Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2015/07/28
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.PNG){kind=link}
_poster.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyright violation and possible false status IndianBio (talk) 09:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: by Túrelio; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 16:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
File:Chris Vining launches a wrist shot past Penn State University goalie Josh Durahm during the Wildcat's 5th consecutive loss this Saturday at TCC..jpg
[edit]
Elusive following the Copyrightholder. Is User:L.Amburgey the Arizona Daily Wildcat? Gary Dee (talk) 17:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own work, no permission. Yann (talk) 11:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
COM:OTRS verification required to confirm details of license. Storkk (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello Storkk - I'm afraid I don't understand why you have nominated this for deletion or what the problem is. Ian gave me the photo himself and has full legal rights to it, as I explained in the info about it. It's the photo he specifically gave to put on the page and it belongs to him - he has paid the photographer for the copyright and it is his to do with as he wishes. I'm very busy at the moment and this is an unnecessary headache I seriously don't need - I don't really understand any of this and put it up there as a favour to a family friend (Ian himself) as he was understandably upset that the original photo there was of a completely random stranger and not him at all!
Perhaps before deleting anything you could contact Ian himself? He can be contacted via his magazine fRoots (froots@frootsmag.com) then he can personally assure you that he has rights to it and he has authorised me to put it on Wikipedia. That's the only thing I can think of...he will be upset if his photo is removed, and (as I say) I have no idea what the problem could possibly be.
PS It's not really clear what you are supposed to do or how you are supposed to do it when stuff is marked for deletion, so apologies if I'm doing it wrong. I'm not a Wikipedia professional, and genuinely don't have the time to spend ages learning how to do this particular task (replying to deletion requests) - I did have a quick look to see, but couldn't find anything on the correct etiquette or format, so am just writing this here with no formatting and explaining the situation to you like you would in a conversation...hope that is sufficient.— Preceding unsigned comment added by EmJones67 (talk • contribs) 13:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- @EmJones67: It would be great if we could keep this photo. Please read the link I pointed to above: COM:OTRS, which answers all of your questions. Essentially, Mr. Anderson should email the OTRS team (the email address is on COM:OTRS) confirming both that he is the copyright holder and also that he releases the photo as claimed. Thanks, Storkk (talk) 12:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks - Ah, that's a link to pertinent information is it? Sorry, it wasn't clear - I assumed it was just an automatically attached Wikipedia indexing tag, the letters referring to the type of file it is. OK, I'll see if I can work out what to do.— Preceding unsigned comment added by EmJones67 (talk • contribs) 13:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Great - thanks... The OTRS team will take it from here. Thanks for your effort! I've moved the {{subst:OP}} template to the image page where it belongs. Cheers, Storkk (talk) 13:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: ticket:2015072810018602 Natuur12 (talk) 12:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사진의 출처 홈페이지가 업로드한 사람의 홈페이지도 아닌데도 불구하고 해당 사진을 이렇게 위키백과에 사용하겠다는 동의를 구한 어떠한 리플도 찾아볼수 없음 그러므로 해당 사진은 저자권자의 동의를 얻지 못하고 무단 도용한 사진으로 보여짐 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 17:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Keep please see a small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page. You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/> also, the photo is owned by the owner of the source blog, since this search result. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoice useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:37, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사이트에 위키백과에 이용하겠다는 그 어떠한 언급도 없으므로 무단도용이 의심됨. Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep please see the small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page. You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/>--Puramyun31 (talk) 04:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:39, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사진 저작권에게 동의를 구한 어떠한 멘션도 찾아볼수 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep please see a small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page. You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/> also, the photo is owned by the owner of the source blog, since this search result. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:23, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
File:Suzy being appointed as 2015 Gwangju Summer Universiade Ambassador, 19 November 2013 02.jpg
[edit]
아무리 동영상이라도 저작권은 MBC방송국에서 촬영을 통해 얻은 자료이기 때문에 해당 영상물 자체를 이용한것이 저작권에 위배된다고 사료됨. Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep the file is from the official YouTube account of Gwangju Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation, and licensed under Creative Commons CC-BY licence (click "show more" at the source page) --Puramyun31 (talk) 05:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the account owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:42, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
File:Suzy being appointed as 2015 Gwangju Summer Universiade Ambassador, 19 November 2013 01.jpg
[edit]
아무리 동영상에서 얻었다고 하더라도 출처가 MBC뉴스 이기 때문에 해당 영상물의 저작권은 MBC방송국에 있으므로 저작권에 위반된다고 사료됨 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep the file is from the official YouTube account of Gwangju Munhwa Broadcasting Corporation, and licensed under Creative Commons CC-BY licence (click "show more" at the source page)--Puramyun31 (talk) 05:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the account owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:43, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사진 출처 사이트에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 어떠한 동의를 구한 코멘트도 찾을수 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep please see a small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page. You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/>. also, the license is a public license. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. -Puramyun31 (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:44, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 저작권자 동의 코멘트를 볼수가 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep please see a small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page. You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/>. also, the license is a public license.--Puramyun31 (talk) 06:31, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 동의 코멘트를 찾아 볼수가 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep please see a small cc-by license icon at the bottom right corner of the source page (블로그 페이지의 작은 CCL 아이콘 확인). You can find this HTML code in that page: <img id="ccl-icon-5-0" class="entry-ccl-by" src="http://i1.daumcdn.net/cfs.tistory/v/0/static/admin/editor/ccl_black01.png" onmouseover="tistoryCcl.show(this, 3)" onmouseout="tistoryCcl.hide()" alt="저작자 표시"/> --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author.([https://creativecommons.org/licenses/?lang=ko 이용자는 적용된 CCL을 확인한 후에 저작물을 이용함으로써 당사자들 사이에 개별적인 접촉 없이도 그 라이선스 내용대로 이용허락의 법률관계가 성립) also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
출처 페이지가 존재하지도 않으므로 동의를 구했는지 알수가 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this photo is license-reviewed and CC license is irrevocable. so the status of the source page doesn't matter. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. and does not require further notification to the author. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoice useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:34, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 페이지가 존재하지 않으므로 저작권자가 동의했는지 알수가 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this photo is license-reviewed and CC license is irrevocable. so the status of the source page doesn't matter. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:47, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 페이지가 존재하지 않아서 출처 불명이며 저작권자에게 동의를 구했는지 알수 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this photo is license-reviewed and CC license is irrevocable. so the status of the source page doesn't matter. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:45, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:12, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author(CCL은 이와 달리 원칙적으로 모든 이의 자유이용을 허용하되 몇 가지 이용방법 및 조건을 부가하는 방식의 개방적인 이용허락 입니다. 이용자는 적용된 CCL을 확인한 후에 저작물을 이용함으로써 당사자들 사이에 개별적인 접촉 없이도 그 라이선스 내용대로 이용허락의 법률관계가 성립). also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice, so we are just following that.--Puramyun31 (talk) 08:26, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 페이지가 존재하지 않아서 출처 불명이며 저작권자에게 동의를 구했는지 알수 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this photo is license-reviewed and CC license is irrevocable. so the status of the source page doesn't matter. --Puramyun31 (talk) 05:10, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:09, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. and does not require further notification to the author. also, the CC licensing is the blog owner's choice that is done before this image is uploaded here, so we are just following that. --Puramyun31 (talk) 08:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Revi 13:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
해당 페이지가 존재하지 않아서 출처 불명이며 저작권자에게 동의를 구했는지 알수 없음 Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep this photo is license-reviewed and CC license is irrevocable. so the status of the source page doesn't matter. --Puramyun31 (talk) 04:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Per what Puramyun31 wrote. --Chiyako92 (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- 그렇게 말씀하신다면 이렇게 직찍으로 블로그에 올라온 사진은 해당 블로그 페이지에 해당 사진을 위키백과에서 이용하겠다는 언급도 없이 도용해서 사용해도 상관 없다는 말씀이신지요? 더구나 해당 사진들 마다 워터마크를 잘라내고 올렸는데도 그것이 합법이라면 눈가리고 아웅하는 것이라고 보여 짐니다. 그렇다면 뉴스에 붙어 있는 사진들도 소스페이지를 기입하고 워터마크를 잘라내서 올려서 합법이겠네요. 오십보백보라고 생각 됩니다. --Vmffjtmrkarl (talk) 08:11, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
@Vmffjtmrkarl: CC-BY license allows modification(변형) of the image file. if not, the license is CC-BY-ND or CC-BY-NC-ND. -Puramyun31 (talk) 08:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: speedy kept: The purpose of License reviewing is to validate the copyright status at the time of upload (CC is irrevocable) so we can avoid useless deletion debate like this. If you have sufficient evidence that the copyright holder licensed the file by mistake, we may consider deleting the files, but not required to. — regards, Thibaut120094 (talk) 16:18, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alvino Allen (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused unencyclopedic personal image outside our scope.
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused unencyclopedic personal image outside our scope. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 05:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:34, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
I uploaded by mistake. Igx-pr (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Uploader requested and unused.--Fanghong (talk) 09:37, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:39, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:40, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:51, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:41, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:42, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 08:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted / Out of scope.--Fanghong (talk) 09:43, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
por q yo lo subi Wikimedia2872015 (talk) 23:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
por q yo lo subi Wikimedia2872015 (talk) 04:03, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
por q yo lo subi Wikimedia2872015 (talk) 04:02, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: uploaders request shortly after upload. JuTa 06:38, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Low resolution/quality, many better alternatives in Category:Propane. Leyo 00:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: unused poor duplicate George Chernilevsky talk 04:54, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Blurry and unused, have several SVG and a higher-quality PNG in Category:Aliskiren DMacks (talk) 04:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: unused poor duplicate George Chernilevsky talk 04:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused unencyclopedic personal image outside our scope.
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 04:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Logo of a company, possibly not under the indicated license, uploaded for a deleted article en:Horizon Hosting Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 04:57, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Logo of a company, possibly not under the indicated license, uploaded for a deleted promotional article en:Joomlashine Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 04:57, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Logo of a company, uploaded for a deleted promotional article en:Livetecs.com Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 04:57, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Poor quality picture, uploaded for a deleted self-promoting article en:Michael Banks (internet personality) Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 04:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
i am the uploader and wish to delete the file for personal reasons (photo is of my father and me) Firedrop (talk) 21:11, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per Nominator and out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. While "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page... is allowed", this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. Storkk (talk) 09:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. While "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page... is allowed", this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. Storkk (talk) 10:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. While "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page... is allowed", this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. While the description makes a claim for notability, it seems dubious, and in any case if true, would probably necessitate consent of the subject. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:02, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo. While "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page... is allowed", this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused non-notable artwork/logo. While the uploading of small numbers of images... for use on a personal user page... is allowed, this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. Will withdraw if notability is reasonably asserted. Storkk (talk) 10:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused doodle. Not realistically useful for educational purpose and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jhenespanto (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused unencyclopedic personal image outside our scope.
- File:11042955 814525125305701 8665583418219340061 n(1).jpg
- File:11742624 881837948574418 522843065197178407 n(3)(1).jpg
- File:Jhozen raper.jpg
- File:Jhozen Raper123.jpg
- File:10959879 799695890121958 1541957242182645248 n(1).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
§§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 12:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:05, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Text only, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:06, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:18, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:07, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jonatasbaldenebro (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused documents and chart of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.
- File:Diagrama Plano de Ação - 5W1H -1.jpg
- File:Processo - figura 01.PNG
- File:Diagrama Plano de Ação - 5W1H.PNG
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:08, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Personal vanity image. Stuchka (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 17:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 17:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 17:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 17:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 17:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:12, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people, out of scope -- Christian Ferrer 18:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:14, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Seemingly out of Wikimedia Commons scope. Josve05a (talk) 18:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Chandan Singh Virat (talk · contribs)
[edit]Self-promotion, out of scope.
- File:Photo of Chandan Singh Virat.jpg
- File:Image is related to Virat India Private Limited's Comety-- 2014-04-18 13-30.jpg
Thibaut120094 (talk) 18:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not an svg file, unused, seem to be a test file, no description, watermarks, not categories, etc F (talk) 18:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Обратная сторона Луны (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private drawing album. Not used.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 00:42, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Обратная сторона Луны (talk · contribs)
[edit]not within scope, personal drawings not used
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rosario Berganza 20:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:18, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
not within scope, bandspam
Rosario Berganza 20:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 05:19, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Clipping from a newspaper SounderBruce 04:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: seems to be copyrighted Ymblanter (talk) 19:01, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep As nominator, I vote keep. My mistake. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 20:50, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: PD-RusEmpire Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- See Commons:Stamps/Public domain#USSR --Butko (talk) 07:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Butko: Which American public domain tag should be used for Soviet stamps then? --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Soviet stamps are geberally fine Ymblanter (talk) 19:04, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia. A.Savin 12:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in Russia for sculptures Ymblanter (talk) 19:16, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia. A.Savin 12:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in Russia for sculptures Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia. A.Savin 12:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in Russia for sculptures Ymblanter (talk) 19:17, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP in Ukraine. A.Savin 12:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no FoP in Ukraine Ymblanter (talk) 19:18, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
License review failed Максим Підліснюк (talk) 21:41, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
The license review failed because it was listed under Picasa as "all rights reserved". This has now been changed to "creative commons".
Delete Image has a 'Non-Commercial and 'No-Derivative use restriction. Only {{Cc-by-3.0}} or {tl|cc-by-sa-3.0}} licenses are OK for Commons whether version 2.0 or 3.0. Regards, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:55, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: non-derivative license Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
This collage certain contains copyrighted architecture and there is no FOP in Italy. Therefor permission from the architect is required or someone should provide evidence that those buildings are out of copyright. While this file is kept before that was only procedural because it was part of a mass nomination. Natuur12 (talk) 23:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per above, {{NoFoP-Italy}} and COM:PRP due to the fact that we have no evidence that the Flickr user is the photographer of the images in this collage. Josve05a (talk) 00:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: No FoP in Italy Ymblanter (talk) 19:20, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused equivalent to File:Übersicht Boord Olefin.svg (only difference is alignment of the double-bond in the product) DMacks (talk) 03:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused equivalent to other SVG in Category:Boord olefin synthesis, except this one has an empty box drawn over the last reaction arrow. DMacks (talk) 03:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Equivalent to File:Boord Olefin Mecha Version 6.svg except missing the arrows for the last reaction step (the whole point of this image seems to be the mechanism, so a missing mechanistic detail is a deficiency...have others in Category:Boord olefin synthesis that illustrate the overall idea sans mechanism). DMacks (talk) 03:22, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused essentially equivalent to File:Elbs-Oxidation 2c.svg except slightly different angles of some S=O bonds. That one ("2c") is a later upload by same author, so presuming it is the intended/better/cleaned-up version. DMacks (talk) 03:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:25, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused equivalent to File:Kumada Catalytic Cycle.png except parts of some superscripts (these are key technical details) are obscured behind the large numbers. DMacks (talk) 03:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:28, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused equivalent to File:Kumada Catalytic Cycle.png except parts of some superscripts (these are key technical details) are obscured behind the large numbers. DMacks (talk) 03:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:29, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused essentially equivalent to File:Aliskiren synthesis2.svg except different layout (location of the final product structure). This image is deficient (not just different choice for different possible layout needs) in that the caption-text of that final product is jumbled (SVG bug/mistake). DMacks (talk) 03:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:31, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unused, lower quality (size/resolution, mixture of text faces). And missing key detail of the BaSO4 or other support for the Pd. Have File:Rosenmund Reduction Scheme.png and also SVG available. DMacks (talk) 21:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 21:26, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolution missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:AndyReyDJ. Uploaded in a row on 30.06.2012 for Mexican city es:Rincón de Romos most likely by an all-can-get-grabber active since 1887 who's is known - per watermark - also as "juan luevano".
- File:Rincon de romos ags mexico.jpg
- File:Parque alameda.jpg
- File:Gimnasio calpulalpan.jpg
- File:Monumento al Padre Nieves.jpg
- File:Senor de las angustias.jpg
- File:Matlachin rinconense.jpg
- File:Iglesia rincon de romos.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 19:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Speedy delete -- magazine cover is covered by copyright. MShabazz (talk) 19:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Speedy delete -- magazine cover is covered by copyright MShabazz (talk) 19:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
unused, useless, no encycopedic value, no category, etc F (talk) 19:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
This image is all over the internet, even in higher resolution. There is no way this is "own work". P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Hi, My name is Nataly and im the girl on the pictures. I have changed my permissions on flickr long time ago and for almost 1 year now, i deleted my account on flickr. So please delete the pictures on your page. Thank youNataly 79.97.246.205 19:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep: File in use, and CC license are irrevocable. No reason for a courtesy deletion. --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Didym (talk) 23:54, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Own work claim doubted, poster of the German National Library. The Evil IP address (talk) 19:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:53, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
This file asserts that it is CC-BY-2.5. However, a search of the source and a review of archive.org gives no indication that the source ever released this image under a CC license. The front page of the source web site says the site contents are copyrighted "Derechos Reservados © 2015 Instituto de Elecciones y Participación Ciudadana". —RP88 (talk) 21:07, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Comment: Did you notified the actual uploader instead of GifTagger? --Amitie 10g (talk) 23:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, Hedwig in Washington notified the uploader (you probably overlooked the notification since he tagged via a redirect). But I'll put a another notification on the uploader's page. —RP88 (talk) 23:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:52, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Questionable authorship claims based on the low resolution, missing metadata, and the uploader's history, which includes claiming authorship of non-free photos from Getty Images. —LX (talk, contribs) 23:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
EXIF says Photoshop, the user has a history of uploading copyright violations Ymblanter (talk) 06:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- It's a crop from the original version of the file, which has no EXIF metadata either. The white borders on the original indicate that it may be a screenshot. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 14:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, EXIF says photoshop, the user has a track record of uploading copyright violations Ymblanter (talk) 06:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:11, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Angelitohp03 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unclear copyright status and obviously (grabbed from Internet) not own works considering logos of several football clubs in the Dominican Republic. May be in public domain by other reasons but relevant info must be provided. Uploaded in a row on 28.07.2015.
- File:O&M Futbol Club.jpg
- File:Moca Futbol Club.jpg
- File:Delfines del Este.jpg
- File:Club Barcelona Atletico.jpg
- File:Club Atletico Pantoja.jpg
- File:Cibao Futbol Club.jpg
- File:Bauger Futbol Club.jpg
- File:Atletico Vega Real.jpg
- File:Atlantico Futbol Club.jpg
- File:Atletico San Cristobal.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 06:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per COM:PCP Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
The first upload of this file seems to have been in use elsewhere before the own work upload here, see this from July 2012, this from March 2012, and this as examples. —SpacemanSpiff 07:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unclear copyright status. Uploaded in 05.2013, the flag itself may be (as indicated) fictitious but it contains (was derivated from) the copyrighted logo of Mexican football club en:Tigres UANL via (example) official https://www.facebook.com/tigresoficial/photos/a.131339973594721.23815.126944017367650/306335526095164/?type=1&theater (2012), needing permission. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Mistigres.png + Commons:Deletion requests/File:Escudo Tigres UANL.png + Commons:Deletion requests/File:Logo Tigres UANL.png + Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tigres uanl.png + Commons:Deletion requests/File:Tigres UANL Escudo.png + etc. Gunnex (talk) 08:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Own work doubtful, too many (c)vios uploaded. Com:PCP Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 08:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:12, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no metadata, watermarked: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, probable professional portrait: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 09:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Support Concur with nominator. I just cleaned up the image that was previously submitted by cropping out some extra space. If this image is deleted I recommend that the original also be deleted as well. Reguyla (talk) 13:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)- Delete From what I've been able to determine, this photo was first posted online by Anamika chaudhary in a Picasa gallery on January 22, 2015 (two months before it was uploaded to Commons). This specific photo on Picasa does not appear to have a free license, the photo reuse terms are set to "© All rights reserved". As a non-free work first published elsewhere, I agree with the nominator that at the very least the uploader needs to send evidence to OTRS that the copyright holder has given permission to publish this photo under a free license. —RP88 (talk) 09:55, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small filesize, no metadata, possible video still: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 09:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Likely passes COM:TOO. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no metadata, probable professional portrait: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Additional likely scope issues. Storkk (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no metadata, probable professional portrait: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Additional likely scope issues. Storkk (talk) 10:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no metadata, probable professional portrait: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Additionally, it appears to be an unused personal photo. While "the uploading of small numbers of images (e.g. of yourself) for use on a personal user page... is allowed", this is unused and therefore likely out of scope. Storkk (talk) 10:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
No metadata, probable professional portrait: uploader's assertion of {{Own work}} in doubt. If uploader is the copyright holder, this should be confirmed via COM:OTRS. Storkk (talk) 10:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:13, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:CORNERMAN. All files uploaded 08.2010. Considering also:
- File:Ayat.jpg --> taken from http://www.coetenerife.malloza.com/old/galeriafotosguerris.htm = http://www.coetenerife.malloza.com/old/fotos/Guerrilleros%20competicion.jpg (last modified: 2007)
- File:Ayatband.jpg --> screenshotted from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIpAtSXT5uQ&t=4m15s (02.2010, © by "hamadria")
- File:Pachucaaños20's.gif + File:Cruzazulaños20.gif --> taken from http://homerodragon.blogspot.de/2007/11/historia-del-club-deportivo-social-y.html (2007). Historical photos may be in public domain but relevant info must be provided. Source country most likely Mexico.
- File:Ayat.jpg
- File:Ultratuza1901.jpg
- File:Pachucaaños20's.gif
- File:Cruzazulaños20.gif
- File:FERMINIV.jpg
- File:Ayatband.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 11:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Considering COM:PRP Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:14, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF, most likely grabbed from social media, considering also user logs (similar uploads deleted) Gunnex (talk) 11:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:14, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
includes web-address in the pioture Motopark (talk) 12:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
includes web-address in the pioture Motopark (talk) 12:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Questionable authorship claims. According to the file's metadata, this photo was taken by Lukas Krasa, not Alexander Postnikov. —LX (talk, contribs) 12:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
No descriptive details to place within scope for Commons. Needs a descriptive name and description or it should be deleted — billinghurst sDrewth 12:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope when without context, or description — billinghurst sDrewth 12:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
out of scope when image is not described in context or description — billinghurst sDrewth 12:15, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia. A.Savin 12:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia. A.Savin 12:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:15, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP in Ukraine.
- File:Odessa Vysotsky monument 01.jpg
- File:Odessa Vysotsky monument from the distance.jpg
- File:Odessa Vysotsky monument rear view.jpg
- File:Odessa Vysotsky monument.jpg
A.Savin 12:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP in Ukraine.
- File:Mariupol 2007 (18).jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак Висоцькому В. С. — актору, поету, барду 1.jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак Висоцькому В. С. — актору, поету, барду.jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак Висоцькому В. С., актору, поету, барду.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A.Savin 12:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:17, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
There is no commercial freedom of panorama in Ukraine. According to w:uk:Пам'ятник Висоцькому (Маріуполь), the work was designed/authored by w:uk:Юхим Вікторович Харабет (1929–2004) and w:uk:Юрій Іванович Балдін (1932–). Obviously copyrighted and unfree for commercial Creative Commons licensing distribution.
- File:"Я, конечно, вернусь..." В.С.Высоцкий.jpg
- File:Висоцький,1.JPG
- File:Пам'ятний знак В. С. Висоцькому — актору, поету, барду, м. Маріуполь.jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак В. С. Висоцькому — актору, поету, барду, Маріуполь, Донецька область.jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак В. С. Висоцькому — актору, поету, барду.jpg
- File:Пам'ятний знак В. С. Висоцькому, проспект Миру, 85.jpg
JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 14:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Materialscientist (talk) 04:11, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
http://www.veld.nl/pers/veld_koeltechniek_innoveert_met_mobility.aspx?sa=X&ved=0CBgQ9QEwAWoVChMI5or9yvb9xgIVhN0sCh2yJwDY Agora (talk) 13:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:19, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:AnyDavid/logs. All files (including the recently detected copyvios) uploaded in a row on 12.05.2013 for es:Guanare, a city in Venezuela.
- File:Plaza francisco miranda en Guanare.jpg
- File:Casco historico de Guanare.jpg
- File:Reliquia de la virgen de coromoto.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 13:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:19, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolution, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Arja82 (serial copyright violator) Gunnex (talk) 13:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:20, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolution, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 17:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution (191x190 px), missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 17:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bloomberg13 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. File:Sandro Salsano & Johanna Shahani.jpg eventually taken by "alex.svizzero", uploaded 15.05.2013 (indexed by Google) via http://www.99celebrities.com/sandro-salsano-italian-entrepreneur (©2015 99Celebrities. All rights reserved.)
- File:Sandro Salsano & Johanna Shahani.jpg
- File:Sandro Salsano, venture capitalist, entrepeneur and financier.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 17:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:21, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
experiment 164.126.53.224 19:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Done by Didym Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:22, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Me equivoque al subirlo, no cuenta con la licencia adecuado. JudithJunkers (talk) 20:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Done by Yann Jianhui67 talk★contribs 08:22, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Bellow the COM:TOO? Amitie 10g (talk) 00:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 14:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
File:Ραμφόστομες πρόχοι (Γ. Α. Παπαβασιλείου, Περί των εν Ευβοία αρχαίων τάφων, 1910, πιν. Θ).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
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) 23:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 14:30, 9 August 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) 23:59, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all. JuTa 14:32, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Reddogsix as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-nJBDEaaS8Nl_etUDnL8JA. The uploader seems to be the same as the owner of the Youtube channel linked in the Speedy tag, andtherefore, is very likely to be the owner of the work. But seemks to be prommotional. Amitie 10g (talk) 00:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: personal artwork, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:08, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
no evidence for the license Ign christian (talk) 02:04, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Maybe {{PD-Textlogo}}? --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: unused promotional logo, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 02:09, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
In description on Flickr: "Mandatory Credit: C.M. Wiggins/WENN.com" No evidence that the image is freelity licensed by the copyright owner, just this re-users claim. And the FLickr-user has a lot of ©-vio images in his feed. Josve05a (talk) 13:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio, no permission. Wdwd (talk) 20:08, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The file is defective and was replaced with this Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 13:16, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
Kept: No corrupt file, and not an exact duplicate or scale down. Wdwd (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
The file was uploaded as CC-zero from the website of the person, but the imprint states that all material is copyrighted and should not be used for commercial use. 32X (talk) 13:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello, I updated the photo, because I got it from Matthias Grünert (who is on the picture) himself. He said I should post it on wikipedia. --Tobiasseidel (talk) 12:17, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: No permission. Please provide evidence via OTRS. Wdwd (talk) 19:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
COM:COPYVIOs: A gallery of images of political leaders of Malaysia, all given an own work and personal license. Some of these images may (when their true age and source is known) be able to be retained, but they are not own work. COM:EVID requires the uploader to provide actual sources for images. Notice also the duplicated file; the only woman in the group. Other, more recent images were found on the web and speedied.
- File:Sultan Iskandar Shah (Perak).jpg
- File:Sultan Abdullah Muhammad Shah II.jpg
- File:Sultan Abdul Aziz Al-Mutasim Billah Shah.jpg
- File:Sultan Abdul Jalil.jpeg
- File:Sultan Idris Murshidul Adzam Shah.jpg
- File:Abdul-jalil-mod.jpg
- File:Sultan Idris Murshidul Aadzam Shah.jpg
- File:Sultanabdullahmuhammad.jpg
- File:Tunku Durah a.JPG
- File:Sultan Malaysia 12.gif
- File:Img biork3 9 3 2.gif
- File:Tunku Durah 3600 x 2400.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Per nom. Obviously not own work, no permission for cc, unknown/wrong date.--Wdwd (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a poorly retouched version of this photograph [1], taken from this page [2], presumably taken from the 1937 book The history of Civil War in the U.S.S.R., Vol. 1. (translated from История гражданской войны в СССР, 1935), published in Moscow [3]. As I understand the Copyright law of the Russian Federation, the copyright term was 25 years before 1993, 50 years in 1993-2004 and 70 years after 2004, i.e. URAA doesn't apply here if we assume the work is anonymous. I don't see any authorship on the source book page [4]. Materialscientist (talk) 10:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Materialscientist: Which public domain in the United States tag should be used in the picture than? ... I don't know anything about this, but what I do know is that you need to show why this image is in the public domain in the United States (where the Wikimedia Commons servers are located...) --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. Materialscientist (talk) 12:55, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Materialscientist: Which public domain in the United States tag should be used in the picture than? ... I don't know anything about this, but what I do know is that you need to show why this image is in the public domain in the United States (where the Wikimedia Commons servers are located...) --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
![[1]](https://sovietbooks.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/2012-07-25-12-45-42.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: Denniss (talk) 20:56, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Copyright by w:Pyotr Otsup see [5] 37.145.27.215 01:35, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
- Delete, per new information on the photographer. Materialscientist (talk) 06:37, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:22, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
The image is clearly a scanned photo from the subject's youth (he was born in 1958, so the image can date from no later than 1980), and is typical of headshot player photos taken by football clubs for publication in newspapers or match programmes. It appears uncredited on the webpage http://www.nasljerseys.com/Players/L/Lowey.John.htm. That site's image policy, at the foot of the page http://www.nasljerseys.com/default.htm states:
"Just a note about the photos on this site: I collected these for personal use. I never thought I'd put up a website. I usually did not keep the photographers name. I've added the credit when I have it. If your photo is being used and you want credit, please send me a note. I'll also remove any that you don't want displayed."
When the uploader first tried to add the image to en:John Lowey (footballer), they linked to its url at nasljerseys.com, then a few minutes later linked to the Commons version. Seems clear that either the uploader found the image at nasljerseys.com, or that both they and the publisher of that site saved the same image cut out of a published source in their personal collections. Either way, there's absolutely no evidence for the image being copyright of the uploader and therefore releasable into the public domain. Struway2 (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Scanned photo, no permission. Wdwd (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Image taken at semi-private event without consent. I (the depicted) only gave written consent for audio recording. Preoblomov (talk) 13:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- "Semi-private Veranstaltungen" sind kein definierter Begriff und schon garnicht auf eine frei zugängliche öffentliche Veranstaltung wie die "Römerberggespräche" zutreffend. Die abgebildete Person war ein offizieller (vermutlich dafür auch vergüteter) Referent dieser Veranstaltung und kein privater Besucher, so dass er sich dabei nicht auf private Rechte der fotografischen Verwertung darauf berufen kann. --dontworry (talk) 07:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- PS. Siehe hierzu auch: [6] --dontworry (talk) 08:05, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- "Semi-private Veranstaltungen" sind kein definierter Begriff und schon garnicht auf eine frei zugängliche öffentliche Veranstaltung wie die "Römerberggespräche" zutreffend. Die abgebildete Person war ein offizieller (vermutlich dafür auch vergüteter) Referent dieser Veranstaltung und kein privater Besucher, so dass er sich dabei nicht auf private Rechte der fotografischen Verwertung darauf berufen kann. --dontworry (talk) 07:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. public event. Wdwd (talk) 20:17, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Image taken at semi-private event without consent. I (the depicted) only gave written consent for audio recording. Preoblomov (talk) 13:05, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- "Semi-private Veranstaltungen" sind kein definierter Begriff und schon garnicht auf eine frei zugängliche öffentliche Veranstaltung wie die "Römerberggespräche" zutreffend. Die abgebildete Person war ein offizieller (vermutlich dafür auch vergüteter) Referent dieser Veranstaltung und kein privater Besucher, so dass er sich dabei nicht auf private Rechte der fotografischen Verwertung darauf berufen kann. --dontworry (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- PS. Siehe hierzu auch: [7] --dontworry (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Die sind eine öffentliche Veranstaltung. Für mich ein Fall von § 23 (1) Ziffer 3 KunstUrhG: "Bilder von Versammlungen, Aufzügen und ähnlichen Vorgängen, an denen die dargestellten Personen teilgenommen haben".--Karsten11 (talk) 10:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- PS. Siehe hierzu auch: [7] --dontworry (talk) 08:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- "Semi-private Veranstaltungen" sind kein definierter Begriff und schon garnicht auf eine frei zugängliche öffentliche Veranstaltung wie die "Römerberggespräche" zutreffend. Die abgebildete Person war ein offizieller (vermutlich dafür auch vergüteter) Referent dieser Veranstaltung und kein privater Besucher, so dass er sich dabei nicht auf private Rechte der fotografischen Verwertung darauf berufen kann. --dontworry (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. public event. Wdwd (talk) 20:16, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted artwork (advertisement) Ricardo Esteban Gutierrez (talk) 00:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: Did you noticed the OTRS permission? --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:00, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The overall copyrighted work in the entire motif is de minimis 121.221.212.184 08:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete per COM:PCP The OTRS permissino is from the photogrpaher, who clearly has no ownership rights of the artwork depicted on the aircraft. The artwork is far too large to be de minimis.--.InfiniteHiveMind. (talk) 01:03, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyrighted part is De Minimis. Tm (talk) 09:32, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Kept: DM. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:30, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Possible copyvio. No evidence of free license in the source Jarash (talk) 03:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: taken from copyrighted website. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:31, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low-res copy of file HMS Illustrious at Speed MOD 45155641.jpg Rsteen (talk) 09:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: duplicate of File:HMS Illustrious at Speed MOD 45155641.jpg. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:41, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
de:ProSquad deleted; no further use WolfgangRieger (talk) 10:22, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: promotional logo, out of scope. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:43, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
.PNG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.PNG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
not own work Fetx2002 (talk) 14:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.PNG){kind=link}
- Keep: Clearly PD-Textlogo. Is better and easier to change the {{Own work}} to "Samsung" instead... --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:10, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: below COM:TOO. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:45, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
.PNG){kind=link}
_poster.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_poster.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Ticked the wrong button indicating ownership of the file is mine; it isn't. Sorry! Anocha Mann (talk) 14:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
_poster.png){kind=link}
Deleted: copyvio. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:50, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
_poster.png){kind=link}
possible copyviol:gmaps screenshot Ciaurlec (talk) 16:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
possible copyviol:gmaps screenshot Ciaurlec (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:51, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Advertising...? Also: Not clear to who the house belongs. Gary Dee (talk) 17:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: advertising. P 1 9 9 ✉ 16:52, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
It was a mistake. 2601:18C:8100:A52:F448:487F:D00B:45D8 04:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
What mistake? If you're the uploader, please renominate with your account instead. If not, Speedy keep. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per original nomination and ignoring the comments of Amitie 10g as irrelevant. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
It was a mistake. 2601:18C:8100:A52:F448:487F:D00B:45D8 04:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- What mistake? If you're the uploader, please renominate with your account instead. If not, Speedy keep. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete as out of scope - unused, unencyclopedic modification of the U.S. flag. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 12:00, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per original nomination and ignoring the comments of Amitie 10g as irrelevant. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
It was a mistake. 2601:18C:8100:A52:F448:487F:D00B:45D8 04:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- What mistake? If you're the uploader, please renominate with your account instead. If not, Speedy keep. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per original nomination and ignoring the comments of Amitie 10g as irrelevant. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
It was a mistake. 2601:18C:8100:A52:F448:487F:D00B:45D8 04:32, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- What mistake? If you're the uploader, please renominate with your account instead. If not, Speedy keep. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per original nomination and ignoring the comments of Amitie 10g as irrelevant. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:28, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:33, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996, but I can't find a source. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- The image is used here: [8], but without a source either. (Perhaps somebody could contact them and ask them about the author of the image?) - Mike Rosoft (talk) 12:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination & discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:30, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996, but I can't find a source for it, therefore delete. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination & discussion, there is no image of this type on "source" page given. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:31, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
Kept: This image has source & license. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996, but I can't find a source... --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: License might be fine, but file has no source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:32, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996, but I can't find source. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: No source at all on this file. We can't keep things that magically appear in the servers, files need sources. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
Kept: Has source & license. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
- Then, Withdraw? --Amitie 10g (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Amitie 10g: I have no clue how one is supposed to do that :p --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:43, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Has source & license. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:02, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:01, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
no indication of early enough PUBLICATION to be PD PlanespotterA320 (talk) 14:53, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
- Pretty sure it's the same picture. This book was published in 1938. Wurzel91 (talk) 18:52, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
- Please clearly indicate that in the source information section of the infobox (book title, author, year, publisher, location, etc)--PlanespotterA320 (talk) 16:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Kept: source added. --rubin16 (talk) 08:49, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:59, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:58, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:56, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
No indication of early enough publication to be public domain anywhere. It can't be PD in Russia at all unless it was published before 1950, but we have no indication of publication date early enough - just a URL and an unsubstantiated claim that is was PD in 1996 from a previous deletion request that did not provide any required information. PlanespotterA320 (talk) 17:24, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Kept: look OK to me. --JuTa 04:49, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
STILL NO indication of early enough publication to be public domain anywhere. It can't be PD in Russia at all unless it was published before 1950, but we have no indication of publication date early enough - just a URL and an unsubstantiated claim that is was PD in 1996 from a previous deletion request that did not provide any required information. Vauge statement of "looks OK to me" by ruling admin (with history of Russian copyright misunderstandings) goes against all existing copyright law and doesn't provide any basis for support of PD claim. "Looking OK" (whatever that means) to someone with little knowledge of copyright law isn't sufficient grounds for keep. PlanespotterA320 (talk) 18:36, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --rubin16 (talk) 17:14, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:38, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:36, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:52, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Copyright expired in the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
The author is unknown, but the public domain is justified by the fact that the author died 70+ years ago. I don't understand the reason why this photo is PD/ — Redboston 21:56, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I found the nomination's wording a bit confusing. The rationale is: the description claims that the image is in the public domain because the author died 70+ years ago, but we cannot know this, because the author is unknown. Brianjd (talk) 13:59, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you for the clarification, you are right. English is not my native language.— Redboston 16:26, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Deleted: Likely copyright violation - Thanks everyone for participating and if you disagree with this decision please take it to Commons:Undeletion requests - unless there is a tech issue. Thanks for assuming good faith and happy holidays!. --Missvain (talk) 00:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep Expired within the country of origin before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:50, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Keep expired within own country 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:49, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996.
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Insufficient source information Copyrightisreal (talk) 02:16, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
- Question What was not resolved in the previous deletion request thread, in which the file was kept? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Kept: PlanespotterA320. —Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:38, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep copyright expired within own country before 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:48, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:37, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep fixed it. published before 1928. Copyright both expired in home country and the US. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 07:46, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:41, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- General Uborevich died in 1937. Perhaps it is a photograph of the 1930s. Who will have the right to this old-photo? --Ashtray (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: image has source & is ok Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Currently unknown if its in the public domain in the United States Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:38, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- + In addition it lacks sources. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:40, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The current license is most appropriate. The image is automatically in PD in the United States because it was in PD in its country of origin (Soviet Union -> Russia) on the URAA date, 1 January 1996, but I can't find a source... Delete. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 08:55, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per discussion. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Probably not own work, Cogan was active as a cyclist until 1951. This picture looks even older. Metadata are certainly wrong. Tekstman (talk) 08:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:43, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
le dessin général et des logos ne sont probablement pas sous licence libre. Havang(nl) (talk) 09:24, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
-2015-07-28T09:24:00.000Z-File:Plan_du_Stade_Jean_Dauger.jpg){kind=link}
- Effectivement, je l'avais perdu de vue vu le peu d'originalité du panneau. Jvillafruela (talk)
- Delete per COM:DW. Josve05a (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per discussion, Joseve05a Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Likely a fake license. Photo from the well-known Laessoe/Lincoff book, stated to be taken by Neil Fletcher. Convallaria majalis (talk) 11:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Probably, fake license. Old historical photo, may not be "own". Bilderling (talk) 11:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: not own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Probably, fake license. Old historical photo, may not be "own". Bilderling (talk) 11:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Probably, fake license. Old historical photo, may not be "own". Bilderling (talk) 11:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Probably, fake license. Old historical photo, may not be "own". Bilderling (talk) 11:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
il s'agit de la signature de michel onfray qui pourrait être utilisée à des fins illégales. elle ne doit pas circuler sur le net. 80.236.115.13 12:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Upload was claimed as own work, yet was the signature of another person. That seems most impossible to licence as own work. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:46, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Reuters2015999999 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent (Facebook) resolutions, missing EXIF. Uploaded since 01.2015 for en:Sandro Salsano, considering also:
- File:SANDRO SALSANO IN GREENLAND.jpg --> previously published via from https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15624634381/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:Sandro Salsano and Gordon Ramsay, Singapore.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15441272527/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:HOLA MAGAZINE SANDRO SALSANO JOHANNA SHAHANI.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15440675289/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:VIP SANDRO SALSANO Ocean Drive.jpg --> appears to be scanned from magazine "Ocean Drive" / http://oceandrive.com (credit: "Fotografía: Rúben Alfú"), see also http://sandrosalsano.blogspot.de/2014/07/exclusive-interview-of-sandro-salsano.html (2014)
- File:SANDRO SALSANO, DOMENICO DOLCE.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15603634626/ (2014, © by "martin moore") or http://sandrosalsano.blogspot.de/2014/07/sandro-salsano-with-domenico-dolce.html (2014)
- File:SANDRO SALSANO EVEREST MOUNT HIMALAYA.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15624637821/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:SANDRO SALSANO SUMMER DAVOS TIANJIN CHINA NATIONAL TELEVISION.jpg --> taken from https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15441135368/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:SANDRO SALSANO AND VITALI KLITSCHKO.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15603603746/ (2014, © by "martin moore")
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH CHIWETEL EJIOFOR.jpg --> previously published via http://sandrosalsano.blogspot.de/2014/07/sandro-salsano-with-chiwetel-ejiofor-12.html (2014)
- File:SANDRO SALSANO, ENRIQUE PENA NIETO.jpg --> previously published via https://www.flickr.com/photos/128907849@N08/15441204948/ (2014, © by "martin moore") or http://sandrosalsano.blogspot.de/2014/04/mr-sandro-salsano-young-global-leader.html (2014)
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH NOBU MATSUHISA IN TOKYO.jpg --> previously published via http://sandrosalsano.blogspot.de/2014/10/salsano-sandro-with-nobuyuki-nobu.html (2014)
Eventually sock pupperty involved, considering Reuters2015 (talk · contributions · Statistics) with similar (deleted) uploads. Related are also:
- Bloomberg13 (talk · contributions · Statistics)
- Bloomberg14 (talk · contributions · Statistics)
- Forbes201523 (talk · contributions · Statistics)
- File:Sandro Salsano and Carlos Slim Domit.jpg
- File:Sandro Salsano and Nobel prize Joseph Stiglitz.jpg
- File:Sandro Salsano World Economic Forum Young Global Leader.jpg
- File:Sandro Salsano Young Global Leader World Economic Forum.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO ROMERO BRITTO @ DAVOS.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO, DOMENICO DOLCE.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO, PAUL GASOL.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO EVEREST MOUNT HIMALAYA.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO, ENRIQUE PENA NIETO.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO JOHANNA SHAHANI WEDDING CHINO Y NACHO.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO JOHANNA SHAHANI WEDDING WITH SHERMANOLOGY.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH CHIWETEL EJIOFOR.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH ROBERTO DURAN.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO IN GREENLAND.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO AND VITALI KLITSCHKO.jpg
- File:VIP SANDRO SALSANO Ocean Drive.jpg
- File:Sandro Salsano and Gordon Ramsay, Singapore.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO SBERBANK DAVOS.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO SUMMER DAVOS TIANJIN CHINA NATIONAL TELEVISION.jpg
- File:HOLA MAGAZINE SANDRO SALSANO JOHANNA SHAHANI.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH NOBU MATSUHISA IN TOKYO.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH RICHARD BRANSON DAVOS 2015.jpg
- File:SANDRO SALSANO WITH MARISSA MAYER DAVOS 2015.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 18:13, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no indication of user's own work on any of this. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:09, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Use photo for stock photo website, so cant be free available FJM88NL (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:06, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Superseded by an other version File:Salaunes Mairie 2015.jpg PA (talk) 19:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Next time just upload a new version. If you don't understand, write me on my talk page and I'll explain how. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Painting of an artist which is still alive, so OTRS needed Shev123 (talk) 20:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Ssolbergj as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: The author is not the German army, but rather the intergovernmental entity Eurocorps. The source provided is misleading. Amitie 10g (talk) 02:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- The crucial point isn't who is the author and if the author authorizes the use of this work (In fact I'm the author but not the "Urheber" (badly translated to "originator", "original creator" or "copyright holder" of this pic).) It doesn't work like - let's say in the US - where works created by government officials as part of their work assignment become public domain. That's not what the license claims and that's not how german law works here. Plus, there's no international copyright law. Thus German copyright law applies at least for all german parts of this international entity if acting in Germany under German jurisdiction or as a public german government agency and thereby using this seal. Then, this seal acts as the official seal of a german government authority. Thus, § 5 Abs. 1 UrhG (Deutschland) states that they are gemeinfrei (That's hard to translate, but in a nutshell: Art. 5 of german "copyright law" makes these works become "public domain".) In fact, this is the most common license for all kinds of german seals, flags, etc. in WikiCommons. If we hadn't this Art. 5 of UrhG it would be almost impossible to depict such works created or used in Germany.--TUBS
08:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- BTW: I find it very strange, that File:Coat of arms of Eurocorps.svg by Ssolbergj should be treated differently. Both works, his and mine, are based on the very same source (namely the Eurocorps website) and redrawn by us (which doesn't make one of us the copyright holder or the "Urheber") The only difference is, that I have cited a law that gives allowance for redrawing and depicting this seal, while Ssolbjerg simply claims that it this his very own work (thus holding all copyrhights?) I find that rather strange. --TUBS 09:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- I'm critical of the argument that Template:PD-Coa-Germany applies to this image merely because Germany participates is the European corps. That would imply that the symbol of any international organisation in which Germany participates, e.g. the logo of the World Bank, could be covered by this public domain license. The source and description provided for this image are IMO clearly insufficient in making such an argument. Unlike File:EC Eurocorps.svg, File:Coat of arms of Eurocorps.svg is not a copy of the exact image used by the organisation, but a separate artistic interpretation of the blazon, and can as such be given a creative commons license for instance (me being the author/heraldic artist). Template:coa blazon explains this phenomenon. - Ssolbergj (talk) 17:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- ya maybe. Let's not discuss "your file". You clearly made a point which must be considered justified based on certain jurisdictions.
- Like every other battalion or regiment the German part of the Eurocorps acts in certain cases as a German government authority (for example when issuing soldiers' IDs or driving licenses). Let's be clear: there is no multinational army unit based on it's own right or based on any international law: and there's certainly not a single Franco-German law. I don't argue - as you say - that this an international organization's logo that becomes public domain on base of German copyright law just because Germany is holding a major stake in this entity. I just say, from a legal standpoint, that the German part of this corps must be treated separately from the French parts and thus like any other all-German entity in the German armed forces. German and French soldiers operating under German and/or French law (French law applies for the Germans when in France and vice versa). The Frenchmen and the Germans only work together on basis of binational treaties and memoranda of understanding. Thus, like everywhere else in the German armed forces, permission for wearing this coat of arms on the german uniforms' sleeves must be (and was) explicitly granted by the German government (or the German president) (as well as using stamps, etc.). That there's (by chance so to say) a french legal entity showing identical coats of arms doesn't matter at all. If this patch wasn't declared official by the German authorities, wearing it on a German uniform would considered illegal. Thus, this seal is obviously the official coat of arms of a German public authority and can be depicted on base of Art. 5 of the cited law - at least everywhere German law can be applied feasibly.
- BTW: I find it very strange, that File:Coat of arms of Eurocorps.svg by Ssolbergj should be treated differently. Both works, his and mine, are based on the very same source (namely the Eurocorps website) and redrawn by us (which doesn't make one of us the copyright holder or the "Urheber") The only difference is, that I have cited a law that gives allowance for redrawing and depicting this seal, while Ssolbjerg simply claims that it this his very own work (thus holding all copyrhights?) I find that rather strange. --TUBS
- The world Bank example seems far-fetched. I don't know much about the world bank, so I better don't comment on that in-depth, however, I doubt that the world bank acts in any case as a German government authority or has a german uniform with official shoulder patches or uses it's logo or whatever you call this for pretending to be a German authority. The German participation in a random organization isn't enough to apply German copyright law to this very organization.--TUBS 22:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- BTW: Template:PD-BW is also feasible as this coat of arms is also depicted in [9] which is is an attachment/an update to ZDv 37/10. As a consequence this pic is in the public domain.--TUBS 10:10, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- BTW: Template:PD-BW is also feasible as this coat of arms is also depicted in [9] which is is an attachment/an update to ZDv 37/10. As a consequence this pic is in the public domain.--TUBS
- The world Bank example seems far-fetched. I don't know much about the world bank, so I better don't comment on that in-depth, however, I doubt that the world bank acts in any case as a German government authority or has a german uniform with official shoulder patches or uses it's logo or whatever you call this for pretending to be a German authority. The German participation in a random organization isn't enough to apply German copyright law to this very organization.--TUBS
Kept: per https://fragdenstaat.de/files/foi/17949/ZDv_37_10_Ergnzung01-2014_28.01.2014.pdf CoA of German part (=Bundeswehr) of Eurocorps. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:19, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Пустая страница, она не имеет никакой информационной принадлежности. Bladedix (talk) 08:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Это страница разрешения неоднозначностей.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:11, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Kept, Это страница разрешения неоднозначностей. Taivo (talk) 07:36, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
The sculpture (File:VysotskyMonument after opening.JPG, File:Памятник Высоцкому в день открытия.JPG) is copyrighted. {{NoFoP-Russia}}. File:Памятник Высоцкому.jpg is not used and will not be used.
- File:VysotskyMonument after opening.JPG
- File:Памятник Высоцкому в день открытия.JPG
- File:Памятник Высоцкому.jpg
Clarissy. 16:04, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
- File:Памятник Высоцкому.jpg demonstrates history of opening Vysotsky monument in Voronezh. It may be usefull to illustrate some articles devoted to Voronezh culture. User talk:Raise-the-Sail
- Don't make me laugh, please. This image can't illustrate anything because it is unclear what it is. We see only two strange men and something in a plastic bag. That's why I'm not surprised that the file was uploaded 3,5 years ago, but has not yet been used though there is an article about the monument.
- You claim that this construction can be recognized as a monument to Vysotsky, isn't it? Great! In that case, read Commons:FOP#Russia, please. Clarissy. 02:09, 29 January 2013 (UTC)
- Keep File:Памятник Высоцкому.jpg This file shows history of opening Vysotsky monument in Voronezh and history of reconstruction of Karla Marksa Street. That is not COM:SCOPE and not Commons:FOP#Russia, because monument is covered. --Insider (talk) 11:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)
- You have repeated the words of your friend as a mantra, but you haven't refuted my arguments. It's impossible to be a little bit pregnant. If this object can be recognised as a monument to Vysotskiy, it is copyrighted as a modern work of art. Similarly, a church under construction is copyrighted. According to paragraph 1 of article 1256 and paragraph 3 of article 1259 of Russian Civil Code copyright protection covers both published and unpublished three-dimensional works of art.
- P.S. Charming flash mob and manipulation: 1, 2, 3, 4 ;-) Clarissy. 21:36, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
- Сhurch under construction is copyrighted, but the church is covered with a tarpaulin is not protected by copyright. As a church or a monument behind the fence are not protected by copyright. P.S. WP:AGF. In my watchlist all files in the category:Voronezh Oblast. Of course I've been watching these nominations. File:Kotenok s ulitsy Lizyukova Voronezh 2005.jpg (ru:Файл:Kotenok s ulitsy Lizyukova Voronezh 2005.jpg) is not my authorship. I just moved it to Commons. --Insider (talk) 07:22, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: There is no FOP in Russia FASTILY (TALK) 03:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
Copyrighted contemporary object, no FoP for sculpture in Russia.
A.Savin 12:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 07:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Canitar regarding official symbols
[edit]Coat of arms (brasão) and flag (bandeira) of Brazilian municipality pt:Canitar emancipated in 1991 (see also http://www.canitar.sp.gov.br/o-municipio.php), failing {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "(...) published or commissioned (...) prior to 1983." No trivial text/shape logo, failing {{PD-textlogo}}/{{PD-shape}}. All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established by municipal law. Generally for most of the Brazilian coats of arms and flags: unlikely also that these symbols were digitized in there present form prior to 1983 (when "Internet" was available only for a few institutions, TCP/IP was standardized in 1982). Their creation date could be quite recent, maybe not even by an employee of the Brazilian government (mostly some years after official federal constitution, see also this extreme case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols in 2014: 81 years after emancipation...). The actual Brazilian copyright law from 1998 makes no exception for government works.
Gunnex (talk) 12:48, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 07:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Bonjour, le projet de modification du blason de Loudes n´a pas été retenu par la Mairie, ce blason n'a donc plus aucune valeur (le blason à retenir est le plus simple). Pour confirmation voir www.loudes.fr, le site officiel de la Mairie. Clodion (talk) 14:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: This Coat of Arms is just an heraldical representation of a Blazon (notice that in french Coat of arms and Blazon have the same translation, but does not mean the same!). Heraldically talking, specific version of a CoA may be copyrightable, but the Blazon text itself not. Also file in use. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:25, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per Amitie 10g Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:21, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear (c) status. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
File:Rodrigo Moyano Rodmobel gimnasta cochabamba en Mandarina Bar con su novia y una fanática.JPG
[edit]
no es relevante para el publico Nicolegarcia200 (talk) 14:34, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Unclear if User:Wikilucc represents "Dominic O'Riordan, Warren Smith". If so than he/she should send permission to com:OTRS. Image seem to be copied from http://cache.vevo.com/Content/VevoImages/video/07C880C4414F6CCC7455DC3BBBE5207B.jpg Jarekt (talk) 14:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear (c) status. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
While marked as "own work" and listed under CC-BY-SA-3.0, it is essentially a faithful reproduction (scan) of a 2-D copyrighted work. Unless there's something about German copyright law that would make this ineligible that I'm merely unfamiliar with. LFaraone 15:01, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Delete. I uploaded an edit of this file, in which I cropped it to show only the front of the card. I agree the file appears to have the wrong licensing, as it was when originally uploaded. Cloudbound (talk) 21:08, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Laomonarchrestore (talk · contribs)
[edit]These images are not 'own work', and although have sources, there is no evidence they are available under a free licence. Unless evidence is presented that they are either in the public domain, or freely licenced, they should be deleted.
- File:King Sisavang Vatthana Portrait.png
- File:Sombath Somphone.jpg
- File:Prince Thanyawong Savang.png
- File:Prince Phetsarath.jpg
ColonialGrid (talk) 15:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unclear (c) status. Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:31, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
bad version, bad colour, better version is there (File:Serres 1 Studenten Meubeln Möbel.jpg) Cholo Aleman (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: duplicate Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
{{NoFoP-Italy}} Josve05a (talk) 17:02, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: No FOP in Italy Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:33, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Picture collection must collect from local picture from Commons, please upload first every picture to Commons and then collect it from those. Please take a look at File:Collage Rome.jpg as an example how to do it. See Commons:Collages for details. Motopark (talk) 18:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Out of scope, promotional Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:34, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by דוד שי as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: picture taken at 1966, will be free at January 1, 2017 Didym (talk) 20:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Still under (c) Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:37, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mr. Ibrahem (talk · contribs)
[edit]The 10-year copyright term provided by Yemeni law only applies if the photos were first published in Yemen. As the author is based in the UK, this seems unlikely.
- File:Hadhramaut 1994 - 7.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut desert 1994.jpg
- File:Little Aden 1994.jpg
- File:Shibam Hadramaut 1993 - 1.jpg
- File:North of Aden 1994.jpg
- File:Hadramaut 1993-3.jpg
- File:Hadramaut 1993-2.jpg
- File:Hadramaut 1993-1.jpg
- File:Hadramaut Shibam 1993.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut 1994 - 10.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut 1994 - 11.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut 1994 - 9.jpg
- File:Sayun 1994 -2.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut 1994 - 8.jpg
- File:Hadhramaut 1994.jpg
- File:Hodeidah 1994.jpg
- File:Sana'a 1994 - 5.jpg
- File:Shibam Hadhramaut 1994 -2.jpg
- File:Shibam Hadhramaut 1994 -1.jpg
- File:Mukalla 1993.jpg
- File:Near Taiz 1993.jpg
- File:Nabi Shu'ayb 13th November 1993.jpg
- File:Mukalla 25th December 1993 -1.jpg
- File:Sayun 1994.jpg
- File:Jabal al-Nabi Shuaib 13th November 1992.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-10.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-9.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-8.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-7.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-6.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-5.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-4.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-3.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-2.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a 1993-1.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-6.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-5.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-4.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-1.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-3.jpg
- File:Yemen Sana'a Hash 1992-2.jpg
Underlying lk (talk) 07:13, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
- Not mentioned in the law The photos must were first published in Yemen.? --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 15:52, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Mr. Ibrahem: Yemen is a party to the Berne Convention so the convention's definition of the country of origin applies.--Underlying lk (talk) 21:39, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 12:02, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mr. Ibrahem (talk · contribs)
[edit]Recent books, no evidence of public domain.
- File:DRM2728.pdf
- File:تاريخ المستبصر.pdf
- File:بهجة الزمن في تاريخ اليمن.djvu
- File:حرب اليمن 1994.djvu
- File:SHIFTING SANDS 'The British in South Arabia'.djvu
- File:اليمن من الباب الخلفي.djvu
- File:Yemeni Archaeologicl Annual Vol.1&2.djvu
- File:ABADY Yemen Archaeology 9 12.djvu
Yann (talk) 14:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- hi, these books have become free because of the author's death 70 years agoː
- File:DRM2728.pdf, File:بهجة الزمن في تاريخ اليمن.djvu ( Abd al-Bāqī ibn ʻAbd al-Majīd Yamānī, death in 1342 [10])
- File:تاريخ المستبصر.pdf (Ibn al-Mujāwir, death in 1291 [11])
and the other books was transferred from the Archive.org via IA Upload Bot --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 16:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, I think there may be confusion between the Arabic and the Western calendar. Could you please add, for each book, the date of first publication, and the name and date of the author, if possible in English. Regards, Yann (talk) 09:03, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Conversions for the two death-years given: 1291 AH = 1874–75 CE; 1342 AH = 1923–24 CE.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, that helps. Could you do that for all other books above, like I did here? Regards, Yann (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- I think I got the wrong end of the stick above; searching for the first author I’m finding both 1281–1343 (or 1342, or 1343?) and 680–743 figures associated with the name. And for the second I see 1204/5 – 1291/2 and 601–690. So I’m inclined to think the years given above are already in CE, which would make “70 years ago” something of an understatement! Not reading Arabic I can’t be sure (nor can I tell how much modern commentary or other editorial content may be included), but now it seems to me very likely that these two authors are from the mediaeval period (in Western terms).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
- I wanted to say that, the years already in CE, But I was blocked from editing for week --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 14:39, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
- I think I got the wrong end of the stick above; searching for the first author I’m finding both 1281–1343 (or 1342, or 1343?) and 680–743 figures associated with the name. And for the second I see 1204/5 – 1291/2 and 601–690. So I’m inclined to think the years given above are already in CE, which would make “70 years ago” something of an understatement! Not reading Arabic I can’t be sure (nor can I tell how much modern commentary or other editorial content may be included), but now it seems to me very likely that these two authors are from the mediaeval period (in Western terms).—Odysseus1479 (talk) 22:44, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, that helps. Could you do that for all other books above, like I did here? Regards, Yann (talk) 10:19, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Conversions for the two death-years given: 1291 AH = 1874–75 CE; 1342 AH = 1923–24 CE.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 09:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Tarawneh: Could you please have a look? Thank you! :-) --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 08:23, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyright didn't expire for the above books and others (deleted too). These books are partly presenting old text and partly academically reviewing the text. Not PD. --Tarawneh (talk) 17:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
This is not simple. Copyright The Walt Disney Company . HombreDHojalata.talk 06:12, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- If the file is deleted, a majority of Disney logos will be liable for deletion as well. - Mike Rosoft (talk) 14:44, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep This image only consists of simple geometric shapes--EEIM (talk) 02:10, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete No. Obviously, this not consists of simple geometric shapes. --. HombreDHojalata.talk 11:18, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
- Keep File:Disney Channel 2014 HD.png (similar to File:Disney-channel-new2015.png) was nominated by me for deletion and the result was Kept per text-logo. --Mega-buses (talk) 19:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
- Delete This is not a textlogo. The fonts are not copyrightable in USA, but this is not a font. For example, both N-s in "channel" are different. Also, blue ribbon around letters is not simple, and look mouse-shaped dot above i – this is not simple and the logo is eligible to copyright. I think, that the first decision to keep the logo was incorrect. Taivo (talk) 07:41, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with Taivo but... If it were not for the decision of the Deletion requests of File:Disney Channel 2014 HD.png, I would have decided by the Delete. --Mega-buses (talk) 00:42, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
- Comment (For consideration of the administrator who will close the request) On August 9, the user User:HombreDHojalata opened a second request for deletion for File:Disney Channel 2014 HD.png (see Commons:Deletion requests/File:Disney Channel 2014 HD.png) and the result was kept per text-logo (it was decided on August 24 by the User:P199). --Mega-buses (talk) 23:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Regardless of the prior decisions, this logo has changed. The generic swirl has now become Mickey Mouse ears and is not TOO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
Soviet-Russian images
[edit]- These need PD US tags, if they're PD in the US.
- File:Andreev Andrey Andreevich.jpg
- File:Alexey Badaev.jpeg
- File:Bubnov andrei.jpg
- File:Khatayevich.jpg
- File:Kirow.jpg
- File:Lazar Kaganovich.jpg
- File:Vlas Czubar.jpg
- File:Bucharin.bra.jpg
- File:Kosior.jpg
- File:Krupskaja.jpg
- File:Gleb Maksimilianovich Krzhizhanovskiy.jpg
- File:Valerian kuybyshev.jpg
- File:Georgy Lomov-Oppokov.jpg
- File:Mamia Orakhelashvili.jpg
- File:Petrovskiy GI Soc Kiev 1937 01 p10bis.jpg
- File:Piatnicki.jpg
- File:Globus-1935-05-Pavel-Postyshev-foto.jpg
- File:Yury Pyatakov.jpg
- File:Rudsutak.jpg
- File:NikolayShvernik.jpg
- File:Stalin lg zlx1.jpg
- File:MichailTomski.jpg
- File:Klim voroshilov.JPG
- File:Bryuhanov.jpg
- File:Shalva Eliava.jpg
- File:Grigory Naumovich Kaminsky.png
- File:Kosarev.jpg
- File:Krinicki.jpg
- File:Solomonlosovsky.jpg
- File:Mezhlauk Valery Ivanovich (1893-1938).jpg
- File:Levon Mirzoyan.jpg
- File:Boris Pozern.jpg
- File:V V Ptuha.jpg
- File:Sokolnikov.jpg
- File:IP Uborevich.jpg
- File:1936 genrich grigorijewitsch jagoda.jpg
- File:Yakir Iona.jpg
We need to find out if these images are public domain are public domain in the US, and can be kept here on WP Commons. --Trust Is All You Need (talk) 06:52, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withrawn by nominator - see here. --JuTa 10:15, 12 September 2015 (UTC)