:Lai賴和.jpg
- File:Koxinga沈光文.jpg
- File:Viet古百越文化旗.png
- File:Maps-bible-archeology-exodus-route-kadesh-barnea-john-speed-1651ad-close.jpg
- File:Egypt girl.jpg
- File:Exo-2-5-web-watermarked.jpg
- File:19 ALMA TADEMA FINDING OF MOSES THE.jpg
- File:Zipporah in the field.JPG
- File:ExodusProcess.jpg
- File:The-Finding-of-Moses-by-Edwin-Long.jpg
- File:Exodus Map the Deteil.jpeg
- File:Asenath the system.jpeg
- File:Exodus Map the Largest.gif
- File:Asenath埃及宰相約瑟的妻子亞西納.jpeg
- File:鐵扇公主羅剎女線描畫.jpeg
- File:Gokuu.jpg
- File:Plum梅花.jpeg
- File:Sunflower葵花.jpg
- File:榜香尤.jpeg
- File:Japanophile-Taiwan-migration.png
- File:Japanophile-Taiwnn.png
- File:Japanophile.png
- File:Singhalse鄭氏令旗.png
- File:Chinese-army-A.png
- File:Europe歐羅巴雙頭鷹.jpeg
- File:Flag of Chinese Taipei Formosa.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- File:Psalmanazar 1705 Carte.jpg seems to be a work from 1705 and therefore in public domain.--Pere prlpz (talk) 17:24, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:44, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: red gradient only; not educationally useful & unused. Lupo 15:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Photo of poster. Thibaut120094 (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:33, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Участница неоднократно загружает чужое изображение под неразрешённой от автора лицензией. Dogad75 (talk) 16:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:34, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF. File:Carnatal em Natal.jpg (uploaded 2009) was previously published (even in lower res) via http://www.carnatal.com.br/mobile/blog/2008/12/09/simtv-reprisa-nesse-final-de-semana-os-melhores-momentos-do-carnatal/ (2008) = http://www.carnatal.com.br/_resources/files/_modules/files_old/files_19575.jpg (last modified: 12.2008), with identical exif, inclusive a comment "Copyright 2007 - Luciano Azevedo", published by him ("Luciano Azevedo de Sousa") also on his Flickr via https://www.flickr.com/photos/lassal/3088133273 (2008, all rights reserved by "Luciano Azevedo de Sousa"). File:Carnatal3.jpg (uploaded on same day as the file above), showing the same location, was most likely taken also at this time by "Luciano Azevedo". Permission needed.
Gunnex (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:35, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Completely wrong camera image. Thats the CPS EMITRON post 1956 78.145.4.10 16:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Being a wiki, you can edit the image page text and fix this. --Fæ (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep As above, if you'd like to change the file name and description please do, here is a guide on image renaming. Mrjohncummings (talk) 06:06, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 16:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 16:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Нет разрешения автора на загрузку данного файла под указанной лицензией Dogad75 (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status and unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Uploaded in 06.2009 by MayIN (talk · contributions · Statistics), sourced with a 404 myspace page giving credits to "Mario Alberto Favila Castañeda" (which needs permission) the file was most likely taken from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/5282747 (2007, © All rights reserved by ABEL RAMIREZ, high res & exif available). Gunnex (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
нел разрешения автора на загрузку фото под указанной лицензией Dogad75 (talk) 16:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Apparent copyvios by sock; low res, no camera EXIF, some (all?) easily found elsewhere before upload to Commons (e.g., File:Quran Alam alhoda.jpg is here; File:Alamolhoda 2.jpg is here; etc.)
Эlcobbola talk 16:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 16:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
See Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ayatollah Ashrafi Esfehani8.jpg and Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hananeh.M.h; copyvios from license laundering site uploaded by sock.
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi6.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi5.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi12.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi3.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi11.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi10.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi9.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi4.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi7.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi2.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi8.jpg
- File:AliAkbar Aboutorabi1.jpg
Эlcobbola talk 16:44, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alex Carate (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope: unused personal pictures.
Lupo 16:46, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The uploader claims the image as own work, but it appears to be a promotional image of the actor which is likely to be unfree. Joshua (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution (Facebook), missing EXIF. Uploaded by Leinardo (talk · contributions · Statistics) in 08.2013, a similar shot is available via (example) https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=107154545961247&set=o.95272359155&type=1&theater (2009). Another aerial photo uploaded by this user (File:Vista aerea.jpg) was also taken from this Facebook page. Gunnex (talk) 17:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Алтаир1978 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Dubious licenses, no authors' permissions.
- File:Агальцова Надежда Алексеевна.jpg
- File:Бабошин Александр Львович.jpeg
- File:Никифоров Владимир Олегович.jpeg
Sealle (talk) 17:47, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Алтаир1978 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical documents, photo and newspaper. Proper author/source and country of origin should be provided and license tags corrected.
- File:Выписка из распоряжения 1971.jpg
- File:Распоряжение из архива 1966год.pdf
- File:История Завода "Маяк".jpg
- File:Завод Маяк.jpg
- File:Вырезка из газеты.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:48, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 18:40, 12 August 2018 (UTC)
The author died in 2003, no permission.
- File:Обложка книги Элизбара Ананиашвили.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Композиция.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Натура и рисование по представлению.jpg
- File:Осип Авсиян. Натюрморт.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Илл.3.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Илл.2.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Илл.1.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Мужской портрет.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. На даче.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Портрет старика.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Дождь.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Ритмический мотив.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Зима.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Музыка города.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. В саду.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Зима на Сретенском бульваре.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Портрет девушки.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Васильки.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Портрет сына.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Женский портрет.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Красный стул.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Одиночество.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Набережная зимой.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Южный город.JPG
- File:Осип Авсиян. Зимний день.JPG
- File:Авсиян Осип. Автопортрет.JPG
Sealle (talk) 18:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:47, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Silva Franco (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Silva Franco
- File:Escuela Tecnica 1.jpg
- File:Celebracion Punta Alta.jpg
- File:Calle Irigoyen de Punta Alta.jpg
- File:Asociación Española Punta Alta.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 18:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:48, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The uploader requested deletion at my talk page [5] after he realized there is no FoP in Russia for monuments. Ymblanter (talk) 19:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
The uploader requested deletion at my talk page [6] after he realized there is no FoP in Russia for monuments. Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Emre İSKENDER (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused private images, out of scope.
Achim (talk) 19:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:49, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 19:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This file is poor quality, redundant and out dated. It's not in use. Only uploaded as a potential update for File:Syrian_civil_war.png. As uploader, I request a courtesy deleted. John Smith the Gamer (talk) 19:14, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 19:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 19:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: unused personal picture. Lupo 19:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DWs of posters on wall behind subject and COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Notice overprinting lower right corner... COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:50, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment: The file is found: [7]. And the site has a notice releasing all its contents under GFDL. In all the deletions requests relating to this source, I checked only this one file at random, as a test, but given that the result is positive, the other files can probably be found also, for example in the search results, using the file description as keywords [8]. That said, one might ask what were the terms of the contractual relations between the photographer and the publishing organization, and if the free licensing decision was made within all the rules of the art, but that would be a matter between them, unless there is reason to believe that there was a copyright violation. -- Asclepias (talk) 06:10, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment It's up to the uploader to provide source, not to later users to seek out the images via the site's search engine. There is no indication of who took any of these photos, often they're overprinted or captioned "sajed.ir" and in no way is that the author of any of them. Ellin Beltz (talk) 06:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of poster over men's shoulders, and COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:The inmate is a storyof the Boston massacure in a short graph of it it is all I got 2004-08-10 13-43.jpg
[edit]Photo of some school test; copyright status of text shown is unclear. Lupo 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of artwork behind men, and COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO This images is credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is "www.sajed.ir". File is not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, it's not an author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIO These images are credited "author = www.sajed.ir" and also source is given "www.sajed.ir" without a direct link to the image; nor do these images appear on that website's home page. Files were not found at source given in template. Sajed.ir is a website, not an author.
- File:Zeinodin023.jpg
- File:Zeinodin024.jpg
- File:Zeinodin025.jpg
- File:Zeinodin027.jpg
- File:Zeinodin030.jpg
- File:Zeinodin032.jpg
- File:Zeinodin033.jpg
- File:Zeinodin034.jpg
- File:Zeinodin035.jpg
- File:Zeinodin036.jpg
- File:Zeinodin037.jpg
- File:Zeinodin038.jpg
- File:Zeinodin039.jpg
- File:Zeinodin040.jpg
- File:Zeinodin041.jpg
- File:Zeinodin042.jpg
- File:Zeinodin043.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:52, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Each image in this gallery is missing valid author information as the author is either not stated at all or stated to be the website from which they were allegedly copied. The sources (where given as clickable links) do not lead to the images; and most of the sources are given as the main page of the website. Please also see Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Iriq8yw for prior deletions from this gallery for same reason.
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-038.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-037.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-036.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-035.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-034.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-033.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-032.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-031.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-030.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-029.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-028.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-027.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-026.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-025.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-024.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-023.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-022.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-021.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-020.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-019.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-018.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-017.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-016.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-015.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-014.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-013.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-012.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-011.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-010.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-009.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-008.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-007.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-006.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-005.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-004.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-003.jpg
- File:Mohamad-ebrahim-hemat-002.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-005.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-023.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-022.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-021.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-020.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-019.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-018.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-017.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-016.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-015.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-014.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-013.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-012.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-011.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-010.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-009.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-008.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-007.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-006.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-004.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-003.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-002.jpg
- File:Mohsen-vezvaei-001.jpg
- File:Basir-hosein-004.jpg
- File:Basir-hosein-005.jpg
- File:Basir-hosein-003.jpg
- File:Basir-hosein-002.jpg
- File:Basir-hosein-001.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-012.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-011.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-008.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-010.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-009.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-007.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-005.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-006.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-004.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-003.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-002.jpg
- File:Sayad-shirazi-001.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-009.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-008.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-007.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-006.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-005.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-002.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-003.jpg
- File:Norooz-salehi-001.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-001.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-002.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-003.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-004.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-005.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-006.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-007.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-008.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-009.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-010.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-011.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-012.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-013.jpg
- File:Hosein-kharazi-014.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-010.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-009.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-008.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-006.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-007.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-005.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-004.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-002.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-003.jpg
- File:Ahmad-kazemi-001.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-8.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-7.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-6.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-5.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-4.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-3.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-2.jpg
- File:Kaveh-mahmood-1.jpg
- File:Khomeini00010.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have found File:Norooz-salehi-002.jpg for example at sajed.ir/cat/1715, and it says the content is published under GFDL at the bottom of that page. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 12:26, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Please see former discussions about lack of photographer's names on the sajed.ir site and the lack of confidence that the site has the rights to GFDL any images. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:41, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- Can you direct me to those discussions, please? -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Per request
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Ayatollah Ashrafi Esfehani8.jpg
- Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Hananeh.M.h
- Special:Contributions/Iriq8yw -- notice these are at the top of this same page
- Commons:Deletion requests/File:Zeinodin007.jpg
- Of course all mentions of sajed.ir in Commons can be found by using the search tools, for example this result. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:04, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
deleted. INeverCry 01:18, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of a pile of crests with no sources on this poster. COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of a pile of crests and a photo in the background of this 2009 poster, COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of crests and logos without attribution, COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
DW of football (soccer) crests on this poster as well as background image/s not credited, COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unused, no indication of user's own work, out of COM:SCOPE and possible COM:COPYVIO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Juliannemiro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Copyrighted image and logo, both uploaded as own work. No more contributions, likely copyvio.
Sealle (talk) 19:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hofmann Roadmarking (talk · contribs)
[edit]Commons is not a place to advertise COM:ADVERT. Alternatively file descriptions could be purged.
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-combined-profile-edge-line-Kamflex.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-MultiDotLine-Plus.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-MultiDotLine-round.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-MultiDotLine-drop-shaped.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-90-cross-profiled-markings.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-stochastic-agglomerates.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-two-component-cold-plastic-closed-pattern.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-two-component-cold-plastic-open-shifted-pattern.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-two-component-cold-plastic-shifted-central-pattern.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-03.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-two-component-cold plastic-material.jpg
- File:Roadmarking-patterns-01.jpg
- File:HOFMANN Roadmarking Extruderverfahren.jpg
- File:Applikation 2K Stochastik.jpg
Achim (talk) 20:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:53, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. Achim (talk) 20:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Unfree architectural work. --Stefan4 (talk) 21:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. Achim (talk) 20:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:28, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:30, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe this is own work. Manyhits on Google also with higher resolution. See for example here. Wouter (talk) 20:44, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
A redirect because it has an error in the date. No use. Jan Arkesteijn (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:54, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
All files coming from https://www.flickr.com/people/41599103@N05/ ("Ciko7") + https://www.flickr.com/people/49620569@N08/ ("Puco98") + https://www.flickr.com/people/38702123@N04/ ("SaturdayCam") are most likely Flickrwashing. The uploader managed to upload files from these Flickr users almost instantly when they were available at Flickr and it is most likely that "Ciko7" + "Puco98" + "SaturdayCam" = Kil098 (talk · contributions · Statistics). Per logs uploader's name is "Jose Felix" (+/- 25 copyvios, note that Kil098 cleared constantly his talk page). Examples:
- By "Ciko7"
- File:San Julián.jpg (19.08.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/41599103@N05/3835533941/ (19.08.2009, by "Ciko7") = grabbed from (example) http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=27129264&postcount=61 (2008, by "Chalex") = http://oi38.tinypic.com/23j2920.jpg
- File:Manglares Laguna de Términos.jpg (01.09.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/41599103@N05/3878725943/ (01.09.2009, by "Ciko7") = grabbed from (example) http://lagunadeterminos.conanp.gob.mx/cuerpo%20biodiversidad.htm (wayback to 2005 available) = http://lagunadeterminos.conanp.gob.mx/Manglar%202.jpg. The original frame (in height) is most likely similar to http://www.revistabuenviaje.com/conocemexico/destinos/campeche/cdcarmen/laguna_terminos.jpg.
- File:ChenkanBeach.jpg (16.12.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/41599103@N05/4189909902/ (16.12.2009, by "Ciko7") = cropped (time stamp removed) and grabbed from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/20088692 (03.2009, © All rights reserved by Kohlle)
- File:Hochob67.jpg (23.09.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/41599103@N05/3947625528/ (23.09.2009, by "Ciko7") = grabbed from http://mayaruins.com/hochob/c3_018.html (2003) = http://mayaruins.com/hochob/c3_018.jpg (last modified: 2006). http://mayaruins.com is "Copyright ©1995-2010 by Barbara McKenzie, all rights reserved."
- File:Dzibilnocac.jpg (23.09.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/41599103@N05/3946958549/ (23.09.2009, by "Ciko7") = grabbed from (example) http://www.monografias.com/trabajos62/iturbide-mexico/iturbide-mexico2.shtml (2008, see comments, © Monografias.com S.A.) = http://www.monografias.com/trabajos62/iturbide-mexico/iturbide-mexico_image022.jpg
- etc.
- By "SaturdayCam"
- Most of the files (+/- 7) from this Flickrstream (same procedure: simultaneously uploaded on Flickr and then Commons) were previously published via http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=35951340&postcount=1645 (04.2009) where they are sourced with http://www.implancarmen.org/portal/pdu/estrategicos.pdf (404). http://www.implancarmen.org/ is "© El Instituto Municipal de Planeación de Carmen". Examples:
- File:Calle22.jpg (26.06.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/38702123@N04/3661324911/ (26.06.2009, by "SaturdayCam") = grabbed from above = http://i39.tinypic.com/2jtn4m.jpg (last modified: 04.2009)
- File:Islaaguada.jpg (14.06.2009) --> https://www.flickr.com/photos/38702123@N04/3623221947/ (13.06.2009, by "SaturdayCam") = grabbed from (example) http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=37675570&postcount=47 (03.06.2009) = http://www.en-yucatan.com.mx/gallery/paseo-lancha/isla-aguada-2.jpg
- etc.
- By "Puco98"
- Same procedure as above. Most likely also Flickrwashing
- Special case
- File:ParqueJesus.jpg, here the only file declared to be "own work", which I doubt, considering the "whole" program above and e.g. this comment by @Martin H: .
All other uploads from this user are Flickr reviewed files from Flickr users not related to uploader.
- Tools
- Weblinks "Ciko7"
- Weblinks "Puco98"
- Weblinks "SaturdayCam"
- Please blacklist these Flickr users
- File:MiguelColorado2.jpg
- File:SanAntoniodelRío.JPG
- File:Miguel Colorado.jpg
- File:Palizada7.jpg
- File:Tortugueros.jpg
- File:Bahamitas.jpg
- File:ChenkanBeach.jpg
- File:PlayaChenkan.JPG
- File:RioCham.jpg
- File:Champoton2.jpg
- File:Champotón.jpg
- File:Dzibilnocac.jpg
- File:Hochob67.jpg
- File:ParqueJesus.jpg
- File:PetenesCampeche.jpg
- File:Manglares Laguna de Términos.jpg
- File:Palizada1.jpg
- File:Hormiguero.jpg
- File:Xpujil.jpg
- File:San Julián.jpg
- File:Prospectiva.jpg
- File:IsladeTris.jpg
- File:Calle22.jpg
- File:BoulevardCar.jpg
- File:IslaCar2.jpg
- File:IslaCar.jpg
- File:AcuaculturaCam.gif
- File:Uvacampeche.jpg
- File:Islaaguada.jpg
- File:Corredor2.jpg
- File:UvaCam.gif
Gunnex (talk) 21:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:57, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:55, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates! Ras67 (talk) 14:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Krd 09:56, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
out of scope? Pibwl (talk) 21:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
bad quality kid's photo Pibwl (talk) 21:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
out of scope (desription: photo of a kitchen set) Pibwl (talk) 21:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
blurry, low resolution, we have many better files in Category:A Storm in the Rocky Mountains, Mt. Rosalie (Brooklyn Museum) by Albert Bierstadt Oursana (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates! Ras67 (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Krd 09:55, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:38, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 21:39, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
usless autopromo, same for other uploads: File:OOH Profile.jpg, File:OOH Profile Page 4.jpg, File:OOH Profile Page 5.jpg, File:Outdoor Advertising Profile Title.jpg Pibwl (talk) 21:40, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, sole upload Pibwl (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This photograph is not in the Venezuelan public domain because it was published after 1960. The copyright term when the Venezuelan photograph is in the public domain is 60 years after publication. Y.haruo (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo Pibwl (talk) 21:45, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
out of scope Pibwl (talk) 21:49, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:04, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 22:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep We should assume the CIA take this images in any legal way, because it was published (as PD). We should not assume the CIA publish illegal taken photos.--Slick (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- You mean, that the CIA took a permission from Tom Wright? Gee, that's the CIA, this agency didn't need a permission for nothing! Government authorities are often careless in copyright things. But Commons need certainness and there are doubts about the freedom of this file --> COM:PCP. --Ras67 (talk) 12:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:PRP. INeverCry 01:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
File:The World Factbook - United Arab Emirates - Flickr - The Central Intelligence Agency (2).jpg
[edit]No Freedom of Panorama in the United Arab Emirates. Ras67 (talk) 22:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep We should assume the CIA take this images in any legal way, because it was published (as PD). We should not assume the CIA publish illegal taken photos.--Slick (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- You mean, that the CIA took a permission from Tom Wright? Gee, that's the CIA, this agency didn't need a permission for nothing! Government authorities are often careless in copyright things. But Commons need certainness and there are doubts about the freedom of this file --> COM:PCP. --Ras67 (talk) 12:05, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per COM:PRP. INeverCry 01:05, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
No source given for original work. Kelly (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:06, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
unused personal? photo or a person of unknown notability, sole upload Pibwl (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:06, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Victorcarv (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Victorcarv/logs and especially the latest uploads by this user from 12.2014, arbitrary licensed with an unsourced CC-license. I already "cleared " some uploads by this user in 11.2011, 01.2013 and now in 01.2015 (no permissions/copyvios), so far without any reaction. Apparently the uploader doesn't care and is gaming the system. All files related to the military police and firefighters (school) in São Paulo. Most likely all files grabbed from http://www.ccb.polmil.sp.gov.br/ (Copyright © Corpo de Bombeiros) or from related sites.
- File:Coesaopaulo.jpg
- File:Piscinasesb.jpg
- File:Treinamentoesb.jpg
- File:Salvamentoterrestre.jpg
- File:Torresesb.jpg
- File:Pistabrec.jpg
- File:Brecesb2.jpg
- File:Auditorioesb.jpg
- File:Bombeiroescola.JPG
- File:Esbescola.jpg
- File:Brecesb1.jpg
- File:Celpmp.jpg
- File:Vistaaereaesb.jpg
- File:Esb1.jpg
- File:Espada06 3.jpg
- File:Espada06 2.jpg
- File:Espada06 1.jpg
- File:Hallentrada.jpg
- File:Vistaaereaacademia.jpg
- File:Instrucaotiro.jpg
- File:Desfilecavalaria06.jpg
- File:Cursosapmbb.jpg
- File:Daxv.jpg
- File:Apmbb.gif
Gunnex (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:06, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
autopromo and/or copyrighted. Same for useless logo File:Logo de Scooter System.gif Pibwl (talk) 22:13, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
some autopromo, out of scope, used only in user's sandbox, abandoned in 2012 Pibwl (talk) 22:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
I can't see why it is in scope. No categories, one of user's few uploads. Pibwl (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
out of scope (personal photo?), no educational use, sole upload Pibwl (talk) 22:21, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
seems like someone's personal claims against Orange - same for other user's upload File:Mais Orange refuse pour le motif que vous êtes au RSA.jpg. Pibwl (talk) 22:25, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:07, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
all uploads by this user - unused autopromo of some football club of dubious notability (and unclear copyright status) - also:
- File:UNIFORME ALTERNATIVO.jpg,
- file:UNIFORME TITULAR.jpg,
- file:Macota del club.jpg,
- File:HIMNO DEL CLUB.jpg,
- file:Bandera del CLUB PATRIOTAS DEL CARIBE.jpg,
- file:Escudo del Club Patriota del Caribe.jpg,
- File:ESCUDO DEL CLUB.jpg
Pibwl (talk) 22:43, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo - not a free file Ldorfman (talk) 23:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Unneeded duplication with File:David Tzur.jpg Ldorfman (talk) 23:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ivan Linares (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unclear copyright status. Pictograms taken from (as indicated) "Metrô do Recife (Metrorec)" (metro system for the city of Recife in Brazil), licensed with {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}} (on which base?). May be in public domain by other reasons but relevant info must be provided. Doubtful if licensable via {{PD-shape}} or PD-whatever. Ignoring by this uploader File:EWerneck.jpg (simple circle and an italic "W").
- File:ECamaragibe.jpg
- File:ECurado.jpg
- File:EAltoDoCeu.jpg
- File:EJaboatao.jpg
- File:EEngenhoVelho.jpg
- File:EFloriano.jpg
- File:ECavaleiro.jpg
- File:ECoqueiral.jpg
- File:ETejipio.jpg
- File:EBarro.jpg
- File:EWerneck.jpg
- File:ESantaLuzia.jpg
- File:EMangueira.jpg
- File:EIpiranga.jpg
- File:EAfogados.jpg
- File:ERodoviariaRec.jpg
- File:Esquema Metro do Recife.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 23:53, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 01:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
no esta bien elaborado Musik009 (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Photo without a licence.
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:16, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Porque no quiero que aparezca mi nombre de usuario hacia el publico Angee.jm (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Just an outdated and unused version of File:NearEast.png (exactly the same but without South Sudan). Leftcry (talk) 04:54, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
out of scope INeverCry 10:04, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:19, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This file had the wrong metadata från Lightroom when i uploaded it, so this file should be removed becasue i have uloaded a new file with the right license and metadata. Joakim Berndes (talk) 11:05, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: by Magog the Ogre. Yann (talk) 11:21, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Clearly not from 1986, clearly not from the red cross, clearly not an official document. Just a made-up document which includes the wiki-pe-tan image. Wittylama (talk) 11:35, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Official document red cross
[edit]
.jpg){kind=link}
![48 File:How People In Rural America Connect "I Have An Idea" mjb 2014-05-14 12-10.jpg](#File:How_People_In_Rural_America_Connect_"I_Have_An_Idea"_mjb_2014-05-14_12-10.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_2013-12-31_14-18.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
![[3]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4wL7ta1E-yY/U68hut_XPcI/AAAAAAAAAmU/5UJ9Nj1jUJQ/s1600/IMG_20140606_174440.jpg){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_2013-12-31_14-18.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2013-12-31_14-18.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_2013-12-31_14-18.jpg){kind=link}
_2013-12-31_14-18.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Bien un certificat d'opérateur radio de la Croix-Rouge Française.
--F1jmm (talk) 15:12, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Túrelio as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.m.theyangongallery.com/images/logo.jpg. Simple shapes, bellow COM:TOO Amitie 10g (talk) 13:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC) I own the copyrights of the logo and therefore I have uploaded it. I request not to delete it. Thank you Whuthmone (talk) 04:39, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 11:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of scope Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 16:27, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Do we have other images of people in the terrace of Museo Pablo Serrano or images of girls with Zaragoza cityscape in the background?--Pere prlpz (talk) 17:22, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Do we need images of people in the terrace of Museo Pablo Serrano or images of girls with Zaragoza cityscape in the background? :-D
- I mean, can they reasonably illustrate any educative content or wikipedia article? --Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 21:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- A Wikipedia article probably not, but the real question if you are reasonably sure that nobody can illustrate any educative work of any kind. For instance, a lot of language courses are illustrated with images quite similar to this one, and any collection of all-purpose stock photos include images like this one. We have a lot of categories of images not related to any wikipedia article (for example, Category:Standing women in India).--Pere prlpz (talk) 12:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, it could be that way, your arguments seem compelling... let's wait for a third-party opinion :-) --Discasto talk | contr. | es.wiki analysis 13:19, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- A Wikipedia article probably not, but the real question if you are reasonably sure that nobody can illustrate any educative work of any kind. For instance, a lot of language courses are illustrated with images quite similar to this one, and any collection of all-purpose stock photos include images like this one. We have a lot of categories of images not related to any wikipedia article (for example, Category:Standing women in India).--Pere prlpz (talk) 12:54, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 11:27, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
personelle fggg FC VILLENEUVOIS (talk) 17:41, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Yann (talk) 11:27, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Official Chinese military photo of which the uploader is not the copyright holder 178.10.108.39 18:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio [9]. Yann (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Flag of Honduras.svg. Fry1989 eh? 18:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Flag of Honduras.svg. Oscarnav (talk) 18:26, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 11:31, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
merge with the basically identical File:Ilhas jônicas.png PanchoS (talk) 19:54, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Replaced, duplicate. Yann (talk) 11:36, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
LA46
[edit]
Own Work. Wish to have removed. Out of scope. --LewisArmistead46 (talk) 03:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: by Yann on 5 February 2015. Green Giant (talk) 20:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
not used; uploades by mistake Harc123 (talk) 19:54, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, arbitrary dated/sourced and authored with "unk" (whatever that means = unknown?), considering also File:Mar-escolanaval.jpg by same uploader (same here: "unk"/"unk"/"unk"), a photo which was grabbed from Panoramio. Obs.: DR initiated by uploader in 2010 which remained incompleted Gunnex (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Looking at the history it appears that the uploader has tried to get this uploaded right after upload, but somehow it didn't get deleted. It has no true licence or source or anything else.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.158.11.172 (talk • contribs)
- The vote above was made by me, and it was (via a minor edit) moved from the section above to this one without any indication of why it was necessary and without making it clear on this page. I want to make it clear that the reason for putting the vote in the section above rather than this one was because this deletion should not be counted against the uploader, as it is clear that one has attempted to delete right after the original upload, you can see that in the history.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.158.147.172 (talk • contribs)
- Hi IP, the section above is (as I mentioned) an incomplete (lost in space since 2010), manual deletion request by the uploader Harc123 (talk · contributions · Statistics) himself which I updated/relisted (with new arguments). Gunnex (talk) 10:49, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Gunnex. Green Giant (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
None provided proof that this actually Russavia The_Photographer (talk) 19:08, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: The page history shows the user has identified himself. Green Giant (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(15561659860).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(15746509615).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Files in Category:Hassan II Mosque 34
[edit]No FOP in Morocco
- File:Arcs de la Mosquée Hassan-II.jpg
- File:Hassan II Mosque - Grande Mosquée Hassan II.jpg
- File:Mosque Hassan II, Casablanca, Morocco, 摩洺哥.jpg
- File:MOSQUEE HASSAN II.jpg
- File:Mosquée Hassan II -2.jpg
- File:Mustapha ennaimi - 23768064204.jpg
--Minorax«¦talk¦» 13:25, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Furthermore File:MOSQUEE HASSAN II.jpg is previously published and would need a separate VRT permission from the photographer even if we obtained a general permission for the mosque. ~Cybularny Speak? 13:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: by Krd. --Minorax«¦talk¦» 12:59, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Files in Category:Hassan II Mosque 35
[edit]No FOP in Morocco
- File:Casablanca, Morocco (51256636929).jpg
- File:الدار البيضاء مسجد الحسن الثاني.jpg
- File:جامع الحسن الثاني.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
--Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 10:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: by Jameslwoodward. --Min☠︎rax«¦talk¦» 06:23, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:TOYS and copyrighted architectural design by Adrian Smith. Ras67 (talk) 23:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
- Don't understand the reason - If the building is copyrighted all the images from the Burj Khalifa should be deleted (Category:Burj Khalifa). If creatures from existing buildings are copyrighted, all imgages from Category:Lego Architecture should be deleted. Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 12:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- The building's architectural design is copyrighted until 70 years after the architect's death. Many of the buildings here are old enough. The toy is a derivative work of an architectural design an two times copyrighted, as original design by Adrian Smith and as toy by Lego A/S. Pictures of it can not be free. --Ras67 (talk) 13:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- So that means that all the images of the Burj Khalifa in Category:Burj Khalifa should be deleted as well, because the building's architectural design is copyrighted? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, I've made a deletion request for all images, who focus to the building alone. For this cases is even an own category. The other images are probably de minimis. --Ras67 (talk) 15:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- So that means that all the images of the Burj Khalifa in Category:Burj Khalifa should be deleted as well, because the building's architectural design is copyrighted? Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- The building's architectural design is copyrighted until 70 years after the architect's death. Many of the buildings here are old enough. The toy is a derivative work of an architectural design an two times copyrighted, as original design by Adrian Smith and as toy by Lego A/S. Pictures of it can not be free. --Ras67 (talk) 13:53, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 21:13, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by 颐园新居 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: 作者请求删除，原因上传版本出错
Converted by me to DR to allow for a discussion, as file has been uploaded 2 years ago. -- Túrelio (talk) 07:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The Chinese translates as "Author requests deletion, because of error in the uploaded version." --Joshua (talk) 16:33, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per Joshua's comment Ellin Beltz (talk) 23:04, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Looking at their two similar image upload of this woman -(File:Conceição_Trucom_em_Criciúma.jpg and File:Conceição Trucom na AAO.jpg)- this one also appears to be copyright violation and not really the 'original work' of uploader. I'm unable to trace the origin, though, at this moment. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 23:33, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:47, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Too much tilt, soft and blurry, better pix in same category. Sardaka (talk) 10:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Not a good photo, but the only one that shows the building's left side. The other photos (which are all by you), only show the front and the right side. --Sebari (talk) 18:01, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Tour Perret (Amiens)
[edit]There is no FOP in France. The_architect, Auguste Perret died in 1954.
- File:Amiens France Tour-Perret-01.jpg
- File:Tour Perret de nuit.jpg
- File:Vue en Contre Plongée de la Tour Perret - Amiens.jpg
BrightRaven (talk) 10:18, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep No more copyright protection because of loss of originality according to french law. The loss of originality occured with the extension and modification of the tower in 2006. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:29, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Info Please do not just repeat, "there is no FoP in France". The french court explicetly binds a copyright protection for buildings to several criteria for originality. --CEphoto, Uwe Aranas (talk) 10:32, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- The "definite artistic character" and "esthetic preoccupation" is very clear in the case of work considered as part of the architectural heritage of France by the French Ministry of Culture. It is not a purely functional building, nor part of a series, so it is not acceptable here. I do not understand how an extension or modification of a building could jeopardize its original character (unless it damages the original building, which is not the case here). BrightRaven (talk) 10:42, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. INeverCry 05:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Tour Perret (Amiens)
[edit]- File:1165 - Tour Perret - Amiens.jpg
- File:633 - Tour Perret vue de la gare - Amiens.jpg
- File:Amiens Tour Perret.JPG
- File:Amiens.jpg
- File:AmiensTourPerret.jpg
- File:La gare d'Amiens vue par dessus les marquises.JPG
- File:Tour Perret Amiens.jpg
- File:Tour Perret au couleur du 100ème Anzac Day.JPG
- File:Tour Perret et gare au coucher de soleil.jpg
- File:Tour Perret.jpg
- File:Un des très très rare TGV à Amiens.JPG
VIGNERON (talk) 08:32, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Oppose Pourquoi supprimé "Un des très très rare TGV à Amiens.JPG" ou "La gare d'Amiens vue par dessus les marquises.JPG" car cette tour est en arrière plan et que l'objet principale est la rame TGV Atlantique et la gare et que cette photographie est utilisé pour illustrée la page de la Gare d'Amiens pas de notre faute si cette putain de tour soit dans les vues. Les photos sont mis en ligne depuis des années et c'est maintenant que vous vous reveillez ??? ou alors vous voulez faire chier votre monde (comme d'autres)--Thierry80 (talk) 10:32, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Neutral : il arrive un moment où cette absence de liberté de panorama devient pour le moins... bizarre. Pour les photos représentant directement le bâtiment incriminé, soit. Mais pour celles où ledit bâtiment n'est qu'un élément du décor, cela me semble exagéré. --NB80 (talk) 04:00, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
- Si ils supprime la photo avec le TGV, je la réuploaderai, car la Tour n'est pas l'objet principale de la photo. Car c'est de l'abus de pouvoir de Vigneron... Par exemple, on supprime le TGV, mais sur une autre photo, celle là n'est pas dans la liste (File:18.03.06_Amiens_BB116058_(6100995321).jpg) y'a vraiment 2 poids 2 mesures, je suis scandalisé. --Thierry80 (talk) 11:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Je ne fais que poser une question et proposer ce qui me semble être trop limite par rapport à ce que je connais de la loi et de la jurisprudence française. Vu que je suis proposant, je ne ferais aucune suppression (il n'y a donc aucun pouvoir dont je pourrais supposément abuser) et je laisse aux autres le soin de juger et ne supprimer ou non tout ou partie de ces photos. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 12:02, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
- Si ils supprime la photo avec le TGV, je la réuploaderai, car la Tour n'est pas l'objet principale de la photo. Car c'est de l'abus de pouvoir de Vigneron... Par exemple, on supprime le TGV, mais sur une autre photo, celle là n'est pas dans la liste (File:18.03.06_Amiens_BB116058_(6100995321).jpg) y'a vraiment 2 poids 2 mesures, je suis scandalisé. --Thierry80 (talk) 11:44, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: two as DM, deleted the rest where the tower is the principal subject. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 14:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Tour Perret (Amiens)
[edit]Same as in previous nominations. Derivative work copyright violation: there is no commercial freedom of panorama in France, and the author, the architect, is not yet dead for more than 70 years.
- File:Amiens Cathédrale Notre-Dame Blick auf die Tour Perret.jpg
- File:Amiens Tour Perret.jpg
- File:Tour Perret - Amiens (FR80) - 2021-05-30 - 1.jpg
- File:Tour Perret - Amiens (FR80) - 2021-05-30 - 2.jpg
- File:Tour Perret - Amiens (FR80) - 2021-05-30 - 3.jpg
- File:Tour Perret - Amiens (FR80) - 2021-05-30 - 4.jpg
- File:Tour Perret - Amiens (FR80) - 2021-05-30 - 5.jpg
- File:Tour Perret 20210917 173751.jpg
_-_2021-05-30_-_1.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2021-05-30_-_2.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2021-05-30_-_3.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2021-05-30_-_4.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_-_2021-05-30_-_5.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 04:50, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
- You can delete mine (I can't find a way to do it). Rp (talk) 09:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- @Rp: yes, it is restricted for architectural works from France. The two separate cases in 1990s in which two postcard publishers were indicted just by publishing images of Grande Arche and Le Geóde without their then-living architects' licenses prove that; see [10], 2012 article by Lipovetsky and de Dampierre. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 09:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 17:49, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
The floor of this room can surely be considered a work of art per se. So, a permission from the painter is required. -- Túrelio (talk) 10:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- I can have permission from the artist but I am not sure how to submit it. Can you please suggest? Whuthmone (talk) 04:52, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Whuthmone, that's easy. Either ask him to send it to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org or forward it by yourself. The permission needs to mention the filename (File:The Yangon Gallery Interior.jpg), contain a statement of his authorship (or rightsholdership) in this work and the name of the license under which he wants to release it. --Túrelio (talk) 07:17, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: OTRS permission needed. INeverCry 05:05, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
falsches Logo Schoesslers (talk) 11:17, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Same logo is used on ReachLocal's web site. I can't see how it can be wrong. --Sebari (talk) 18:04, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP#Denmark.
Stefan4 (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Also:
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg A silhouette infringes as much as the image of the whole statue would. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, yes. I looked at that for a long time, but couldn't make up my mind. The file name suggests that the main object of the photo is the surroundings, but then I would have covered the statue differently so that you only see a white square or something, and when I look more carefully, I see too much of the silhouette of the statue. So yes, delete that too, or hide more of the picture around the statue. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:49, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I am the owner of the image of the statue of the "Little Mermaid" in Copenhagen. I am new to Wikipedia and do not understand why it has been deleted or why they want to erase. If I would greatly appreciate it can be explained. Sincerely, 62.97.140.2 11:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Juan Carlos Ruiz miranda
- See the Danish copyright law §24.2:
Kunstværker må afbildes, når de er varigt anbragt på eller ved en for almenheden tilgængelig plads eller vej. Bestemmelsen i 1. pkt. finder ikke anvendelse, såfremt kunstværket er hovedmotivet og gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt.
- Approximate translation by me:
Artworks may be reproduced if they are placed permanently at or next to a place or road accessible to the general public. The rule in 1 does not apply if the artwork is the main purpose and the reproduction is used commercially.
- The problem is that you only can upload images to Commons if they can be used commercially in both the United States and in the source country. Since Danish law doesn't allow you to use the photos commercially, you can't upload them here. See for example http://www.journalisten.dk/havfruens-arvinger-tjener-fedt-pa-ophavsret (in Danish) where it says that a Danish newspaper had to pay 10,000 Danish crowns for using a photo of the statue without permission from the sculptor's heirs. The copyright to the statue will expire in Denmark on 1 January 2030 (70 years after the death of sculptor da:Edvard Eriksen), so starting from that date, you may upload photos of the statue to Commons. Unfortunately, it is not yet 2030. --Stefan4 (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
{{FoP-China}} only applies to works installed outdoors, but this seems to be indoors. The statue is in the public domain in China (as {{PD-old-50}}) and in the United States (as {{PD-1923}}), but the source country of the statue is Denmark, where it is not yet in the public domain.
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 16:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know the law well, but I think {{FoP-China}} can apply to these photos because they were actually displayed outdoors. I've been there. It was an open architecture with no "indoor" place. Maybe your can see its structure from this photo -- File:Denmark Pavilion of Expo 2010 2.jpg.--Stevenliuyi (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting. I wonder if this counts as indoors or outdoors, then. It looked very much like an indoors place from the images in the nomination, but from the image you found, it looks as if it might work differently, although it looks like a strange construction, so maybe it could go either way. If kept, note that {{FoP-China}} requires mentioning the sculptor (Edvard Eriksen) and the title of the work (Den lille Havfrue) --Stefan4 (talk) 00:54, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- So you are saying that if you have a British painting by a painter who died in 1950 which was exhibited in the UK in 1905, then you can circumvent COM:L and British copyright by transporting the painting to Japan (where it entered the public domain 50 years+3794 days after 1950) and then upload a photo of it? Commons files have to be free in the source country of the work (in this case Denmark). If Denmark doesn't recognise Chinese FOP for photos taken in China, then I suppose we should delete the photos regardless of whether they are outdoors or indoors as the photos need to be free in Denmark. --Stefan4 (talk) 11:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- A painting would not be the same thing as sculpture. A photograph of a painting would not be derivative work, but only a copy, since the photograph would not meet the threshold of originality, therefore the source country would be the source country of the painting. When you photograph a 3d object such a sculpture and its surroundings, that photograph would meet the threshold of originality and a new copyright is created, therefore the source country is the country of the photograph, even if you photograph a copyrighted object. So I do not think paintings and sculptures are the same thing. At least if we forget for a moment that some jurisdictions might consider photos of paintings to be above the threshold.
But to clarify, I think this is more of a policy decision on how aggressively we want to interpret our "free in the source country"-rule than it is a copyright question. Do you think the bit in Commons:Licensing should be rewritten from "… and in the source country of the work" to "… and in all source countries of the work" or something like that? Peter Alberti (talk) 12:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)- If you make a faithful reproduction of a painting, then the reproduction is below the threshold of originality in Denmark, meaning that it is protected for 50 years since creation (if it is a photo), or not at all (if it is not a photo). However, the reproduction does not need to be faithful. Check http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/6-16-09yawnersRGB20090616095504.jpg and http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qnUbmG-dYTM/Trzhc3SU4eI/AAAAAAAAABY/3Pa2Ri4_KA0/s1600/skriethomer_29544134.jpg for example. Both are obviously derivative works of nb:Skrik and they are in no way faithful to the original painting. The original painting is in the public domain in a large number of countries, such as USA, Canada, China, Japan, Australia and Korea, but it is still copyrighted in Norway. If you make a derivative work like those two, but make the derivative work in a country where the original painting is in the public domain, would the derivative work then be acceptable on Commons? I'd assume not. I think that we had a case like that where someone in Germany had made a derivative work of a work from Afghanistan, but I don't remember what the outcome was. Works from Afghanistan are in the public domain outside Afghanistan since the country hasn't signed any copyright treaties with other countries. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about those derivatives of The Scream other than what I see, but if they have educational value in their own right, I would lean towards allowing them. Another possible more interesting example in the world of Scream-derivatives could be Andy Warhol's popart versions (e.g. [11]). If they were public domain in the US due to lack of notice (which I doubt), I'd like to see them included here. I understand if others feel differently, and — as it seems I might be in a minority — I'm striking my keep-vote.
Regarding the example with works from Afghanistan, I see other issues with those. When Afghanistan signs the treaties, copyright to works from Afghanistan will be applied retroactively elsewhere in the world, meaning that that derivative may very well not be free in Germany or anywhere else a couple of years from now. I wouldn't consider that to be acceptable for us. There's an interesting discussion to be had there, but it's one that could reach a different conclusion. Peter Alberti (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about those derivatives of The Scream other than what I see, but if they have educational value in their own right, I would lean towards allowing them. Another possible more interesting example in the world of Scream-derivatives could be Andy Warhol's popart versions (e.g. [11]). If they were public domain in the US due to lack of notice (which I doubt), I'd like to see them included here. I understand if others feel differently, and — as it seems I might be in a minority — I'm striking my keep-vote.
- If you make a faithful reproduction of a painting, then the reproduction is below the threshold of originality in Denmark, meaning that it is protected for 50 years since creation (if it is a photo), or not at all (if it is not a photo). However, the reproduction does not need to be faithful. Check http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/6-16-09yawnersRGB20090616095504.jpg and http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qnUbmG-dYTM/Trzhc3SU4eI/AAAAAAAAABY/3Pa2Ri4_KA0/s1600/skriethomer_29544134.jpg for example. Both are obviously derivative works of nb:Skrik and they are in no way faithful to the original painting. The original painting is in the public domain in a large number of countries, such as USA, Canada, China, Japan, Australia and Korea, but it is still copyrighted in Norway. If you make a derivative work like those two, but make the derivative work in a country where the original painting is in the public domain, would the derivative work then be acceptable on Commons? I'd assume not. I think that we had a case like that where someone in Germany had made a derivative work of a work from Afghanistan, but I don't remember what the outcome was. Works from Afghanistan are in the public domain outside Afghanistan since the country hasn't signed any copyright treaties with other countries. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- A painting would not be the same thing as sculpture. A photograph of a painting would not be derivative work, but only a copy, since the photograph would not meet the threshold of originality, therefore the source country would be the source country of the painting. When you photograph a 3d object such a sculpture and its surroundings, that photograph would meet the threshold of originality and a new copyright is created, therefore the source country is the country of the photograph, even if you photograph a copyrighted object. So I do not think paintings and sculptures are the same thing. At least if we forget for a moment that some jurisdictions might consider photos of paintings to be above the threshold.
I think there are two issues, which are not well distinguished above:
- First, if a sculpture is permanently moved to an FOP country and meets the FOP rules there, then we accept images of it. See, for example, Category:Alexander Calder where we have many images of sculpture by Calder, an American, which were fabricated in America and shipped to Germany, where they are on permanent public display. Thus our rule about country of origin speaks to the country where the image was taken, not the country where the subject was created. If the Mermaid, or a cast of it, met the FOP rules in China, then images of that piece would be acceptable here.
- Second is the question of whether taking a sculpture from its country of origin, a 70 year pma country, into a 50 year pma country makes it acceptable on Commons. I would think not.
- The difference is that an image taken with an FOP rule in place does not change the copyright status of the sculpture. A sculpture in an FOP country is not PD, it is still copyrighted, but the image is a legal DW. The change from 70 pma to 50 pma is a change in the copyright status of the sculpture and I don't think we're going to recognize that for a temporary move. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Those are not unreasonable distinctions, but they are to the best of my knowledge neither dictated by copyright law nor written down as policy or guidelines anywhere. Distinguishing between a temporary and a permanent move when it isn't required by freedom of panorama-rules seems to be just a random line in the sand. (And I don't see why the Mermaid shouldn't meet the freedom of panorama-exceptions in China, by the way, per Stevenliuyi's comment.) Likewise distinguishing between FOP-exceptions and shorter copyright durations seems to be a random line in the sand, when neither necessarily makes any difference elsewhere in the world. Maybe I just don't know where to look, but I think such things, if they are to be applied as general rules, ideally should be written down somewhere in the project namespace to allow uploaders to take them into account and to make it easier for administrators to apply them consistently. But that's just a thought, feel free to ignore it. Peter Alberti (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Delete ALL ! For all reasons stated above as well as the legal issue to WMF. The copyright holders have won cash settlements. They may see the images on all the wiki articles. They most probably will be pissed. They have every right to sue or ask for an office action. My perssonal reasons may also seem valid: Countries and creators that don't allow the masses to view them are losing out. They will have articles of text only, low sales of legitimate copies, etc, etc, etc.......--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Note that there is no legal issue for the WMF. The statue was "published" in 1913, so it is in the public domain in the United States. This is only an issue about the copyright status in Denmark. See for example w:Den lille Havfrue#Copyright issues: a replica was placed in the United States and the sculptor's heirs asked for royalties, but the case was later reported dropped without giving a reason for this. Presumably, the heirs had realised that USA has different copyright rules (at that time requiring copyright notices+renewals for Danish statues without any protection for pre-1919 statues) and that the copyright claim was invalid in the United States. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- I can see valid reasons for legally keeping them. But do we want to spend WMF money on legal battles to keep them or is their a better use for the funds? The heirs have won other battles and may file on this one. Not to win but for publicity or other reasons.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Well, the policy is that Commons files have to be free in both the source country and in the United States. My claim is that the images violate Danish law and thus violate COM:L (and so need to be deleted). On the other hand, I don't think that the images violate US law. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- I can see valid reasons for legally keeping them. But do we want to spend WMF money on legal battles to keep them or is their a better use for the funds? The heirs have won other battles and may file on this one. Not to win but for publicity or other reasons.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I see one retracted keep and most others lean on delete. Should we just tag them speedy and see if a bold admin will remove them? We can still discuss and seek consenus on whether any should be undeleted. I am just worried about Danish lawyers waking up to messages monday morning.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Delete those that shows the silhouette of and actual statue in Copenhagen and Keep the rest, including those taken in China. While those taken at the site in Copenhagen are clearly in violation of copyright, File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg is a bit more dubious to me (I was also the creator initially), as the Danish artist Bjørn Nørgaard in 2008 was found to be legally using a photo of the little Mermaid in a collage, by the Eastern High Court in Denmark, in part because the statue was not the main motif in the collage. The statue is clearly not the main motive as it is not depicted on the photo. However the silhoutte could be a derivative, as it is so tight, which would make it a copyrighted item after all. A short notice about the case outcome is available in Danish here. So I'm still a bit in doubt regarding the silhoutte photo, but I guess it comes down to, whither one consider the silhoutte a main motif and a derivative. If the answers to both of these questions are yes, then it's a clear cut delete. I think it actually might be.
For those taken in China, I believe that taking a photo of a sculpture on temporary display is okay per Chinese FOP as it doesn't specifically mention permanent display, which is the case in other places - i.e. in the German nuances example. As PMA is 50 in China and the photo was taken about 5 months after the expiry of those 50 years, I am of the opinion that they are okay for Commons. --heb [T C E] 15:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem with {{FoP-China}} is that it only applies to works located in a "室外公共场所". It is unclear if the image fulfils that requirement.
- The Danish page tells that you may use a photo of the statue if it is not the main purpose of the photo. It's unclear if it is the main purpose of this photo or not, since you clearly see its silhouette. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- This blog-entry shows the Danish pavilion at the Expo from various angles. As far as I can see from then this is an outdoor public place (室外公共场所) as per article 22 in Chinese copyright law (unless there was an entry fee or something similar to the Expo-area, which would put everything in a different light). I haven't found anything indicating that Chinese law supports a distinguishing between outdoor and partially covered.
- Regarding the silhouette, I actually believe that I (as the uploader) have stretched it a bit to far with that silhouette and that the photo is in fact a derivative of a copyrighted work, and that the photo should be deleted under the COM:PCP. In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 08:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that it looks as if the place has walls but no roof. I don't know if something with a wall but no roof is treated as "indoors" or "outdoors" in China. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- If you put 室外公共场所 into Google Translate it would appear that 外 is the outside-word, translating to multiple meanings such as 'outside', 'external', 'outer' and 'foreign'. I guess it could be anything without a door for this sake. The only source I have been able to find, that gives any hint in any direction regarding article 22 is this and it doesn't help terribly much (though it does provide some nice insights into the Chinese Copyright Act (CCA)).
- But I found another angle for this could which might perhaps make the question is much simpler. I actually believe that the CCA Article 22 is describing fair use (as defined on EnWiki), and the paper I refer to above also uses the expression 'fair use' on Article 22, as do this Chinese law firm. Commons:Fair use states (at the very beginning): "Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use media files (such as non-free logos, covers, screenshots, or reproductions of other copyrighted works) because fair use laws vary from country to country—thus, content deemed acceptable under, for instance, US fair use concepts (which are very broad) is not usable in the majority of other countries."
- 室 = room
- 外 = outside
- i.e. outside a room. I'm not sure whether this can be considered to be outside a room or not.
- "Fair use" is a thing in United States copyright law (s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 107) which says that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder. There are also other sections in United States copyright law (e.g. s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 120) which say that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, and those sections are not denoted "fair use". The former is considered insufficient for Commons whereas the latter is considered sufficient for Commons.
- The copyright laws of other countries sometimes also allow you to use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, but the copyright laws of other countries generally don't use the term fair use. The idea is that Commons files can be reused freely by anyone for any purpose, and this means that we need to analyse the terms in the copyright law to determine whether each kind of use is sufficient or not. For example, the Danish copyright law has multiple sections which say that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, and you could denote those fair use if you wish. § 24.2 is a type of insufficient fair use since it doesn't apply if "gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt", whereas § 24.3 is a type of sufficient fair use since it just says that "Bygninger må [...] afbildes [frit]" without giving any further restrictions. § 24.2 allows any use of the image unless "kunstværket er hovedmotivet", but it may be dubious whether something is a "hovedmotiv" or not, and this may depend on how you use the images. However, this is an issue with COM:DM in its entirety and not only an issue with Danish images.
- {{FoP-China}} looks like a kind of sufficient fair use to me, similar to s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 120 and Danish § 24.3. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I was referring more to the concept of fair use than the actual American use of the words. I find it worth noting that the licensing resolution doesn't use the term fair use either, but it would similar apply to parallel fair dealing rules of the Commonwealth countries as do other national limitations and exceptions. That stated I do agree whole-heartedly with you in that "we need to analyse the terms in the copyright law to determine whether each kind of use is sufficient or not". Unfortunately this is a bigger issue for Commons than simply this little mermaid :( --heb [T C E] 17:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that it looks as if the place has walls but no roof. I don't know if something with a wall but no roof is treated as "indoors" or "outdoors" in China. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Summary per 8 January 2013
I'm going to try with a summary as of today. Basically I noted remarks and votes from seven users (User:Canoe1967, User:Heb, User:Jameslwoodward, User:Peter Alberti, User:Stefan4 and User:Stevenliuyi plus anonymous Special:Contributions/62.97.140.2). There seem to be a clear consensus about deletion of the following:
- File:Sireneta.JPG: Close-up of The Little Mermaid on "her normal" stone in Copenhagen
- File:Sirenita Copenhague.jpg: Same as the above, but from a different angle
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg: The actual statue has been masked out and replaced by white, leaving a distinct silhouette
Then there are the three photos from the Denmark Pavilion of Expo 2010 in China:
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg: The statue is a significant part of the photo, but not nessecarily the main subject
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg: Same as the above, but from a slightly different angle
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg: The statue is the subject, but the surroundings make a good part of the photo
File:Danish Pavilion 8.jpg could perhaps also be mentioned on above list, as it shows the statue, but it is clearly not the main subject. The discussion revolves mainly on the subjects of:
- what is considered the source country (of the photo (China) or of the statue (Denmark)),
- wither a temporary/short-term move to another country should be considered "equal" to (more) permanent move, and
- if it is indoor or outdoor per {{FoP-China}}
Regarding the source country precedence (per User:Jameslwoodward's comment) indicates that on Commons, source country is the source of the (in this case) photograph, not the statue as such, however as User:Peter Alberti remarks, it is very much a question of interpretation of COM:L. For the purpose of this summary, I'd say that consensus of this discussion points towards source country being China in this case.
For the temporary vs. permanent move, I don't see a particular clear direction in the comments above, though for this summary I would summarize it as a small overweight towards it not really mattering - or as User:Peter Alberti puts it: "[J]ust a random line in the sand".
Last there is the question on indoor vs. outdoor, which I believe this is the most tricky part, as none of the participants has much knowledge of Chinese Copyright Act court cases. Outside of this summary, I believe that COM:PCP would dictate that they should be considered indoor though and thus the three photos from China should also be deleted, though I personally am in favour of the more "relaxed" interpretation of "outdoor".
Finally there are three more photos in Category:Statue of the Little Mermaid (Copenhagen) that I would like to mention (for good measures):
- File:Denmark. Capital Region. Copenhagen 250.JPG: Close-up of the Mermaid's "normal" stone in Copenhagen, while the statue was in China
- File:Denmark. Capital Region. Copenhagen 255.JPG: Same as above but at a distance
- File:DK ophavsrets udløb (Den lille havfrue).svg: An illustration regarding the copyright of the Mermaid - no visual representation of the actual statue
.svg){kind=link}
These three files are not included in the deletion discussion, even though a part of the category in mention. In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 12:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted, As per discussion and my unchallenged resume above, the following files should be deleted under COM:PCP:
- File:Sireneta.JPG
- File:Sirenita Copenhague.jpg
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg
The remainder of the files (currently) in Category:Statue of the Little Mermaid (Copenhagen) will be kept. --heb [T C E] 16:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
The sculptor died less than 70 years ago.
- File:Birka Stockholm and The Little Mermaid 2013.JPG
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg
- File:Little Mermaid, Copenhagen (2169039556).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I would also include:
- File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 2F (8184260307).jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 1F (8184299754).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Though both have an OTRS-ticket, I wonder whether a permission by the heir(s) of sculptor Edvard Eriksen is included. In addition, there is the statement "Photo manipulation is not allowed." (Bilden får ej manipuleras.) in the image description, which translates into "no derivatives" IMO, making them unfree. It seems that the given permission is intended for press/promotional purposes. --Túrelio (talk) 10:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- I asked about those at COM:OTRS/N#File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 1F (8184299754).jpg & File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 2F (8184260307).jpg and decided to postpone nominating those for deletion before receiving an answer. I didn't notice the text in the EXIF. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg is from the Royal Library, and I am fairly certain that they know the Danish legal situation better than most of us. I'll ask them if they can assist in this discussion. --Palnatoke (talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- See also the comments by User:MGA73 and User:Pieter Kuiper on the page on Flickr about that photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Also the name of photographer Sven Türck was missing from our description, though that's not an issue here. --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He's in the description. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- After I had added him to the author entry ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He was there all of the time (in the "Description" parameter). --Stefan4 (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, but that is hardly read/recognized by automated scripts which read-out the image data. Anyway, a minor matter. --Túrelio (talk) 10:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He was there all of the time (in the "Description" parameter). --Stefan4 (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- After I had added him to the author entry ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He's in the description. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have now asked the Royal Library. They can react in several ways:
- They can pull the picture from Flickr
- They can give us a letter from their legal department explaining why they say "no known copyright restrictions"
- Or they can just ignore us.
- In the first or third case, we should delete. --Palnatoke (talk) 11:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg is from the Royal Library, and I am fairly certain that they know the Danish legal situation better than most of us. I'll ask them if they can assist in this discussion. --Palnatoke (talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- The separate issue regarding the contradictory statements from News Øresund is apparently a non-issue; see Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/archive/2013#ticket:2013052310008773. I'll be monumentally surprised if they have a sublicensing agreement from the sculptor's heirs, though. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:13, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Birka Stockholm and The Little Mermaid 2013.JPG: Deletion accepted. --Morten Haagensen
Deleted, there have been enough time for answer. If copyright owner (sculptor or his/her heirs) sends an OTRS-permission, then it is possible to restore the files. Taivo (talk) 14:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Unfree sculpture. The sculptor hasn't been dead for at least 70 years yet.
- File:Den Lille Havfrue I (4483560253).jpg
- File:Sereia-Copenhaga, Dinamarca.jpg
- File:Sirinìna Cupenàghen.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 05:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
The Little Mermaid will be under copyright until 1/1/2030. These images are derivaitve works and cannot be kept on Commons. No doubt that someone will claim the de minimis applies, because she is small in some of these images, but de minimis cannot be applied to images where the copyrighted work is the only reason for taking the picture and is the central focus of the the photograph.
- File:20140705 Denmark 0133 Copenhagen (15159288612).jpg
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 177.JPG
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 178.JPG
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 333.JPG
- File:Tourist ship at the Mermaid, Copenhagen, June 1975.jpg
- File:Unidentified couple posing in front of the Mermaid sculpture, Copenhagen, Denmark (5075034448).jpg
- File:Visiting the Little Mermaid.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm the photograph of the picture "Visiting the Little Mermaid". It´s been in my focus to show, that the statue is one of the most visited places if interest in Copenhagen. For that you only see the statue from the back.--Schorle (talk) 18:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete If the statue was really of minimal importance to these images, it could be cropped out and the rest of the photograph would be fine, but I find that unlikely. I can sympathize with Schorle but the back of the statue is no less copyrighted than the front. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Delete both sides of a statue are copyright, the Little Mermaid is well known to be in copyright until 2030. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Statue of the Little Mermaid is still copyrighted. Its author Edvard Eriksen died in 1959, so copyright will expire in 2030. Per COM:FOP Denmark photographs of copyrighted public art may be used only for noncommercial purposes.
- File:408DK (1) Kleine Meerjungfrau (15174992498).jpg
- File:408DK (2) Kleine Meerjungfrau (15338597356).jpg
- File:409DK Kleine Meerjungfrau (15338534816).jpg
_Kleine_Meerjungfrau_(15174992498).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Kleine_Meerjungfrau_(15338597356).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Michalg95 (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete! See also this Associated Press article on a new copyright lawsuit and subsequent hefty fine against Berlingske, which strengthens no commercial FOP in Denmark for non-architecture. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:43, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 23:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- File:Copenhagen 2014 - Day One (7) (16947904443).jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue front.jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue side1.jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue side2.jpg
_(16947904443).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Files showing The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen, whose author Edvard Eriksen, died in 1959, Denmark forbids commercial usage of images showing copyrighted artwork. --Michalg95 (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 10:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Нет разрешения автора фотографии Михаила Плецкого на загрузку данного фото под указанной лицензией. Участник Альберт86 без разрешения загрузил фото различных авторов (например, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Surgut_airport_1987.jpg). Dogad75 (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Нет разрешения автора фотографии Бориса Асеева на загрузку данного фото под указанной лицензией. Участник Альберт86 без разрешения загрузил фото различных авторов (например, https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Здание_аэровокзала_Сургута_в_2012_году.jpg). Dogad75 (talk) 17:56, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 85.76.67.3 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: There is no decoration the "Vrijheidskruis der Tweede Klasse met Rode Kruis/2nd class of the Cross of Liberty with red cross": 2. luokan Vapaudenristit (2. class of the Crosses of Liberty), only 3rd and 4th classes can have red crosses: 3. luokan Vapaudenristit (3. class of the Crosses of Liberty) and 4. luokan Vapaudenristit (4. class of the Crosses of Liberty) and also the Medals of Liberty. INeverCry 04:15, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This media is missing permission information. 109.80.250.68 06:10, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept, the author and uploader is the same, no reason to doubt in own work. The file is used, so apparently it is in scope. Taivo (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This media is missing permission information. 109.80.250.68 06:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept, uploader and author are same, no reason to doubt in own work. Taivo (talk) 12:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This media is missing permission information. 109.80.250.68 06:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept, uploader and author are same, no reason to doubt in own work. The file is used in cz.wiki, so the file is in scope. Taivo (talk) 12:08, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This file uploaded to Flickr in August 19, 2013. Uploaded to Commons in December 2014 and passed review by User:TBloemink. The problem is that this is the only file uploaded by this flickr account. I believe it should be checked by the reviewer. Anyway, same file uploaded earlier to her in August 15, 2013 (her). with the same uploader name. I doubt that this Flickr account is from the same person. -- Geagea (talk) 09:23, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- I see up front no reason to assume that there was anything wrong here. If it were some celebrity pic, yes, but this worm is a rather niche subject, I'd say. I notice that someone going by the name "Chris Baugher" (and using the same profile image) also uploaded the image at the Encyclopedia of Life (sourced to Flickr, and also CC-BY-2.0). If you doubt that Flickr user "Chris Baugher" was the same as the "Chris Baugher" at barcodeoflife and the same as the one at EoL, I suggest you contact him directly via his university. Either through the form here (that's the team that dug out that worm), or directly through the e-mail address given here. And just in case that he's no longer at that university, you might try asking his Ph.D. advisor how to reach him. For me, this one is a Keep unless you contact Chris Baugher and he says there was foul play. Lupo 20:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Celebrity pics are not the only pics used to license laundering. Single photo in Flickr photostream need to be checked. True, that not necessarily means that is not ok. In this case look like your new link from the Encyclopedia of Life suggests that this file is probably ok. -- Geagea (talk) 03:57, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep If you feel an image should be checked, please check, and provide a real evidence of copyvio. Anyway, unless we find a real evidence of the place where the image has been copiede from, there is no reason not to assume good faith of uploader and the image should be kept.--Pere prlpz (talk) 17:18, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- I, the uploader, emailed the author the day the deletion was requested, and waiting for answer now. Nonexyst (talk) 20:16, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Additionally, the flickr-account was registered in 2005, six years before image uploaded. It is, however, not a proof of anything. Nonexyst (talk) 20:19, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, nobody answered me. Maybe anyone other emails the author? Nonexyst (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
- No need to worry about. Unless we received some solid evidence, we probably keep this. Jee 03:30, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- Well, nobody answered me. Maybe anyone other emails the author? Nonexyst (talk) 21:42, 9 February 2015 (UTC)
Kept, öet's assume good faith. Taivo (talk) 12:14, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by 颐园新居 as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: 作者请求删除，原因上传版本出错. File uploaded more than one year ago, and therefore does not qualify for Speedy. Amitie 10g (talk) 13:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The Chinese translates as "Author requests deletion, because of error in the uploaded version." --Joshua (talk) 16:34, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, OK, OK, for example file:S405 at Fuxingmen.JPG is very similar. Taivo (talk) 12:21, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Wrong size Andiamo (talk) 19:37, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
No valid reason for deletion. The file has sufficient size for articles. Also, the file may be useful, so Keep until you provide a valid and strong reason for deleting the file, as you as uploader. Amitie 10g (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
Kept: Morning ☼ (talk) 08:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Please delate. There is another fole with the same picture which has been used. See 'Portrait Fritz Stuber'. Andiamo (talk) 17:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep File:Portrait Fritz Stuber 2008.jpg is of significantly lower size and quality. I'm adding superseded template to it now.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.158.11.172 (talk • contribs)
Deleted, I'll delete the smaller file and keep the bigger. Taivo (talk) 12:26, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Anna Frodesiak as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Rush Job as this appears in over 50 major articles now. Copyvio. Derivative of copyrighted image at http://www.epama.net/Upload/396/ZX14001-754-1.jpg. Just an heraldic representation of an official Coat of arms of a chinesse location, no copyvio. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:52, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Amitie 10g: But, how do we know it's an old or official coat of arms? I mean, maybe it's an original creation of someone who made it up and is selling it at that website. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- The issue here is that the image isn't "official". It is original research claiming to be official, which is not permitted on en Wikipedia. Philg88 (talk) 16:00, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep I'd say the nomination is over-zealous. Fry1989 eh? 17:50, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Fry1989. At Wikipedia, we'd call that an argument to avoid. Do you have an opinion related to the copyvio concern, or that there is no evidence that this image is official? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Whether or not the image is real is an issue for Wikipedia to find out, it is not a valid reason alone on Commons to delete content. Furthermore, I do believe you are being absolutely over-zealous in your assumption this is fake, you have provided no evidence to support that whatsoever. Fry1989 eh? 21:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Fry1989. You are saying that evidence that it is fake is required. It is the other way around. If we're adding it to 50 articles, we need to know it's real.
- Whether or not the image is real is an issue for Wikipedia to find out, it is not a valid reason alone on Commons to delete content. Furthermore, I do believe you are being absolutely over-zealous in your assumption this is fake, you have provided no evidence to support that whatsoever. Fry1989 eh? 21:12, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Fry1989. At Wikipedia, we'd call that an argument to avoid. Do you have an opinion related to the copyvio concern, or that there is no evidence that this image is official? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 20:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Now to the issue that concerns Wikicommons. As this appears to be a derivative of an image not owned by the uploader, what do you have to say about the copyvio issue? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- This is not Wikipedia, you are looking at this from a Wikipedia-POV and you are mistaken. Fry1989 eh? 21:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Now to the issue that concerns Wikicommons. As this appears to be a derivative of an image not owned by the uploader, what do you have to say about the copyvio issue? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Fry1989. You must have missed the last paragraph. Please read the above starting with "Now to the issue that concerns Wikicommons." Thank you kindly. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- By the way, Fry1989, I've raised the copyvio issue 3 times and you have not responded to it 3 times. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep, about your two point:"That site is not a government site. It is a sort of coin selling site, and I think they made that up." I can't fine any reference in government site, because this 中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅关于禁止自行制作和使用地方旗、徽的通知(CPC Central Committee and State Council notice prohibiting the production and use their own local flag and emblem), CPC Central Committee and State Council are ban or obscure in whole of China's city flag and emblem, including online information, I only use other channels to obtain sources, avoid annihilation in history.
- "Your version is a derivative. It is essentially a copyright violation." In Chinese law 中华人民共和国著作权法, government badge is in the public domain.
- Sorry , my English not well.--Iflwlou (talk) 19:31, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you for pointing out that we have no way to find evidence that this is the official Haikou seal. I contend that this is made-up. Show me evidence that it is not. In fact, show me evidence that File:Sample haikou seal.jpg is not official. No evidence? Okay. Let's add it to all the articles. Do you see my point? Let me lay it out directly below in my "Delete" statement.
- Thank you for pointing out that we have no way to find evidence that this is the official Haikou seal. I contend that this is made-up. Show me evidence that it is not. In fact, show me evidence that File:Sample haikou seal.jpg is not official. No evidence? Okay. Let's add it to all the articles. Do you see my point? Let me lay it out directly below in my "Delete" statement.
- Delete My rationale: 1. There is no evidence that this is the official seal. Saying that it cannot be disproven is a worthless argument. If you cannot show that it is genuine and official, it is out of scope at Wikicommons and must never be in Wikipedia articles. 2. This is a derivative of an image. That image is copyrighted unless you can prove otherwise. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:56, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
- I reiterate my point, in my reference[12], it said:"中國海口市市徽，海口市人民政府贈", it meaning "City Emblem of Haikou, China, Haikou Municipal People's Government", not about the government site, but rather at least I have entities prove for it, something government objects remaining reservations under the prohibitive of China government.--Iflwlou (talk) 10:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- Iflwlou, the source you are using to show this is official is the coin face at the coin-selling website itself. That is not a reliable source. I live in China where this site is based. There are millions of such products all claiming to be "official" this and that. You are Chinese, right? Do you really trust what it says on this coin face? It doesn't even look "official". It looks made up for the tourist industry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- According your logic, that nothing evidence can be proof, if I give a government website that I should be evidence that the government website to be true, then have to present evidence of evidence, then have be present evidence of evidence of evidence... Why? Because I feel that evidence not the real? I believe this is over evidence obtained, and my reference just enough.--Iflwlou (talk) 10:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not totally sure what you are saying. But, again, the source site for this "fake" coin, is not a reliable source. This "coin" appears to be made up, and we need to show that this coin is official. Just because Chinese law says the image cannot be displayed, does not make this coin become authentic. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:28, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- Your logic, please proof this "fake" coin is fake.--Iflwlou (talk) 17:53, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not totally sure what you are saying. But, again, the source site for this "fake" coin, is not a reliable source. This "coin" appears to be made up, and we need to show that this coin is official. Just because Chinese law says the image cannot be displayed, does not make this coin become authentic. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:28, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
- According your logic, that nothing evidence can be proof, if I give a government website that I should be evidence that the government website to be true, then have to present evidence of evidence, then have be present evidence of evidence of evidence... Why? Because I feel that evidence not the real? I believe this is over evidence obtained, and my reference just enough.--Iflwlou (talk) 10:00, 2 February 2015 (UTC)
- Iflwlou, the source you are using to show this is official is the coin face at the coin-selling website itself. That is not a reliable source. I live in China where this site is based. There are millions of such products all claiming to be "official" this and that. You are Chinese, right? Do you really trust what it says on this coin face? It doesn't even look "official". It looks made up for the tourist industry. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:37, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- I reiterate my point, in my reference[12], it said:"中國海口市市徽，海口市人民政府贈", it meaning "City Emblem of Haikou, China, Haikou Municipal People's Government", not about the government site, but rather at least I have entities prove for it, something government objects remaining reservations under the prohibitive of China government.--Iflwlou (talk) 10:21, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
- My logic is "Please prove this fake-looking coin is real apart from what is on the back of the fake-looking coin being sold by a coin-selling website."
- Your logic is "The coin face says it is real, so it is real."
- Iflwlou, my friend, it is not even a coin. It is oval. The obverse says "HAI KOU" and nothing more. No Chinese characters, nothing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- So why you sure I give you the website 中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅关于禁止自行制作和使用地方旗、徽的通知 is real, I have nothing to prove the website is by the chinese government, it just stuffing some Chinese characters, same the coin, the oval, or something. The coin, the oval, or something can be fake not by government's evidence (your word, I guess). So, my chinese government website can be fake by me, like your File:Sample haikou seal.jpg, then same reason, why you believe website is real and the coin, the oval, or something is fake?--Iflwlou (talk) 18:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. Maybe I have not been clear. The authenticity of the image is in doubt. I do not have to prove that it is fake. You have to prove that it is real. If you cannot do that, then we must assume it is a private artistic work and thus can then never be in Wikipedia articles and is a copyright violation at Wikicommons. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- My reference is show the city emblem relief on coin, and Chinese characters caption on the coin just prove it is make by Chinese government, and you ignore it. I don't think website is only way to proof, and my photo enough to prove this, not need to find the evidence of evidence.--Iflwlou (talk) 17:43, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry. Maybe I have not been clear. The authenticity of the image is in doubt. I do not have to prove that it is fake. You have to prove that it is real. If you cannot do that, then we must assume it is a private artistic work and thus can then never be in Wikipedia articles and is a copyright violation at Wikicommons. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- So why you sure I give you the website 中共中央办公厅、国务院办公厅关于禁止自行制作和使用地方旗、徽的通知 is real, I have nothing to prove the website is by the chinese government, it just stuffing some Chinese characters, same the coin, the oval, or something. The coin, the oval, or something can be fake not by government's evidence (your word, I guess). So, my chinese government website can be fake by me, like your File:Sample haikou seal.jpg, then same reason, why you believe website is real and the coin, the oval, or something is fake?--Iflwlou (talk) 18:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
- Iflwlou, my friend, it is not even a coin. It is oval. The obverse says "HAI KOU" and nothing more. No Chinese characters, nothing. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:00, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, Iflwlou:
- 1. Your reference is the source itself. It is not a reliable source. It is a coin selling site.
- 2. Chinese characters on the coin do not prove it was made by the Chinese government.
- 3. Can you show me this image anywhere other than at this coin selling site?
- 4. Other sites that say "showing an emblem is not permitted" does not make this emblem authentic.
- 5. Why do you even want this image to remain at Wikicommons? It can never, ever, ever, be used in articles while there is no reliable source to say it is authentic. It has no use here unless proof of authenticity can be found.
- 6. Right now, with no proof of authenticity, it is, by default, a copyright violation.
- Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:23, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
- Re Anna:
- 1. When Chinese government cancel and hidden in secret whole China executive city emblem, it main can't be in executive way find the evidence. I don't think a coin selling site is not a reliable source, because I not sent the photo in Wikicommons, but reference the object in the photo.
- 2. So English characters can prove it was made by the Chinese government?
- 3. No, because Chinese government hidden in secret whole China city emblem very well, may be I can find it, be I will make for a long time.
- 4. So I find a photo to proof it.
- 5. Because I don't agree with your reason for deletion, you initially tagged speedy, than I no time and no way to contradict too. And it is authentic exist in my reference, and you choose ignore it.
- 6. So, your conclusion not established.--Iflwlou (talk) 16:24, 8 February 2015 (UTC)
- We are going round in circles here. I have nothing further to say. If this image is not deleted, I will watch where it is used and remove it from any articles it is in. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- Oh I see, discussion is no using, your opinion is power then deletion requests. You think to delete this, even reserved are not allowed others to use this (your word, I guess).--Iflwlou (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- Forgive me. I was not clear. I mean that I have nothing further to add in this debate. If you have something new to discuss regarding this, please say, otherwise, I must leave it to others or the closer to judge.
- Oh I see, discussion is no using, your opinion is power then deletion requests. You think to delete this, even reserved are not allowed others to use this (your word, I guess).--Iflwlou (talk) 16:52, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
- We are going round in circles here. I have nothing further to say. If this image is not deleted, I will watch where it is used and remove it from any articles it is in. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:32, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
- As for removing it from articles if it is allowed to remain at commons, yes, I will do that. However, others are permitted to put it back, including you. Then, a talk page discussion must take place to decide whether or not it should remain in the article. Honestly, it has almost no chance of being accepted in articles. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- OK, Dear Anna, if file is no delete, I will see you in Wikipedia talk page again.--Iflwlou (talk) 11:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, my friend. :) 223.199.66.121 05:03, 17 February 2015 (UTC) (Anna)
- OK, Dear Anna, if file is no delete, I will see you in Wikipedia talk page again.--Iflwlou (talk) 11:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- As for removing it from articles if it is allowed to remain at commons, yes, I will do that. However, others are permitted to put it back, including you. Then, a talk page discussion must take place to decide whether or not it should remain in the article. Honestly, it has almost no chance of being accepted in articles. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
- Delete
Unless its authenticity can be proven, it should be deleted. To be honest, it doesn't really look like the typical emblem of a Chinese prefecture. I think this might the official seal of Haikou, but I'm not sure. Gautehuus (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)- I retract my vote. Gautehuus (talk) 02:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . JuTa 08:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- borderline case. I'm follwing more Iflwlou aguments than Anna Frodesiaks. --JuTa 20:05, 4 March 2015 (UTC)