Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2015/09/07
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(12436320833).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436315503).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436314833).jpg){kind=link}
_(15389211762).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(12436654924).jpg){kind=link}
사용법을 모르겠음. Aquawalk (talk) 05:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright issues whatever else the problems may be Herby talk thyme 06:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Both his heraldy page and flags works provide non-offitial flags, coats of arms, etc., giving the reader of the articles in which they are used false information on the heraldy they supposedly represent. I'd also like to add that they are awfull and resemble a child's work with paint. Lel789 (talk) 09:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
bufvsf J UW 190.238.156.4 17:17, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
Files uploaded by EdsonMadrid (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logos of questionable notability.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:22, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by EdsonMadrid (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status.
- File:Algoritmo 5.pdf
- File:Algoritmo 4.pdf
- File:Linguagem C - Completa e Descomplicada.pdf
- File:Algoritimo 3.pdf
- File:Algoritimo 2.pdf
- File:Algoritimo 1.pdf
- File:ALGORITMOS.pdf
- File:AUTOMACAO TUDO TO TEAch 10 e 11classe.pdf
- File:Introducao bd.pdf
- File:79763-CSS-Criacao-de-Websites-Completo.pdf
- File:Comandos basicos linux.pdf
- File:79764-Apostila-Raciocinio-Logico.pdf
- File:Endereço IP (Internet Protocol). LackingFaces.pdf
- File:Capitulo II.pdf
- File:300 Ideias para Programar.pdf
- File:300 Lógica de Programaç╞o.pdf
- File:TabelaASCII.pdf
- File:Apostila de Programacao Java.pdf
- File:Java progrma.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no licenses at all. --JuTa 20:24, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by EdsonMadrid (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Unclear copyrights status of images.
- File:JavaScript - Básico ao Avançado.pdf
- File:Css-web.pdf
- File:Apostila Curso PHP MySQL(portugues).pdf
- File:Apostila de Banco de Dados e SQL.pdf
- File:Redes de computadores.pdf
- File:LISTA-DE-COMANDOS-DO-LINUX.pdf
- File:Livro Backtrack linux - auditoria e teste de invas o em redes.pdf
- File:Android Programando Passo a Passo.pdf
- File:Como Programar C++ Deitel 5ed-1.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:21, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: marked as no license since 2015-09-14. --JuTa 19:40, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
It's a mistake. This logo is a register trademark, it should be on Wikipedia but not on Wikimedia Commons. ManuleFlamingo (talk) 14:15, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader mistake, wrong license. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
This image is old and redundant. Davidmkiely (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Speedy closed KEPT, apparent mistaken nomination; this is not an image this is your own talk page. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:00, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
again, no offence, but as per File:Hampi - panoramio.jpg imho rather very poor quality, and additiononally, imho no 'educational use', Roland zh (talk) 18:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per shizhao (talk) 06:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
It's old and I don't want it to appear in Google searches, etc. Davidmkiely (talk) 10:15, 20 April 2015 (UTC)
Keep Looks to be a good quality free licensed photo of a notable person. Commons is not for most recent photo only. Nothing requiring deletion, and I don't see any particular problem with it which would argue for courtesy deletion. -- Infrogmation (talk) 20:02, 3 May 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Per above. PD releases can't be withdrawn. Stifle (talk) 08:31, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
This image is old and redundant. Davidmkiely (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- What, specifically is the problem with this image that you've twice nominated it for deletion? Wondering, -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:45, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I've already wasted two hours of my life trying to figure out your codes. Wiki has three very old pics of me that I want deleted. I uploaded them. What's the problem? Thank you.
Kept, Commons needs old photos also to show history. The photo has proper permission and is potentially useful. Taivo (talk) 10:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Marcel Duchamp died in 1968,not PD in France (source country) until 2039. Hop on Bananas (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep See discussion on file talk page. In this case France is NOT the "source country". While the vast majority of Duchamp's work would be under European copyright law, this particular example was created and exhibited in the US, photographed in the USA with photo published in USA in 1917, and thus falls within US copyright law. Thus the tag that this is public domain per US law is correct and appropriate. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:08, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I didn't know that until now-didn't bother to look at the flip side and assumed is was PD-US-1923-abroad. (Most of his other paintings are on en- wp with that tag.) I guess we can keep this one. Hop on Bananas (talk) 19:31, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Closing as kept per above by nominator. -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:39, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
derivative of Duchamp's work, duchamp died in 1968 h-stt !? 13:19, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Per previous deletion discussion "this particular example was created and exhibited in the US, photographed in the USA with photo published in USA in 1917, and thus falls within US copyright law. Thus the tag that this is public domain per US law is correct and appropriate". Tm (talk) 15:20, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- Keep No new facts. --Ras67 (talk) 14:15, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
Kept: as above. --Yann (talk) 23:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)
Tim Fountain is listed as author of this photograph, his COM:OTRS permission is required. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: OTRS permission confirmed – Kwj2772 (talk) 05:20, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Unknown authorship but belongs to Aefofex company and unknown license (both in description here and uploader's comment to related edit in RuWP), copyrighted by default Tatewaki (talk) 14:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: clear copright violation JuTa 19:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
Asaf Epstein and Tom Hahn are listed as author of this image, without COM:OTRS. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: per ticket 2015090810002699 Jcb (talk) 00:13, 13 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no quite notable people : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:09, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
no quite notable people : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:08, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Files uploaded by Jolman varela (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used.
- File:JOLMEN VARELA MEJIA.JPG
- File:Cineasta.JPG
- File:Jolmen Varela Mejia Director de cine Colombiano.jpg + (redirect) File:216634 10200110480218303 848758464 njlkl.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:07, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
image used only by promotional page deleted off enwiki DS (talk) 18:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation: http://gallery.onlinekhabar.com/inside.php?pstyle=1&id=6950&gid=329&start=14 Till (talk) 18:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 19:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 19:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Delete Seems a clear case. -- Infrogmation (talk) 01:14, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
No evidence that original uploader is copyright holder of this portrait. Kelly (talk) 20:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Image taken from the internet: low resolution and without exif. Of unknown copyright status. Takeaway (talk) 20:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Comment Original seems to be from http://www.bhagavatamela.org/pg.html, which images are copyrighted as can be read here-> http://www.bhagavatamela.org/index.html. - Takeaway (talk) 20:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:03, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I doubt about the authorship, seems to be an official photo from a dealer or the car company. No camera-data, standard resolution. Uploader was blocked because of about 20 copyvios, the picture can be found on several webpages. Note also File:УАЗ-450А.jpg. Druschba 4 (talk) 22:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
I doubt about the authorship. Very low resolution, no camera-data, seems to be scanned from a book. Author was blocked because of about 20 copyvios. Note also File:ГАЗ-33086 Земляк.jpg. Druschba 4 (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:02, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
In the top-left corner there is a number, probably a page number. It seems a photo of a magazine or something else. Yiyi (Dimmi!) 22:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:01, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE. Article of subject was deleted at enwiki: en:Esperanza Lázaro Valero Jujutacular (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 01:01, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
It's a mistake. This logo is a register trademark, it should be on Wikipedia but not on Wikimedia Commons. ManuleFlamingo (talk) 14:14, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom Herby talk thyme 11:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ferrara~commonswiki (talk · contribs)
[edit]Probably (c)vio by fashin fan. Com:PCP if no reaction from uploader.
- File:2014.01.02 OnStage.JPG
- File:2013.12.10GetLifeInMusic.jpg
- File:2013.10.07 Closeup(4).jpg
- File:2013.08.21Closeup(3).JPG
- File:2013.08.18HideReality(2).jpg
- File:2013.08.18HideReality (1).jpg
- File:2013.08.03 waterfall.JPG
- File:2013.08.01WhatUwant.jpg
- File:2013.08.01Gameover.jpg
- File:2011.10.07Backyard.JPG
- File:Couple blessed by Crist 2012.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 04:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Looks like copyvio indeed, EXIF shows a variety of cameras plus software programs Ymblanter (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Seems bellow the COM:TOO in France, but JPEG hace artifacts. Amitie 10g (talk) 03:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: still no license at all JuTa 20:31, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Unused low-quality personal photos of subjects with no apparent notability. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope.
—LX (talk, contribs) 19:52, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of project scope George Chernilevsky talk 16:27, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status.
- File:Manual.pdf
- File:Aula0 informatica TE DETRAN SP 57988.pdf
- File:Beginner pt.pdf
- File:Book perl cooler.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused logos of questionable notability.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no licenses at all / per nom. --JuTa 20:29, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Wdwd (talk) 19:50, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Appears to be an advert. Out of scope IMO Gbawden (talk) 09:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: no permission, copyvio. Wdwd (talk) 19:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Wdwd (talk) 19:57, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Personal holiday photo or promotion for Le Ski Chalet Holidays (leski.com). Either way - out of scope. GermanJoe (talk) 09:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyvio Wdwd (talk) 19:59, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:51, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. Wdwd (talk) 20:00, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bn bt ec01 (talk · contribs)
[edit]A series of historical images from India, politicians, buildings, meetings, and so on... all are licensed "self". Since there are at least 8 cameras at work here as well as a wide variety of output: color, black and white, faded, illustrative... it is unlikely this is all the work of one person. Some of the historicals may be old enough for PD-INDIA but Own work they most likely are not.
- File:Chandrashekhar Singh being felicitated by Bihar Janta Party Chief Satyendra Narain Singh.jpg
- File:Shri Satyendra Narayan Sinha with Prime Minister of India Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha with Prime Minister Smt Indira Gandhi at his Patna residence.jpg
- File:Prime Minister Shri Chaudhry Charan Singh with Satyendra Narayan Singh.jpg
- File:Bihar Vibhuti Anugraha Narain Sinha portrait.jpg
- File:Shri Nitish Kumar Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav offering tribute to eminent statesman Chhote Saheb.jpg
- File:Bihar academicians Satyendra Narayan Sinha Jayanti.jpg
- File:BJP Lakshmi Narayan Singh SushilModi RamVilas Paswan PMVisit.jpg
- File:Bihar Leaders Ravi Shankar Prasad Nitish Kumar Bali Ram Bhagat Raghuvansh Prasad Singh Ram Kripal Yadav paying tribute to Satyendra Narayan Singh.JPG
- File:CM NitishKumar paysTribute Chhote Saheb Satyendra Narayan Sinha FirstPunyatithi.JPG
- File:Bihar Vibhuti Dr Anugrah Narain Sinha.jpg
- File:Bihar Vibhuti Dr. Anugrah Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Shri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, The then Vice-President of India being received by Dr. L N Singh on his arrival at Patna Airport in Bihar .jpg
- File:A.M. B.Ed. College Gaya.jpg
- File:Anugrah Memorial BEd College.jpg
- File:Governor Nikhil kumar.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha Veteran Indian Statesman.jpg
- File:Vice President of India Delivers inaugural Satyendra Narayan Sinha lecture.JPG
- File:Shri Satyendra Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Dr Rajendra Prasad PM Jahawar Lal Nehru Dr Anugrah Narayan Sinha Patna.jpg
- File:Vice President of India with Kishori Sinha CM Nitish Kumar.jpg
- File:Kishori Sinha MP.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha Ji.jpg
- File:Nagaland Governor President of India.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Dr Rajendra Pd. DR.Anugrah Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:SATYENDRA NARAYAN SINHA.jpg
- File:Mrs Kishori Sinha MP Vaishalli.jpg
- File:ShyamaSingh firstladyNagaland.JPG
- File:Shekhawat SatyendraBabu.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha1950.jpg
- File:NagalandGovernorNikhilKumar.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Dear Sir,
I stand before the entire wikimedia fraternity as a fellow individual contributor among millions of my friends here who sacrifice their precious time, effort & energy and passionately contributed within the ambit of wikimedia, making it better knowledge based every day, someone among themselves. A contributor whose years of constructive contribution and creative freedom and valuable content addition is on the brink of collapse because of an unsubstantiated, haphazard and prejudiced nomination based on sheer imagination. There can not be a more brazen & blatantly illegitimate & malicious attempt to suppress creativity and to nullify one's sincere contributions to wikimedia commons over so many years.
As an active wikipedian since last one decade, it is a biazarre that almost all the uploaded images have been arbitrarily proposed for deletion without proper analysis and scrutiny of each of them! Some of them have been on wikimedia for over 4-5 years and are an important part of informative content in respective pages. This disturbingly harsh and prejudiced action is highly deplorable and unacceptable in Wikimedia. If you want, all the sincere wikimedia contributors to stop doing their work, please block/ban us but don't spoil the value addition contributions that are the core foundation of wikimedia
It's like one arbitrary action for anything and everything which is both impracticable and incorrect!
Sir, I humbly appeal and ask to the wikimedia community, should there be herculean restrictions on creativity and should all of us contributors be 'censored' to suit one's tailor made needs? This is very much against the spirit of this organization
Sir, As far as the official legitimacy of all the said images are concerned, I humbly ask everyone,Is there any convention/rule that prohibits or censors contributing one's own original creations or pictures of natural landscape, pictures of public figure at public functions taken by an individual and pictures from one's personal archives?
1. If I visit a public function attended by a public figure and take snaps in my individual capacity (Which is absolutely permissible both legally and officially in India & as per the wikimedia policy), will the said images will be deleted just on the pretext and unsubstantiated notion that there must be some official camera pictures present for the said function! It is a bizarre but if i click a picture of a tree or an animal or a public building or a public function and upload it on wikimedia;will it be deleted since the govt. also publishes the similar pictures? If that's the new ruthless policy then almost 95-97 percent of wikimedia pictures will cease to exist!
All the below pictures have been absolutely clicked by me and in my capacity as an individual, neither are they copyrighted nor there is any official hurdle what so ever in uploading them since I , as the author/creator is releasing them in PD as a creative contributor, so there can not be any remotest reason what so ever to remove/delete my creations based on fabricated facts and prejudiced vendetta.All these images are an indispensable part of contents and any deletion will jeopardize the very essence of people's encyclopedia i.e. Wikipedia & Wikimedia.
- File:Shri Nitish Kumar Shri Lalu Prasad Yadav offering tribute to eminent statesman Chhote Saheb.jpg
- File:Bihar academicians Satyendra Narayan Sinha Jayanti.jpg
- File:BJP Lakshmi Narayan Singh SushilModi RamVilas Paswan PMVisit.jpg
- File:Bihar Leaders Ravi Shankar Prasad Nitish Kumar Bali Ram Bhagat Raghuvansh Prasad Singh Ram Kripal Yadav paying tribute to Satyendra Narayan Singh.JPG
- File:CM NitishKumar paysTribute Chhote Saheb Satyendra Narayan Sinha FirstPunyatithi.JPG
- File:Bihar Vibhuti Dr Anugrah Narain Sinha.jpg
- File:Bihar Vibhuti Dr. Anugrah Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Shri Bhairon Singh Shekhawat, The then Vice-President of India being received by Dr. L N Singh on his arrival at Patna Airport in Bihar .jpg
- File:A.M. B.Ed. College Gaya.jpg
- File:Anugrah Memorial BEd College.jpg
- File:Governor Nikhil kumar.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha Veteran Indian Statesman.jpg
- File:Vice President of India Delivers inaugural Satyendra Narayan Sinha lecture.JPG
- File:Shri Satyendra Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Dr Rajendra Prasad PM Jahawar Lal Nehru Dr Anugrah Narayan Sinha Patna.jpg
- File:Vice President of India with Kishori Sinha CM Nitish Kumar.jpg
- File:Kishori Sinha MP.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha Ji.jpg
- File:Nagaland Governor President of India.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:Dr Rajendra Pd. DR.Anugrah Narayan Sinha.jpg
- File:SATYENDRA NARAYAN SINHA.jpg
- File:Mrs Kishori Sinha MP Vaishalli.jpg
- File:ShyamaSingh firstladyNagaland.JPG
- File:Shekhawat SatyendraBabu.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha1950.jpg
- File:NagalandGovernorNikhilKumar.jpg
2.If an honorable constitutional functionary visits my private home on a personal visit and I take the snaps personally, will it be forced to be deleted? Since their official PRD machinery may have taken similar snaps. or of i visit a public function or ceremony or a cricket match and take snaps; will i be coerced & compelled to delete them?
This is draconian & a haphazard murder of creativity and contributions!
The below images:
- File:Shri Satyendra Narayan Sinha with Prime Minister of India Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri.jpg
- File:Satyendra Narayan Sinha with Prime Minister Smt Indira Gandhi at his Patna residence.jpg
- File:Prime Minister Shri Chaudhry Charan Singh with Satyendra Narayan Singh.jpg
are from my personal archives, (Mind you neither official nor professional but totally Personal) On what basis will they be deleted? Just because some one is after an old wikimedia contributor Bn bt ec01, so they must be deleted?
3. There are millions of such pictures of public figures & personalities taken by individuals and uploaded on the Wikimedia; Will all of them proposed to be deleted on similar 'one size fits all' basis? Will they be censored too without reasons?
Infact, even from my Home country India and home province Bihar; there are hundreds of similar images posted by individual contributors; will they be haphazardly deleted and removed without proper individual scrutiny?
4. Why is the wikimedia cracking down on a prejudiced idea and unsubstantiated ground? I hereby stand that all these images belong to the contributor, is there any proof/evidence that contradicts the same? Never, there just can't be!
5. If the wikimedia administrators want to ban, censor, arbitrarily edit/delete and impose restrictions on a legitimate contribution by a author, Please ban/block me from Wikimedia and block hundreds of un-named un-sung volunteers like me who had spent hours & days & years for making wikimedia a global success.
6. There may be technical problems in labeling relevant license but that does not entitle one to delete the entire work! Also, if some picture is already in public domain, how could they be modified/erased if the author has cited veritable source from where the picture is taken? I henceforth, request learned volunteers at wikimedia and would only hope that Justice will be done to me, for this will not be an individual case but the case of every single contributor from India
7. All the listed images should be individually discussed and not merely arbitrarily deleted based on ir-rational beliefs and autocratic censorship
8. I humbly request, Sir,please block me, ban me, despise me and ban hundreds of contributors like me, but don't ruin valuable contributions in a haphazard and blatantly incorrect manner
9.There should be a wider platform to discuss technical glitches and copyright issues but that must not become the playground to distort and damage meaningful contributions
10. Like every sincere wikimedia contributor, I stand by my work and will revert the destructive edits because there has been grave discrepancy conducted in nominating them in a bulk without meticulous individual analysis.I know, I may be banned/blocked; I am ready for it, as long as spirit of Wikimedia stands tall
- While everyone is able to express opinions on Deletion Nominations, I don't think it is wise to do (as Bn bt ec01 did today) remove 14 deletion nomination tags from files without allowing the discussion to proceed. As stated in the nomination, some of these images may be old enough to be kept. Some appear to be scanned from publications. In those cases the metadata reads HPScan, not a camera. Simple sourcing is all that is required. The editors and admins are here to help you and to work with these images. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:36, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I took your challenge to look individually, picked one at random File:Vice President of India with Kishori Sinha CM Nitish Kumar.jpg (543 × 466 pixels, file size: 35 KB); and found it larger at at source, http://pgresize.outlookindia.com/images/gallery/20110712/Hamid-Ansari_20110712.jpg.ashx?quality=60&width=964 700x466 700 × 466 - Jul 12, 2011. The individual picture (larger) is here http://www.outlookindia.com/photos/default.aspx?pt=3&ptv=0&date=7/12/2011. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:47, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Sir,
Is it wise and legitimately permissible to nominate the entire contributions made by a volunteer so far in last 5-6 years in one go without due consideration on prejudiced assertion ? That's too in an arbritarily haphazard manner? Jus because you have rights doesn't means to misuse it and suppress some one.
With respect to the link you have provided above, Dear SIR please let a neutral transparent look at both the pictures and let every one genuinely assess
Both the pictures are of the same event taken by different persons from different angles/positions and the prejudiced assertion that the same picture has been uploaded by me is sheer fabrication of facts! Infact just a few seconds of careful observation will prove that both are similar event pictures but are Completely different
Pls answer my query, hundreds of people like me were present on the occassion , dozens of media houses, diff. Govt PRDs have covered the public event, does that mean that I can not upload snap taken by myself since already some media house has released a similar (but not same/identical ) of it on its website? Please Please carefully look and confirm sir, they are not the same at all!
I stand by every word in the above argument presented by me against blatant incorrect nomination , contesting the veritability and originality of creations of a sincere contributor
I can concede that there may be technical problems relating to license but that doesn't mean that I should be barred from rectifying it
I again request you, please analyse every single file/image blatantly nominated, there's is no verifiable evidence that contradicts my genuine arguments
Also, when the scanned images from documents that are legitimately in public domain are uploaded, a suitable license may be updated
The pertinent reality is, how could the images taken by oneself during public functions and of public buildings be nominated just for name sake? That's too without proper discussion? They were not uploaded over night but over last 4-5 years but today in a brazen manner they all have been nominated today
Also, pls note that, if I have got a picture developed(In old days there used to be camera reel unlike today) and scanned my own clicked snaps and uploaded it, obviously it will show HP Scan
PLEASE ANALYSE AND THROUGHLY assess the files but don't just put forward hastily made conclusion
I request you young lad, please proceed with reason and credible facts and do not be automatically autocratic, it's a platform for all to be creative and not the property of one's whims and fancies— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bn bt ec01 (talk • contribs) 15:23 and 15:27, 8 Sep 2015 (UTC)
- Comment See also User talk:KurodaSho#Message from Bn bt ec01. --KurodaSho (talk) 14:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete I came to these images from en.wiki as a lot of copyvios appeared to have crept into articles. This is unbelievable as images from 1950 to 2012 are included in the ownwork category. Delete all images. —SpacemanSpiff 20:11, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I had examined every image file and the fact put forward by author seems to be both authentic & substianted.
As evident, It's appears as a bonafide mistake of using wrong license template, since the author has inherited the pictures from the private creation & collection of his deceased uncle, there's no problem why they can't be released under template
|
The heirs of this work's copyright holder (usually the creator) have released it into the public domain. This applies worldwide.
In some countries this may not be legally possible; if so: |
Also, some pictures fate back to 1910s-19 30 in India which is already in public domain by virtue of copyright norms.The source for already PD images & wether they were taken or retouched should be updated.
Moreover, There seems to be no copyright violation so far, so the images must be retained with appropriate license updation it would be terminally incorrect to delete the images just because author has inadvertently or out of ignorance put up wron templates for images he is releasing into PD
Keep the images & update license
Sunny singh9128 (talk) 20:42, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment checking all the mentioned files one by ine validates the fact that while many of the uploaded contemporary images seems 2 be all right as they are solely created by author who is releasing rights into PD.
A majority of images, seems to be fit for PD-heirs category
There are also images that are too old and already in PD, so fit for keep Sunny singh9128 (talk) 21:20, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment It should be noted that just because some files may seems to be incorrectly licensed doesn't absolutely Implies that all the files have same issues!
Disruption /Deletion of all the genuine files on the pretext of problems with a selected few is both impracticable & inconsistent with wikimedia policy.
While admitting that inadvertently different incorrect licenses may have been provided for a few instead of the most suitable one but this does not mandates that the entire contributions are unfit or violation of Copyrights
The nomination for deletion discussion is based on strange prejudiced notion that different cameras, styles & colors have been used! Is it possible that pictures of different things, events, occasions & personalities will be taken by creator/author at the same time by the same camera and in same mode?
Does using different equipments over the time amounts to any violation if the images are created /taken/inherited by author who released it in PD? No it doesn't.
The issue here is of copyright and the same may be checked & discussed widely & wisely , though my ID has been banned without prior notice and on dubious grounds , I reiterate the legitimate request that a knee jerk reaction is uncalled for, I am willing to admit mistakes & correct them but such one size fits all shouldn't be the basis for analysis AND only inclusive discussion should be facilitated
Deleted: Per above. Extremely broad date range, camera types (if any) and technical characteristics suggest these are not the work of one person. Reverse image searches of samples also find previous publication of higher quality versions. Эlcobbola talk 17:01, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:00, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
creators will 최광모 (talk) 07:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:02, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Thumbnail-sized "view from the cockpit of an unidentified airplane landing at an unidentified airport." Not really useful for anything, I fear. El Grafo (talk) 10:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:05, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Margarita pink (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
Promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:06, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
The architect (or the artist), Paul Rouve, died in 1973. There is no Freedom of panorama in France.
Cette œuvre de Paul Rouve, mort en 1973 ne peut être diffusée sous licence libre. En effet, la loi sur le droit d'auteur en France interdit toute diffusion de reproductions d'une œuvre sans le consentement de l'auteur ou de ses ayant-droits, et ce jusque 70 ans après le décès de l'auteur (pas de liberté de panorama). Sauf cas particulier, cette photo sera restaurée sur Wikimedia Commons en 2043. Trizek from FR 14:59, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
The architect (or the artist), Pierre Traverse, died in 1979. There is no Freedom of panorama in France.
Cette œuvre de Pierre Traverse, mort en 1979 ne peut être diffusée sous licence libre. En effet, la loi sur le droit d'auteur en France interdit toute diffusion de reproductions d'une œuvre sans le consentement de l'auteur ou de ses ayant-droits, et ce jusque 70 ans après le décès de l'auteur (pas de liberté de panorama). Sauf cas particulier, cette photo sera restaurée sur Wikimedia Commons en 2049. Trizek from FR 15:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
The architect (or the artist), Pierre Traverse, died in 1979. There is no Freedom of panorama in France.
Cette œuvre de Pierre Traverse, mort en 1979 ne peut être diffusée sous licence libre. En effet, la loi sur le droit d'auteur en France interdit toute diffusion de reproductions d'une œuvre sans le consentement de l'auteur ou de ses ayant-droits, et ce jusque 70 ans après le décès de l'auteur (pas de liberté de panorama). Sauf cas particulier, cette photo sera restaurée sur Wikimedia Commons en 2049. Trizek from FR 15:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:04, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
HOAX material. Attached to article for consideration on an unknown 'micronation'. Notice uploader name Horton and country name Who... out of COM:SCOPE we're not here for pranking - try Facebook.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:08, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
I am working on adding the Republic of West Who to Wikipedia as a micronation. There are about thirty such small countries listed in Wikipedia. This material was not added as a prank. Micronations are small, self proclaimed and in many cases unusual nations. John Farr (Horton225)
I intended this to be a category, not a Gallery. I created this in error. If someone else finds a reason to remake this Gallery. There should be no objection. Libertyguy (talk) 02:53, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 17:43, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, ouy of project Fenerli1978 (talk) 02:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Include:
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:41, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted logo of a company. Rapsar (talk) 09:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:42, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
blurred, out of focus Hiddenhauser (talk) 10:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: In use, and therefore in scope. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
out of scope, advertising --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
copyrighted logo in the image : http://www.ceibal.edu.uy/ --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:46, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image, out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 12:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused screenshot of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:48, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
personal artwork, not used Avron (talk) 14:52, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Unused non-notable rich text document; uploader’s single contribution. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:49, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Unused non-notable rich text document; uploader’s single contribution. Includes images with unclear license. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:14, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:50, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Focus failed; image is therefore not useful. Nadiatalent (talk) 15:18, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: many better ones at Category:Agave attenuata. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:51, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Poor focus; there is a better image, File:Starr 040509-0009 Agave attenuata.jpg Nadiatalent (talk) 15:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:52, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Uncategorized and unused vector drawing from a free vector site. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep I have fixed the lack of categorization. The image is useful as an icon, and is currently used in my userspace on Wikipedia. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 05:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination. Image is now in use, categorized. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:56, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:53, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
This file was created by Jaime Lynn Fusco, not the uploader. COM:OTRS permission is needed from the author. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The file has permission as per COM:OTRS. Please remove your nomination. Thank you. --Omert33 (talk) 09:07, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- We need an OTRS editor to review the file. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:56, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
- Ticket is valid. Natuur12 (talk) 11:21, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination. It may take a few days (or not) for a closing admin to finish this. Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:55, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
- Ellin has withdrawn the nomination. We require an OTRS editor. Is there an OTRS editor in the house? --Omert33 (talk) 19:06, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Christophe Lennard is given as the author of this image - not the uploader. Mr. Lennard would need to give COM:OTRS permission for this upload. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Permission received at OTRS from Christophe Lennard--Sphilbrick (talk) 19:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:00, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Micky Binyamini is listed as author of this photograph, his COM:OTRS permission is required. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:14, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I do not understand the nature of this sudden bombardment and questioning. This photo, and all others which I have recently uploaded for that matter, was uploaded via the Wiki Commons uploader tool on the Wiki Commons website. I had clearly stated that "this is NOT my own work", as per the radio button selection on the uploader interface. If there is a problem with how it's running, then maybe the whole system should be reinspected. Thus, I have even provided you with the name of the photographer. More so, this photo is pretty much generic and can be found throughout numerous publications on both print and digital outlets such as the ones seen here and also here. I fail to see the sudden outburst of scrutiny in regards to my recent Wiki Commons uploads with the hope that my intentions would be regarded in all manner of fairness and purity. --Omert33 (talk) 04:38, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Permission from Micky Binyamini via COM:OTRS (a simple email form) is required to hold his images on Commons. Please see COM:L for additional insight into what can and cannot be hosted on Commons. There is no "outburst", you have uploaded a lot of images sourced to other people. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:59, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- The name of the photographer is Avi Levin and not Micky Binyamini as I had previously thought. I will try to get hold of him and request his permission. --Omert33 (talk) 05:56, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Permission from the copyright holder has been received via Template:OTRS ticket. I think this deletion request can therefore be dropped. I JethroBT (talk) 17:06, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination. Thanks everyone! Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:57, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
This image of Buddha is not below COM:TOO. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- From what I see, it most definitely is. Please remove your nomination. --Omert33 (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete The Buddha head is certainly above the TOO. User:Armbrust (Local talk - en.Wikipedia talk) 22:57, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as per COM:TOO. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:58, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Ori Salsero Swid is listed as author of this photograph, his COM:OTRS permission is required. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Permission statement received at OTRS from Ori Salsero Swid.--Sphilbrick (talk) 15:33, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination because of OTRS as above. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:17, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: withdrawn. P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:59, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
i want to renew Pthawatc (talk) 16:46, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: no deletion reason. Just overwrite or upload a new image if you want to update this photo. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
self promotion/advertising : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:13, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:14, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not simple text, designed and copyrighted logo http://www.uiltec.it/ --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not simple text, designed and copyrighted logo http://www.uiltec.it/ --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not simple text, designed and copyrighted logo http://www.uiltec.it/ --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
looks like a photography of a 2d Italian work : FoP not ok in Italy --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative, copyvio. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:16, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable people : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:16, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
not used personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:16, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
Lacking adequate source information; not traced at USFWS image library. Also very low quality. MPF (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete As for 2005, such quality was appropriate, but not now. Many better analogs exist. Stas (talk) 01:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: in use. P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable, funny but out of scope IMO --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete, but not for the above reason. A case could be made that this photo is not out of scope and could be useful as a thematic photo. That is shown by the fact that this photo is much used on the internet. The actual reason for deletion is probable copyvio. More complete versions were already published on the internet before the date claimed by the uploader to Commons. One example: [1]. -- Asclepias (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: P 1 9 9 ✉ 20:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
According to the decision of my father and my mother, this is offensive and promotes religious intolerance in the Brazilian state of Espirito Santo, as it has no place to mix religion with geography as it violates Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of human Rights which says: All human beings can claim the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, of national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction based on the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person will not be done, either that country or independent, trust, self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Remember yours, erasers, with religion if cannot toy. Beware prejudice against Espirito Santo. DAR7 (talk) 01:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted, the reason is wrong, but ... this is uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 08:31, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
According to the decision of my father and my mother, this is offensive and promotes religious intolerance in the Brazilian state of Espirito Santo, as it has no place to mix religion with geography as it violates Article 2 of the Universal Declaration of human Rights which says: All human beings can claim the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, of national or social origin, property, birth or other status. Furthermore, no distinction based on the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person will not be done, either that country or independent, trust, self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty. Remember yours, erasers, with religion if cannot toy. Beware prejudice against Espirito Santo. DAR7 (talk) 01:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, the reason is wrong, but ... this is uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 08:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
تصویر استفاده شده داری حق نشر و water mark است. وهمن (talk) 03:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Keep This isn't a good reason for delete. Just crop it or tag Template:Watermark or remove the watermark. Sukhman Kaur (talk) 06:11, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept, per Sukhman Kaur. Taivo (talk) 08:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by TheRedPenOfDoom as Copyvio (copyright) and the most recent rationale was: "signature" is in fact synonymous with "creatively unique identification Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 03:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I believe, that India is not among those countries, where signatures aren't copyrighted. Taivo (talk) 08:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
it don't seems to be an own work IMO, certainly copyrighted --Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata. Taivo (talk) 08:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
it seems to come from https://www.ontariohealthstudy.ca/en/home where yhe content is copyrighted --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:01, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I did not notice the file in mentioned site, but copyright notice is clear: "© 2011 Ontario Health Study. All rights reserved.". I'll better delete it. Taivo (talk) 08:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
it seems to come from https://www.ontariohealthstudy.ca/en/home where yhe content is copyrighted --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I did not notice the file in mentioned site, but copyright notice is clear: "© 2011 Ontario Health Study. All rights reserved.". I'll better delete it. Taivo (talk) 08:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
it seems to come from https://www.ontariohealthstudy.ca/en/home where yhe content is copyrighted --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I did not notice the file in mentioned site, but copyright notice is clear: "© 2011 Ontario Health Study. All rights reserved.". I'll better delete it. Taivo (talk) 08:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
better version uploaded Ritwick (talk) 05:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
no quite notable company : https://www.ohne-makler.net/ advertising, out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, the company is unknown to de.wiki and en.wiki. In addition, the logo surpasses threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 09:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Self-promotional picture for self-promotional non-encyclopedic article. Allan Aguilar (talk) 05:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Missing legal info Fixertool (talk) 05:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I delete also file:ANDRES BARRETT 2015.jpg. They are small unused personal photos without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contributions. Taivo (talk) 09:23, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Self promotional picture Allan Aguilar (talk) 05:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I do not see any promotionality, but I'll delete it nevertheless as file:Ministerio cristiano evangelista Redención Internacional en colegios de costa Rica predicaciones en costa Rica.JPG. Per EXIF, author is fbg, but uploader is Redencioncambialanacion. Own work is not sure, I suspect copyright violation. These are the uploader's last remaining contributions. Taivo (talk) 09:30, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Contenido promocional y spam / Promotional content or spam Saectar (talk) 07:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unused logo of non-notable thing. I'll delete also file:Quehay.JPG. Taivo (talk) 09:32, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Contenido sin interés enciclopédico, promocional y spam / Promotional content and spam Saectar (talk) 07:51, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unused simple logo of non-notable thing (no mention in enwiki). This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 09:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This photo is certainly not from 1900. The Moskva Hotel was opened in 1935. The Baltika beer (advertisement on top of the building) was launched in 1990. So, the permission of the author is needed for this photo to be used in Commons, and the author is cited as "unknown". Vanjagenije (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, advertisment is de minimis. The architect Alexey Shchussev lived 1873–1949. But the file is not restored in 2020, because photographer is unknown. "Personal collection" is not a good source. Taivo (talk) 09:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
There is no evidence that this photo is a "work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government". Vanjagenije (talk) 08:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, personal archive is not a good source. No proof for license. Taivo (talk) 09:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
versehentlich zweimal hochgeladen Falk2 (talk) 08:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, copy of file:C3-25 Barcelona–Massanes, Neutrassierung.jpg, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 09:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation. Rapsar (talk) 08:56, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, I delete all his/her contributions, because they are small photos, with one exception without metadata and with one (different) exception link to source is wrong. Taivo (talk) 09:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:55, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 09:58, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Wrong license template and probably copyvio: the work is not anonymous, its author died in 1979. Moreover, anonymous works published in India in 1950 were not PD in US in 1996, so URAA applies. This work will be PD in India in 2040 and PD in US in 2045, unless an evidence of earlier publication is found. Ankry (talk) 09:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Checked, its in PD in India because of the DLI license. Please chek information on its copyright license at DLI(dli.gov.in). DLI has written to all the heirs of writers and wherever they have found violations, they have removed the books from server, only books with proper permission, that they be in public domain, are available on the website now. I can check with the website admins and let this be known. --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- If you can read HTML URLs, you can read rights1=In%20Public%20Domain in the source page URL. --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The {{PD-India}} template you used is no way related to "DLI license" but refers directly to The Indian Copyright Act terms.
- Is the "DLI license" granted directly in the Indian Copyright Act? If so PD-India template needs to be modified.
- if it is granted in another legal document, another license template may be created after community decission. But it should be verified whether the "DLI license" is Commons-compatible.
- Which act/agreement states that heirs transferred / lost their copyright rights? What is the deadline for heirs to object the publication in DLI? How can we verify whether the "DLI license" is Commons-compatible: is its text available anywhere? What exactly does it grant? Note, that a license to be Commons-compatible needs to be irrevocable and to allow explicitely commercial reuse and derivative work creation.
- Also note, many libraries misinterprete the "public domain" term. I have seen cases when "public domain" means unclear copyright status, a non-commercial permission, a mistake or even just fair use. So each library declaration that something is "in Public Domain" should be carefully verified, IMHO.
- Ankry (talk) 18:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I now understood what you were talking about. The PD definition in India is loosely defined. For instance, a writer can write to copyright body in India and relinquish his/her copyright over his/her work and it is from thereon marked to be in public domain, (no need for the author to die!)(check http://copyright.gov.in/Documents/Copyright-Forms-I.pdf) all such submissions are put up at the office in a traditional paper file. RTI can be used to get another paper copy of the same. So, the {{PD-India}} needs to be changed accordingly.
- About DLI, from admin metadata, http://dli.gov.in/cgi-bin/DBscripts/allmetainfo.cgi?barcode=1990010094362 and http://dli.gov.in/cgi-bin/DBscripts/allmetainfo.cgi?barcode=5990010045115, the first book is uploaded on 2006-01-24 and the second one on 2004-11-30. The copyright policy page says that books are in accordance with http://www.dli.gov.in/copyright.html relinquishing the copyrights. Check slide 21 of http://dli.gov.in/UDL-Talks-May2004/Venkamma%20%20CCL.pdf to know the DLI process. Again, for an individual book, an RTI can be filed and the returning officer will let us know and give us permission letter taken from author or heirs of author or information about the copyright status of the book. But the RTI process itself will take about 30 days to 45 days in India.
- 2 requests : Change the PD-India definition on commons according to the actual copyright law, which says writers can relinquish their copyright and such list is available in the gazetteer published by the copyright authority of India. And DLI books, after thorough information from DLI officials, be checked for commons-compatibility. Thank you for bringing this to my notice, I will remove PD-India templates and add DLI links. Please let me know what else to be done. These books are being worked on Wikisource for digitization by around 300 Wikisourcerers, what should be done further not to disturb their activity? --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 18:13, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- @రహ్మానుద్దీన్: so if I understand you in the right way: You mean that the authors of these books (or their heirs) filled something like CC0 Public Domain declaration ("relinquishing the copyrights")? Ankry (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes @Ankry: --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:57, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
- @రహ్మానుద్దీన్: so if I understand you in the right way: You mean that the authors of these books (or their heirs) filled something like CC0 Public Domain declaration ("relinquishing the copyrights")? Ankry (talk) 20:45, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
- The {{PD-India}} template you used is no way related to "DLI license" but refers directly to The Indian Copyright Act terms.
- If you can read HTML URLs, you can read rights1=In%20Public%20Domain in the source page URL. --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:35, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, undeleted in 2046. Taivo (talk) 10:02, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
plz remove my logo Eirakco (talk) 09:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 10:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Contains copyrighted text. Rapsar (talk) 09:30, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, source site is licensed "Copyright © 2010, Turkey GarantiBank". Taivo (talk) 10:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
please remove my logo Eirakco (talk) 09:33, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 10:04, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
not in public domain. Litograph by Henri Rivière (1864-1951) Shonagon (talk) 09:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, and this copyright violation was in Commons 9½ years! Undeleted in 2022, when copyright has expired. Taivo (talk) 10:09, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Wrong license template and probably copyvio: the work is not anonymous, its author died in 1990. Moreover, anonymous works published in India in 1943 were not PD in US in 1996, so URAA applies. This work will be PD in India in 2051 and PD in US in 2039, unless an evidence of earlier publication is found. In 2039 it may be uploaded to oldwikisource. Ankry (talk) 09:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Again same argument as for File:Kabeer by Hajari Prasad Dwivedi.pdf. Checked, its in PD in India because of the DLI license. Please chek information on its copyright license at DLI(dli.gov.in). DLI has written to all the heirs of writers and wherever they have found violations, they have removed the books from server, only books with proper permission, that they be in public domain, are available on the website now. I can check with the website admins and let this be known. If you can read HTML URLs, you can read rights1=In%20Public%20Domain in the source page URL. --రహ్మానుద్దీన్ (talk) 09:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, undeleted in 2051. Taivo (talk) 10:12, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Using Commons as advertising/promotion. Mabalu (talk) 10:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 10:14, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
copyviol from here and here Fringio—α†Ω 13:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Didym (talk) 02:07, 18 August 2015 (UTC)
Copyviol from various sites: here, here and TinyEye research Fringio—α†Ω 10:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, recreation of content, deleted by community consensus. This is the uploader's last remaining contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:19, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This seems to be a commercial photo that can be licensed from https://fphoto.photoshelter.com/image/I0000aC48O10dMWE 131.111.115.52 10:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, EXIF says clearly: "© 2000 Richard Megna - Fundamental Photographs". Taivo (talk) 10:21, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This schould probaly be send to COM:OTRS. Not sure about copyright status of this file. Obviously not {{Own work}}. -- Steinsplitter (talk) 10:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Steinsplitter, I wish to clarify that the document was worked on by me (written) and signed by the representative of the institution. Also they are aware that the hard copy that they signed was going to be scanned and uploaded to commons for the purposes of the GLAM Ghana grant we were writing Flixtey (talk) 13:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Steinsplitter, Flixtey and I are working on GLAM Ghana and we went to the bodies involved to get MOU's if you can see the MOU's bear our name in them. The bodies involved are also aware so I don't understand your basis of wanting to delete it.--Rberchie (talk) 18:54, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, can be undeleted in 2086, after copyright has expired. OTRS-permission is needed, if you want to undelete it sooner. Taivo (talk) 10:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
small and blurry Hiddenhauser (talk) 10:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: In use, and therefore in scope. --Amitie 10g (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment. Doesn't this image look a little like a screenshot? It seems a little suspect to me, as does the deleted files from the author's account on the English Wikipedia. — ξxplicit 07:01, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, original uploader into en.wiki Rilkepath has multiple copyright violation warnings on his/her talk page, including for the same image, which was recognized as copyvio by a bot. I delete the file as copyvio. Taivo (talk) 10:34, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Unfortunately the mentioned source has copyrighted content : http://www.ucdmix.com/ --Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Unclear whether uploader is the original creator. Lottebelice (talk) 12:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
ho sbagliato a caricarlo per il concorso dei monumenti italiani Faleno (talk) 12:29, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 10:39, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Die Datei ist veraltet. Grafik-kunst-fotos (talk) 12:43, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 10:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Copy of File:Depressed girl.png with watermark of unclear relevance added. McGeddon (talk) 13:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, both deleted. Small photos without metadata, educational value is weak. Taivo (talk) 10:48, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Copyright notice at source. Bermuda Monetary Authority unlikely to release banknotes as cc-by-2.5: see http://www.bma.bm/notes-and-coins/SitePages/Guidelines.aspx. DrKiernan (talk) 13:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, this is ND-NC-license. Taivo (talk) 10:59, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Uploader does not own copyright on the coin. DrKiernan (talk) 13:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Delete That's right; I'm not the owner of the copyright and the status of Cayman Islands' currency is unclear. Banfield - Amenazas aquí 20:09, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader agrees to delete. Taivo (talk) 11:00, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by ChangeYourLife80s (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
- File:Jennifer Menken in the late 90s.jpg
- File:1971 alan playing piano.jpg
- File:Janis Menken in the 70s.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, per no answer. I delete also file:Céline Dion in Des fleurs sur la neige (Flowers on The Snow) 1988.jpg and file:Céline Dion and Anna Menken.jpg for the same reason. Taivo (talk) 11:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
_1988.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Apparently uploaded as an attack image; unused; uploader’s only contribution; irrelevant to Commons (lots of equivalent, better images). -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:12, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Non-notable rich-text document. Also: includes unlicensed image. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 14:24, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, this is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:13, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Image seems to have a NC clause on the Wellcome website: http://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/image/L0023567.html -- Deadstar (msg) 13:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The choice of NC was removed more recently, as per the EXIF data used at source. This was after the meetings I was part of. --Fæ (talk) 00:57, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Fæ: Will I ignore any other of these cases I come across? Can you link the EXIF data you checked so I know where to look thanks. -- Deadstar (msg) 08:24, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Welcome collection images have been reviewed by their professionals before release. Mistakes happen, so there may be fair reason to question some. The suitable release is on the Commons image page in the metadata section at the bottom (which is normally the same as any useful EXIF data). --Fæ (talk) 09:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Ah right, I see. I thought you checked something against the EXIF on the Wellcome page. Perfect, thanks. -- Deadstar (msg) 11:20, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- Welcome collection images have been reviewed by their professionals before release. Mistakes happen, so there may be fair reason to question some. The suitable release is on the Commons image page in the metadata section at the bottom (which is normally the same as any useful EXIF data). --Fæ (talk) 09:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Fæ: Will I ignore any other of these cases I come across? Can you link the EXIF data you checked so I know where to look thanks. -- Deadstar (msg) 08:24, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- User:Fæ, now the image has NC-clause at source site. Do you want to say, that you reviewed the license when uploading and then there was no NC license? I can add Licensereview, but who is reviewer? If there will be no Licensereview template, then the file should be deleted. Taivo (talk) 10:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- The site quoted as the source is just a convenient public link (the images you can find from there will not be digitally identical as they have credit bars on them). This image was uploaded from a USB hard disk supplied to me by the Wellcome library. The EXIF data (put on the file by the Wellcome) shows the correct current licence and can be examined on the Commons image page. The gallery website/catalogue has not been refreshed to match current policies (it's different departments that do these different things). For external evidence, you can read http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/News/Media-office/Press-releases/2014/WTP055466.htm, where Catherine Draycott, who was the key decision maker during my meetings with the library, makes a clear statement about the change of copyright. The "Over 100,000 images" mentioned, is precisely the 100,069 images I uploaded and added to Category:Files from Wellcome Images. I have updated the Wellcome Images credit template to link to this blog post (diff) but I think a translation admin needs to clear it for it to be live.
- For this particular image, PD-UKGov applies as the Brigadier was working for the Royal Army Medical Corps during the war when he took the photograph, and it always was part of RAMC records, rather than ever having been a personal photograph.
- If you want, as a license reviewer I can add licensereview templates on all 100,000 images, but this seems more than a little bureaucratic. --Fæ (talk) 11:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Kept, thank you, Fæ, for adding the diff into template! Now licensereview is not needed and I can keep the image. Taivo (talk) 17:36, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Image license seems to have a NC clause on it http://wellcomeimages.org/indexplus/image/L0024826.html -- Deadstar (msg) 14:21, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Keep The choice of NC was removed more recently, as per the EXIF data used at source. This was after the meetings I was part of. --Fæ (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept, after fixing Wellcomme template. Taivo (talk) 17:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
No indication of user's own work on this drawing, small size, low quality. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:10, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The photo was created using the MomentCam mobile app by me. Please remove your nomination. --Omert33 (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment I don't see free license at https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/momentcam-customized-cartoons/id687624831?mt=8 which was not credited on your upload. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:03, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- First of all, I created it on my Android phone on the MomentCam app for Android. Second, the image is "reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License." as stated right here. I have therefor updated the license on the image description page to {{Cc-by-sa-3.0}}. Kindly, remove your nomination notice. Thank you. --Omert33 (talk) 08:55, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment Actually it reads: The Android robot is reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License. This isn't an image of the Android robot. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:57, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
- In that case, it's reproduced or modified from work created and shared by Hightalk Software Corp. and myself via their MomentCam app. and thus qualifies for a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License, does it not? --Omert33 (talk) 04:14, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept, per Omert. Taivo (talk) 18:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Lara Berman is both the subject and the author of this image, uploaded by Omert33 who has other uploads credited to others as well. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata. Taivo (talk) 18:49, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
More doodle art of some unnamed architecture, out of COM:SCOPE. It looks like an entire class of students is uploading doodles to Commons. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unused art of non-notable artist is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 18:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Low quality photocopy of doodle art, out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unused art of non-notable artist is out of priject scope. Taivo (talk) 19:07, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Derivative work of the photos on the image, no indication that this user created the jersey, the photos or the poster. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, for collages source and license of every single image is needed. Taivo (talk) 19:10, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
A copyrighted football club logo. I cannot see why it should remain on Wikimedia Commons. Glorious 93 (talk) 16:22, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Bellow the COM:TOO? --Amitie 10g (talk) 16:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, now the file has PD-70 license, which is wrong. The club is old, but the logo was created in 1975. Comparision with threshold of originality ... Quite borderline case, but probably not simple logo. The logo is only as fair use in en.wiki. Taivo (talk) 19:18, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
A series of five images of the same musician, two are duplicates, none have sources other than self. Various sizes, no metadata and mono-subject make this gallery unlikely to be user's own work.
- File:Leina.jpg
- File:Leons.jpg
- File:11988366 1468413840130142 8472630026328791884 n(1).jpg
- File:Image lei prince.jpg
- File:11874966 1462133130758213 4199208939445614444 o - Copy.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Lei Prince is unknown to en.wiki. Unused photos about non-notable musicians are out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 19:25, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Dollyshkarokerita (talk · contribs)
[edit]A series of images of musicians from Bon Jovi, small sizes, no metadata, sevearl composites, highly unlikely to be user's own work.
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 08.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 07.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 05.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 06.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 04.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 03.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 02.jpg
- File:Criss Chandia Doble De Bon Jovi 01.jpg
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 19:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Out of COM:SCOPE family snap. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small unused personal photo, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 19:33, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Appears to have been taken from a website without regard for copyright status. Website indicates it was from Dutch textbook published in 1941: "Het vliegtuig en zijn onderdelen" by T.J.W. van Lammeren (1907- ) 1941. Chapter "Projecten voor de toekomst". Not published anonymously and no evidence van Lammeren (born 1907) died less than 70 years ago per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Netherlands-table. -- Dual Freq (talk) 16:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Original authors are said to be the w:Koolhoven company which existed until 1956, less than 70 years ago. w:Frederick Koolhoven died in July 1946, also less than 70 years ago. --Dual Freq (talk) 16:58, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Move to Wikipedia(s). This would meet en:WP:NFCC for articles on Koolhoven, or the flying boat design. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:58, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- I am sure Andy is right, but please point me to NFCC so I know where I am?--Rstory (talk) 11:53, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Linked. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:23, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
- Yes, move to Wikipedia(s)--Rstory (talk) 17:30, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, we do not know, when van Lammeren died, so there is no restore date. Taivo (talk) 19:41, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
The author claims it is their own work but I strongly suspect that they are a paid editor and that this is not the case. See for example their involvement in en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Britainneedsyou. Smartse (talk) 16:47, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 19:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alex1986rus (talk · contribs)
[edit]No indication of user's own work on this gallery of three military images.
Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:55, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, after Ellin's request the user has uploaded more files, all copyright violations. I warned him and delete all his contributions. Taivo (talk) 20:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
The uploader mentioned the copyright notice written in the intermediate source, "Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*)", and tagged the file with the "attribution" template. But the "with limitation" part, in light of the more explicit copyright notice of the original source, is not compatible with the "attribution" tag and is not a free license. -- Asclepias (talk) 17:28, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, unfortunately you are right. Source site gave two conflicting licenses. That case, per precautionary principle, we must take the harsher and delete the file. Taivo (talk) 20:28, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
small picture without meta-data, please upload bigger version Motopark (talk) 17:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, all the user's uploads are unused, without metadata and mostly small. I delete them all. Taivo (talk) 20:35, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Flag of Maghreb.svg. Fry1989 eh? 17:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 20:38, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Missing permission. Fry1989 eh? 17:50, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, surpasses threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 20:40, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soy meseño (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Soy meseño
Gunnex (talk) 17:57, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, plus big watermark. These are the uploader's last remaining contributions. Taivo (talk) 20:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
no offence please, but DR started to verify if that imho rather poor quality upload from paronamia may be helpfull as imho there are lots good alternatively images related to that temple, Roland zh (talk) 18:03, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, there are 22 photos in category:Sasivekalu Ganesha Temple, enough superior photos among them. Taivo (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
once more, no offence, but as per File:Hampi - panoramio.jpg and File:Hampi - panoramio - yamarhythm.jpg, imho rather (very) poor quality and lots of alternative images of "Lotus Mahal", Roland zh (talk) 18:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept, no, the shot is made from interesting spot and this is the only photo in the category, which shown these stones near temple. Quality is satisfactory. Taivo (talk) 21:01, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 19:13, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, Taivo (talk) 21:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Derivative of copyrighted product packaging. Kelly (talk) 19:14, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- How much of it can be copyrighted? I can see the "HOLLYWOOD" logo, which forms only a small part of the packaging, a swirling mass of colours and a question mark. Can Hollywood Chewing Gum hold a copyright on a mass of colours and a question mark? And anyway, this image has already been taken well into illustrative use in both the English and the French Wikipedias. JIP (talk) 19:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, yes, this mass of colors with question mark is eligible for copyright protection, because surpasses threshold of originality. Taivo (talk) 21:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
This was uploaded by mistake from my personal account, I'll Reup it from the official ANM account. Rsberuben (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, nice picture, but uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 21:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
small and blurry Hiddenhauser (talk) 21:38, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept, the only silhouette in category:Cityscapes of Signa. Taivo (talk) 21:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Very small Hiddenhauser (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, description is inadequate. We do not know, what is depicted. Taivo (talk) 21:17, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:31, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I was following the Wikibook Help page that says "PDF files could previously be uploaded to Wikibooks but new files are now uploaded to Commons." https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Help:Print_versions I created the PDF, because the auto-generated PDF version of the Wikibook misses all equation in boxes (which are the most important ones). Also, the auto-generated version has a two-column layout, which does not fit the length of some equations. So, I believe the PDF is useful. Wikibook Help pages encouraged me to "be bold" and manually create the PDF myself, which I did. If readable PDF versions should not be created or if they should be uploaded elsewhere, that's fine - but in this case please update the manual accordingly. --LarsWinterfeld (talk) 20:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Thats a pdf version of a wikibook. The Wikitext is here https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Probability/Transformation_of_Probability_Densities so I think we could keep this file. At least I did the same quite often. And in partikular we got a catagory here for these kind of files: Category:English_Wikibooks_PDF
--Dirk Hünniger (talk) 17:00, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Kept, the file is used in wikibooks, so automatically in scope. Taivo (talk) 10:00, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Sorin Oprescu la semnarea protocolului de infiintare a USD - 10.02.2014 (12436660124).jpg
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Semnarea protocolului de infiintare a Uniunii Social Democrate - 10.02.2014 (7) (12436320833).jpg
[edit]_(12436320833).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436320833).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:14, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Sorin Oprescu la semnarea protocolului de infiintare a USD - 10.02.2014 (2) (12436315503).jpg
[edit]_(12436315503).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436315503).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:15, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Sorin Oprescu la semnarea protocolului de infiintare a USD - 10.02.2014 (3) (12436314833).jpg
[edit]_(12436314833).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436314833).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:07, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: . Materialscientist (talk) 07:14, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Lansarea candidaturii lui Victor Ponta la alegerile prezidentiale din 2014 - 20.09 (28) (15389211762).jpg
[edit]_(15389211762).jpg){kind=link}
_(15389211762).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
According to the EXIF data, the copyright belongs to Agerpres, not the Social Democrat Party. Mihai (talk) 03:37, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see, the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Resonable justification from uploader. James F. (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Victor Ponta si Sorin Oprescu la semnarea protocolului de infiintare a USD - 10.02.2014 (12436653674).jpg
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr at this size, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Resonable justification from uploader. James F. (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
File:Victor Ponta si Sorin Oprescu la semnarea protocolului de infiintare a USD - 10.02.2014 (2) (12436654924).jpg
[edit]_(12436654924).jpg){kind=link}
_(12436654924).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Copyright per EXIF LIVIU SOVA/AGERPRES, not PSD. Mihai (talk) 03:41, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Press agencies use to sell these kind of photos, and the party PSD, who bought them, has the rigts to release them under any licence. As you can see the photo cannot be find anywhere else than on flickr on this size, where is licenced under cc-by-2.0.Ionutzmovie (talk) 04:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Resonable justification from uploader. James F. (talk) 20:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
I cannot see the OTRS ticket, but Commons:Currency#New Zealand indicates that coins like this are likely to be copyrighted. DrKiernan (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- The image of Elizabeth II is the Raphael Maklouf portrait[2], which I presume to be Crown copyright expiring in 2036 (50 years from 1985). DrKiernan (talk) 12:50, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Depicts copyrighted work. James F. (talk) 20:18, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Tagged as a US government work, but author given is Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, which is not a government agency. Samuell (talk) 04:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Per Commons:Currency#United Kingdom. DrKiernan (talk) 14:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:27, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- I deleted one file, but if the others are own-created sudokus, then they are in scope. Taivo (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Natuur12 (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ngheancusi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:49, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:36, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like trolling. (Also: unused, single upload from user.) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 15:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Rami Zamegar is not the same as the uploader, this file would need COM:OTRS from the author to be retained. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:12, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- If you'll notice on the Hebrew Wikipedia File page: he:קובץ:N macmel atir.jpg, the file was marked as a free-file and even recommended to be moved to Wiki Commons. Since the migrating tool did not work properly, I moved it manually. There is no problem whatsoover with the file's permissions which are enclosed therein. Please remove your nomination. --Omert33 (talk) 17:51, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment There is no indication that Rami Zamegar ever gave permission for this photo to be used anywhere. There is no link to any Wikipedia entry on this page. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:01, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
- There is an OTRS ticket per COM:OTRS on the Hebrew article for Nava Macmel-Atir (he:נאוה מקמל-עתיר) dated December 31st 2013 by a user who calls himself/herself Hanay. I've added this OTRS permission along with the TicketID. Please check yourself. --Omert33 (talk) 12:06, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- Furthermore, it clearly states there, in very simple Hebrew: "תמונה זו סומנה כתמונה חופשית. מומלץ להעביר תמונות חופשיות לוויקישיתוף, שם תמונות אלה תוכלנה לשמש מיזמים נוספים בעברית ובשפות אחרות.". Which means: "This picture was marked for free use. It is recommended to move this photo to Wiki Commons, where it could benefit other projects.". Please remove your notification. --Omert33 (talk) 12:11, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
- The number on the OTRS ticket is not long enough and is highlighted in red atm. We need a COM:OTRS volunteer to look into this one. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:55, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Ticketnumber seems to be corrected by an OTRS-agent. Natuur12 (talk) 15:40, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Ori Salsero Swid is listed as author of this photograph, his COM:OTRS permission is required. Ellin Beltz (talk) 16:15, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
- Restored. The OTRS permission is from Ori Salsero Swid (אורי סלסרו סוויד). -- Geagea (talk) 02:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
The author claims it is their own work but I strongly suspect that they are a paid editor and that this is not the case. See for example their involvement in en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Britainneedsyou. Smartse (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Comment The user has 4 uploads. 2 I nominated for deletion due to small size and lacking metadata, but other 2 have same camera model, maybe really own work. Taivo (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: USed here so I doubt it. Natuur12 (talk) 15:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Google 2015 logo.svg. Fry1989 eh? 18:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 15:37, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
Possible COM:COPYVIO. Could be PD but a published/taken date is not provided. KurodaSho (talk) 04:23, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- Uploader says 1942 [3] but no evidence. --KurodaSho (talk) 06:32, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- 画像は慶大教授時代のものだから1942年頃と推測する。--Ninnin (talk) 08:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Ninnin: Why do you think so? Could you show us the evidences? A reliable source says that he had promoted to a Professor in 1954, not 1942. (なぜ教授時代だと思われるのですか？教授時代であるとすれば1942年のはずはないのではありませんか？日本語でも結構ですから，なぜそのように推測されたのかご教授ください．) --KurodaSho (talk) 15:54, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
- 証明写真は通常所属研究機関での紹介で使用する。--Ninnin (talk) 07:26, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
![[3]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Toshihiko_Izutsu.jpg&diff=170994463&oldid=170988578){kind=link}
Deleted: per cmts Alan (talk) 13:26, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
