Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2015/04/13
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
I own this image and do not authorize its use. Lurker1589 (talk) 21:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- Actually, as the photographer, I own the copyright to this image. Morbidthoughts (talk) 00:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: revenge DR as his copyvio upload was deleted, user warned for vandalism Denniss (talk) 12:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
The image name is misspelled - correct version ("Kopgalis" instead of "Kopgailis") here: Image:Klaipėda Kopgalis muzea bieno - fiŝista domo.jpg -- ThomasPusch 21:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC) (the uploader)
Deleted. Please use {{bad name}} for errors in images's names. Axxgreazz (talk) 03:54, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Delete - this image serves no purpose and it is unused in all wikimedia projects. therefore it must be deleted. Oren neu dag 11:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, out of scope. The missing description and categories arise the question whether the "self made" comment is true. --32X 19:13, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- Deleted 32X 14:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
copyright violation, OTRS Ticket#: 2007120210010511 Gribeco 03:12, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Delete all of these. I don't know what the OTRS ticket says, but I would think these are copyvios from [1]. Lupo 07:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Discussion moved to Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Anne-Sophie Pic sepia.jpg
Kept, with correct licensing. Quadell (talk) 13:46, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. /Lokal_Profil 12:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 12:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
lack of license 83.20.128.245 19:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm a new Commons user and I admit I didn't know that not all files from foreign Wikipedia projects can be uploaded to Commons and used in other Wikipedia projects. Sorry for my mistake. Please delete the file (I do not know how to do it) Simoneo 19:56, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. No licence. -- Cecil 13:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:01, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:35, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Dieses Bild stellt eine massive Beleidigung und Verunglimpfung einer lebenden Person dar. Die Assoziierung des Herrn Schäuble mit Mördern, Folterern und generell Schwerstverbrechern halte ich für unangebracht für eine Enzyklopädie. Ich bitte daher diese Geschmacklosigkeit zu entsorgen. Weissbier 10:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Discussion at the base image, Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Stasi 2.0.JPG. Lupo 11:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:01, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
NO COM:FOP in Dubai or the United Arab Emirates. Leoboudv (talk) 00:14, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Keep Withdrawn by the nominator. --Leoboudv (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
FOP violation. Mass deletion request page here: Commons:Deletion_requests/Burj_Khalifa [chinneeb|talk] 11:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Closed to keep discussion in one place. Jafeluv (talk) 10:37, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
Subject was born 1893, and appears to be in 30's - 40's in this picture. It's unlikely the author died before 1937 --Patstuart 23:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence to support copyright claim; sourced only to secondary copyrighted site. -- Infrogmation 01:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 16:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
This item is an item that many millions of people in the world hold sacred. The design is copyrighted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's use is controled by said church, and the exibition of it is a voilation of the patent they hold on said item.
- Please use Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Garment.jpg for any discussions /Lokal_Profil 01:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
This item is an item that many millions of people in the world hold sacred. The design is copyrighted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it's use is controled by said church, and the exibition of it is a voilation of the patent they hold on said item.
- Please use Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Garment.jpg for any discussions /Lokal_Profil 01:15, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
orhpan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimorsitanos (talk • contribs) 16:56, May 3, 2008 (UTC)
Deleted as duplicated file by User:Zirland on 8 May 2008. --Spiritia 10:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Low resolution suggests a video capture - no exif - uploaders history at vi looks a bit suspect. Megapixie 13:29, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm confused, what's the problem? If we do remove it, what do we replace it with? 12.210.215.90 06:06, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Deleted No original source given at vi:Hình:Pic3.jpg. --GeorgHH • talk 14:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligable for copyright". possibly PD for other (non stated) rweasons. /Lokal_Profil 08:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 08:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. Per nom. Reasons for alleged public domain are not available. Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. /Lokal_Profil 14:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 14:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. As with Commons:Deletion requests/Image:1952 kokuji0003.png Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. /Lokal_Profil 15:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 15:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. As with Commons:Deletion requests/Image:1952 kokuji0003.png Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Blurred nonsense 217.68.187.94 17:29, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete out of scope. Durova 19:36, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 22:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
Delete No longer need we have Image:I-275 (MI).svg include metric version.--Freewayguy 16:21, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
orhpan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimorsitanos (talk • contribs) 16:56, May 3, 2008 (UTC)
Deleted as duplicated file by User:Zirland on 8 May 2008. --Spiritia 10:41, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Without a description of who this person is, this image is outside Project scope, and without a permission by this person it is likely to violate personality rights. High on a tree 22:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete if not used soon. Otherwise, if used, tag with {{userpageimage}}. Patstuart 15:46, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. Still unused. Lupo 10:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. /Lokal_Profil 16:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 16:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. As with Commons:Deletion requests/Image:1952 kokuji0003.png Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 14:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligable for copyright". Possibly PD for other (non stated) reasons. /Lokal_Profil 08:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 08:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. As with Commons:Deletion requests/Image:1952 kokuji0003.png Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Delete:This image is exact copy of Image:I-240 (OK).svg--SoCal55 23:51, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
- Delete (image uploader), Image:I-240 (OK).svg is more accurate to ODOT guidelines and follows the more recent naming convention. —Scott5114↗ 02:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
has been marked as a copyright violation User:Cezary_p (talk) 04:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
13:32, April 2, 2008 Zirland (Talk | contribs | Block) deleted "Image:Johny Deep Madame Tussaud.jpg" (In category Copyright violations; no license) (restore) – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
Images of signs taken by User:Neta
[edit]I understand that there is copyright on the text on the signs. User:Neta 12:42, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- Image:David Ben Goryon Sign.JPG
- Image:Sign about the mosdot Haleumiyim.JPG
- Image:Malha Sign.JPG
- Image:Hamosadot Haleumiyim Sign.JPG
- Image:Sign Hamosadot Haleumiyim.JPG.
- Image:Weizmann Sign.JPG
- Image:Yad ben Zvi's sign.JPG
- Deletion fix per user on User talk:Neta. Deadstar 13:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Doublette. All churches removed to Category:Churches in Landkreis Heilbronn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moros (talk • contribs) 8 April 2008, 14:03 (UTC)
- There were still 9 pending, which I myself moved. Maybe other people still use it, better be kept redirected than deleted. --Spiritia 16:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
has been marked as a copyright violation User:Cezary_p (talk) 04:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
13:32, April 2, 2008 Zirland (Talk | contribs | Block) deleted "Image:Nicole Kidman Madame Tussauds.jpg" (In category Copyright violations; no license) (restore) – Mike.lifeguard | @en.wb 02:25, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
This category duplicates Puma concolor. Felis concolor is the old scientic name of Puma concolor.--Abujoy (talk) 07:53, 23 September 2008 (UTC)
- He is right. The creator of the category.--Mickey-B (talk) 18:12, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. Martin H. (talk) 18:29, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
fghkl^$yuoip*$ 41.202.86.153 13:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: No reason for deletion given. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
fffvbgmbbb,nn, .jç,.;m.n kbmbnn,nnn.n.nn.n.n.n.n..n,n,n,nnvjmnbmbmbmbmbmbmbmbmbmbmm 177.45.81.52 22:12, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:52, 5 September 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
Wrong name - category renamed. Traumrune (talk) 21:10, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Comment The above text was placed at Commons:Deletion requests/File:Prohibited Items.jpg where it was obviously misplaced. I don't know if the above statement is accurate. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Moved to Category:Wallace fountains in France. --rimshottalk 16:10, 31 October 2012 (UTC)
Tagged as {{PD-USGov}}, but also claimed to be the uploader's own work. The uploader appears to speak Portuguese, so I'm not sure this is correct. —LX (talk, contribs) 19:14, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Delete there is no evidence and no source as a work of the US Federal Government. --Vriullop 12:23, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Deleted. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:59, 15 June 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. Also iamge description seems to mention fair use. /Lokal_Profil 16:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 16:07, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. As with Commons:Deletion requests/Image:1952 kokuji0003.png Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 14:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Uploads by Snoopybergen
[edit]I do not believe that the below images of a Dutch actor/drag artist are self made.
These are also user's only uploads. You can view all of them in Category:Richard Dreise. -- Deadstar (msg) 20:54, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
Deleted. Wknight94 talk 22:26, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
Offensive and prive of sense - 151.57.194.111 17:00, January 11, 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Documents real life. It makes sense. --User:G.dallorto 15:02, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Documents real life and a real social problem. You can't delete it just because you don't like it. It makes sense to keep it. --Grigio60 22:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Appears to be the logo of a football/soccer team (w:Guatemala Apertura 2007-08), and is thus not a free image. Giggy\Talk 07:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Logos are presumed non-free unless otherwise provided. -- RedCoat 12:21, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
Deleted per nom (and no source). -- Cecil 01:53, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
unintended duplicate by author —Preceding unsigned comment added by Montebianco (talk • contribs) 15:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC) (fixed DR... Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 16:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC))
Deleted. Lewis Collard! (hai thar, wut u doin) 16:57, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
Dublicate of Image:Комсомольск-на-Амуре Дом со шпилем.jpg with wrong name —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ingwar JR (talk • contribs) 04:05, June 16, 2008 (UTC)
Already deleted. Dupe of Image:Комсомольск-на-Амуре Дом со шпилем.jpg Lokal_Profil 18:37, 21 September 2008 (UTC)
The right Category is: Capitol Visitor Center --Druffeler (talk) 09:13, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Delete This is a typo and is empty, as all images are in the correctly-named Category:Capitol Visitor Center. Carl Lindberg (talk) 22:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
---
orhpan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dimorsitanos (talk • contribs) 17:17, May 3, 2008 (UTC)
Deleted as duplicated file by User:Zirland on 8 May 2008. --Spiritia 10:36, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
Not "ineligible for copyright". Possibly PD for other non-stated reasons though. /Lokal_Profil 16:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Lokal_Profil 16:00, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
- Delete the image is created in 1942, still copyrighted. Wooyi 21:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted. Ecemaml talk to me/habla conmigo 13:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
The photographer hasn't provided any copyright tag for the photograph. See COM:ART#Photograph of an old coin found on the Internet. Stefan4 (talk) 14:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
A copyright tag was provided. --Stefan4 (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Image has many duplicates on the Internet https://www.tineye.com/search/be93aa9ba3677448d7e9cba8e3317382ea985653/ , such files are not eligible for redistribution on Wikimedia, please see license policies. Hnapel (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 16:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Clearly licensed by Getty Images, don't mess with large press / media organizations on wikimedia please http://www.gettyimages.nl/detail/nieuwsfoto%27s/actor-christian-bale-arrive-at-the-los-angeles-premiere-nieuwsfotos/80001538 Hnapel (talk) 15:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 16:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Il file non rappresenta un Conus mercati. Il Conus fotografato è un Conus globoponderosus (Sacco, 1893), una specie molto meno nota. Ho mandato un'email all'autore attraverso l'apposito link della sua pagina, con cui potrete confrontarvi. Alessandro Zanzi (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Renamed. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
la page affecte sur les comportements des enfants 41.137.57.129 16:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Per COM:CENSORSHIP, a file is not deleted solely on the grounds that it may not be "child-friendly" or that it may cause offence to you or others. Betty Logan (talk) 16:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Non-sense DR (and vandalism). Commons is not censored. --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
this media file is Not educationall or useful at all it's just a Pornographic video and should be removed Motawer.Dev (talk) 15:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- The fact it is pornographic does not come into it. If it were not useful then the media would not be used by the various Wikipedias and at least two language editions use the media file. Whether it is educational or not is subjective, but I would say hosting classic films that have fallen into the public domain is a credible use of the Commons. Betty Logan (talk) 18:44, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- if anyone uploaded their amateur porn videos which might be free to use (public domain) commons will become a porn site, and yes hosting films that have fallen into the public domain is a good use of commons but only if the file has any educational value, and the reason commons exists is [Educational & Useful].--Motawer.Dev (talk) 23:21, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
- The file is useful because it is used as a supporting material on articles about the film. Its presence and purpose on Commons is no different to that of File:Birth of a Nation (1915).webm and File:Night of the Living Dead (1968).webm. The only reason you have singled it out is because it is pornographic so I suggest you review COM:CENSORSHIP. Betty Logan (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
- As for a supporting material a Trailer would be fairly enough File:Debbie Does Dallas, 1978, Edited Trailer.webm or File:Debbie Does Dallas, 1978, trailer.webm. As for my reasons, being pornographic is one but not all, I don't see any educational value that this file can add to the community or to the entire world, it's not an illustration of something or has any valuable info, even when considering the broad meaning of "Educational" the file does not provide knowledge nor it is instructional or informative. Motawer.Dev (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- The educational value is fairly obvious: readers are able to view the work that is being discussed. In that regard it offers the same value as any other classic film in the public domain hosted on the Commons. Your agenda here is transparent: the fact the film is pornographic isn't "one of" your reasons, it is the sole reason. Betty Logan (talk) 22:25, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- As for a supporting material a Trailer would be fairly enough File:Debbie Does Dallas, 1978, Edited Trailer.webm or File:Debbie Does Dallas, 1978, trailer.webm. As for my reasons, being pornographic is one but not all, I don't see any educational value that this file can add to the community or to the entire world, it's not an illustration of something or has any valuable info, even when considering the broad meaning of "Educational" the file does not provide knowledge nor it is instructional or informative. Motawer.Dev (talk) 10:04, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
- The file is useful because it is used as a supporting material on articles about the film. Its presence and purpose on Commons is no different to that of File:Birth of a Nation (1915).webm and File:Night of the Living Dead (1968).webm. The only reason you have singled it out is because it is pornographic so I suggest you review COM:CENSORSHIP. Betty Logan (talk) 23:31, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
Excuse me because I failed to understand your definition of "Educational", the way you describe it seems like a "reference", and if it's only that then a Trailer is super enough, while the meaning I'm referring to is 'Educational', if it was the MakeOf the film then I would say it has some educational value because it show how films of that kind are made. But this case is not the file's not informative nor instructional or even provide any useful knowledge and in addition to all this it's Pornographic -Motawer.Dev (talk) 11:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - as much as I don't love this keep !vote being one of the few deletion discussions I've participated in on commons, this is clearly in scope as a well known film that is the subject of wikipedia articles, etc. No other policy-based reason to delete given. — Rhododendrites talk | 04:05, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per COM:INUSE on fr:Debbie_Does_Dallas. d:Q579826 lists 12 articles about this movie, that meet criteria of notability. The movie should be added to all that do not include it. --Jarekt (talk) 02:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Keep - per COM:INUSE. Wikicology (talk) 21:35, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
- Delete I strongly vote for delete, because if we kept them with reasons such COM:INUSE then no body will complain if someone wrote an article on Wikipedia about self cannibalism (or anything disgusting ) and by chance he found a video on commons of someone who cut his arm and ate it or chewed it while it's still connected, so he used the file to support his article, or an article about Self-Nutrition, and of course a file is always ready for the case showing someone eating his feces, or anything disgusting, Sorry for the words but you can imagine. And this case is not different from the above cases: the file is In Use and Commons is not Censored and lastly the file has no Licensing Issues. the point is if there is no law (yet) against killing someone on the moon, it does not mean you can, and if a file is intended for adults, then it should be uploaded where it belongs not here, I never imagined a world famous website intended to teach the world and spread knowledge to host such files, never in a million year, I wonder if people who donate to Wikimedia foundation know about the rules here !!. anyway sorry if crossed the grey line but I think I made myself clear. DroidPedia (talk) 13:37, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure how seriously this comment should be taken, given its content and the fact that the user has 0 other edits, but Wikipedia is not censored, and neither is Commons. This is a film that has been the subject of a lot of coverage and is therefore an encyclopedic subject. That it contains explicit content is not reason to delete. Nor is what someone might upload in some ridiculous hypothetical. See COM:SCOPE and COM:NOT. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:51, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry if I sound rude but you should take my comment very seriously, and about the 0 edits, I've made some edits at Wikipedia but only as visitor I never thought about creating an account as my contributions are very rare, but I created an account just to contribute to the deletion of this file (and similar ones) So I guess this is the only good thing came from it. I work as an IT specialist at the Municipality Public Library in which we provide aside from local books more than 80 computer with free and unlimited access to online libraries and useful websites such as e-mail services and of course can't forget all Wikimedia projects, even in summer we get some visitors and last Saturday I was doing some minor computer maintenance I saw a 13 maybe 12 years old kid watching something, the poor kid just run out of luck because when I turned my eyes toward the screen I saw it clearly (a *** and ***), the kid was playing nothing but this file, I was so angry and gave him a hell of a slap but the kid didn't cry instead he run away with a creepy smile on his face, I could only imagine what was in his little head maybe :"I found a treasure", and when I checked the browser history the kid entered wikimedia.org then commons and searched for "porn video" (I'm sure this is universal in all languages) and I'm also sure the kid did not understand what they said in the film because he barely know French (English has to wait for few other years), the kid didn't saw the film on Wikipedia or any other page but Commons, you get the idea right?. anyway I hope their parent don't sue me because I provided access to digital pornographic content to minor (which is forbidden not only in my country ) and here it's forbidden even for adults, even if it was unintentionally from my side but it is considered lack of responsibility and professionalism, Now I think I should start doing some filtering either search for files and block links one by one (which is really Stupid) or block commons.wikimedia.org (this is also a bad idea) or lastly ask people here reasonably, logically and politely to delete the files. I think this a very long comment so I will end it with: I remember reading about a law project in the USA (about 2003) to criminalize providing pornographic materials to juveniles with prior knowledge of their legal situation this goes also for websites based in the USA and that they should inform the visitor to not enter if he's under 18. DroidPedia (talk) 00:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure how seriously this comment should be taken, given its content and the fact that the user has 0 other edits, but Wikipedia is not censored, and neither is Commons. This is a film that has been the subject of a lot of coverage and is therefore an encyclopedic subject. That it contains explicit content is not reason to delete. Nor is what someone might upload in some ridiculous hypothetical. See COM:SCOPE and COM:NOT. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:51, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
- DroidPedia, I understand it is a problem, but we can not help you with it. Commons is not censored and it does have a lot of material which might not be OK for minors to watch. And if they want to find porn I am dure they will find it, if not here than on other sites. Check out w:Porn 2.0 article for ideas of other sites to either block or ask to delete their content. --Jarekt (talk) 03:19, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks Jarekt, But the listed websites are intended for adults and they announce it publicly and loudly “we provide adults content only”, and most of them prompt the visitor with a message to either Leave as this is only an Adult place or to enter at his own risk, and some of them use age verification system, all this just to be on the brightest side of the law, and honestly I can't got to a porn site and ask them to erase all the data in their server's hard drives, though I wish if it could work, and for me I'm running a White listed Firewall, The world is blocked except for the good websites, and I had no issues with that list except for two cases, the first with Internet Archive and the last with Commons. the two cases use Educational flag and hide mines in their fields. Look I don't mean to be mean or anything, I really like the whole Idea of Wikimedia and I learned a lot from here, But I think it could be perfect if only they did something about this black spot, In fact I never saw any kind of signs or anything that say "shocking images" at least except for once, it was an image hidden by a sign and I don't even remember whether it said shocking image or pornographic media, and if only they prompt the visitor with a warning message, I wouldn't be angry. and again I think there is a law against providing pornographic materials to minors with prior knowledge of their age. --DroidPedia (talk) 10:40, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- DroidPedia, I understand it is a problem, but we can not help you with it. Commons is not censored and it does have a lot of material which might not be OK for minors to watch. And if they want to find porn I am dure they will find it, if not here than on other sites. Check out w:Porn 2.0 article for ideas of other sites to either block or ask to delete their content. --Jarekt (talk) 03:19, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Kept: COM:INUSE (used in fr wikipedia main namespace) and no consensus to delete the file. If there is evidence that the file has been hosted in violation of US law please contact the Wikimedia Foundation (in his role as hosting provider). --Steinsplitter (talk) 12:16, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Hardcore-Pornography, no educational purpose TünnesUndSchäl (talk) 22:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jarekt (talk) 03:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Former nominations for a deletion argued that "Debbie Does Dallas" endanger the well-being of children. That is right, but it is not the a discussion I'd like to start, as far as I know the community's point of view. The primary problem is the law! As you know, the open access to pornography without any check of the legal age is highly forbidden. A second argument is the educational purpose: "Debbie Does Dallas" is a porn video, not a documentary. You could argue about the historical porns you could find here, but a full porn of 1978 hasn't any educational purpose! Some aruge, that the french wikipedia would use it. In fact, the open access of porn is higly forbidden in France. So first: there is a legal ban on porn in the internet, and second: there is no educational purpose. So why retain a porn on wikimedia commons? TünnesUndSchäl (talk) 11:38, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep: Wikimedia projects are hosted in the United States, not France. Commons is not censored. There is no legal requirement in United States to check age for pornography as far as I'm aware: Such extraordinary claim needs extraordinary references to back it up. The work is in use at Wikimedia projects, so it falls within Commons' project scope per COM:INUSE. These arguments have been previously iterated. 80.221.159.67 12:13, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment Reiterating what was said by User:Steinsplitter in closing the second deletion nomination: If there is evidence that the file has been hosted in violation of US law please contact the Wikimedia Foundation (in his role as hosting provider).
80.221.159.67 12:16, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Comment I recommend imposing a 1-year moratorium on deletion nominations. Three nominations in a 2-month period is an abuse of the process and just wastes people's time. If the circumstances change sufficiently then it can be reviewed a year from now, or if the legal context changes the foundation can delete it at its own discretion. Betty Logan (talk) 12:49, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep So TünnesUndSchäl, a user that [:[Category_talk:Females_having_sex|"been irritated of a photograph showing a close-up of a penetration in the german Wikipedia"]] - by the way what kind of articles were you reading to appear this kind of imagery? I ask this as i find odd what kind of article would had this kind of imagery except ones related to sex and pornography? - after your first (and third deletion request about this file) not happy with the closure, you open a new deletion request only 2 months have passed, with the very same arguments and make several wild claims without backing them up with facts and laws. You, that only "contribute" with deletion requests of this kind of files, as you are on a moral crusade per your own words as you asked "Is there any cleanup of this category planned?", should know what the law of the land is, beggining per Miller v. California.
File in use so in scope. This movie has articles on 12 languages in Wikipedia, so educational and " it is regarded as one of the most important releases during the so-called "Golden Age of Porn",[5] and remains one of the best-known pornographic films" per english Wikipedia article.Tm (talk) 22:06, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
Kept: the file has been in used continuously in the article for almost a year, so we don't have to look at the 'scope' question. Laws on child protection may play a role, but this is not handled by our DR procedure. If you think there is a legal problem with the file, please contact legal at wikimedia dot org. --Jcb (talk) 09:15, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
As with Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge March 2015.jpg, this image has an MOD News License and is not released under the OGL. DrKiernan (talk) 18:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Withdrawn. The metadata has a different license to the source page, and the MOD cannot withdraw one license if it has already been released under it. DrKiernan (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Photograph, uploaded in error, was deleted from the MoD's image library because the MoD interprets the "personal data" restriction of the Open Government Licence to mean that photographs where an individual is recognisable cannot be OGL.[1] Firebrace (talk) 15:11, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- So was it uploaded under OGL or not? -mattbuck (Talk) 18:06, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- "Personal data in the [image]" is not covered by the Open Government Licence.[2] Firebrace (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- There is only one identifiable person here. Does it come down to whether the Queen consented to be photographed? Jonathunder (talk) 19:26, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- It's whether she consented to the image being licensed under OGL. Since there are no other photographs of the Queen in the OGL section of the MoD's image library, when there could potentially be hundreds, the answer to that question is probably not. Firebrace (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Delete The image has not been removed from the library, just moved. It can be seen here. The licence is now the Crown MOD News Licence. We could argue that the original licence was irrevocable, but I'm not sure this is the image to take a stand on, nor is there a crafty pattern of licence changes intending to undo lots of public domain material. --Fæ (talk) 21:10, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Even if it was OGL, personal data is exempt from the licence. We'd have to blur her face... Firebrace (talk) 21:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- It's an overly hypothetical case, so let's not dig too far, or try to set a precedent where we need not. If the MOD wanted to put a portrait of a public figure as OGL, I'd say that was their choice and we could safely presume that they had pinned down any potential personal data or consent details before publication. At the end of the day, the MOD is a Crown agent, so when it comes to portraits of members of the Royal family, the choices of the Crown are respectful of the Crown, by definition... --Fæ (talk) 21:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Even if it was OGL, personal data is exempt from the licence. We'd have to blur her face... Firebrace (talk) 21:17, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Nonsense, I actually got them to fix their licence last year and also, if you look at the Exif, the image (usage terms) is under OGL which supersedes any other stupid licence, it will apply to any other images added from their after January 2017, but not before it... Go do some real work, I have already gone through this fight before, if you do not understand OGL, learn it, there is no personal data in the image (which includes documents which are not allowed, that is the bloody damn Queen, not some random soldier whose identity must not be compromised)..pathetic, didn't expect this from Fae of all people.--Stemoc 00:39, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
- Defence Imagery website contains very few OGL photos of any person's face. It's not about protecting the identity of elite troops, but complying with the law. MoD in May 2014, before this photo was taken: "The Open Government Licence is not suited for use with “Personal Data”. The presence of Personal Data means that at least one individual is recognisable within an image."[3] It was clearly published under the wrong licence, a mistake that has been rectified, and while the MoD may be unable to revoke the licence, the photo still contains personal data (the face of a living person, who is the main focus of the image, attending an event to which the general public had no access, meaning she wasn't in a public place), which isn't covered by the OGL. Journalistic work is exempt from the Data Protection Act, and it's for this reason the MoD can release the photo under the News Licence without the Queen's consent. TL;DR: Does the photo contain personal data? Yes. Is personal data covered by the licence? Not automatically. Was consent obtained from the individual to release her image under the OGL? Probably not. (Who's going to trifle the Queen over a stupid thing like this?) Is the Commons in breach of the licence terms and conditions? Most likely. Firebrace (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, but do you know what "Personal Data" is? If you go through their site, you will come across images of military personnels with their name and face and sometime ranks shown, there are also legal documents which are uploaded to the site, they all fall under "Personal Data" ..The Picture of the Queen is not part of that licencing, last i checked, the picture of the queen has no other recognizable faces and the queen was attending a public event, not a private one, there is no one in the background whose face needs to be blurred or private information removed/redacted. If You still have an issue with this, go through all of Fae's uploads from that site, they all carry a "MoD NEWS" licensing in their EXIF, why don't you start tagging them for deletion as most of these are pictures of Military Personnel doing their job..and again, the Queen's image was uploaded under OGL (its clear as day in the exif), if the licenses have changed now, it does not matter as the original licence stands, anyhow, you can't download the image anyways even when you click download in the link provided by Fae. The licences in the image is more important than where the image is taken from and even then, the image is still under OGL--Stemoc 01:08, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
- Defence Imagery website contains very few OGL photos of any person's face. It's not about protecting the identity of elite troops, but complying with the law. MoD in May 2014, before this photo was taken: "The Open Government Licence is not suited for use with “Personal Data”. The presence of Personal Data means that at least one individual is recognisable within an image."[3] It was clearly published under the wrong licence, a mistake that has been rectified, and while the MoD may be unable to revoke the licence, the photo still contains personal data (the face of a living person, who is the main focus of the image, attending an event to which the general public had no access, meaning she wasn't in a public place), which isn't covered by the OGL. Journalistic work is exempt from the Data Protection Act, and it's for this reason the MoD can release the photo under the News Licence without the Queen's consent. TL;DR: Does the photo contain personal data? Yes. Is personal data covered by the licence? Not automatically. Was consent obtained from the individual to release her image under the OGL? Probably not. (Who's going to trifle the Queen over a stupid thing like this?) Is the Commons in breach of the licence terms and conditions? Most likely. Firebrace (talk) 16:00, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
References
- ↑ Defence Intellectual Property Rights (January 2017). MOD Crown Copyright Licensing Information. "To comply with the Data Protection Act 1998, permission to publish or use imagery which reveals personal data (for example by showing an identifiable person) will not be provided unless consent has first been obtained from any individuals who have personal data in the imagery."
- ↑ Open Government Licence for public sector information. The National Archives.
- ↑ Ministry of Defence (May 2014). Copyright Licensing Information.
Kept: The OGL is perpetual (ie irrevocable). I don't see that a photograph, taken in public, of one of the most widely photographed people in the world, is "personal data". . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:12, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
hideously outside project scope DS (talk) 19:27, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 06:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
someone trying to spam commons with a wikipedia entry DS (talk) 02:18, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:17, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal photo Taivo (talk) 08:55, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
File:Biografia.jpg DjO$OMusic (talk) 19:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Closed: Changed to speedy. Also, please protect this page, very common filename that has been abused. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . Krd 07:30, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Looks like a previously released album cover, unless there's explicit info about the copyright this should not be re-uploaded to wikimedia. 2001:980:59FB:1:84B8:F6C3:784C:7CF1 12:38, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violation. JuTa 10:26, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
The quoted source has an explicit copyright notice attached to the picture : (C) Orsola Mema by Class Photography, hence this is not elgibile for redistribution on wikimedia. Hnapel (talk) 14:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete COM:NETCOPYRIGHT. Please use {{Copyvio}} next time. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copyright violation. JuTa 10:27, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
SVG available as File:Coat of arms of Syria.svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: ... an no license at all. JuTa 10:30, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
SVG available as File:Coat of arms of Egypt.svg. Fry1989 eh? 20:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: ... an no license at all. JuTa 10:29, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
poster fair use pictures are not allowed Motopark (talk) 15:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 08:34, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
{{Delete |reason= |subpage= |day=12 |month=April |year=2015 }}
Deleted: by User:Dennis. JuTa 14:06, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Matiia (talk) 00:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The original image can be found here: http://www.wallpaperseries.com/celebs/shilpa-shetty-hd-desktop-wallpaper.html That site says in the Terms & Conditions (at the bottom, click) that the pictures on the site belong to their owners, and cannot be used for commercial purposes, so I think Commons cannot host this image. Dontreader (talk) 00:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
File:El error que cometen los y las periodistas en la investigación de reportajes de la economía social y solidaria?.pdf
[edit]not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sunil Raika (talk · contribs)
[edit]not within scope
Rosario Berganza 00:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Harshs.park (talk · contribs)
[edit]collection of photos of questionable copyright status
- File:Alhar Bikaneri Memory Function.jpg
- File:ALHAD BIKARNERI NEWS2.jpg
- File:ALHAD BIKANERI ON STAGE NEW.jpg
- File:ALHAD BIKANERI BOOKS.jpg
- File:Alhar Bikaneri Mahamoorkh Kavi Sammelan Jaipur- 2000.jpg
- File:Alhar Bikaneri Mahamoorkh Kavi Sammelan Jaipur-1996.jpg
- File:Alhar Bikaneri in Chakkalas 1973.jpg
- File:LAST.JPG
- File:Alhar Bikaneri poet.jpg
- File:Last Lines.jpg
- File:Alhad Bikaneri in his Last Days.jpg
- File:Alhar Bikaneri in Maha Moorkh Kavi sammelan jaipur.jpg
- File:For Aditya.jpg
- File:Alhad Bikaneri & OM Prakash Aaditya.jpg
- File:Alhad bikanei.jpg
- File:Alhad bikaneri 2.jpg
- File:Alhad bikaneri -1.jpg
- File:Alhad bikanei 1972.jpg
- File:Alhad bikaneri Hindi acadmey award.jpg
- File:Alhad bikaneri Kaka hathrasi award.jpg
- File:Alhad.jpg
- File:HAR HAAL MEI KHUSH HAIN.jpg
Rosario Berganza 00:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yann as no license. Well, there is a {{PD-Egypt}}, but its validity seems doubtfull. JuTa 03:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mollanayini (talk · contribs)
[edit]out of project scope
- File:تابلو سردر دفتر شادی و غم و اندیشه.JPG
- File:ماه زمضان.JPG
- File:عقد نامه ازدواج موقت.JPG
- File:محرم و صفر.JPG
- File:اطلاعیۀاقتصادی.jpg
- File:تربيت فرزند.JPG
- File:اطلاعیه توانمندیهای روحانیت شیعه 13920303.JPG
Motopark (talk) 03:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Music bio1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF. Promo set for en:Daley (musician) uploaded in a row on 04.04.-06.04.2015, grabbed from TV sources (from The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon: File:Daley Fallon4.jpg + File:Daley & The Roots 1.jpg + etc., see also Facebook 01.2015) and Internet source (like File:Daley live at 930 Club - Washington, DC.jpg + crop File:Daley 930 Club - DC.jpg versus http://thekey.xpn.org/tag/daley/ (2014, gallery, credit: "Photo by Cameron Pollack", Copyright WXPN) = http://thekey.xpn.org/aatk/files/2014/04/Daley-16.jpg (exif available).
- File:Daley & The Roots 2.jpg
- File:Daley wireless london.jpg
- File:Daley & Gorillaz perform.jpg
- File:Daley at Wired 2011.jpg
- File:Daley, Damon Albarn, Jamie Hewlett.jpg
- File:Daley Highline Ballroom NYC 2.jpg
- File:Daley 930 Club - DC.jpg
- File:Daley live at 930 Club - Washington, DC.jpg
- File:Daley Wireless 2013 4.jpg
- File:Daley Highline Ballroom NYC2.jpg
- File:Daley Highline Ballroom NYC.jpg
- File:Daley Fallon4.jpg
- File:Daley & The Roots 1.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 08:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Music bio1 (talk · contribs)
[edit]A series of promotional uploads, only two images have camera metadata, the rest are of variable sizes, lighting, styles, and etc. showing probable sources COM:COPYVIOs not own work. E.G. The image from the talk show is certainly not own work and also displays a book cover.
- File:Daley TV 2.jpg
- File:Daley NYC.jpg
- File:Daley Live.jpg
- File:Daley Shoreditch House.jpg
- File:Daley Wireless.jpg
- File:Daley Gorillaz.jpg
- File:Daley TV 1.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photos are out of project scope. Unidentified, probably non-notable people. Taivo (talk) 08:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The photographer Fabio Nunes aka Zima is not the uploader. I suspect the photographer's copyright violation. OTRS-permission from the photographer is needed. This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:30, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Low-quality "home-porn" shots, uploaded in a row on 05.04.2015, mostly grabbed from Internet (example). Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used.
- File:Bunny38 hairy pussy.jpg
- File:Bonnie 38 hairy pussy.jpg
- File:Bonnie38 hairy pussy.JPG
- File:Bonnie38-hairy pussy.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 08:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal files are out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 08:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I do not understand the description, but probably this is violation of artist's copyright. The photo is probably taken in such country, where freedom of panorama is missing. Taivo (talk) 08:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
picture collection some kid of poster Motopark (talk) 09:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Isn't it derivative work of copyrighted art? Taivo (talk) 09:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Telecaster (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Promo shots for Japanese band en:Porno Graffitti uploaded in a row on 31.03.2015 which were most likely all grabbed from Internet, like File:Porno Graffitti 2013.jpg --> http://www.pornograffitti.jp/info/?category=release = http://www.pornograffitti.jp/info/images/%E3%81%93%E3%82%8C%E3%81%A7%E3%81%99.jpg (last modified: 2013) or File:Porno Graffitti 2008.jpg grabbed from Google.
- File:Porno Graffitti 2004.jpeg
- File:Porno Graffitti 2008.jpg
- File:Porno Graffitti 2013.jpg
- File:Pornograffitti ax2013 4.jpg
- File:Pornograffitti ax2013 2.jpg
- File:Pornograffitti ax2013 3.jpg
- File:Pornograffitti ax2013 1.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 09:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. As indicated by file title ("Captura de pantalla") screenshot from copyrighted source, like official https://www.facebook.com/DavidRazuMx/photos/a.756551874386017.1073741827.756547754386429/839218966119307/?type=1&theater (01.2015) Gunnex (talk) 09:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This the uploader's last remaining contribution. (S)He uploaded 4 album covers as own work and I deleted them speedily. This is small photo without metadata, so I doubt in own work. Can you upload a bigger version, for example, 2000×1500 pixels? Can you upload a version with EXIF data? Taivo (talk) 09:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The logo surpasses threshold of originality (look the bird in left side). OTRS-permission from blogger is needed. Also it is totally possible, that the logo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 09:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Amitie 10g as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Vandalism Taivo (talk) 09:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Speedy delete: Did you seen this user contributions? The two files uploaded are clearly vandalism. The first one has been speedily deleted. Why this file needs discussion in order to be deleted? Clearly vandalism and possibly copyvio. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The user uploaded 2 files. I deleted one as unused art of non-notable artist, but this ... I am not sure, I do not understand this language. Let somebody other decide, who understands this language. Taivo (talk) 18:23, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm native spanish speaker from Chile, and I understand this chilenism. The contents obviously are not related with the Human rights, and therefore is vandalism. Why doubt? --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:21, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: Clearly vandalism. -- Aisano (talk) 17:51, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This is routine request for small photo without metadata. Is the uploader really the photographer? Why the photo is so small? Can you upload a bigger version, for example, 2000×1500 pixels? Can you upload a version with EXIF data? Can you categorize the file correctly? This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. The image seems to come from here and to depict Максимов Игорь Владимирович (Maksimov Igor' Vladimiroviĉ) from ОДК. I think we cannot keep the picture without an OTRS confirmation. Besides, a description would be useful. -- Aisano (talk) 14:27, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope. Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I am aware this image has been nominated and deleted before, however it was swiped from a website, see the 16th picture in the slideshow at http://conpoema.org/?p=10154. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:39, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted Basvb (talk) 13:27, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Posters, permission needed, please see COM:OTRS.
- File:Plakat KUNST UND DRAMA Miles Davis.jpg
- File:KUNST UND DRAMA Nebeltanz.jpg
- File:Plakat von KUNST UND DRAMA zu OFFE.jpg
- File:Plakat KUNST UND DRAMA NÜRNBERG-NATUR.jpg
- File:Plakat KUNST UND DRAMA Ausstellung Rathaus 2011.jpg
- File:Plakat 1. DAVOSER KURZFILMNACHT mit Roland Eugen Beiküfner (2).jpg
Yann (talk) 10:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Taken with at least 12 different cameras or missing metadata, so unlikely to be own work. Some file pages also mention other photographers, but no permission. The OTRS ticket on File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner, Poster für einen Film in den Niederlanden.jpg is probably useless, as it does not mention an author or a license.
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner und Michael Elliott.jpg
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger, Autorin.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner 2020.jpg
- File:Kunstobjekt GELIEBTER WATZMANN von Roland Eugen Beiküfner.jpg
- File:Protest von Václav Havel KUNST UND DRAMA-Produktion.JPG
- File:DIE ZENSUR Roland Eugen Beiküfner.jpg
- File:FÜNF JAHRE.jpg
- File:Objekt MEERESRETTUNG.jpg
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger als Ina Wagner in DER PFAD.jpg
- File:UNO-ROLLER von Roland Eugen Beiküfner.jpg
- File:Isolde Holderied und Roland Beiküfner , Off-Road Event von Toyota.jpg
- File:Maximilian M. Altmannsberger.jpg
- File:Gerda Poppa.jpg
- File:MILES ODER DIE PENDELUHR AUS MONTREUX Szenenfoto der Theatergruppe KUNST UND DRAMA mit Roland Eugen Beiküfner und Jodok Lingg.jpg
- File:Beikuefner le corbusier.jpg
- File:Roland Beiküfner in FAUST-EIN AGENTENLEBEN als Prof. Dr. Karl-Heinz Buchholz.jpg
- File:Szene aus Theaterstück Paula Ludwig-Freundschaften und Wege mit Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger und Roland Eugen Beiküfner.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner schreibt das Drehbuch zu DER PFAD in Portugal.jpg
- File:Logo LE CORBUSIER BAUT BERLINER FLUGHAFEN.jpg
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann Grießinger in Paula Ludwig - Freundschaften und Wege.jpg
- File:Rudi Stohl und Schauspieler Roland Beiküfner bei der QUATTRO LEGENDE 2015.jpg
- File:Lawrence Davies Musiker in Shackleton Banjo oder Bibel 636 Tage im Eis.jpg
- File:Toyota Corolla E9 Rally.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner und Albert Summer besprechen den Hans Eschelbach - Pfad von Götzis nach Fraxern.jpg
- File:VERITAS LITERATURPREIS.tif
- File:Musiker James Michel.jpg
- File:KUNST UND DRAMA Menschenrechtspreis 2018.jpg
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger.jpg
- File:Szenenfoto Gisela Elsner Blickwinkel 2017.JPG
- File:William Becher - Leben und Werk in Lindau.jpg
- File:Paula Ludwig -Freundschaften und Wege.jpg
- File:Roland Beiküfner Deutscher Schauspieler.jpg
- File:KUNST UND DRAMA - Institut für theatralische Formen , Logo Foto Kunst und Drama.jpg
- File:Roland Beiküfner am Beginn seiner Motorsportlaufbahn im Alter von 12 Jahren auf dem Circiut Pomposa in Italien.jpg
- File:Objekt SPERRZONE von Roland Eugen Beiküfner 2017.jpg
- File:Ligurische Grenzkammstraße VW Bus T2.jpg
- File:KUNST UND DRAMA am Stadttheater Lindau.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner 2016.jpg
- File:Uraufführung Shackleton Banjo oder Bibel.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner 2015.jpg
- File:DER HUT VON JOSEPH BEUYS Logo.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner in der Performance Flug.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner in TORQUATO TASSO.gif
- File:Rolands Hasenjagd für Joseph Beuys.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner in der Performance KÖNIGS SEHTEST.jpg
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner in der KUNST UND DRAMA Produktion KLEINE GEFÄNGNISSE GROSSE FLUCHTEN.JPG
- File:Schauspielerin Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger in Stillstand.jpg
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger von KUNST UND DRAMA.jpg
- File:Shackleton BANJO ODER BIBEL Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger.jpg
- File:Shackleton BANJO ODER BIBEL Roland Eugen Beiküfner.jpg
- File:Kleine Gefängnisse Große Fluchten Premiere 2011.JPG
- File:KUNST UND DRAMA Ausstellung Rathaus 2012 Antonia Hersche Eichin.jpg
- File:Pressefoto MILES ODER DIE PENDELUHR AUS MONTREUX von Henning Mankell.JPG
- File:Friederike Pöhlmann-Grießinger, KUNST UND DRAMA, Montreux Jazz Festival.JPG
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner erklärt die Capri-Batterie.JPG
- File:Roland Eugen Beiküfner, Poster für einen Film in den Niederlanden.jpg
Didym (talk) 15:16, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: by Fitindia. --Minoraxtalk 13:37, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Movie still, no permission. Yann (talk) 10:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 13:31, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Copyright on this work expired in 2003 based on creation date. Jooojay (talk) 05:40, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted work by Oskar Kokoschka (d. 1980), permission of his heirs needed via COM:OTRS. Patrick Rogel (talk) 11:36, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. . Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 20:56, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
no license-permission revoked Clippclan (talk) 23:17, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- The license can't be revoked by definition.
However it's not a very useful picture - I'd be inclined to delete it anyways since Commons isn't your personal photo album.nevermind, this is three years after the fact. — Mike.lifeguard 22:01, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
these files are not allowed on commons is not work itself is incorrect because in commons upload files and boxes of CDs, games, movies, posters and newspapers that primarily disrespects the copyright and license is not allowed in these files Commons:sobre las licencias Elberth 00001939 (talk) 21:36, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- some cover picture, please delete--Motopark (talk) 04:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
these files are not allowed on commons is not work itself is incorrect because in commons upload files and boxes of CDs, games, movies, posters and newspapers that primarily disrespects the copyright and license is not allowed in these files Commons: Sobre las licencias Elberth 00001939 (talk) 21:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- some cover picture, please delete--Motopark (talk) 04:05, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
(edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log)
other version of this file is available on commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:%E0%AE%A4%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%B0%E0%AF%81%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%A3%E0%AF%8D%E0%AE%A3%E0%AE%BE%E0%AE%AE%E0%AE%B2%E0%AF%88.jpg Thamiziniyan (talk) 14:33, 27 February 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
these files are not allowed on commons is not work itself is incorrect because in commons upload files and boxes of CDs, games, movies, posters and newspapers that primarily disrespects the copyright and license is not allowed in these files Commons: Sobre las licencias Elberth 00001939 (talk) 21:42, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- some cover picture, please delete--Motopark (talk) 04:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Found it on the portfolio of a wig designer http://www.christine-chomicki.com/us/portfolios this is likely not original work (the wig designeris likely also in violation but may have kind permission), the point is this looks like a promotional picture for a stage act, so there's doubt about this being 'original work' from an uploaded that has no confirmed status as a professional photographer. Hnapel (talk) 13:19, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Location tag in filename ("BeijingMuseumOfNaturalHistory") is incorrect; new image with the correct location ("PaleozoologicalMuseumOfChina") has been uploaded to WikiCommons to replace this one Captmondo (talk) 16:22, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- Use the rename media template next time. Also, why is the new upload a different file with smaller file size? FunkMonk (talk) 23:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
these files are not allowed on commons is not work itself is incorrect because in commons upload files and boxes of CDs, games, movies, posters and newspapers that primarily disrespects the copyright and license is not allowed in these files Commons:Sobre las licencias Elberth 00001939 (talk) 21:33, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
- delete, no OTRS-permission, album cover--Motopark (talk) 17:42, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused image with no author information. Scapler (talk) 02:24, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete says "Source Self" but it is badly descriped so I doubt anyone will ever find and use it. --MGA73 (talk) 15:58, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete copyvio of http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=416566--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 18:07, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused, uneducational image. Scapler (talk) 00:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete --MGA73 (talk) 16:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
- Delete--Diaa abdelmoneim (talk) 18:11, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
- DeleteUnused unknown person not a User photo WayneRay (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This is a copyrighted image taken from http://strangereaction.com/2009/07/17/7-seconds-and-more/. The uploader has been uploading non-free images to en.wikipedia under false free licenses, and having been warned there has moved on to uploading them to Commons for use on en.wiki, which doesn't address the copyright issues. If the uploader can provide evidence that they are indeed the copyright holder, then this nomination shall be rescinded. IllaZilla (talk) 08:53, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Maybe a copyright violation, doesn't looks like a free picture -> wikipedia (de) 80.132.83.15 00:36, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
- Why an anonymus request for deletion? There is actually a OTRS pending, forgot to insert the tag. Rectilinium (talk) 23:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unwanted online by the user Charllo (talk) 21:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC) {speedy|unwanted by the user}
unwanted online by the user Charllo (talk) 21:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC) {speedy|unwanted online by user}
unwanted online by the user Charllo (talk) 21:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC) {speedy|unwanted online by user}
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I doubt that all those pictures which are on a site where I wanted to add the photo of chemto differ from my photo. I think you not identically behave to the people doing identical actions. you want that Your choice was higher than my choice. you forget that Wikipedia it an encyclopaedia is made its users. Where democracy and equal possibilities ? I only wanted to be in a position as well as other to improve Wikipedia. Sorrowfully that such administrators as you mix it to do. You laid me to that I stole a photo groundless. I would like to hear from you facts confirmative that photo not my - differently you are a liar.
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request --Psujauddin (talk) 12:00, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The picture is taken from the electronic encyclopaedia on Bulgarian History (on CD), which is Copyrighted material of Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, "Trud" Publishing house and software company "Sirma" , as their website states. This publishing house "Trud" is notorious in Bulgaria for attempts to legal prosecutions related to their copy rights. Get more information from here Thank you. HNY! --Spiritia 21:22, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
this is controvecial island between India and bangladesh, the position is island is not NPOV and uploader was not said original source in eng wiki, so this image was reomed from there, I think he claim wrong license Jayanta Nath (talk) 07:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
- I saw this image in enwiki with a proper license so, i uploaded it to the commons. Though I haven't the prove now, but I think the license tag is wrong. So, It can be removed. — Tanvir 10:33, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. OK. Please delete. --Mstp77 (talk) 19:58, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
- Keep old and public domain. --Martina talk 18:37, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Patent nonsense. Low resolution cropped screen-shot of wikipedia article infobox. --Labattblueboy (talk) 21:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- Please delete, it was my mistake. Thank you. --Lightwarrior2 (talk) 22:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Not in use, a mistake. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 09:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Nice picture and a very pretty lady, but there's a logo in the top-right corner indicating this is not original work. Hnapel (talk) 13:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
michale karzer
wollen sich auch alle wenn wie sonne kommt ist warden kann ich viel sagen dich ich wünsch dir viel in herz und dein dann meien tag unr atgesjäher wir machen äber ich liebe auch alle bin ich immer da ja ich was schaten in dir in meien deien augen so schöne wir strene wollen mit mir
wenn du mich zueit ich haben noch von dir ich wünsch dir ich liebe un r dich wo alle sit
ich was dass du mich pass sit alle warden der nacht sit wollken sit zu regen ni dir
deien licht ur schaten in dir seien warden euch an bist heute von immer
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded a better picture of this person. 23:20, 24 August 2008 Elena xxx (talk · contribs)
- Comment: I dont think, that this image must be deleted just because there is another one, this image is absolutely ok. --Martin H. (talk) 13:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
- Actually, Outi Alanko herself wanted that I delete this picture from Wikipedia because she doesn't like it. ;-) Elena (talk) 12:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Obsolete format: Replace with Downtown_Gaming.png Pacomartin (talk) 20:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
outdated replaced with .prn file Pacomartin (talk) 14:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
outdated replaced with .prn file --Pacomartin (talk) 08:44, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No menciona autor ni regla que establezca que las fotos de la OEA son PD. --Roblespepe 15:15, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
- English translation: Description cites neither the author nor any rule to establish that OEA photos are public domain.
- The image description I just saw (late August 2007) seems to have some information that goes to this issue; can someone check to see if the complaint still applies? Lawikitejana 22:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
- I have added the name of the photographer. Nobody has claimed that the photos are in the public domain. I have removed the deletion request template. --Head 14:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
- The image description I just saw (late August 2007) seems to have some information that goes to this issue; can someone check to see if the complaint still applies? Lawikitejana 22:30, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This template {{Kangxi radicals}} and nine others used many hundreds of dead links and caused to be represented prominently in Special:WantedFiles.
They are now replaced by a much better solution and not anymore needed. In this case about redundant templates a Speedy might do as well.
Also obsolete:
- Template:Kangxi radicals-order.gif
- Template:Kangxi radicals-red.png
- Template:Kangxi radicals-seal.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-oracle.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-bigseal.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-bronze.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-kaishu.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-songti.svg
- Template:Kangxi radicals-clerical.svg
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Wrong city name - I've already uploaded this photo with correct name Wojciech Muła (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Please use the {{Duplicate}} for this, and provide the file name of the replacement. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
- Delete Duplicate of File:Rakszawa - primary school 3.jpg (edit · last · history · watch · unwatch · global usage · logs · purge · w · search · links · DR · del · undel · Delinker log); not used. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:56, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
File:איך היכה יעקב שריד אביו של יוסי שריד מנכ"ל משרד החינוך עולים דתיים מושב עוצם בלשכת משרד החינוך.JPG
[edit]This file should be deleted because:
- It has no copy rights.
- It is reporting about someone's opinion, according to the news; not about the news.
- It probably is defamation.
- Sorry.
- יש למחוק קובץ מזה מהסיבות הבאות
- אין לו אישור זכויות יוצרים.
- הוא מתעד דיווח על דעה של מישהו, בעקבות החדשות ולא על החדשות עצמן.
- הוא נושא לשון הרע לפי ההלכה ואולי גם לפי חוקי המדינה או חוקי מדינות אחדות בהן הוא יוצג.
- צר לי. Eddau (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request License
Deleted: . Krd 13:22, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This is blatant copyright infringement. It's cropped from a promotional photo of the band, owned by Epitaph Records (http://www.epitaph.com/artists/artist/22/Descendents). The uploader has been uploading images to en.wikipedia under false licenses (marking them as free when he in fact isn't the creator and doesn't hold the copyright, so has no right to release them as free), then he moved on to uploading them to commons in the same manner, now he's moved to uploading them to flickr & from there to commons. A clear case of hide-the-copyvio. IllaZilla (talk) 08:36, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Uploader wants it deleded. Ricky212 16:42, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request Andrenio 14:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
weil wir die rechte daran haben! action press GmbH & Co KG, Hamburg; Jens Höppner 85.182.242.50 09:45, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- Comment - IP address says they own the rights. They represent action press GmbH & Co KG in Hamburg (Germany). Photographer Jens Höppner. I've messaged the IP with request for a source that can confirm this. --Krinkletalk 12:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
- ticket:2010032310043707 (german) says so. I opt for speedy. --Guandalug (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Неиспользуемая, бесполезная фотография, которая была представлена автором под заведомо неверными категориями (например Ужгород) 212.115.225.23 10:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
- Комментарий: категории добавил не автор, а бот. Изображение использовалось в удалённой статье ru:Шкиряк, Зорян Несторович. --AVRS (talk) 11:05, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete this is a copyrighted illustration and should be removed. Including artwork by a designer to wikicommons is a blatant IP infringment. See also: File talk:Pedelec.jpg --Panoramedia (talk) 19:33, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- Keep simple forms. --Diego Grez return fire 18:22, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
- “Simple Forms”?? Sorry, but that's ridiculous. Since when is a Bauhaus-lamp less protected than an Art Nouveau one? --Panoramedia (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Uploader wants it deleted Ricky212 16:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Non free logo. Dereckson (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Website conditions quote: Use Of Ubikwiti Trademarks, Logos, etc. You agree to follow Ubikwiti's Guidelines For Using Ubikwiti Trademarks and Copyrights as published and may be modified from time to time. You agree not to use the marks "Ubikwiti," the Ubikwiti Logo or any other marks belonging or licensed to Ubikwiti in any way except as expressly authorized in writing by Ubikwiti in each instance. You agree that all goodwill arising out of your authorized use of Ubikwiti's marks shall inure to the benefit of and belong to Ubikwiti.
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Bad name Barraki 20:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The photograph does not comply with Commons:Project Scope. The photograph was not taken to show the vandalism in the subway, it seems that the main objective was the girl who appears in it. Taking pictures of a girl on the subway its condemnable and in some jurisdictions even illegal. 189.233.36.47 08:06, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
There are a new version without metro's user, policy acomplished, and this discusion ended, only to satisfy a mexican IP with a "anonymous" user, a coward user that not sign his post. --Mexicumbia (talk) 08:53, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The image has a disputed license tag. 62.156.174.102 09:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request Mike Reiss 19:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC) Copyright?
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request Grzegorz Polak 21:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request Alsaca 16:12, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request CarlJF 14:39, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Legal Status of the image not clear
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This file, like the Milan, Venice, Trieste, Palermo...coat of arms of Italian cities, many of them dating back to Middle Ages. The idea that these pictures can be protected by a copyright is simply ridicolous. Without considering the damage to Wikipedia given by deleting such important files from Italian citie's pages that is simply IRRESPONSABLE. And why starting to delete our coat of arms so much years after the creation of Wikipedia? Why don't you delete coat of amrs of all other countries? Or do you have a matter with Italy? So there is no reasons in the world for delete them.
--Conte di Cavour (talk) 23:00, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Photography of a book, therefore most probably a copyright violation. -- Cymothoa exigua (talk) 22:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
- Es ist nur eine Distanzaufnahme. Daher ok. Not delete. --Xenos (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is a high-resolution reproduction of the complete cover! -- Cymothoa exigua (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- Yes, but only in distance. --Xenos (talk) 06:41, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
- It is a high-resolution reproduction of the complete cover! -- Cymothoa exigua (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete --Clockwork Orange 13:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - 88.107.110.193 01:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- Keep -- 88.107.122.156 00:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
- A British photographer would be shot if he even came near Goebbels in 1941. Germany and the UK were in war, so the pic must be deleted. --Clockwork Orange 09:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- Thats you own belief...not based on fact. 88.107.122.156 00:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Fair use. --Sterkebak 16:12, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Not public domain photos. Stewart~惡龍 14:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Formular Incorrect!!! Correct is Image:Pudioxide.png Uwe W. 19:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Not public domain photos. Stewart~惡龍 14:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request 87.189.97.250 11:10, 18 April 2007 (UTC) commercial content
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- please delete Image:CarelKraayenhof1.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof2.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof3.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof4.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof5.jpg and Image:CarelKraayenhof6.jpg, since i rotated them all with an extra zero.
- they are now available as Image:CarelKraayenhof01.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof02.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof03.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof04.jpg, Image:CarelKraayenhof05.jpg and Image:CarelKraayenhof06.jpg.
- can i apply for a sysopbit so i can undo my mess myself? ;-) grtz, oscar 01:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No permition of copyright holder . Jaro.p 14:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No reasons for deletion -Liesel (talk) 14:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:23, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused image with no real educational value and an activity hard to make out in specific. Scapler (talk) 16:00, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
- Seems to be another picture of the painter named Zende. I'm unsure whether we should keep it or not, since it's indeed low quality.
Jonathan Groß 
08:23, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_16.36.38.png){kind=link}
![137 File:איך היכה יעקב שריד אביו של יוסי שריד מנכ"ל משרד החינוך עולים דתיים מושב עוצם בלשכת משרד החינוך.JPG](#File:איך_היכה_יעקב_שריד_אביו_של_יוסי_שריד_מנכ"ל_משרד_החינוך_עולים_דתיים_מושב_עוצם_בלשכת_משרד_החינוך.JPG){kind=link}
_(Elmasfuerte).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.svg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
.svg){kind=link}
_16.36.38.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_16.36.38.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
_16.36.38.png){kind=link}
_16.36.38.png){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
- Delete Same image as on http://www.zende.org/atelier01.htm - no evidence for permission. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 10:05, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No reasons for deletion -Liesel (talk) 14:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request 89.52.62.124 18:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Transfer nomination for speedy translation to a regular deletion review. Speedy nominater claims PD-Art cannot apply to a 3D object, disagree with a speedy on the basis that even if PD-Art does not apply, PD-old for a file depicting something that is something over two millenia old is probably justified. --KTo288 (talk) 16:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Delete PD-old can't apply too, because we don't judge the work (which is PD) but the reproduction (the photo is probably not PD). Bibi Saint-Pol (sprechen) 19:34, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I the uploader of this work want a deletion of this image. The Author (User:Michael Angelkovich) can upload this image a 2nd time if he wants. -Cedyk 16:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
- But why? It's as good as the copy I could possibly make.--Michael { talk } 12:00, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Oh, I see. This one is lossy. I will upload the new one.--Michael { talk } 12:06, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The image was licensed as {{PD-Japan}}, the original image from English Wikipedia was licensed as w:template:PD-Japan (which is identical to {{PD-Japan-oldphoto}}. For this license to apply the image has to have been published before December 31, 1956. The image in question was taken in September 1957 according to Corbis: http://pro.corbis.com/popup/Enlargement.aspx?mediauids={5b401081-5484-4c87-966a-d8415d3d4210} --Oden 22:22, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
Ia m for that the pic says. No one will amke a storm for 9 months. The picture is OK, and it should stay, caouse it was published in 1957. But this is urgent, you say, if I founda pic published before 1956, or took before 1946, it can stay on commons ?
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request -Liesel (talk) 14:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request --Chdeppisch1 21:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
duplicate of White Beech - seedling.JPG Poyt448 (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
duplicate of White Beech - seedling.JPG Poyt448 (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
duplicate of File:White Beech - seedling.JPG Poyt448 (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
- Delete /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 00:34, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
No reasons for deletion -Liesel (talk) 14:45, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request 83.190.59.201 18:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)copyright violated
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
I am the painter of these 3 pictures. The problem was: a member of the wikibooks.DE had uploaded these picture form my old homepage, in order to help me a little by the first steps as an author. So far no problems. But these 3 pictures are logos. These are special designed for the guitar-school and shall not be use for any outer things but the wikibooks guitar. With the rights and with the memory place on the commons it cannot be managed. In order to say it completely clearly: for the three pictures exist no rights and no permission (for the commons), because I as the author of the pictures did not entitle the upload of these pictures. I never gave the rights for the Commons. I hope this was clear enough! --Mjchael 12:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Deleted: . Krd 13:24, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Please see our project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Please see our project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Could you be more specific regarding nomination for deletion of my autobiographical photo. Project scope is very vague!
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Please see our project scope. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Don Iyke Maduike (talk · contribs)
[edit]
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Author request deletion Villaf36 (talk) 23:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Author request deletion 77.57.157.31 08:53, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: licence is not revokable Krd 13:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Cette image était en fait un test, que j'ai téléchargé par erreur. Il contient plusieurs erreurs, dont le fait que je ne suis pas l'auteur de le photographie. J'avais déjà demandé la suppression de cette image, sans oser admettre mon erreur. Toutes mes excuses. Villaf36 (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio --Krd 09:32, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope. Seems to be a personal work to mock an uploader's friend. Not even a notable sportsman or representative from the club. Fma12 (talk) 23:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:25, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Almost certainly not own work. Proof is required, especially since it's here: http://www.paraguay.com/espectaculos/victor-beckelmann-fotografia-en-simultaneo-asuncion-bruselas-71371/pagina/2 Dontreader (talk) 03:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
_(Elmasfuerte).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(Elmasfuerte).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
unused try of self-promotion, out of scope Achim (talk) 19:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
_(Elmasfuerte).jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
_(Elmasfuerte).jpg){kind=link}
Copyvio. Fry1989 eh? 20:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Copyvio. Fry1989 eh? 20:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope. Looks to be a personal image of low quality not used on any wiki's Reguyla (talk) 20:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Advertisement, out of scope. Achim (talk) 20:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope. Fry1989 eh? 20:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete spam advert Motopark (talk) 16:28, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
The rule is: take your OWN pictures of well known people at a public place and do not scrape them from the web, the text and size indicate this not original work, looks like a phote taken from a magazine. Hnapel (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:20, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Saber gouiez (talk · contribs)
[edit]Book covers, no permission.
- File:جامع العلوم و الحكم.jpg
- File:أسرار البلاغة في علم البيان.jpg
- File:نزهة النّظر بشرح نخبة الفكر في مصطلح حديث أهل الأثر.jpg
- File:إعراب ثلاثين سورة من القرآن الكريم.jpg
- File:أخلق افعال العباد و الردّ على الجهميّة و أصحاب التعطيل.jpg
- File:مبادئ الأصول.jpg
- File:أدب المفتي و المستفتي.jpg
- File:التعريف بآداب التأليف.jpg
- File:الإقتراح في بيان الإصطلاح و ما أضيف إلى ذلك من الأحاديث المعدودة من الصِّحَح.jpg
- File:كتاب الشكر لأبي بكر بن أبي الدنيا البغدادي.jpg
- File:كتاب المنار المُنيف في الصحيح و الضعيف للإمام شمس الدّين محمد بن أبي بكر بن قيِّم الجوزيّة.jpg
- File:كتاب مُحاسبة النفس لأبي بكر عبد الله بن محمد سفيان ابن أبي الدنيا.jpg
- File:ما يحتاج إليه الكاتب من مهموز و مقصور و ممدود.jpg
- File:صيانة صحيح مُسلم من الإخلال و الغَلَط و حمايته من الإسقاط و السَّقَط.jpg
- File:الفروق في اللغة.jpg
Yann (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Saber gouiez (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small size, no EXIF data, user blocked for copyvios, unlikely to be own works.
- File:خسائر حرب العراق.jpg
- File:دخول الجيش الأمريكي إلى العراق.jpg
- File:دخول قوات التحالف إلى العراق.jpg
- File:بداية حرب العراق.jpg
- File:فرقة الإسعاف- الحماية المدنية الجزائرية.jpg
- File:التغني بالقرءان.wav
- File:فرقة الإطفاء و الإنقاذ. الحماية المدنية الجزائرية.jpg
- File:الحماية المدنية الجزائرية. أفراد فرقة الغوص. سكيكدة.jpg
- File:تلاوتي لسورة الشرح.wav
- File:طريقة استعمال قِشر الرمان.jpg
- File:السنا.jpg
- File:قِشر الرُمّان.jpg
- File:زيت الضرو.jpg
- File:صورة محمود كنز.jpg
- File:صورة جلول بختي نميش.jpg
- File:صورة محمد جغابة.jpg
- File:صورة براهيم شيبوط.jpg
- File:صورة السعيد عبادو.jpg
- File:صورة غلاف كتاب الاشباه و النظائر.jpg
- File:صورة غلاف كتاب المزهر في علوم اللغة و أنواعها.jpg
- File:وسام جيش التحرير الوطني.jpg
- File:L'art de la solidité des os - makiwara -01.png
- File:L'art de la solidité des os - makiwara -.png
- File:شهادة الكفائة المهنية في مهنة فن الطبخ.jpg
Yann (talk) 16:35, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 01:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of scope. Yann (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gonzalo1901 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Gonzalo1901
Gunnex (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Uploader related: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Catedral-asuncion.jpg. Gunnex (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This sure is a big picture, however the claim that the uploader is indeed the portrayed person (and would therefore be more likely to hold rights to the image) is quite doubtful, for now nominating for deletion, this needs a beter story re. the provenance, also found it here on the web: http://www.justjared.com/photo-gallery/3323747/kate-upton-hosts-grand-slam-adoption-event-02/fullsize/ Hnapel (talk) 21:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
It is my own work and it is not well on focus Longo73 (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader request Krd 14:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This file has been uploaded with the copyright information "own work". However, in the draft article at English Wikipedia it has been given a caption which is the same as a caption in the book Abstract Art from the Río de la Plata: Buenos Aires and Montevideo, 1933-1953 Front Cover Americas Society, Jan 1, 2001 - Art, Abstract - 159 pages 0 Reviews Exhibition of paintings and sculptures, including publications and manifestos of the period. published in 2001. There may be a copyright issue. Anne Delong (talk) 21:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 21:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:17, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Delete while the photographer has freely licenced their photo, the Austrian stamps are copyright and require permission the designer per Commons:Stamps/Public domain#Austria. Ww2censor (talk) 22:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I think in this case thats extemped by "Fair Use" because: no free substitute provided, for non-commercial educational purposes Andy990525 (talk) 12:14, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Unfortunately the commons does not accept fair use images. See Commons:Fair use. I'm pretty sure the current two uses of this image could be illustrated by freely licenced images. Ww2censor (talk) 13:07, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Wait... Does some part of the Wikipedia allow fair use? I did recall seeing fair use elements somewhere...Andy990525 (talk) 19:06, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Where is the delete botton:). Plz delete it..Andy990525 (talk) 19:11, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- There is no delete button for you. Only the closing admin can do that and it will happen in due time. There is no actual fair use on the commons but on the enwiki there is a non-free media policy and, as I mentioned, this use can be illustrated by freely licenced images, so it will fail the rather strict enwiki non-free media policy guidelines that require images to comply with all 10 of the criteria. Ww2censor (talk) 22:21, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
low quality Paterm (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:16, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Why is this design in the public domain? Discasto talk 22:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete It's not. The photo was released on Flikr, almost certainly improperly, [2], and I'm putting this here for the record. It was uploaded here by User:File Upload Bot (Magnus Manske) 16:32, 5 February 2013. The bot command was issued by Russavia,through Flickr2commons, probably based on seeing this amazing photographer's work, and then commanding Flikr2commons to transfer all of it. It was 1620 files. This image would be an exception, I presume the vast majority of those files were legitimate. Discasto, you might have been the first human being on Commons with a trace of clue to look at this. I notice a user categorized the file as a T-shirt, which might have waved a big red flag, but ... using HotCat, not necessarily paying much attention. Ooooh! T-shirt, click! ... Good catch. --Abd (talk) 23:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Well, in fact I arrived here by chance (trying to find a proper category for File:Por que no te callas goatxa chica 01.jpg. I had the slightest idea about Russavia having uploaded the file. --Discasto talk 22:33, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This is a crop from a previously published picture http://radioamericahn.net/?p=231899 so it doesn't look like original work. Hnapel (talk) 22:37, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
This is a copyrighted album cover and there is no indication anywhere at the source site that it was being released under a free license. ˉanetode╦╩ 22:49, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Juninhoguitar (talk · contribs)
[edit]promotion of non-notable band, not within scope
- File:Html abrasion.JPG
- File:Abrasion1.jpg
- File:Abrasion6.jpg
- File:Abrasion-Voz Do Vento Motoclube 2012.jpg
Rosario Berganza 00:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Ymblanter (talk) 19:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Ymblanter (talk) 19:09, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
File:Here Mama Africa with the king of Hip Hop in one of the forums at SFU, down town Vancouver.jpg
[edit]
not within scope Rosario Berganza 00:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 01:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 01:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 01:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:45, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of project scope. Matiia (talk) 02:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:46, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 02:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:47, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
not within scope Rosario Berganza 02:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:47, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
not within scope, non-notable person
Rosario Berganza 02:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 02:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:48, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 04:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:49, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
File:Darian Mattos is a PC gamer and also plays xbox 360 he's username for YouTube is darianmattos - 2014-05-30 19-18.jpg
[edit]
not within scope Rosario Berganza 04:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
not within scope Rosario Berganza 04:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused text document of questionable notability, out of project scope, should be converted to text if notable Motopark (talk) 04:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused text document of questionable notability, out of project scope, should be converted to text if notable Motopark (talk) 04:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
coogle finds plentry of copies to this picture, and out of scope description Motopark (talk) 05:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:52, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 10:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 10:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 10:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
low quality, out of proportion Mjrmtg (talk) 11:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 11:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:56, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of project scope; signature of a minor without any encyclopedic relevance, also see File:Handtekening Miguel.png. Wikiklaas (talk) 11:25, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
- For your information, the user's other signatue has been deleted. ErikvanB (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 19:57, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Probably not own work, and most likely from a photo shoot. I don't think it was released under a free license. Here's a link: http://www.bmx-results.com/db/riders_info.php?id=61765&code=i Dontreader (talk) 00:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 23:21, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Artist is still alive, no proof of permission. Image has been deleted before. Ronn (talk) 01:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- The painting was painted by Jean Thomassen and a photograph of the painting is derived content and still needs permission from the original painter. And no proof of permission is given. Mbch331 (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Also deleted File:Last Judgment opened wings 0.jpg which was larger copy of the nominated file. Green Giant (talk) 23:26, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Why should I believe that a screenshot from a movie was released under that license? Where's the proof? Exactly who released it? Was a declaration of consent sent in to Commons? Here's the image: http://dominicthackray.org/?page_id=52 Maybe COM:CONSENT was used and I'm not aware of it. Dontreader (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh hi, i'm sorry, i'm sort of new to this so i don't know if i'm responding in the right place or using the correct language.. anyway, the images concerned (GirlfriendInaKimono Pistol.jpg and GirlfriendInaKimono_PennyRimbaud.jpg) are both owned by me. I'm Dominic Thackray, i made the film from which the two stills are taken and i'm very happy for them to be used on Wikipedia or indeed anywhere else on the internet so long as it/they is/are attributed to the film (which they clearly are here at any rate). I don't know what more i can say or do about it. I noticed a couple of days ago on the Facebook version of the Wikipedia page for the film that the images had been deleted in February for some hypothetical copyright reason/s so i uploaded the two pictures and applied the consent declaration that WIkipedia recommended that I, as owner of the pictures, should declare. Is there something else i should do? There are no copyright issues with the images from the film. Please advise. Best wishes, Arigateau
- Hello Arigateau. Thanks for your message. As I said, if you sent a declaration of consent to Commons, I was unaware of that. Did you use this form: COM:CONSENT ? The purpose of that email is to prove that you are the owner of the image(s). If you did that, then please ask at the OTRS Noticeboard COM:ON if they received your letter(s), and if you need to do anything else. Maybe you need to add an OTRS pending tag to each file, but maybe not. Give them a few hours to reply. Please specify the two files so that they will know what you are talking about: File:GirlfriendInaKimono Pistol.jpg and the other one. If everything is fine then the files will be kept. This discussion for (or against) deletion lasts usually one week (or more), so there is time. Please keep me updated. Many thanks. Dontreader (talk) 02:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Dontreader, thanks for replying so quickly. No i didn't do that because i had no idea that that was even a thing. I just uploaded the two pictures and applied the consent declaration which Wikipedia recommended i apply... What should i do now, should i go and fill in that form you mention or is there something else i should do because i didn't already do that? all thanks, Arigateau (PS it's 4am where i am so i may not get much more done tonight)
- Hi Arigateau. Please tell me which declaration of consent you applied that was recommended by Wikipedia? If you could tell me that, I would be very grateful. Don't worry for now about sending in the declaration of consent specified here COM:CONSENT because it's too late and you need some rest. Don't worry about this, at least not until you have some time maybe tomorrow night. There is time. A week at least, as I said. Thank you very much. Dontreader (talk) 03:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
For any interested parties who have read this far: this discussion has somehow moved to my Talk page ( http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Arigateau#The_pictures ), i am a bit new to all this so i am unsure how this sort of protocol is supposed to work, please bear with me. Thanks, Arigateau
Comment Arigateau has told me that he has sent in a declaration of consent using COM:CONSENT, so I have assumed good faith and added an OTRS pending tag. Please look for his letter. Thanks. Dontreader (talk) 01:34, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, I charge an email from Dominic Thackray, and has provided the corresponding ID ticket. Sincerely. --minhhuy (talk) 10:39, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep due to apparent OTRS verification alone. --Fæ (talk) 12:30, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Thanks again, Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy, for letting me know, and for your quick work to solve this problem. There's no point in keeping this discussion open. Have a nice day. Dontreader (talk) 17:34, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per evidence provided to OTRS. Green Giant (talk) 23:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused fan-made logo with no educational value or foreseeable use. ~Kevin Payravi (talk) 01:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 23:30, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Same problem as with the other file uploaded by this user. How am I supposed to know that a screenshot from a movie was released under that license? I don't see an OTRS pending tag. Here's a link: http://dominicthackray.org/?page_id=52 I could have uploaded it with that license, but then I would have to prove that I own the rights. Dontreader (talk) 01:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Oh hi, i'm sorry, i'm sort of new to this so i don't know if i'm responding in the right place or using the correct language.. anyway, the images concerned (GirlfriendInaKimono Pistol.jpg and GirlfriendInaKimono_PennyRimbaud.jpg) are both owned by me. I'm Dominic Thackray, i made the film from which the two stills are taken and i'm very happy for them to be used on Wikipedia or indeed anywhere else on the internet so long as it/they is/are attributed to the film (which they clearly are here at any rate). I don't know what more i can say or do about it. I noticed a couple of days ago on the Facebook version of the Wikipedia page for the film that the images had been deleted in February for some hypothetical copyright reason/s so i uploaded the two pictures and applied the consent declaration that WIkipedia recommended that I, as owner of the pictures, should declare. Is there something else i should do? There are no copyright issues with the images from the film. Please advise. Best wishes, Arigateau
- Hi again, Arigateau. Thank you for your kind message. I replied on the other page for deletion. Please include this picture: File:GirlfriendInaKimono PennyRimbaud.jpg when you ask at COM:ON together with the other one. Just make sure that they confirm that they received your declaration of consent, and please tell me what else they advise whenever they reply to you. As I said, this process for deletion or for keeping a picture lasts a week, or more. Thanks again, and best wishes. Dontreader (talk) 03:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Comment Arigateau has told me that he has sent in a declaration of consent using COM:CONSENT, so I have assumed good faith and added an OTRS pending tag. Please look for his letter. Thanks. Dontreader (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, I charge an email from Dominic Thackray, and has provided the corresponding ID ticket. Sincerely. --minhhuy (talk) 10:38, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Thank you, Trần Nguyễn Minh Huy, for letting me know. Have a nice day... Dontreader (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per evidence provided to OTRS. Green Giant (talk) 23:29, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo document of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused privat image of very low quality. Achim (talk) 18:54, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:07, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Unused private image, out of scope. Achim (talk) 18:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 20:08, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Magazine covers don't qualify as original work, potential copyright violation. Hnapel (talk) 13:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 23:50, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Wrong name was used when created. Nerdoguate (talk) 18:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 23:53, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
У этого файла отсутствуют данные о разрешении на публикацию Kirkoo52 (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: just another copyright violation. JuTa 19:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:40, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:38, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: stillno license at all. JuTa 22:42, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:48, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:53, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:55, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 22:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 23:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Amitie 10g (talk) 17:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 23:08, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Commons:Deletion_policy#Out_of_scope (not educationally useful), Commons:Deletion_policy#Out_of_scope (advertising or self-promotion), Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats (the content is essentially raw text), not used, user's curriculum vitae. Aleator (talk) 16:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:38, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats (the content is essentially raw text and is the same contained in w:ca:Revista_Ràpita), file is not used. Aleator (talk) 17:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Files of User:Surfychem
[edit]- File:TMDD Wetting Agent.pdf
- File:TOYNOL FS-600 Series.pdf
- File:TOYNOL FS-204A,PA,PG Series.pdf
- File:TOYNOL DF-57 Anti-webbing Agent.pdf
- File:TOYNOL AMINE C-TDS.pdf
- File:TOYNOL FS-6502.pdf
Reasons for deletion request: apparent copyright violation (COM:GCSD#F1). Own user writes "Intellectual property of the document belongs to Tianjin Surfychem T&D Co., Ltd". Also, PDF shows commercial and propietary products information. --Aleator (talk) 17:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Saurabh.deshmukh2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused private images, out of scope.
Achim (talk) 18:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Looks very much like a PR shot, and thus unlikely to be copyright the uploader Timtrent (talk) 19:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
This is not original work since it has too many general hits for reverse image search https://www.tineye.com/search/08ace0e81f9c6b80f3fa70c00c5e95c3107ba203/ sorry, need to take your own pictures, then they would not be so small also, a sure hit for a copy / paste action. Hnapel (talk) 21:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:30, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Very small, no EXIF data, unlikely to be own work. Yann (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:29, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Low quality. OSX II (talk) 01:43, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, we have hundred photos about the car and this photo is way too small. Taivo (talk) 15:22, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
Low quality. OSX II (talk) 01:52, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unused file, very bad quality. Taivo (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
It's highly unlikely that this professional work would be released under a free license. Here's the image: http://www.fashionmodeldirectory.com/models/tako_natsvlishvili/showphoto/467908/ Dontreader (talk) 01:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 20:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Professional photographers typically don't release their work. Proof is needed. Here's the image: http://www.vocidicitta.it/societas/milano-fashion-week-alla-scoperta-dei-trend-invernali/ Dontreader (talk) 02:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 20:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Professional photographers don't take pictures to give them to everyone for free the same year. Proof of consent for usage here is needed. Image is here: http://glamourfashionstyle.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/gfs-272.jpg Dontreader (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 20:19, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Collage of professional photos. Unlikely to be released under a free license. Photographers need to make money with their work. Here's the image: https://instagram.com/p/ySsHKopZkG/ Dontreader (talk) 02:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 20:20, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bouzid Bertal (talk · contribs)
[edit]None of these images is correcdtly licensed. They are all taken from a third party.
- File:Lucía Méndez 2014-05-24 16-28.jpg
- File:Marielena 2014-05-24 16-14.jpg
- File:Wichita7411955 2014-05-24 13-13.JPG
- File:Un jeu risque 2014-05-24 12-52.jpg
- File:Wichita(55)1955 2014-05-24 12-33.jpg
- File:Wichita(74)1955- 2014-05-24 11-55.jpg
- File:Edgar buchannan 2014-05-24 11-40.png
- File:Wichita(78)1955 2014-05-24 11-34.jpg
- File:Wichita(09)1955 2014-05-24 11-29.png
- File:Wichita(06)1955 2014-05-24 11-25.jpg
- File:Wichita(05)1955 2014-05-24 11-21.jpg
- File:Wichita(00)1955 2014-05-24 11-15.jpg
- File:Wichita(04)1955 2014-05-24 10-00.jpg
- File:Wichita(03)1955 2014-05-24 09-55.jpg
- File:Wichita(02)1955 2014-05-24 09-44.jpg
1955_2014-05-24_12-33.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955-_2014-05-24_11-55.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_11-34.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_11-29.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_11-25.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_11-21.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_11-15.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_10-00.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_09-55.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
1955_2014-05-24_09-44.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 18:25, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: Deleted as (c) vios. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:10, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bouzid Bertal (talk · contribs)
[edit]none of these appear to be the uploader's own work
- File:Marielena(1993)(077) 2014-05-30 19-33.jpg
- File:Marielena1993(77) 2014-05-30 16-27.jpg
- File:Marielena1993(03) 2014-05-30 14-37.jpg
- File:Marielena1993(03) 2014-05-30 12-50.jpg
- File:The nevadan(1950)l'homme de Nevada 2014-05-28 18-42.jpg
(077)_2014-05-30_19-33.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2014-05-30_16-27.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2014-05-30_14-37.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_2014-05-30_12-50.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
l%27homme_de_Nevada_2014-05-28_18-42.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosario Berganza 04:14, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvios. --Rosenzweig τ 20:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Works that seems to fit better in wikibooks Discasto talk 12:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of project scope. Rosenzweig τ 20:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
included hybrids of Echinopsis rowleyi (Trichocereus grandiflorus). Now included in Category:Echinopsis Cultivars
Deleted: Deleted as empty category by user Fastily. Rosenzweig τ 20:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Category:Massimo's Eis Venezia (Hannover) - Plain private advertaising. Please speedy delete. --Thirunavukkarasye-Raveendran (talk) 14:53, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: deleted as empty category by user Fastily. Rosenzweig τ 20:23, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
This file should be deleted. The reason: It depicts the proprietary Pantone Matching System. 88.77.242.184 09:45, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: In Category:Pantone there are similar pictures, which by this argument would also have to be deleted. -- Aisano (talk) 18:07, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
This file should be deleted. The reason: It depicts the proprietary Pantone Matching System. 88.76.232.34 18:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
This file should be deleted. The reason: It depicts the proprietary Pantone Matching System. 88.76.232.34 18:54, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Pure colors by themselves are not protected by copyright. Rosenzweig τ 20:26, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Vzhledem k tomu, že jsem majitelem této nemovitosti a již nyní má pro mne dosti velkou negativní reklamu na jiných internetových stránkách (neustále nám zde cizí lidé zvoní a obtěžují nás), VÝSLOVNĚ SI NEPŘEJI, aby zde byla tato fotografie a obzvláště nechci, aby byla dále volně šiřitelná. 80.250.14.170 01:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
fotografie byla vyfocena z veřejně přístupné silnice. Při pořízení snímku nebyly porušeny žádné platné zákony České republiky. Tudíž nevím čím by Vás tato fotografie mohla omezit a způsobit Vám negativní reklamu. Proto nesouhlasím s jejím smazáním. --Petr1888 (talk) 18:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Nikdo tu neřekl, že porušujete zákon. Jasně jsem uvedl, že nás již nyní obtěžují lidé doma. A tím, že tato fotografie může být umístěna díky Vám kdekoli, bude to ještě horší. Zvláště, když ji umyslně umísťujete jako hlavní fotografii na tuto stránku
http://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velk%C3%A1_Bukovina_%28Chvalkovice%29
,což jsem již podruhé zrušil.
Na jakém základě dovozujete, že kvůli této fotografii Vás lidé obtěžují doma. To se na ní odkazují?
Nemazat, k odstranění není důvod.--Tomas62 (talk) 09:51, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
V rámci slušného chování SMAZAT. Každý si promyslete, jak by bylo Vám, kdyby u Vás zvonili neznámí lidé. --Czech111 (talk) 10:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Vzhledem k tomu, že jste mne sám navedl, abych se lépe podíval na naše zákony, tak na základě svých práv požaduji okamžitý výmaz této fotografie. Navíc nesouhlasím s jakýmkoli dalším fotografováním mého majetku. Navíc jste užil licenci, která umožňuje využití i ke komerčním účělům a tudíž potřebujete souhlas majitele, který jsem Vám neposkytl.--80.250.14.170 11:55, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Image is in Category:Velká Bukovina (Chvalkovice) showing multiple other images from this location taken with same date, photographer. None of the arguments advanced has any bearing on keeping or deleting this file. Petr stated "The photo was taken from a publicly accessible road. When the shooting was not violated any law in the Czech Republic." Kept. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality. OSX II (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Useless photo. Delete as per nom. mr.choppers (talk)-en- 03:54, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:12, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Low quality. OSX II (talk) 01:50, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Judging by this collage which I think is from her official Twitter account, I think it's a still from a TV show: https://twitter.com/souka_official/status/554021742956806144 The upper-left image is the same. Dontreader (talk) 02:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Yann as no license. Well, there is {{PD-old-70-1923}}, but as a 1947 this license looks invalid. JuTa 03:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no valid license, image is too new to be PD-old. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:13, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Wrong license. According to the source, the card was painted by James Montgomery Flagg, who died in 1960 so it is still copyrighted (a less of 70 years must pass since author's death to be PD). Fma12 (talk) 03:58, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Children's Peace Monument Motopark (talk) 04:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Children's Peace Monument Motopark (talk) 04:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
per Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Children's Peace Monument Motopark (talk) 04:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thumb-sized satellite photo, so not own work Rosario Berganza 04:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: User isn't a satellite. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
thumb photo, not a self-portrait, not own work Rosario Berganza 04:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: And derivative works of the paintings clustered around subject of image. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Unused text document of questionable notability, out of project scope, should be converted to text if notable Motopark (talk) 04:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Fma12 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Not own work, copyrighted by C.A. Lanús - See official web. Bellow the COM:TOO? Amitie 10g (talk) 19:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I marked it as copyvio because it is above the TOO (there is a certain degree of complexitiy IMO). The uploader is currently blocked due to continuous copyright infringements. Besides, this emblem is one of the few Argentine football logos whose author is known: architect Carlos Pointis designed it in 1928 (as Lanús official site states and there is no a accurate information about the date of his death so {{PD-old}} could not be used for this emblem. Fma12 (talk) 23:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per Fma12, work of Carlos Pointis, not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 03:42, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Movie poster and song. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:24, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 13:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Low resolution photo without original exif. Doubtful authorship. Art-top (talk) 05:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 01:20, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Not an original work https://www.tineye.com/search/aaf35c690fbf6f217d35e1e82f93d21ec6ac6cf1/ please note the guidelines state you need to take a photo of a person at a public event or supply info that you have permission to re-use others' work. Hnapel (talk) 14:59, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. --Rosenzweig τ 13:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Possible copyviol: seems to be a gmaps screenshot Ciaurlec (talk) 15:16, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- It clearly is from Google Maps. It has to be deleted. --Flappiefh (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. Rosenzweig τ 13:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
Copy from http://www.vistec-support.de/FILES/Brochure/Broschure%20Corporal%20Plus.pdf Gleiberg (talk) 16:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete.--Wdwd (talk) 18:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Rosenzweig τ 13:18, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
I am the creator of this image and I would like this wiki to be deleted. This image has been used by various companies for their own benefit and have not attributed me the creator. Therefore, I want this wiki and image to be removed immedialtely. Darrenfranc (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. Essentially, the requestor is trying to withdraw the CC license he once granted and that, imho, is not possible. Of course it is bad if his work is used without giving him credit but that's a common problem in a globalized world. (Several of my pictures have suffered the same fate. Plagiarism is the most genuine – of course not the most honest – form of admiration.)
- Btw, I asked the requestor why he distinguishes between "image" and "wiki" but have got no answer so far. He does not seem to be a regular user, and the picture in question is his only contribution until now. But he seems to be a native speaker, his English is far superior to mine, and so I assume there could be something behind this distinction. It's unlikely that by "wiki" he means the description; the image does not have any worth mentioning. -- Aisano (talk) 14:07, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: The upload license is irrevocable. Companies can do that with Commons uploads. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:13, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
-- Aisano (talk) 08:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not an image of Kepler-8b, not even an artist's impression of it. Jcpag2012 (a.k.a. John Carlo) from Wikimedia Commons 08:20, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photos are out of project scope. Also this is small photo without metadata, so own work is dubious. This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 08:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not an image of Kepler-6b, not even an artist's impression of it. Jcpag2012 (a.k.a. John Carlo) from Wikimedia Commons 08:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
This is not an image of Kepler-5b, not even an artist's impression of it. Jcpag2012 (a.k.a. John Carlo) from Wikimedia Commons 08:22, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:15, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dtadaeng as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: All indications are that the photo is under current copyright contrary to unsourced info in file "Licensing" section. According to the citation provided by the uploader, the photo was first published in 1986 in Rolling Stone magazine. In 1990, it was included in the booklet accompanying the Columbia Records Robert Johnson CD box set The Complete Recordings, with the credit "Dime-store photo of Robert Johnson—early 1930s (p.4) © Stephen C. LaVere, 1986". In subsequent years, the photo was subject of lawsuits contesting the ownership of the copyright. On February 20, 2014, the Supreme Court of Mississippi issued a written decision favoring LaVere and detailing the litigation.[3] Nowhere in its decision is there a mention or assertion that the photo is in the public domain (if it was PD, there would be no copyright ownership issues and nothing to litigate). Unless there is a reliable source specifically confirming that this photo is in the public domain, it should be treated as currently being under copyright. maybe have a discussion first before deletion Jianhui67 talk★contribs 09:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Per the page This photo is a self-published picture by Johnson taken before 1964 with no copyright renewal. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Copyright Correct me if I'm wrong but in the United States, someone owns the copyright to a photo once he takes it--not when someone else buys it later and puts it in print. The photo was published in the photobooth: it's irrelevant if someone else puts it in a magazine 50 years later. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 13:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Copyright law is a complex and highly specialized field of law. There are no simple rules or formulas, especially in dealing with older material. It is best not to speculate what does or doesn't constitute "publishing" or what or when starts the clock ticking. For example, for many years Johnson's songs thought to be in the public domain, but the court decided as recently as 2000 that the copyrights belong to his estate (read the rational: ABKCO Music v. Stephen LaVere. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (June 26, 2000). Again, if the photo is in the public domain, why would Columbia Records (one of the biggest and oldest record companies) and the Supreme Court of Mississippi both identify the copyright holder as LaVere? Do you have a reliable source that apparently they don't? —Dtadaeng (talk) 17:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Here are some additional reliable sources (besides the two cited in the Request for speedy deletion) regarding the dime-store photo and copyrights:
- AllMusic Steve LaVere biography (undated): "After determining that Johnson's feebly established publishing rights had not actually tumbled into the black hole of the public domain, LaVere worked out an agreement with people considered to be members of Johnson's surviving family."[4]
- Los Angeles Times Oct. 8, 1995: "To top it off, the photographs of Johnson LaVere got from Spencer [a Johnson heir] are the only two in circulation ... And reproductions of those images are zealously guarded by LaVere."[5]
- Rolling Stone Dec. 21, 2011: "Crumb's drawing from an iconic photo [Johnson's dime-store photo] of blues legend Robert Johnson caused more headaches than he'd bargained for. Steve LaVere, who claims rights to much of Johnson's work, threatened to sue the artist for copying the image. 'He's extremely litigious. I got a summons to appear in court – oh, God, it was awful. I said, "You can't claim ownership of my drawing."' Advised that he'd probably win in court but it might cost him $100,000, Crumb agreed to settle."[6]
- Huffington Post June 28, 2012: Caption in article next to dime-store photo – "(Robert Johnson took this self-portrait in a photo booth in the early 1930s. © 1986 Delta Haze Corporation, all rights reserved; used by permission)."[7] (Delta Haze is one of LaVere's companies.)
—Dtadaeng (talk) 15:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Dtadaeng: Thanks. I'd like to see this be a test case, honestly because this is ridiculous but you've obviously done the legwork here and courts have sided with the most ridiculous interpretation. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:32, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
- Koavf, in the U.S., the courts decide legal issues. No one has been able to successfully challenge Johnson's estate's and LaVere's claim of copyright. I think that the copyrights to Johnson's songs would have made a much better test case, but the U.S. Supreme Court decided to let the Court of Appeals ruling that they belong to the estate stand (see ABKCO v. LaVere cited above). Most importantly for Wiki purposes, reliable sources indicate that the photo (and the rest of Johnson's work) is not in the public domain. Your original research has led you to a different conclusion and is not supported by reliable sources. One may feel that someone is guilty of a crime or a contract is void, however, since it is the courts that decide such matters, other views are irrelevant. —Dtadaeng (talk) 13:15, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: reliable sources indicate that the photo (and the rest of Johnson's work) is not in the public domain., per discussion Ellin Beltz (talk) 00:16, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
It has a logo which indicates the copyright to this image has likely not been 'liberated' ref. http://www.popsugar.com/celebrity/Harry-Styles-Playing-Beach-Volleyball-Australia-32200468 2001:980:59FB:1:60AD:3532:1E90:224C 20:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
While image is under the proper guidelines on Flickr, image is likely not-free, due to being a candid image taken of Styles taken by another photographer, therefore Flickr uploader cannot hold the copyright to the image. Fan-upload. Livelikemusic (talk) 21:16, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 13:48, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Dessin non libre (dérivé de File:Free_vector_bender_by_se7enes.png) / non free picture (derived from File:Free_vector_bender_by_se7enes.png) Habertix (talk) 18:13, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
- donc la conclusion dérive de Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Free_vector_bender_by_se7enes.png
- so the final call inhertits from Commons:Deletion_requests/File:Free_vector_bender_by_se7enes.png
- --Hoshimoriyo (talk) 19:15, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted by D-Kuru: maybe own work, but derivative work of a copyrighted cartoon character (see also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Free vector bender by se7enes.png)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
probably rubbish 91.66.170.117 05:31, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: by Ellin Beltz; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 22:09, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
probably rubbish 91.66.170.117 05:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: by Ellin Beltz; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 22:10, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyrighted logo Frozeficent (talk) 03:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 19:41, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 06:29, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 09:48, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 19:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This is routine request for small photo without metadata. Is the uploader really the photographer? Why the photo is so small? Can you upload a bigger version, for example, 2000×1500 pixels? Can you upload a version with EXIF data? Can you describe and categorize the file correctly? This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 19:58, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The portrait features the book The Boss Murphy Musical Legacy: Irish Music from the Churchtown Area of North Cork ISBN 0952493128, Colette Moloney. This is quite recognizable and seems at a size that does not fall under the normal reading of de minimis. Fæ (talk) 11:18, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Cropped the book of and deleted the older version. Basvb (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF Hang9417 (talk) 11:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF Hang9417 (talk) 11:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Also, it is unused now.--Hang9417 (talk) 23:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
doubt this is a free image Mjrmtg (talk) 12:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:02, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dman41689 as no permission. But I cant find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 12:32, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this might actually be the uploaders own work it says its by Sachyn Mital the Meta Data at the bottom says Copyright:Sachyn Mital that's something I missed before Dman41689 (talk) 07:33, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per discussion, although contact with OTRS about the permission would be a good idea in this case, Basvb (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Agora as no permission. But I cant find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 12:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Own work not unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:04, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Although the text is possibly in the public domain, no info about edition is provided. Therefore, it's not possible to assert whether the cover picture is also in the public domain Discasto talk 12:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by CarlaRomero (talk · contribs)
[edit]Publication date is 1969. It does not seem to be enough for the newspaper and associated pictures to be in the public domain
- File:Eduardo Romero Lascano en la cúpula de la Catedral de Tucumán. La Gaceta..jpg
- File:Eduardo Romero Lascano en la cúpula de la Catedral de Tucumán. Detalle..jpg
- File:Eduardo Romero Lascano en la cúpula de la Catedral de Tucumán.jpg
Discasto talk 12:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope: the documents seems to be part of sort of court proceeding
- File:Ante un hecho nuevo reitera medida cautelar.pdf
- File:Fundamentos del fallo en el caso Veron.pdf
- File:Impugnación a la declaración del fiscal Adler.pdf
- File:2013-03-15 Presentación ante el Presidente Comisión de Juicio Político - Afirmaciones Carlos Garmendia.pdf
- File:Presentación al Fiscal de Instrucción V Nominación.pdf
- File:Presentación al Fiscal de Instrucción 4° Nominación.pdf
- File:Respuesta del juez Eduardo Romero Lascano a la acusación en su contra.pdf
Discasto talk 12:42, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Found the same image on a Polish site http://st-gama.pl/#!/kamilla-baar.html which looks like a site of an agent that has this artist under contract, this raises doubt about being original work, unless proper copyrihgt info can be provided this should be deleted. 2001:980:59FB:1:84B8:F6C3:784C:7CF1 12:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unlikely own work. Basvb (talk) 20:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The fact that the image is so small it suggest this is not original work and instead comes from a cache of stockfotos, since this is a potential copyrihgt violation, the imgae should likely be deleted. Hnapel (talk) 13:09, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:08, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Low quality. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:53, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Quality is alright Basvb (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Copy: Həmşivəng cənub fasadı.JPG
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
No permission and source. And this is not original file. --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 12:38, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:11, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reason: Contradictory copyright status when compared to the year that the photo first taken.Cerevisae (talk) 02:06, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: not 50 years after publication. Basvb (talk) 20:12, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
File:Smyrna-turkish soldiers-heads-massacre 1922.jpg
- Unsourced propaganda material. Look how it has been used in the past in other places. --E4024 (talk) 15:15, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: I don't undertand in violation of which copyright or commons policy this file is. Basvb (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
COM:FOP#The Netherlands does not apply, as this is not made to be permanently situated. Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:04, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
- Ah well, this was too fast. Siegfried Bing died 1905, and the work shown on the banner must be PD. The rest should be {{PD-ineligible}}, so I withdraw my nomination. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 19:53, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Per withdrawal Basvb (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
La iconografía, tipografía e imagenes se encuentran registradas ante el Instituto Nacional de Derechos de Autor. Se prohíbe su uso, reproducción, modificación o comercialización sin permiso escrito del Sistema de Transporte Colectivo.
Translation: The iconography, typography and images are registered with the Instituto Nacional de Derechos de Autor. Prohibiting its use, reproduction, modification or disposal without a written permission from Sistema de Transporte Colectivo.
This notice can be seen on the left side in the pages of the website:
http://www.metro.df.gob.mx/red/iconografia.html
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
- Reason
- Possible copyvio, not enough copyright information. See User_talk:Tom_noll on Wikipedia for context.
Gobeirne, 18:24, 15 Dec 2009- Retract - User appears to be Marketing Production Manager for Conrad Schmitt Studios. - gobeirne (talk) 22:12, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Painting on the wall and interior might be copyrighted. Basvb (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:17, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
personality rights SpeedyGonsales (talk) 20:35, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment The church is hardly visible, this seems out of project scope. However, uploader was not notified; I have done that now. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 20:45, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
- The person is my brother, he allowed the picture. thx--Beyond silence 22:25, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Per explanation given. Basvb (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The picture has been uploaded by myself, but the name "Palla Bianca.JPG" is wrong and misleading. The right name should be "Im hintern Eis.jpg" (the name of the mountain): the "Palla Bianca" itself is the mountain immediately OUTSIDE of the picture, on the right.Fdbef (talk) 15:38, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
- Why delete, nice picture. You can use Template:Rename, or Template:Bad name if you already have already uploaded the same file under a new name--Ankara (talk) 15:42, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
"Public domain works must be out of copyright in both the United States and in the source country of the work in order to be hosted on the Commons. If the work is not a U.S. work, the file must have an additional copyright tag indicating the copyright status in the source country." Maybe Template:PD-UK-unknown is needed? 84user (talk) 08:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
- Keep No reason to delete. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 21:07, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
safira
[edit]- File:upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Selo_Conde_Safira.jpg
- File:upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Costas.jpg/475px-Costas.jpg
Reasons for deletion request -- Please delete, thease images were mine and I do not wish to expose them to public no more.
Deleted: Seems to be deleted long ago. Basvb (talk) 20:19, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
not original file. --Moheen Reeyad (talk) 11:17, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
- Did you mean copyvio? I didn't find any on the internet. Low resolution probably because captured by a non-smartphone? Either way that's not a valid rational. ~ Nahid Talk 16:33, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Please expand the motivation. Basvb (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
just a book cover, nothing written, useless Frédéric (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm, true, just a book cover. Same useless or useful as the foto of a tree (though still there probably are many more trees than book covers ever published ...), I guess. Depends, what it is used for. In this case: List of all books published by one of Germanys most popular female writers in the 19th century, Marie Nathusius. --Wistula (talk) 11:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Basvb (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Submitter wishes to replace wtih duplicate image without border but with same name; just added by submitter, not linked. --Kablammo 13:53, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- just use uploading new version of this file, old version will be overwrited. Julo 14:06, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
- Now done, and request removed from deletion requests. This page can be deleted, closed, or archived-- whatever is appropriate. Thank you. Kablammo 14:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:20, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
lizard id is possibly incorrect, file should be called "broad tailed gecko". Photographed creature is probably Phyllurus platurus not Saltuarius_swaini. Though both species on Wikipedia default to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Leaf-tailed_Gecko Poyt448 (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
lizard id is possibly incorrect, file should be called "broad tailed gecko" Poyt448 (talk) 12:44, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: First, the deletion request was not marked on the File: page itself. Second, if the image name is wrong (which I am at a loss to judge) there is no need to remove the image; just request a {{rename}}. -- Aisano (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request it's a wrong chemical structure.
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:21, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
_02.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_02.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The file doesn't exist. I have a technical problem.
There were two files in removing table, but after renaming one of them, the second had an statement, that such a name exist. So I had changed a name into "Yvonne Strahovski at Nerd HQ 2014 (cropped) 02.jpg". And after the next renaming I get a statement there is no such a file. Maybe exist the only one? Look at File:Yvonne Strahovski at Nerd HQ 2014 (cropped).jpg I don't know what happened: whether the file disappeared, or it was duplicated for a while because of the base problems? Wieralee (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
_02.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:22, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
_02.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Er.rahulrajsonu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope.
- File:Rahul allbro.jpg
- File:Rahul 2015.jpg
- File:Rahul munmun1.jpg
- File:Rahul collegetime.jpg
- File:Rahul 20112.jpg
- File:Rahul monu.jpg
- File:Rahul 20111.jpg
- File:Rahul lotoustample.jpg
- File:Rahul raj.jpg
- File:Rahul munmun.jpg
- File:Munmun.jpg
Ies (talk) 07:42, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- two used in user pages, all other deleted -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:02, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
- I've nominated both the abandoned drive-by user pages these 2 photos are used on for speedy deletion under G5. If the speedy deletions are done, these last 2 photos should be deleted - if the pages are kept, the photos should be kept. Rosario Berganza 07:29, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: All deleted now. Basvb (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
uploaded under new nameMpisani 20:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request Calvet 01:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
there is already a better image Cocoloi 21:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep: "there is a better image" could probably be said of tens of thousands of pictures in Commons; if we discussed this argument it would get us nowhere. There is no harm in keeping such an image; it might even have some hidden qualities (e.g. by demonstrating the state of technology at an earlier date, by showing older specimens of a certain kind, …). I suggest not to discuss such issues.
- Btw, the delete request was not added to the image page. -- Aisano (talk) 23:13, 18 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:23, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
File:2008 Fresneda de la Sierra Cuenca-Las Zorreras-Fuertescusa ED-50-UTM-USO 30 X-569934 Y-4478486.JPG
[edit]
poyatos de la sierra 188.77.14.36 15:55, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- La foto no es de Poyatos de la Sierra, está correctamente ubicada en el término de Fuertescusa, la foto está localizada, y corresponde a la margen izquierda descendente de una gran formación rocosa sobre el Rio Escabas que simula un lagarto, esa piedra está en el término municipal de Fuertescusa lindero con Fresneda de la Sierra a la izquierda del Prado de Navellia.
- Keep
- Español: Se el nombre de la foto es erroneo o engañoso no hace falta borrar la imagen, solo cambiar la descriptión, o quizas solicitar un cambio del nombre.
- English: If the name of the picture is wrong or misleading there is no need to delete it, just to change the description, or maybe request a name change.-- Aisano (talk) 19:20, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per Aisano's argument Basvb (talk) 20:24, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't believe that this photo is GFDL. Actually, it seems a copyroghted photo of an international press agency. Otherwise, this is the coolbuddy.com disclaimer:
All images submitted to this site are from independent authors, we do not have the resources to check the contents of these files for copyright infringements. We assume that the authors have given full credit where required. However, sometimes an infringement can still occur. If this is the case, and you own the copyright and wish to have the file removed, please inform us, and we will notify the author and remove the file.
I can't see anything referring to GFDL or free license. Kanchelskis 10:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Derivative work. Copyvio Jeffness 00:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It is not a photo of Ryoanji Temple entrance; the photo actually shows the Sakuramon gate of Kitano Tenmangu Shrine, Kyoto, on one of the monthly festival days at that shrine. Perhaps, rather deleting the photo altogether, its caption can be corrected and the photo moved to the Kitano Tenmangu Shrine category. In my opinion, if that is going to be done, the original creator of this file should be responsible for doing it. Tksb (talk) 11:36, 23 January 2010 (UTC) Also, I found an extremely similar photo on an internet site about Kitano Tenmangu Shrine, Kyoto: http://sssin007.com/q54.jpg
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request -Lasy88 05:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
ParkerRunTipple.jpg is a better upload of the same image! Douglas W. Jones (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
ParkerRunTipple.jpg is a better upload of the same image! Douglas W. Jones (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
ParkerRunTipple.jpg is a better upload of the same image! Douglas W. Jones (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:25, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
see: Commons:Deletion requests/Haxo — Superbfc 00:27, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It's an exactly copy of an existing file. See File:Rafael - ressureicaocristo01.jpg Dornicke (talk) 23:34, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
- In this case you should use {{Duplicate}} instead. Mizunoryu 大熊猫❤小熊猫 (talk) 16:56, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
- That's all right. I've uploaded a sharper version of this file. It's not a duplicate anymore. Dornicke (talk) 03:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status, see image description. GeorgHH 18:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
see Commons:Deletion_requests/Haxo Superbfc 00:29, 10 November 2006 (UTC) — superbfc
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request: Unknown copyright-202.64.84.185 03:28, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
My real name appears in the description and is linked to my user name..not comfortable with this. Would prefer to delete the image entirely and then reupload without my personal information Heightwatcher (talk) 12:40, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- Deleted. Please upload a new version. ++Lar: t/c 03:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
- Strike that. I've undeleted the image and the non problematic revisions. The file is used in several wikis so it's needed to be kept around. ++Lar: t/c 04:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request: I uploaded the wrong image Mokka 13:37, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
- Keep and rename. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:04, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It hasn't anything to do with my name! --86.83.224.17 17:38, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Delete and reupload under a different filename. -- Drini 19:36, 19 September 2008 (UTC)
- Delete another oddly old discussion? Privatemusings (talk) 02:48, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Rename. The rest of possible issues are fine. 119.30.35.67 05:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:26, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
It is a proprietory image, made available for self-aggrandisement and to promote the owner thereof within his particular subculture. 80.177.162.157 07:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- Whatever -- First, I, the SVG image author, am not Tanos (who made the design). Second, it's the subject of a Wikipedia article. Third, Tanos gave me personal permission to make the SVG file and release it under its current copyright terms. If you have any substantial reasons to propose the deletion of this image, then by all means bring them forth. AnonMoos (talk) 17:15, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
Kept: Old nomination where the template has not been on the image for a long time. Please renominate if the grounds for deletion still apply. Basvb (talk) 20:27, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by దిగవల్లి రామచంద్ర (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos, documents and books. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:చళ్ళపిళ్ల వెంకట శాస్త్ర్రి గారు స్వహస్తముతో వ్రాసినది.pdf
- File:రాజమండ్రీ జైలులో లాఠీదెబ్బల పాట కృష్ణా పత్రిక డిసెంబరు 1930.pdf
- File:Bezwada Municipal Election Manifesto of Dr.Sarma garu.pdf
- File:Doc Ghantasala Sarma garu.jpg
- File:హనుమంతరావుగారిని గూర్చిశివరావుగారి నోట్సు.pdf
- File:వెలిదండ్ల హనుమంతరావుగారి 49th వర్ధంతి సభ.pdf
- File:Dr.Ghantasala Seetharama Sarma.JPG
- File:Dr. Velidandla Hanumantha Rao.jpg
- File:నవీన ఆర్ధిక నీతి(1936).pdf
- File:With new spects fter IOL operation in 1991. Photo by Dr.V.R.Prasad B.V.Sc Khargone on 8the Sept.1991.jpg
- File:ఫెడరేషన్ నిజస్వరూపము (Jan 1939).pdf
- File:ఆంగ్ల రాజ్యాంగము (1933).pdf
- File:Dictionary of Technical Terms(1988).pdf
- File:ఏనుగుల వీరస్వామయ్య గారి కాశీయాత్ర చరిత్ర (1991).pdf
- File:వీరెశలింగం వెలుగు నీడలు 1985.pdf
- File:అధినివేశ స్వరాజ్యము(Dominion Staturs) 1933.pdf
- File:అంకుల్ టామ్ కధ (1935) in memorium.pdf
- File:కధలు గాధలు 4 భాగాలు 2008 Edition.pdf
- File:Ramakrishna Math Swami Chiranthananda swamy and Bharthiya Ithihasa Parishad.pdf
- File:చళ్ళ పిళ్ళ వెంకటశాస్త్రి గారు.pdf
- File:Cuttamanchi .R.Reddy.pdf
- File:First page of his diary.pdf
- File:Digavalli Venkata Sivarao in his Jubilee Hills residence in 1985 (he was 88 years).jpg
- File:ఆఫ్రికా జాతీయోద్యమము 1959.pdf
- File:Speaking in felicitation meeting 1987.jpg
- File:Digavalli Siva rao and Kamala.JPG
- File:As Lawyer D.V.Sivarao in 1956.jpg
- File:ప్రజా ప్రభుత్వము Jan 1966.pdf
- File:THE BRITISH RULE IN INDIA 1938 by Digavalli Venkata Sivarao.pdf
- File:మన ఆంధ్రత్వము Dec,1962 By Digavalli Venkata Sivara Rao.pdf
- File:విస్మ్రుతాంధ్రము విశాలాంధ్రము with inner page written by దిగవల్లి వేంకట శివరావు.pdf
- File:భారతదేశమున బ్రిటిష్ రాజ్యతంత్రము October2,1938 By Digavalli Venkata Sivarao.pdf
- File:Digavalli Venkata Sivarao in 1930s.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:12, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- Many of these files are copyrighted to Digavalli Venkata Siva Rao (or "D.V. Sivarao"). According to VIAF we know he was born in 1898 but there's nothing about his death. According to this pic apparently her son (the original uploader of these files) asserts he died en 1992 (94 years! :O), so these books would not be in public domain (because author died after 1954). Nevertheless, it could be the copyrights now belong to his son/heir (as I said, apparently the uploader), or to the publisher (in second case works pre-1954... would be in public domain? I don't know). Strakhov (talk) 17:19, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- The author of these media is a new editor for Wikipedia. He is the copyright holder and wound provide information regarding the same. Please give him sometime.--Rajasekhar1961 (talk) 05:44, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
- Any updates? Natuur12 (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- Strakhov, Natuur12, Jameslwoodward As per my knowledge, Digavalli Ramachandra is legal hair of late digavalli venkata sivarao. He has every right to release these books. I and Dr.Rajasekhar encouraged him to release rights for these books. I can say this is a great treasure to telugu wikisource. We are trying to figure out some easy way to get this issue solved. Can you help us. --Pavan santhosh.s (talk) 03:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
- This is not the place for this discussion -- this DR has been closed -- but I will comment. As I noted below, the pdf files are out of scope and do not belong on Commons. Being the heir of digavalli venkata sivarao does not make the uploader the copyright holder of the photographs. In order to restore the photographs, we will need a license from each of the photographers or their heirs. If you want to continue this discussion, please do so on my talk page. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:31, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
- Strakhov, Natuur12, Jameslwoodward As per my knowledge, Digavalli Ramachandra is legal hair of late digavalli venkata sivarao. He has every right to release these books. I and Dr.Rajasekhar encouraged him to release rights for these books. I can say this is a great treasure to telugu wikisource. We are trying to figure out some easy way to get this issue solved. Can you help us. --Pavan santhosh.s (talk) 03:25, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
- Any updates? Natuur12 (talk) 14:34, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: THe PDFs are out of scope, many of the photos are very poor quality and all have the same copyright questions. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by దిగవల్లి రామచంద్ర (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical documents and photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Digavalli Venkata Sivarao's ideals.pdf
- File:దిగవల్లి తిమ్మరాజుగారు 1828లో కట్టించిన భీమేశ్వారాలయంలోని సిలాశాసనము.pdf
- File:Digavalli Sivarao had all rights on his books.pdf
- File:Death certificate of D.V.Sivarao.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:29, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
unlikely that the uploader took picture inside the EU parliament, and shrunk it to that tiny size. It is the only image by that uploader. We have enough better images at Category:Kay Swinburne. Herzi Pinki (talk) 14:36, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete See EXIF: '(C) European Union PE-EP'. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Personal image of the uploader mixed with no educational value QuiteUnusual (talk) 15:12, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. User is not here to build an encyclopedia. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 14:48, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Basvb (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I don't want it on Wikipedia as it's my work Jenkerbell (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope. Basvb (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Louis Derbré, the scuptor, died in 2011 — Racconish 📥 15:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in France Basvb (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This image appears to be from a half-toned source, no camera metadata. User's other uploads were from LA Times, and at least two other photographers. Please read COM:L before making more uploads. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
The sculptor, Bourganov, is not dead. — Racconish 📥 15:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in France Basvb (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This image doesn't have a source other than own work which is clearly impossible if the work dates to 1871. A real source needs to be added, the image is in use on the web, see [8] but with no clarification to source there, date of image or copyright status. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Please provide a valid source and authorship information, then this file can be restored. Basvb (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This image doesn't have a source other than own work which is clearly impossible if the work dates to 1871. A real source needs to be added, the image is in use on the web, see http://www.zarrinkafsch-bahman.org/6.html] but with no clarification to source there, date of image or copyright status. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Please provide a valid source and authorship information, then this file can be kept. Basvb (talk) 20:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This image doesn't have a source other than own work which is clearly impossible if the work dates to 1871. A real source needs to be added, the image is in use on the web, see [9] but with no clarification to source there, date of image or copyright status. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:17, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: 1871 seems past every possible PD-old there is. Some work on correct licensing is welcome here. Basvb (talk) 20:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
COM:GCSD#G1 (containing nonsenses), Commons:Deletion_policy#Out_of_scope (Not educationally useful), Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats (The content is essentially raw text). Aleator (talk) 16:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: plain text file. Basvb (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
COM:GCSD#G1 (containing nonsenses, also deleted on w:es:Bedoyismo), Commons:Deletion_policy#Out_of_scope (not educationally useful), Commons:Project_scope#PDF_and_DjVu_formats (the content is essentially raw text), not used. Aleator (talk) 16:53, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope: plain text file. Basvb (talk) 20:40, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
File:Portsmouth Goldsmith Avenue Conservative Party general election 2010 advertisment vandalism.JPG
[edit]
Photo of a copyrighted advert. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
wrong name, my mistake. this picture was reuploaded under right title: File:Igreja de Nossa Senhora do Carmo - Ouro Preto.jpg tetraktys (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: you can use Template:Duplicate for this in the future. Basvb (talk) 20:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Uploader's mistake, the image it too wide. Delete and I will upload better image Pete unseth (talk) 18:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Under "File history" there is a button: upload a new version of this file, please use that button. Basvb (talk) 20:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Better file previously updated. Anybody who knows how, please delete this. Pete unseth (talk) 18:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: upon uploader request/clearly etter version exists Basvb (talk) 20:37, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Graffiti in County Armagh
[edit]Derivative work of the signs - fails COM:FOP#United Kingdom
,_September_2009.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_September_2009.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 19:01, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This needs assessing for copyright breach. The lack of camera data makes me suspicious. The quality appears to be a cropped and enlarged element from a larger picture, so it may be fine Timtrent (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Is already deleted. Basvb (talk) 20:35, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Derivative work of the sign. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:07, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This appears to be a low-res copy of the file File:US Navy 071219-N-4658L-110 The guided-missile destroyer USS John Paul Jones (DDG 53) sits pier-side, ready for a judging panel's inspection during the 2007 holiday ship decoration contest.jpg - and the "Source" description "Own work" appears to be false. Rsteen (talk) 19:26, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
_sits_pier-side,_ready_for_a_judging_panel%27s_inspection_during_the_2007_holiday_ship_decoration_contest.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:31, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Snowden is not the creator he is the one who collected files and made it possible to publish it. Sanandros (talk) 20:28, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep -- Edward Snowden most certainly is a "creator", being a writer and creator of speeches and commentary about documents. -- Cirt (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per Cirt's arguments. Basvb (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by WinWikinaan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Dubious authorship. Varying resolution, no EXIF, File:Chumbawambas Tubthumping Music Video.jpg has an interesting watermark and File:Dunstan Bruce in Tubthumping.jpg exists in higher resolution elsewhere.
- File:Chumbawambas Tubthumping Music Video.jpg
- File:Dunstan Bruce in Tubthumping.jpg
- File:73492d4ecb0d7bb590a17230c6171d41 400x400.jpeg
- File:Dunstan Bruce.jpg
- File:Dunstan.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 20:44, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Likely copyvios Basvb (talk) 20:33, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Edgars2007 as Copyvio (copyvio) Yann (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Edgars2007 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.zudusilatvija.lv/objects/object/18356/ Yann (talk) 21:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Hier wünscht die Familie Pani aus Boston ausdrücklich, dass das Foto nicht weiterverwendet werden sollte. Und hier wird die "Reise" des Fotos über den Atlantik geschildert und wie die Familie Pani einem Autor erlaubte, das Foto in seinem Buch abzubilden, es jedoch nicht weiterzuverbreiten. Gruss--Alboholic (talk) 20:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
If still applicable please renominate. Basvb (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status... To be PD in the US (which is required), this would have to have been taken 70 years before 1996 (URAA date), so 1926. I don't think we can confidently say based on the photo that this predates 1926. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:10, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- The source seems to be dead, so it is not possible to determine whether the file is in the public domain in the source country or not. --Stefan2 (talk) 16:35, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: unclear copyright status. --JuTa 20:52, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
Jeg foreslo "sletting", bare for å dempe fra "Hurtigsletting", ettersom jeg i dag ble klar over at bildet var et klart eksempel på "copyright violation". Rettighetshavere er oppsporet. Tillatelse kommer en av de første dagene! Se filens diskusjonsside på Commons. mvh kj 08:48, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy keep According to the deletion request above, the image was nominated to prevent speedy deletion due to the missing license. OTRS has received proper permission (CC-by-sa-3.0) and the image is now tagged as such. Asav (OTRS) | Talk 23:44, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
If still applicable please renominate. Basvb (talk) 20:55, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
After today identifying around 15 uploads as copyvio it´s difficult to believe that these remaining files would be own work (can be found also earlier on Web) : IMHO untrusted user uploading a bunch of copyrighted material (small/inconsistent resolutions, missing exif) so these ones (per COM:PRP) can't be believed either. All files related to es:Club Atlético Belgrano, an Argentine sports club. Historical photos may be in public domain but relevant info must be provided.
- File:Predio Villa Esquiú.JPG
- File:Belgrano campeon 1913.JPG
- File:Luis Fabián Artime.JPG
- File:Julio cesar villagra.JPG
- File:Jacinto "La Chancha " Carballo.JPG
- File:Belgrano 1986.JPG
- File:Belgrano.JPG
- File:Club Atlético Belgrano de Córdoba.JPG
- File:Belgrano de Córdoba 2.JPG
- File:Belgrano campeon.JPG
- File:Dr.Arturo Orgaz.jpg
- File:Belgrano de Córdoba.JPG
- File:Recibimiento de Belgrano en el Gigante de Alberdi.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 14:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: by Yann; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 19:49, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Historical newspapers and photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Belgrano revoluciona Argentina.JPG
- File:Belgrano de Córdoba a primera.JPG
- File:Ascenso de Belgrano de Córdoba 1968.JPG
- File:Diario la voz del Interior 1968.JPG
- File:Camiseta de Belgrano.JPG
- File:Formación de Belgrano contra Vélez Sarsfield.JPG
- File:Dr.Arturo Orgaz.JPG
- File:Belgrano el más popular.JPG
- File:Belgrano vs Checoslovaquia.JPG
- File:Partido internacional de Belgrano.JPG
- File:Partido internacional de Belgrano de Córdoba.JPG
- File:Partidos Internacionales.png
- File:Belgrano de Córdoba.JPG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Low resolution, no EXIF, File:Estadio Gigante de Alberdi.JPG looks like a scan from a magazine.
Stefan4 (talk) 15:08, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:47, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Copyright Violation This image was created by the Salt Lake City newspaper Deseret News during 2002. This .SVG image appears to have been extracted from this PDF: http://www.deseretnews.com/media/photos/plaza3.pdf and slightly edited. I don't see where we have permission from the Deseret News to use it here in the commons. 209.33.246.41 14:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
seems a cropped image of http://www.atoutcoeur36.fr/0_0_0_0_250_188_csupload_56860449.jpg whitch is in this site http://www.atoutcoeur36.fr/conf-rences. This site and its contents seems copyrighted -- Christian Ferrer 05:03, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
- The file here has a larger size and exif-data, thus the link is not the source. Basvb (talk) 19:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per Basvb. Sanandros (talk) 12:09, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Low resolution photo already existed on its official website since January 2008 which means that the author copied the image from the website and uploaded it to wikipedia, not the other way round.
Deleted: deleted Sanandros (talk) 12:28, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
Photo of posters, fails COM:FOP#United Kingdom -mattbuck (Talk) 17:06, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination. Basvb (talk) 22:43, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Graffiti in Manchester (Hulme Subway)
[edit]While I'm not certain, the level of art and extent of it would imply to me that this is "authorised graffiti". It thus counts as a mural and so fails COM:FOP#United Kingdom.
- File:Hulme subway 03.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 04.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 05.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 06.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 07.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 08.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 09.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 10.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 11.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 12.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 14.JPG
- File:Hulme subway 15.JPG
-mattbuck (Talk) 17:10, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: except for 9, 12 and 14 they are just the average vandalism tags and thus very unlikely to be authorised IMO. Basvb (talk) 22:44, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Personal images originally from Category:Men
[edit]Unused personal images.
- File:12rafa.jpg
- File:2012 JML Stephane.jpg
- File:Acetino1.jpg
- File:Adil Omar in 2009.jpg
- File:AlbertBlack.jpg
- File:AMProjekt Band.jpg
- File:AnthonyAnthony Ausgang.jpeg
- File:Anuj.jpg
- File:Anush bekal.jpg
- File:Arkemyr på berg.jpg
- File:Arsenalz czw i iws.jpg
- File:Bartosz Kuberacki.JPG
- File:Beach(shooting).jpg
- File:Becho.JPG
- File:Being Rami.jpg
- File:Belrose.JPG
- File:Benja.jpg
- File:Benjamin Martin.jpg
- File:Benjaminbirkbeck.jpg
- File:Bienvenido Vicioso.JPG
- File:Billede 045.jpg
- File:Blake-Harrison.jpg
- File:Blue2212.jpg
- File:Bob the Ravager.jpg
- File:Boorboor.jpg
- File:Brandon Elizondo.jpg
- File:Call center agent 2.jpg
- File:Cantando x.JPG
- File:Carte de visite Damien Levy - Copie.JPG
- File:Carwyn, The Legend.JPG
- File:Caveras.jpg
- File:CHrisLAwn.gif
- File:CollW.jpg
- File:Come jerwin.jpg
- File:Cooke in Swansea, May 2009.jpg
- File:Cookingschool.jpg
- File:Coolbluejinx.jpg
- File:Copia de chucho51.JPG
- File:Copia de DSC04642.JPG
- File:Copy of 7.JPG
- File:Copy of rksingh.JPG
- File:Corderputo.jpg
- File:Corp.jpg
- File:Cris knight101 4594.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 15:43, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:16, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
Unused personal images
[edit]Unused personal images, or without sufficient context to allow identification.
- File:Zach lol.jpg
- File:Zapbeerfull.jpg
- File:Ziad.jpg
- File:Zitoune simple.JPG
- File:Ziya cool2.jpg
- File:Zz555.JPG
- File:Štefan Časar.jpg
- File:Жинкин, Георгий Николаевич.jpg
- File:Комиссаров М.Ю..jpg
- File:Фото019.jpg
- File:سید امیر حسین رضوی (Seyyed Amir Hossein Razavi).jpg
- File:صورة094.jpg
- File:عدنان جبالي.png
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 17:25, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
- File:Štefan Časar.jpg has already been nominated for deletion here. Can you please verify in the future whether the images that you want to propose for DR are already nominated? Thank you. Regards, --Eleassar (t/p) 18:10, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 18:29, 15 December 2013 (UTC)
Files in Category:Mattbuck's temporary category
[edit]Fails COM:FOP#United Kingdom - these are all "graphic works", which are not covered by FoP in the UK. Without permission from the copyright holder we cannot keep these.
- File:82 Fazeley St Digbeth.JPG
- File:Acocks Green Community Orchard.JPG
- File:Birmingham Coach Station.JPG
File:Bull Ring Stained Glass.jpg- File:Canal Mural at The Bond.JPG
File:Cat Tile Snowhill Station.JPG- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork (11654440786).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - badger (11653580645).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - blackbird (11653842124).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - cotteridgepark.org.uk (11654330066).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - dogs (11653770193).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - dogs (11653976864).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - dogs (11654392586).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - dogs - dalmatian (11653831483).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - Thanks for Visiting (11653602335).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - Welcome to Cotteridge Park (11653591415).jpg
- File:Cotteridge Park - railway bridge - artwork - Welcome to Cotteridge Park (11653921193).jpg
- File:Custard Factory Archway.JPG
- File:Custard Factory Brown man.JPG
- File:Custard Factory Car park 2.JPG
- File:Custard Factory Car Park.JPG
- File:Custard Factory face.JPG
- File:Custard Factory High Rise.JPG
- File:Custard factory ice cream cones.JPG
- File:Custard factory Jimmy C.JPG
- File:Custard Factory Shop Front.JPG
- File:Custard Factory Spaghetti.JPG
- File:Custard Factory under Arch 1.JPG
- File:Custard Factory under Arch 2.JPG
- File:Digbeth Eugene Booms.JPG
- File:Digbeth Hands.JPG
- File:Digbeth Heath Mill Lane Car Park 2.JPG
- File:Digbeth Heath Mill Lane Car Park.JPG
- File:Digbeth Horror in the Streets.JPG
- File:Digbeth Leprechaun.JPG
- File:Digbeth Mind Control.JPG
- File:Digbeth Octopus.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 1.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 10.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 11.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 12.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 13.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 14.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 15.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 16.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 17.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 18.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 19.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 2.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 20.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 21.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 22.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 23.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 24.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 25.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 26.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 27.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 3.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 4.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 5.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 6.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 7.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 8.JPG
- File:Hockley Flyover Subway Street Art 9.JPG
File:Horse Fair.JPGFile:St Martin de Porres School.JPGFile:St Vincent Mural.JPGFile:The Emergence of Women in the 20th Century.JPGFile:Winson Green Smithy.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Note to closing admin - please just delete the files, not my category! -mattbuck (Talk) 12:57, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:29, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Hmm so now you want to delete all Birmingham graffiti photos off here? Ok. Does Brianboro know? Ellrbrown (talk) 21:04, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- You can't delete the following: Horsefair is a mosaic by Kenneth Budd.
- Winson Green Smithy is a 3D pub sculpture (not 2D graffiti).
- St Martin de Porres School looks like a mosaic also (you got a thing against mosaics - if so you'd request to delete all Kenneth / Oliver Budd works such as the JFK Memorial in Digbeth).
- Cat Tile Snowhill Station is a tile. (the uploader posted it on the Snow Hill Station wikipedia page I think).
Ellrbrown (talk) 21:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- The list above includes sculptures, hand-painted tiles and stained glass, each of which are speciically allowed by COM:FOP#United Kingdom. Andy Mabbett (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Ellrbrown: - Those have duly removed from consideration. Thankyou for the heads up. Regarding the graffiti, I don't think there's actual graffiti there (as in vandalism), it looks likely to be legitimate murals which do fail FOP. Stupid ridiculous counterintuitive law that it is. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ok thanks re the ones mentioned yesterday. I normally call the street art graffiti. These days the art that goes up in Digbeth is part of the City of Colours project. Am always wondering how these artists get onto the Connaught Square site (the demolished part that isn't used as a car park). Although there's a gap in the hoardings near the River Rea. Ellrbrown (talk) 19:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- I've seen this one File:The Emergence of Women in the 20th Century.JPG myself inside The ICC. It's a tapestry. Not sure what the law covers for that though. Ellrbrown (talk) 22:02, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- That would be OK as it counts as artistic craftsmanship rather than graphic work. Removed from consideration. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:24, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- I've seen this one File:The Emergence of Women in the 20th Century.JPG myself inside The ICC. It's a tapestry. Not sure what the law covers for that though. Ellrbrown (talk) 22:02, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- What about mosiacs, such as File:St Vincent Mural.JPG? Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:54, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- grumble* misleading filenames. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Ok thanks re the ones mentioned yesterday. I normally call the street art graffiti. These days the art that goes up in Digbeth is part of the City of Colours project. Am always wondering how these artists get onto the Connaught Square site (the demolished part that isn't used as a car park). Although there's a gap in the hoardings near the River Rea. Ellrbrown (talk) 19:42, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Ellrbrown: - Those have duly removed from consideration. Thankyou for the heads up. Regarding the graffiti, I don't think there's actual graffiti there (as in vandalism), it looks likely to be legitimate murals which do fail FOP. Stupid ridiculous counterintuitive law that it is. -mattbuck (Talk) 22:10, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- The list above includes sculptures, hand-painted tiles and stained glass, each of which are speciically allowed by COM:FOP#United Kingdom. Andy Mabbett (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
- File:Custard factory ice cream cones.JPG would seem to fall under "de minimis". Andy Mabbett (talk) 10:55, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- Possible but not certain - the photo is clearly meant to show the artwork. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:07, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per discussion. --Krd 03:21, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
Various UK graffiti images
[edit]I've been trawling through Category:Graffiti in the United Kingdom, and I believe that all of the images here nominated are "authorised" graffiti rather than vandalism. This makes them murals, and more importantly 2D graphic works, and so they fail to qualify for freedom of panorama. Thus, lacking any statement by the artists, we must assume these are copyrighted and so must be deleted.
I am aware that some of the ones nominated are less clear-cut than others, so if you have any objections to specific images being deleted then say so and they may be removed from consideration.
- File:100 3199a.JPG
- File:Art in Cladymore^ - geograph.org.uk - 1533957.jpg
- File:Belin in Manchester - erokism.jpg
- File:Blutate.jpg
- File:Brick Lane Graffiti Usain Bolt 2.jpg
- File:Brick Lane Graffiti Usain Bolt.jpg
- File:By the Gipping river footpath - geograph.org.uk - 1467798.jpg
- File:Car Park Art 01.JPG
- File:Car Park Art 02.JPG
- File:Car Park Art 03.JPG
- File:Car Park Art 04.JPG
- File:Decorated stadium wall - geograph.org.uk - 337679.jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6013692863).jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6013693251).jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6013693589).jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6014241024).jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6014241176).jpg
- File:Edinburgh (6014241498).jpg
- File:Empty Walls Cardiff 2014 - David de la Mano on Buffalo Bar, Windsor Place.jpg
- File:Empty Walls Cardiff 2014 - Ekstraternek on disused shop unit, Wood Street.jpg
- File:Empty Walls Cardiff 2014 - Phlegm on Marland House, Wood Street.jpg
- File:Fabulous Furry Freaks - geograph.org.uk - 977171.jpg
- File:Graffiti (complete).jpg
- File:Graffiti (part 1).jpg
- File:Graffiti (part 2).jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 086.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 68.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 69.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 70.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 71.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 72.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 74.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Liverpool 75.jpg
- File:Graffiti in Shoreditch, London - Nelson Mandela by Paul Don Smith (9424997560).jpg
- File:Graffiti or art ^ - geograph.org.uk - 873124.jpg
- File:Graffiti Street Art Sokes Croft Bristol - geograph.org.uk - 1437688.jpg
- File:Graffiti Wall, Sweyne Park - geograph.org.uk - 156915.jpg
- File:Graffiti, Dinsdale Place (geograph 3202622).jpg
- File:Grafitti 1 (4876307266).jpg
- File:Grafitti 2 (4875693667).jpg
- File:Harry Brearley by Faunagraphic.jpg
- File:Lokey01.jpg
- File:Lokey02.jpg
- File:Lokey05.jpg
- File:Lokey06.jpg
- File:London graffiti 2013 (1).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (2).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (3).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (4).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (5).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (6).JPG
- File:London graffiti 2013 (7).JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti 2.JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti 3.JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti 4.JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti 5.JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti 6.JPG
- File:London Southbank Centre graffiti.JPG
- File:Monty Python Graffiti Leicester.jpg
- File:Potterrow street art (6063730376).jpg
- File:Potterrow street art (6063731468).jpg
- File:Potterrow street art (6063732652).jpg
- File:Potterrow street art (6063733768).jpg
- File:Roxe Graffiti Jam 2008.jpg
- File:Salford Graffiti (7379911994).jpg
- File:Salford Graffiti B&W (7379911154).jpg
- File:SeeNoEvil Inkie 2012.jpg
- File:Shop keepers Cowley road.jpg
- File:Skateboard rink, Victoria Park, Leamington Spa - geograph.org.uk - 1238124.jpg
- File:St John the Baptist, Bristol, graffiti.jpg
- File:Street Art in Hull - geograph.org.uk - 218293.jpg
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (11).JPG
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (16).JPG
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (23).JPG
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (24).JPG
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (27).JPG
- File:T13 Events and Market, Belfast, March 2012 (28).JPG
- File:The Graffiti House, Kentish Town - London.jpg
- File:Think Local (Taken by Flickr user 20th December 2014).jpg
- File:Wall art, Jacqueline's Night Club - geograph.org.uk - 754271.jpg
- File:Authorized graffiti in Car Park - geograph.org.uk - 724023.jpg
- File:ZebrafaceGraffiti.jpg
- File:Flyover graffiti - geograph.org.uk - 1282196.jpg
- File:Graffiti Art, Kensington Street - geograph.org.uk - 368581.jpg
.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){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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 19:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Many of these are not "authorised" graffiti, more that they have been allowed to remain, I feel that there is an essential difference here that you have failed to observe Oxyman (talk) 09:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- Perhaps, and I welcome suggestions as to which of these are authorised and which are not. -mattbuck (Talk) 12:20, 14 April 2015 (UTC)
- All or most of the images here need further discussion and should be nominated individually in order to facilitate such discussions. It is clear that you are just assuming many or most of the material here is authorised with no actual indication being present that this is the case Oxyman (talk) 08:15, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
It's highly inappropriate to add new deletion nominations at the foot of a page which has near its head the words "This deletion debate is now closed." Andy Mabbett (talk) 14:06, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure whether we can assess whether they're are 'authorised' or 'audacious' graffiti without a great deal of research. Generally I would assume that graffiti is unauthorized as it usually is, but furnishing the issue either way with proof in any case would be near impossible. Mtaylor848 (talk) 23:54, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted some which attributed a certain artist and where in places where it was likely that they were authorised. Kept most as there is quite a chance that they were not authorised and thus the argument for deletion does not follow. For those separate renominations (or in small groups) are a good option. I might have missed some which clearly state an author. Basvb (talk) 22:38, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Flickr files by Leonard Bentley
[edit]While the flickr stream of Leonard Bentley [10] holds many nice freely licensed, self-taken images, it also includes a plethora of images from other sources which Bentley also releases under CC-BY-SA, but without any evidence that they have the right to. See for example File:A Yeoman of the Guard (19380035331).jpg, stated to be a Tuck's Oilette from 1908; or File:Admiralty Arch (14726933558).jpg, which is clearly a postcard.
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
I have added Bentley to the "questionable flickr users" list, and unfortunately I think we must delete their entire collection under COM:PRP. G
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(15030559747).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.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){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){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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){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){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 09:09, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Those that are blatantly PD. I do not see the grounds to delete File:"Equestrian monument in an unidentified location" = Emperor Joseph II in the Josefsplatz, Vienna! (9404901487).jpg, File:Blackall and McDonagh (8651631526).jpg or File:D.I.Y. High Cross (8650532617).jpg. I suggest closing this DR en-mass unless a more detailed review is done before trying this again. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 09:23, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- 52 files are made with a Nikon D810 and 74 with a Canon powershot G10, it seems possible that one or both of these are own work as they are recent and local (East Sussex) files. Maybe there's an option to investigate that a bit further. On the other hand given that there are a few hundred old files, unlikely own work, deleting everything and reuploading more carefully (per Fae) is also an option. Basvb (talk) 10:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- I agree that some files are almost certainly own work, but I don't think that we can allow unrestricted uploads on the grounds of the numerous photos which are not own work. Fae is probably right that some are PD, but we need an explicit reason those are PD, not just a vague assertion. -mattbuck (Talk) 13:39, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- 52 files are made with a Nikon D810 and 74 with a Canon powershot G10, it seems possible that one or both of these are own work as they are recent and local (East Sussex) files. Maybe there's an option to investigate that a bit further. On the other hand given that there are a few hundred old files, unlikely own work, deleting everything and reuploading more carefully (per Fae) is also an option. Basvb (talk) 10:42, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep File:"Equestrian monument in an unidentified location" = Emperor Joseph II in the Josefsplatz, Vienna! (9404901487).jpg because it isn't from Leonard Bentley's Flickr stream at all, that name only appears in the description because a person of that name (possibly the same person whose Flickr stream is being discussed here) apparently identified the object, which certainly shouldn't raise any questions about the copyright status. That file comes from the Flickr stream National Library of Ireland, not Leonard Bentley. darkweasel94 17:46, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Struckthrough, my bad, I thought I got rid of those which weren't explicitly from the photostream. -mattbuck (Talk) 18:17, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - all the images on his photostream (that I just scanned briefly) appear to be well over 100 years old or photos he took himself. File:Admiralty Arch (14726933558).jpg must be from the 1870s! How would copyright still apply? Wikimandia (talk) 18:48, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- The point of the DR was to decide which images COULD be kept. Some are clear copyvios, some less so, I figured that starting a DR people would help out with that, for instance by striking through images that they think are easy keeps (and adding a rationale). -mattbuck (Talk) 21:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Wikimandia: That particular photo (File:Admiralty Arch (14726933558).jpg) is marked as being by Aerofilms Ltd., a company that wasn't even founded until 1919. It's from the 1920s at the earliest, and that you're about 50 years off rather makes the point about why these need to be looked at. Revent (talk) 23:02, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- The point of the DR was to decide which images COULD be kept. Some are clear copyvios, some less so, I figured that starting a DR people would help out with that, for instance by striking through images that they think are easy keeps (and adding a rationale). -mattbuck (Talk) 21:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Close all as keep. If a shorter list can be constructed, of those that seem to definitely lapse from our inclusion standards, then shorter and more selective nominations can be made. I uploaded File:Tanks crossing Westminster Bridge on Peace Day -- 1919-07-19.jpg Under what conditions can a picture from 1919 still be protected by copyright? Is there any credible reason to believe the image sat, unpublished, for half a century or so? I simply can't agree there would be a scrap of credibility to this assertion, and to act like it was would be to carry PRP to ridiculous extremes. Geo Swan (talk) 21:13, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Quite easily if the author didn't die until 1946. I've seen photos from the 1890s which are still in copyright. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Aren't these all UK images? What does Template:PD-UKGov say about when UK images entered the public domain?
- "It is a photograph created by the United Kingdom Government and taken prior to 1 June 1957; or
- "It was commercially published prior to 1965; or
- "It is an artistic work other than a photograph or engraving (e.g. a painting) which was created by the United Kingdom Government prior to 1965."
- Every one of these images I have looked at seems to have been either a UK government image, or a postcard, or other image that would be best described as "commercially published". So, 1946 doesn't seem relevant to these 100 year old images. Geo Swan (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- That applies only to UK Government works... i.o.w. a work of the UK government that was commercially published before 1965. It has nothing at all to do with postcards published by private companies, where the relevant term is either 70 years pma, or 70 years from publication if it is anonymous (and we need evidence that it was actually 'anonymous', for the UK). Revent (talk) 23:10, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Aren't these all UK images? What does Template:PD-UKGov say about when UK images entered the public domain?
- Quite easily if the author didn't die until 1946. I've seen photos from the 1890s which are still in copyright. -mattbuck (Talk) 21:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- The nomination asserts flickr contributor Bentley images should all be considered questionable, because his or her stream "also includes a plethora of images from other sources which Bentley also releases under CC-BY-SA, but without any evidence that they have the right to."
Here, in the 21st Century, practically every US airbase, battalion, naval station, and USN or USCG vessel, has an (amateur) webmaster. Hundreds, or thousands of these amateur webmasters established IDs on flickr, where they upload images that we all realize should be marked as public domain -- under a CC-BY-SA license. I see that flickr has added the ability to license images as {{Cc0}} essentially equivalent to PD. But this is very recent, and practically all the images that should have been licensed as PD or cc0 are licensed as cc-by-sa, because that was the free-est license flickr allowed, up until recently.
Bentley's decision to use cc-by-sa when that was the free-est liscense flickr allowed was completely reasonable, and was not a sign of bad-faith. If we challenge Bentley's images on this basis, are we going to challenge the several thousand DoD images I uploaded from the user-ids of the DoD's amateur web-masters? We might be talking about hundreds of thousands wasteful challenges here.
flinfo reads the exif info, and will over-ride cc-by-sa, when the exif info states the image is PD. Should any uploader should feel free to do this for any flickr image which is clearly PD?
As for 100 year old postcards, that Buckley applied a cc-by-sa license to, postcards are, by their very nature, published. No one can assert 100 year old postcards are still protected by copyright, based on the possibility they sat unpublished for half a century, because they are, by their very nature, demonstrably published. I don't think any 100 year old postcards should have been challenged. Geo Swan (talk) 21:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Geo Swan: The idea that a 100 year old postcard from the UK, even if published at that time, could not be under copyright is mistaken, as Mattbuck noted above. For UK photographs where the author is 'known' (even if not by us) the copyright terms is 70 years from their death, not based on publication date. Revent (talk) 23:04, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- When has a postcard company not acquired all rights to the images they use? Geo Swan (talk) 17:56, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Geo Swan: That's beside the point. Acquiring the rights to an image does not change the length of its copyright protection. Even a work for hire, where the first owner of the copyright was a company, still normally has a copyright term based on the lifetime of the actual creator of the work. See, for 'proof', the second section of this UK.gov page. Revent (talk) 05:03, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Geo Swan: The idea that a 100 year old postcard from the UK, even if published at that time, could not be under copyright is mistaken, as Mattbuck noted above. For UK photographs where the author is 'known' (even if not by us) the copyright terms is 70 years from their death, not based on publication date. Revent (talk) 23:04, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Keep for now. This list needs to be more carefully thought through. Many are postcards are clearly in the public domain, such as File:Oxford Circus (22891646886).jpg a postcard by fr:Léon & Lévy - George Levy died in 1913. Some images have matadata that would indicate they are much more likely properly licenced. File:Kingsway Tunnel (15486221195).jpg appear to be a Getty image per this. File:Army Order (15030279140).jpg and File:Army Order (Continued) (15030559747).jpg are clearly UK government works that fell into the public domain in 1969. Make a deletion that groups similar items together instead of such an eclectic mixture of images. Ww2censor (talk) 23:33, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - Per Raphael Tuck images. Sorry if this is grandmother and sucking eggs. The Raphael Tuck database states that pre-1928 Tuck postcards are in the public domain, presumably whether or not the photographer/tinter is still alive today. Generally, virtually all postcards don't acknowledge a photographer, only a publisher, so how can we tell if or not a postcard is '1923 and 70 years'... the date range of a publisher's publishing might give us an idea. A question might be asked if the Tuck database web site has the authority to waive stuff into the public domain, but if it hasn't I would have thought that it and its own web publications would have been pulled up on this since its inception in 2010. Acabashi (talk) 21:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Acabashi: It's honestly an awkward point, regarding old UK images. Even if the photographer or artist was not attributed on the work itself, if the publisher kept records, and those records still exist, then under UK law the author is not unknown, as their identity could be determined by a 'reasonable inquiry'. There are undoubtedly many works on Commons that are licensed as 'unknown', when the author is really just 'unknown to us', and we have not truly met the legal grounds for making the assertion that the authorship cannot be determined. At the same time, many of them are probably PD due to expiration anyhow. As far as 'how can we know', the official guidance for such searches is pretty detailed... they don't mean 'a reasonable inquiry', they mean 'every plausible inquiry that has a reasonable chance of yielding the information.' Revent (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Just as a further comment, the Tuck postcards are a bit of an exception to this, since it is a matter of public knowledge that the records were destroyed by an act of war. Revent (talk) 05:34, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- @Acabashi: It's honestly an awkward point, regarding old UK images. Even if the photographer or artist was not attributed on the work itself, if the publisher kept records, and those records still exist, then under UK law the author is not unknown, as their identity could be determined by a 'reasonable inquiry'. There are undoubtedly many works on Commons that are licensed as 'unknown', when the author is really just 'unknown to us', and we have not truly met the legal grounds for making the assertion that the authorship cannot be determined. At the same time, many of them are probably PD due to expiration anyhow. As far as 'how can we know', the official guidance for such searches is pretty detailed... they don't mean 'a reasonable inquiry', they mean 'every plausible inquiry that has a reasonable chance of yielding the information.' Revent (talk) 05:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
- Comment - Per Raphael Tuck images. Sorry if this is grandmother and sucking eggs. The Raphael Tuck database states that pre-1928 Tuck postcards are in the public domain, presumably whether or not the photographer/tinter is still alive today. Generally, virtually all postcards don't acknowledge a photographer, only a publisher, so how can we tell if or not a postcard is '1923 and 70 years'... the date range of a publisher's publishing might give us an idea. A question might be asked if the Tuck database web site has the authority to waive stuff into the public domain, but if it hasn't I would have thought that it and its own web publications would have been pulled up on this since its inception in 2010. Acabashi (talk) 21:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
- This deletion request is too general. Many licenses can easily be "repaired" using the information in the file description, see File:Horse Guards (15072321110).jpg for example. Keep for now and reconsider on a one-by-one basis. -- Robert Weemeyer (talk) 09:18, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
- Could you please help sort them into categories based on potential copyvioness then? -mattbuck (Talk) 11:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Kept, the community clearly opposes mass-deletion of these files; questionable ones could be renominated separately. Materialscientist (talk) 03:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Bullshit Picture, non encyclopedic-- DerHandelsreisende (talk) 14:13, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
- Keep COM:INUSE. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:25, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Kept: in use Krd 09:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The photo already existed on its official website since January 2009 which means that the author copied the image from the website and uploaded it to wikipedia, not the other way round.
Deleted: per nomination Krd 09:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
The photo already existed on its official website since January 2009 which means that the author copied the image from the website and uploaded it to wikipedia, not the other way round.Cerevisae (talk) 02:04, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 09:28, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Murals count as graphic works and thus are not free per COM:FOP#United Kingdom
- File:Donegall Street Place mural, Belfast, July 2010 (01).JPG
- File:Donegall Street Place mural, Belfast, July 2010 (02).JPG
- File:Donegall Street Place mural, Belfast, July 2010 (03).JPG
- File:Donegall Street Place mural, Belfast, July 2010 (04).JPG
- File:Donegall Street Place mural, Belfast, July 2010 (05).JPG
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
-mattbuck (Talk) 19:05, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 09:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Fails COM:FOP#United Kingdom as being a mural. -mattbuck (Talk) 19:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 09:27, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
files in category Buildings by Alexandr Voinov
[edit]In most countries, all paintings, sculpture, architecture, text, and other creative works have copyrights which last for 70 years after the death of the creator. An image of a work that is still under copyright is a derivative work, and infringes on the copyright so that we cannot usually keep the image on Commons. In some countries, there is a special exception to the copyright law which allows such images under certain circumstances. We call that exception freedom of panorama (FOP). Unfortunately there is no applicable FOP exception in Belarus. these buildings were designed by Alexandr Voinov. Since 70 years haven't passed after his death, one cannot distribute the images of these buildings under a free license 37.17.4.13 09:21, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- The other images being
- File:Belarus-Minsk-CIS_Headquarter-1.jpg
- File:Belarus-Minsk-CIS Headquarter-2.JPG
- File:Kolas str, 2 - Skorina av..jpg
- The building Kolas str, 2 was built in 1939 --— Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.121.233.214 (talk • contribs)
- --195.50.31.213 21:00, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 10:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I wonder whether this is own work. The 4 contributions of the user are 4 photos of aircraft carriers all on December 4th. None of the photos have meta data. The type of this (and the other photos) is typically as being copied from an other source. On Google I found that the photos are used very often, but I could not find an higher resolution photo. Is the given copyright statement acceptable for Commons? Wouter (talk) 10:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: This user has uploaded four files, one of which, File:USS Long Beach.jpg, clearly a US Navy image and not "own work" as claimed. (see http://www.navsource.org/archives/04/1109/040109.htm). Therefore, Assume Good Faith no longer applies and we must assume that the uploader also did not take the other three. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:59, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
a fake license アンタナナ 11:47, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- the original file description was:
{{Зображення
|Назва=Тетіїв - центр міста
|Опис=Центр міста
|Автор=Полушвайко Ростислав
|Джерело=
|Час створення=2008
|Ліцензія=
}}
- the local upload history goes like this:
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 00:04, 3 квітня 2015 . . UWCTransferBot (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) м (381 байт) (на вилучення)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 16:18, 2 квітня 2015 . . SteveR (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) м (393 байти) (SteveR перейменував сторінку з Файл:22072008022.jpg на Файл:Центр міста Тетіїв.jpg без створення перенаправлення: (Script) Перейме...)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 19:18, 24 березня 2015 . . Mr.Rosewater (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (393 байти)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 12:26, 29 липня 2008 . . Turzh (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (366 байтів)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 20:03, 23 липня 2008 . . BotCat (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (288 байтів) (Нема шаблона ліцензії)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 18:30, 23 липня 2008 . . SAINTDOG (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (226 байтів) ({{Зображення |Назва=Тетіїв - центр міста |Опис=Центр міста |Автор=Полушвайко Ростислав |Джерело= |Час створення=2008 |Ліцензія= }})
the uploader (if (s)he is the author (Полушвайко Ростислав)) never edited the description of the file. the license was added by another user (Turzh). I have sent a letter to the uploader asking to add the license, but I doubt it will work. (s)he was asked before [11] to no avail. and (s)he stopped editing in 2008... --アンタナナ 11:57, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. If the uploader does decide to license the image, they can request an undeletion at COM:UDR. Green Giant (talk) 21:55, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
a fake license アンタナナ 12:00, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
- the same story: Commons:Deletion requests/File:Центр міста Тетіїв.jpg. the original file description was:
{{Зображення
|Назва=Тетіїв - Роська
|Опис=Роська
|Автор=Полушвайко Ростислав
|Джерело=
|Час створення=2008
|Ліцензія=
}}
- the local upload history goes like this:
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 00:04, 3 квітня 2015 . . UWCTransferBot (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) м (369 байтів) (на вилучення)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 16:18, 2 квітня 2015 . . SteveR (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) м (403 байти) (SteveR перейменував сторінку з Файл:22072008024.jpg на Файл:Росинька у Тетіїві.jpg без створення перенаправлення: (Script) Перейме...)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 19:41, 24 березня 2015 . . Mr.Rosewater (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (403 байти)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 06:50, 24 грудня 2012 . . 77.47.182.125 (обговорення • заблокувати) (354 байти)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 12:23, 29 липня 2008 . . Turzh (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (350 байтів)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 20:03, 23 липня 2008 . . BotCat (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (270 байтів) (Нема шаблона ліцензії)
(показати/сховати) (різн.) 18:57, 23 липня 2008 . . SAINTDOG (обговорення • внесок • заблокувати) (208 байтів) ({{Зображення |Назва=Тетіїв - Роська |Опис=Роська |Автор=Полушвайко Ростислав |Джерело= |Час створення=2008 |Ліцензія= }})
the uploader (if (s)he is the author (Полушвайко Ростислав)) never edited the description of the file. the license was added by another user (Turzh). I have sent a letter to the uploader asking to add the license, but I doubt it will work. (s)he was asked before [12] to no avail. and (s)he stopped editing in 2008...
Deleted: Per nom. If the uploader does decide to license the image, they can request an undeletion at COM:UDR. Green Giant (talk) 21:56, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
