Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2015/12/08
 |
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}
.jpeg){kind=link}
_in_Jam_with_Kako_Band.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Trio_3-door_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
_ST_sedan_03.jpg){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_(1871)_(20570306546).jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Commons:Deletion requests/Commons:Sandbox/it
Files uploaded by Ghfgjfjfgjfg (talk · contribs)
[edit]- File:The-newsroom-paleyfest-jeff-danielsghl,lguh.vlgh.jvnhlhg.jv.jpg
- File:Helen-mirren-2010-oscars-red-carpet-03fgmgfitykf.jpg
- File:Robin 1lhg,vblgotulgh.jvgluj.blgu.jbmg;j.b.jpg
- File:Holly Hunterhykfh,vkf,vnfykh,vnfl,vnlfh,v.jpg
- File:Barbra-20Streisand-20GIfgutrfgimbvkfyhmv.jpg
- File:115957655gfbvngjmbvjfmbv.jpg
- File:5luBbpRzjfgjfgjfgjfgjg.jpg
- File:Gfjfjkfhklgflljlhf.jpg
- File:MV5BMjE3NTQ5MjgwNl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwNDUxODQ0 V1 SX640 SY720.jpg
- File:Nicole kidman cannessssssss.png
- File:CatherineZetaJonesAtTheGoldenGlobes20-4.jpg
- File:130437507-jpghfhfhfjgf.jpg
- File:Best-actress-oscar-1986-Geraldine-Pagegjfjfj.jpg
INeverCry 08:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 09:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Picture from a website, claimed as "own work" under CC-BY-SA, but also present without a free license on a sourced website. Given the low res, it seems likely to have been copied from the website and improperly claimed as "own work". Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 07:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 12:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Gss.sam.619 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small size, no EXIF data, user with bad history, unlikely to be own works.
- File:Nagachaitanya1.jpg
- File:Allu arjun stills.jpg
- File:Manchu-Lakshmi.jpg
- File:Amala-paul-52201420948PM.jpg
- File:HY04-HARSHA GFD HY 1825991e.jpg
Yann (talk) 13:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: They're all over the web at the usual celebrity sites without free license DMacks (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Palosirkka as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: proprietary software Alan (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: 1st rev deleted Alan (talk) 16:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Palosirkka as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: proprietary software Alan (talk) 13:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: 1st rev deleted Alan (talk) 16:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Palosirkka as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: proprietary software Alan (talk) 13:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: 1st revision deleted Alan (talk) 16:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Skim as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Non-free book Alan (talk) 13:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: confirmed copyvio Alan (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Missing permission, logo above the TOO. At bottom of Progresar webiste, there is a copyright notice. - Fma12 (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. Yann (talk) 17:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by Finnusertop as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Previous publication with no indication of a free license |source=http://www.sno.phy.queensu.ca/group/faculty.html That's a crop of File:Art McDonald 2008.jpg, which here since long and bigger than this source. Yann (talk) 18:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- That's just the thumbnail, Yann. The site hosts the image in full resolution (identical to the version hosted on Commons): Art2.jpg Finnusertop (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: OK, right. Yann (talk) 18:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Please undelete this image. I took the picture myself and have given it a free license. I am webmaster of www.sno.phy.queensu.ca, and had also previously used this image there, but this shouldn't be cause for deleting it here.Boardhead (talk) 13:42, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This is not an accurate representation. Please change ASAP. Cambrogan (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Hi Cambrogan, I'm not sure what you mean by accurate representation. I can upload a new version of this file if that's what you're looking for. Wwongbc (talk) 11:11, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 12:01, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
It is a really bad picture of me. 24.74.213.164 19:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Speedy kept: Vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 19:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)
Low resolution, bad quality, no metadata. Cjp24 (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyright violation Natuur12 (talk) 23:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Low resolution, no metadata, possible copyvio. Cjp24 (talk) 22:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Grabbed from the web Natuur12 (talk) 23:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Colégio da Polícia Militar do Piauí (talk · contribs)
[edit]The flag is clearly not own work and the parede file is [copyvios
Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Blatant copyright violations Natuur12 (talk) 23:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
http://wayback.archive.org/web/20120124115510/http://www.galeriasmiguel.org/gal/displayimage.php?album=40&pid=651#top_display_media Artist Evelina Coelho is alive. Josve05a (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Clear copyright violation Natuur12 (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
yhgįšrešvhgy 78.60.115.89 13:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Keep because oscmsdcuwdhcweo → «« Man77 »» [de] 10:07, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept considering beprasmiškumas. --Achim (talk) 16:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Campeão invicto do 1º Torneio de Futsal da Comunidade do Pires Glicosefutsal (talk) 09:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: User request. Yann (talk) 22:17, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
File:Campeão Invicto do 1º Torneio de Futsal da Comunidade do Pires, em Congonhas. (Feminino Sub-18, foto após a final).jpg
[edit].jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
File:Campeão_Invicto_do_1º_Torneio_de_Futsal_da_Comunidade_do_Pires,_em_Congonhas._(Feminino_Sub-18,_foto_após_a_final).jpg Glicosefutsal (talk) 09:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: User request. Yann (talk) 22:51, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Se trata de un plagio de aquí: http://www.ccma.cat/tv3/merli/ No es un trabajo propio del que ha subido la imagen. Tuareg50 (talk) 17:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 00:28, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpeg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Se trata de un plagio de aquí: http://epreader.elperiodico.com/APPS_GetPlayerZSEO.aspx?pro_id=00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001&fecha=20151114&idioma=0&doc_id=a7fdbad3-8260-4a90-9cfc-4f44b03281dc Tuareg50 (talk) 17:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
Deleted: Clear copyright violation Natuur12 (talk) 00:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpeg){kind=link}
Copyvio: image from an unknown source, cropped by user. Trizek from FR 17:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: com:NETCOPYRIGHT Natuur12 (talk) 00:30, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of project scope. Cjp24 (talk) 19:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo, out of project scope. Cjp24 (talk) 20:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 04:00, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, per Alan as copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 15:35, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Сомнение в авторстве. В статье "Грозовые ворота" использовался с рекл. характером Olglagol (talk) 06:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, the uploader Darkdjadai (talk · contribs) used the photo for advertising. Also small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Сомнение в авторстве. В статье Грозовые ворота использовался с рекламными целями [1] Olglagol (talk) 06:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, uploader Darkdjadai (talk · contribs) used the photo for advertising. Also small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
I am finding no reference to this deletion request and would petition that it be restored to the commons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BeeCeePhoto (talk • contribs) 14:12, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- If you look at the notices on the archive of the discussion page of the uploader, you can see that, for the file in question, there is a notice of regular deletion request, immediately followed by a notice of speedy deletion request. That suggests that the actual request was a speedy deletion request and a page of regular deletion request was not created. Apparently, the user who did the notifications simply forgot to remove the notice of regular DR when they added the notice of speedy DR. This page of regular deletion request did not exist before you created it yesterday. -- Asclepias (talk) 16:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: by Polarlys in 2012; DR closed by Josve05a (talk) 09:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 19:57, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable individual - possibly uploaded as harrassment DAJF (talk) 02:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted, by description it's clear harassment. Taivo (talk) 12:17, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Same reason [2], Copyrights violation Quark Logo (talk) 03:56, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
![[2]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:%E7%BE%BD%E6%9F%B4%E6%96%BC%E6%AC%A1%E7%A7%80%E5%8B%9D.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 15:41, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused photo of non-notable individual - possibly uploaded as harrassment DAJF (talk) 02:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Speedy then. Yann (talk) 19:36, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://cache2.asset-cache.net/gc/475609178-actor-zachary-garred-attends-the-australians-gettyimages.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=GkZZ8bf5zL1ZiijUmxa7Qemyads2KVaDcl%2BowOJCfaP%2FTxuG7uWQenB%2B4oX35WlwDBm47b7dZtGEbQE1hSRQtA%3D%3D.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Denniss (talk) 12:11, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
Very poor quality. At least two far better alternatives (File:Agmatin.svg and File:Agmatine.png) Rhadamante (talk) 22:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nom. Leyo 20:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Einsbor as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Out of project scope Yann (talk) 21:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyright violation. Derivative work of copyrighted cover. Alan (talk) 01:15, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Erenyce Official (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low quality private / self-promoting image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope.
2mmj.jpeg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ies (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Low quality private / self-promoting image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by INeverCry as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: post WW2 photo of Stalin isn't an "own work" of this user ★ Poké95 03:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Neutral until 10 December 2015. I hope the uploader will provide information for the author and source, and when this is photographed/published. If the uploader doesn't provide sufficient information, I will vote for delete. --★ Poké95 03:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)- Comment: It may be from the same time as File:Stalin01.jpg, which is also undocumented. -- Asclepias (talk) 22:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:34, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sebastian.147 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused Out of scope images and several possible copyvios
- File:Sebastian Galeano.369.jpg
- File:Sebastian Galeano.147.jpg
- File:FRASES.jpg
- File:Tmprs.jpg
- File:Sebas.jpg
- File:MARIHUANA.jpg taken from [3]
- File:Sebastian Galeano.jpg
Alan (talk) 18:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Unused user pictures respectively some copyright violations. --ProfessorX (talk) 21:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:36, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
COM:Flickrwashing Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Old file. Could be old enough. Could be not. Definatly not own work. We need more evidence to establish the file's PD status. Natuur12 (talk) 23:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Europalia (2007)
[edit]- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000478 (1809685011).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000479 (1810531814).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000480 (1810533310).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000481 (1809689859).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000482 (1809691409).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000487 (1809698229).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000494 (1810545690).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000496 (1810547564).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000497 (1810549182).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000498 (1810550650).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000499 (1810552098).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000500 (1809708663).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000502 (1810556130).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000504 (1809713905).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000517 (1810574788).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000520 (1810575562).jpg
- File:Europalia 2007 - 1000523 (1809731365).jpg
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Rodrigolopes (talk) 23:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:35, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Could be PD-old but not enough evidence provided to support this. Clearly not own work. Natuur12 (talk) 23:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Rana Muhammad Ali Abbas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (7).JPG
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (6).jpg
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (4).jpg
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (5).jpg
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (3).jpg
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (2).jpg
- File:Muhammad Ali Abbas (1).jpg
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
INeverCry 03:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:54, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
_in_Jam_with_Kako_Band.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_in_Jam_with_Kako_Band.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of project. Uploaded by the user to create his own biography The Avengers (talk) 11:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
_in_Jam_with_Kako_Band.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:49, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
_in_Jam_with_Kako_Band.jpg){kind=link}
See EXIF: "Not to be printed, broadcast or transmitted without the permission of MediaSource or its representatives." Stefan2 (talk) 13:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:50, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.
- File:Fameasser.jpg
- File:Superkickbyziggler.jpg
- File:Zigzagbyziggler.jpg
- File:Ronsimmonschamp.jpg
- File:Jblwwechamp.jpg
- File:Bookert.jpg
- File:GeneOkerlund2015.jpg
- File:Bobarmstrong.jpg
- File:Bobbyheenan.jpg
- File:Dustyrhodes2015.jpg
- File:Tom Phillips.jpg
- File:Xavierwoodsnewday.jpg
- File:Bubba Ray 2015.jpg
- File:Thenewday.jpg
- File:Undertakerwwfchamp.jpg
- File:Kanewwfchamp.jpg
- File:Cena15x.jpg
- File:Cenaustitle.jpg
- File:Roman2015.jpg
Yann (talk) 17:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Motopark (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:53, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
cropped distorted image from File:Michael lin.JPG --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by H0935660697 (talk · contribs)
[edit]- File:GJJA.jpg
- File:WGST2005.113.jpg
- File:Sw2015 2.JPG
- File:Sw2015.JPG
- File:Chen Xue bottom Doha 2006.jpg
- File:Iraq Player Doha 2006.jpg
- File:VanIerselPurple.jpg
Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
The file is still under copyright, even if it is available on Gallica. - The author died in 1963. Pikinez (talk) 18:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- (google translate) no under copyright, is the United States since published before 1923 --Le ciel est par dessus le toit (talk) 19:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Comment Public domain in the US but probably still copyrigthed in France (probably because it is very strange that Gallica, the french national Library, says it's public domain). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)- Comment Probably, to be moved to sourceswiki if still copyrighted in France. Ankry (talk) 18:31, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Moved to frwikisource Ankry (talk) 22:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Ankry: I deleted the file on frwikisource (we don't accept files still under copyright in France there). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:28, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Mahmoud Zreik (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images /content : out of scope
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by GalerieTannousArt (talk · contribs)
[edit]Jean Tannous is born in 1946. Copyright violation.
- File:Jean Tannous pour Volvo-Blainville.png
- File:405440 251576941583585 1601781888 n-2.jpg
- File:268270 144278008980146 3849541 n-2.jpg
- File:226366 132139646860649 1788563 n-2.jpg
- File:263724 143845179023429 5693399 n-2.jpg
- File:Accord en coulisse.jpg
- File:À l'ombre.jpg
- File:Carré ouvert.jpg
- File:Jean Tannous à Montmartre.jpeg
- File:Jean Tannous sur l'île des Impressionnistes.jpg
- File:Jean Tannous et Europ'art China Gallery au Royal Méridien à Shanghai.jpg
- File:Toute rouge.jpg
- File:Le mec.jpg
- File:La rousse.jpg
- File:Le mannequin.jpg
- File:La pensive.jpg
82.120.164.228 17:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kyparamudu (talk · contribs)
[edit]Don't seems to be own works but scans
- File:D25644182.jpg
- File:D25327504.jpg
- File:D25645090.jpg
- File:61063 111664682226471 100001488204097 94947 1066808 n.jpg
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:58, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Aleix Clarió 1
[edit]Highly unlikely to be "own work": 8 different cameras (plus several without EXIF data), no consistent filenames and sizes. Some photos credited to others: File:D1 Temps Flors ©Pere Duran 739.JPG is © PERE DURAN; File:FIRES186.JPG is Copyright David Borrat. Several uploads of this user already deleted as copyvio.
- File:Mercat del Lleó.jpg
- File:La Cocollona.jpg
- File:Centre-empreses-giroemprèn.jpg
- File:24politecnica.jpg
- File:Art3b.jpg
- File:Sala11.jpg
- File:Torre Alfons XII.jpg
- File:Llibre remences obert.jpg
- File:Foto arxiu crdi.jpg
- File:Girona 10.jpg
- File:Girona Disctricte Musical.jpg
- File:FIMG 2014.jpg
- File:Setmana Santa - J.Curto (51).jpg
- File:Girona 006.+Æscar Vall.Arxiu Imatges PTCBG.jpg
- File:168 DSF4728.jpg
- File:212 MG 3258.jpg
- File:Ajuntament de Girona Devesa1.JPG
- File:Pau Busquets Devesa amb catedral de fons.jpg
- File:D1 Temps Flors ©Pere Duran 739.JPG
- File:FIRES186.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 18:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Personal photo. Unused. Out of scope Alan (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused, Out of scope Alan (talk) 18:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:56, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Graziele.sousa 1
[edit]All unused and uneducational screenshots, out of scope. See also precedence at Commons:Deletion requests/File:ELP PAN (2).jpg.
.jpg){kind=link}
- File:ELP PAN (3).jpg
- File:ELP PAN (7).jpg
- File:ELP PAN (6).jpg
- File:ELP PAN (5).jpg
- File:ELP PAN (4).jpg
- File:ELP PAN (1).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (7).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (4).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (2).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (1).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (6).jpg
- File:ELP (CACIQUE) (5).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (3).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (6).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (5).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (4).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (2).jpg
- File:ELP (BV) (1).jpg
- File:ELP 5.jpg
- File:ELP 4.jpg
- File:ELP 3.jpg
- File:ELP 2.jpg
- File:ELP 1.jpg
- File:Opera (8).jpg
- File:Opera (5).jpg
- File:Opera (3).jpg
- File:Opera (2).jpg
- File:Opera (1).jpg
- File:Operação (10).jpg
- File:Operação (9).jpg
- File:Operação (8).jpg
- File:Operação (7).jpg
- File:Operação (6).jpg
- File:Operação (5).jpg
- File:Operação (4).jpg
- File:Operação (3).jpg
- File:Operação(2).jpg
- File:Operação1.png
- File:Operação.png
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(7).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(4).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(6).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(3).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(6).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(5).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(4).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(2).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
P 1 9 9 ✉ 19:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 02:55, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Dally O Dalmas (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal images used in user page however the only contributions were to create the page and upload personal content. User page images are allowed for contributors (and contributions should come first). 3 images unlikely to be own works too.
- File:DALMAS E.png
- File:DALMAS A.JPG
- File:DALMAS D.png
- File:DALMAS C.PNG
- File:DALMAS B.png
- File:LIBRARY LIBRARY A.jpg
- File:LIBRARY LIBRARY.JPG
- File:Dally Dalmas.jpg
- File:Dally Dalmas.JPG
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 00:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:34, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 00:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation - small size - no EXIF - own work claim doubtful INeverCry 00:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: .. Basvb (talk) 13:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Also:
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
The man wears a hat tied with a sign saying "Chaque fois que vous blessez la liberté vous la renforcez" and "Même pas mal!" Also, it has drawings of three pencils, including one broken in half and one held by hand rasing from a grave. De minimis would not apply when noticeable by a reader. The sign tied with the hat surpasses threshold of originality. George Ho (talk) 00:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 13:35, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Images of "Tune tueras poi" board sign
[edit]- File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (146).jpg
- File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (141).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
A board sign containing a dying, bleeding man writing "Tune tueras poi" surpasses originality threshold. Per Commons:Deletion requests/File:Je suis Charlie, Brussels 11 January 2015 (142).jpg, images of the board sign should be deleted. --George Ho (talk) 01:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: If drawing is removed from sign it would be ok, but there are similar images available. Basvb (talk) 13:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files of User:One Nirun
[edit]- All files: Special:ListFiles/One_Nirun
These files are all obvious copyright violations, as shown by Tineye. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I only see one simple text file.
No proof that uploader is the copyright holder of this image. This image is most likely a derivative work of a non-free image. Steel1943 (talk) 01:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: .. Basvb (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
No proof that the uploader is the copyright holder, so this is most likely a non-free image. Steel1943 (talk) 01:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Obviously screenshotted & cropped from (+/-) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeKJJhp_jJQ&t=10m10s (2012, credit: "Filmed by: Caitlin McCarthy", © by "FenwickTelevision"). Gunnex (talk) 10:03, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Uploader is most likely not the copyright holder of this image. This may be a copyright violation from a YouTube video regarding the image's subject. Steel1943 (talk) 01:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 01:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 01:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - no educational value INeverCry 02:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - no educational value - simple text in a jpg - unused INeverCry 02:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per nomination Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
possible copyvio - 2015 trophy INeverCry 02:08, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Grabbed from http://www.presidencia.gob.hn/?p=5013 (02.2015, © "propiedad de la PRESIDENCIA DE LA REPÚBLICA") = http://www.presidencia.gob.hn/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/COPA-5.jpg (identical exif)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Wrong license, copyrighted until 2033, so Xul Solar died in 1973. - Fma12 (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Needs OTRS permission from painter Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by YellowMellowMG (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal/self-promotional images
INeverCry 02:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 02:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - promotional image INeverCry 02:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused poor-quality personal vanity photo of non-notable individual. Outside project scope. DAJF (talk) 02:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: / Basvb (talk) 13:42, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Self nomination, low quality image, replaced by same car in same colour File:1999 Mitsubishi Verada (KH) Ei sedan (2015-07-03) 02.jpg. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
_Ei_sedan_(2015-07-03)_02.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Uploaders request Basvb (talk) 13:43, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - low quality personal photo - probably shouldn't have been transferred from Panaramio in the first place INeverCry 03:08, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
imagen repetida, mejor copyright Skulljujos (talk) 03:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Own work unlikely Basvb (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 03:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
©AryaDil in title and EXIF - no indication of permission - also no indication of the pictured indivual's identity or notability INeverCry 03:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 03:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:44, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Fahim Shabir (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 03:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - no educational value INeverCry 03:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: and likely copyvio Basvb (talk) 13:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Jose Luis Rama Narbona (talk · contribs)
[edit]likely copyvios - WW2-era photos and paintings - not "own work" of this user
- File:Official Francisco Franco.jpg
- File:Official José Enrique Varela Iglesias.jpg
- File:Official Emilio Mola.jpg
- File:Official Manuel Azaña.jpg
- File:Juan Yagüe.jpg
INeverCry 03:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete all. One of the photos was deleted in the past, look Commons:Deletion requests/File:Official Francisco Franco.jpg. I blocked Jose Luis for a month. Taivo (talk) 12:41, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: need proper attribution Basvb (talk) 13:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 03:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:46, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 03:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Adebo emmanuel (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 03:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Elvisrobles (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used.
- File:Ing Elvis Robles creador de TECKNOCHTITLAN.jpg
- File:TECKNOCHTITLAN descripcion breve del mayor proyecto turístico mexicano en decadas.jpg
- File:TECKNOCHTITLAN 01.jpg
Gunnex (talk) 07:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Bitte um Löschung unseres Bildes auf ihrer Seite. Wir wissen nicht werd diese Daten eingetragen hat 217.91.186.203 08:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Hallo, das ist nicht "Ihr Bild" sondern eine Aufnahme Ihres Ladens. Ich habe (bzw bin noch dabei) alle Geschäfte in Mannheim fotografiert, was nach deutschem Recht kein Problem darstellt. Durch das wiederholte Begehen der Stadt kann so die Veränderung in der Ladenstruktur festgehalten werden. Außerdem ist das Bild, wie auch ihr Laden, bei OSM (OpenStreetMap) eingetragen. Ich sehe also keinen Grund für eine Löschung.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wegavision (talk • contribs)
Kept: . Basvb (talk) 13:49, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
violates copyright 578985s (talk) 09:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: and out of scope Basvb (talk) 13:50, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by ManniLo as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: spam. Not sure, needs explanation. Taivo (talk) 11:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Taivo, you're right, the reason is a little short. I can't see any encyclopedic usage for this File. Also the image description sounds strange. --ManniLo (talk) 11:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope Basvb (talk) 13:51, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
There is no freedom of panorama in Germany indoors. Taivo (talk) 11:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: pwer nomination Basvb (talk) 13:51, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Private photo, out of scope 4ing (talk) 12:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: .. Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
spam, del on DE Nolispanmo 12:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Private photo, out of scope 4ing (talk) 12:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Private photo, out of scope 4ing (talk) 12:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Private photo, out of scope 4ing (talk) 12:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This logo does meet the threshold of originality. These are not simple geometric shapes. DCB (talk) 12:57, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: fingerprint Basvb (talk) 13:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused video of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: used Basvb (talk) 13:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . Basvb (talk) 13:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Commons:Derivative works from toys. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Basvb (talk) 13:53, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
This page was created before I was outwardly transgender and the name does not reflect this, instead using my birth name. Irockz (talk) 12:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Uploader request, not in use. Darwin Ahoy! 11:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation: not so sure about source Gravabreo (talk) 18:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Book cover, obvious copyvio Darwin Ahoy! 11:36, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted FC logo. Fry1989 eh? 20:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed. Michael Barera (talk) 04:47, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Modern football logo, obvious copyvio Darwin Ahoy! 11:39, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of the EU flag. Fry1989 eh? 20:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Small res. duplicate, not in use Darwin Ahoy! 11:38, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Low res, small size. No valid EXIF. Doubtfull claim of ownership Natuur12 (talk) 23:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Per above Darwin Ahoy! 11:40, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Missing EXIF information. High doubt if the uploader could take such professional pictures, according to the history of him it could be copyvio. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: http://koken.blog.nl/files/2009/02/wb.jpg Yann (talk) 18:35, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
_Trio_3-door_hatchback_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Trio_3-door_hatchback_01.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by OSX as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Self-nomination, low quality file replaced by much better images of the same car at Category:Ford Festiva (WB). Not sure, the quality is not so bad. Taivo (talk) 11:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
_Trio_3-door_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete — low quality file, much better examples of this car illustrated at Commons. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
_Trio_3-door_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by OSX as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Self-nomination, low quality file replaced by much better images of the same car at Category:Ford Festiva (WD/WF). Not sure, the quality is not so bad. Taivo (talk) 11:08, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete — low quality file, much better examples of this car illustrated at Commons. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by OSX as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Self-nomination, low quality file replaced by much better images of the same car at Category:Ford Festiva (WD/WF). Not sure, the quality is not so bad. Taivo (talk) 11:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete — low quality file, much better examples of this car illustrated at Commons. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by OSX as Speedy (speedy) and the most recent rationale was: Self-nomination, low quality file replaced by much better images of the same car at Category:Ford Festiva (WD/WF). Not sure, the quality is not so bad. Taivo (talk) 11:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete — low quality file, much better examples of this car illustrated at Commons. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Self nomination, low quality image, replaced by other images within Category:Nissan Cefiro (A33). OSX (talk • contributions) 11:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Not own work, no source, no author, bogus license.
- File:Banner2015.jpg
- File:Zapis nutowy hymnu szkolnego.png
- File:Rewerssz.jpg
- File:Awerssz.jpg
- File:Podz.jpg
- File:Wachowicz.jpeg
- File:Kwadraty.jpeg
Yann (talk) 11:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete All files copied from [4], for example Kwadraty.jpeg. Gytha (talk) 20:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 19:09, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by DDemq-MuséumLille (talk · contribs)
[edit]We have no evidence that the uploader has permission to freely license these works from the Musée d'histoire naturelle de Lille.
- File:Trichechus -manatus MHNLille.JPG
- File:Phonographe-Fondain MHNLille.JPG
- File:Neuropteris-gigantea MHNLille.JPG
- File:Marché-Surabaya MHNLille.jpg
- File:Peau-peinte MHNLille.jpg
- File:Vase anthropo-zoomorphe MHNLille.jpg
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Hi, I am discussing with this user for providing a formal permission. I don't think there is any doubt that he works for the Lille Museum. Please do not delete these files. Regards, Yann (talk) 15:58, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: Except 2 requested by the uploader. Account confirmed: #2015122310011304. Yann (talk) 12:37, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by İmge Azra Esin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:35, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused advertisement of questionable notability. No evidence of permission(s).
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ibrahim mukiryani (talk · contribs)
[edit]Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 13:47, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Alejandro Thornton
[edit]Missing permission. The uploader claims to be the author, Alejandro Thornton (b. 1970). If so, all the work uploaded would need an OTRS ticket.
Files affected:
- File:Simulacion Mata ilusion.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton USS.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Receta.JPG
- File:Alejandro Thornton Who is america.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Legs.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Marginales.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Global my ass.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Inspiration is for amateurs.JPG
- File:Alejandro Thornton en taller.JPG
- File:Alejandro Thornton America europea.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton Estable.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton a1012 lapiz.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A40.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton a1011 lapiz.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A36.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A30.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A mistery.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton serigrafia y lapiz s papel.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A Duchamp.jpg
- File:Alejandro Thornton A guy lke this.jpg
Fma12 (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Other Thornton's work uploaded by other users also under copyright:
- File:Global my ass (2002).jpg
- File:Jaulas thornton.jpg
- File:Latino 2004.JPG
- File:Obra612.jpg
- File:International monkey business nina staehli ale thornton 6.JPG
- File:International monkey business nina staehli ale thornton 1.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Fma12 (talk) 02:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: I agree, and even those that have only text undergoes a visual arrangement and became artworks, they need OTRS permission from the artist --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:13, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Copyrighted painting until 2042: his author, Juan Carlos Castagnino, died in 1972. - Fma12 (talk) 02:50, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: copyrighted until 2043 --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:18, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Just a personal selfie. Being used for excessive self-promotion at en:WP Andy Dingley (talk) 10:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete - out of scope, Facebookery. User has been blocked on en:wp as being here only to write about himself.JohnCD (talk) 14:57, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: unused personal image --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:20, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Own work? COM:DW issue Steinsplitter (talk) 16:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:22, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Own work? The file is all over the web. Steinsplitter (talk) 16:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: previously published with bigger sizes --Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:32, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Per COM:FOP#Denmark.
Stefan4 (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Also:
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg A silhouette infringes as much as the image of the whole statue would. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:25, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, yes. I looked at that for a long time, but couldn't make up my mind. The file name suggests that the main object of the photo is the surroundings, but then I would have covered the statue differently so that you only see a white square or something, and when I look more carefully, I see too much of the silhouette of the statue. So yes, delete that too, or hide more of the picture around the statue. --Stefan4 (talk) 15:49, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I am the owner of the image of the statue of the "Little Mermaid" in Copenhagen. I am new to Wikipedia and do not understand why it has been deleted or why they want to erase. If I would greatly appreciate it can be explained. Sincerely, 62.97.140.2 11:59, 27 December 2012 (UTC)Juan Carlos Ruiz miranda
- See the Danish copyright law §24.2:
Kunstværker må afbildes, når de er varigt anbragt på eller ved en for almenheden tilgængelig plads eller vej. Bestemmelsen i 1. pkt. finder ikke anvendelse, såfremt kunstværket er hovedmotivet og gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt.
- Approximate translation by me:
Artworks may be reproduced if they are placed permanently at or next to a place or road accessible to the general public. The rule in 1 does not apply if the artwork is the main purpose and the reproduction is used commercially.
- The problem is that you only can upload images to Commons if they can be used commercially in both the United States and in the source country. Since Danish law doesn't allow you to use the photos commercially, you can't upload them here. See for example http://www.journalisten.dk/havfruens-arvinger-tjener-fedt-pa-ophavsret (in Danish) where it says that a Danish newspaper had to pay 10,000 Danish crowns for using a photo of the statue without permission from the sculptor's heirs. The copyright to the statue will expire in Denmark on 1 January 2030 (70 years after the death of sculptor da:Edvard Eriksen), so starting from that date, you may upload photos of the statue to Commons. Unfortunately, it is not yet 2030. --Stefan4 (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
{{FoP-China}} only applies to works installed outdoors, but this seems to be indoors. The statue is in the public domain in China (as {{PD-old-50}}) and in the United States (as {{PD-1923}}), but the source country of the statue is Denmark, where it is not yet in the public domain.
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg
Stefan4 (talk) 16:02, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know the law well, but I think {{FoP-China}} can apply to these photos because they were actually displayed outdoors. I've been there. It was an open architecture with no "indoor" place. Maybe your can see its structure from this photo -- File:Denmark Pavilion of Expo 2010 2.jpg.--Stevenliuyi (talk) 16:22, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
- Interesting. I wonder if this counts as indoors or outdoors, then. It looked very much like an indoors place from the images in the nomination, but from the image you found, it looks as if it might work differently, although it looks like a strange construction, so maybe it could go either way. If kept, note that {{FoP-China}} requires mentioning the sculptor (Edvard Eriksen) and the title of the work (Den lille Havfrue) --Stefan4 (talk) 00:54, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
- So you are saying that if you have a British painting by a painter who died in 1950 which was exhibited in the UK in 1905, then you can circumvent COM:L and British copyright by transporting the painting to Japan (where it entered the public domain 50 years+3794 days after 1950) and then upload a photo of it? Commons files have to be free in the source country of the work (in this case Denmark). If Denmark doesn't recognise Chinese FOP for photos taken in China, then I suppose we should delete the photos regardless of whether they are outdoors or indoors as the photos need to be free in Denmark. --Stefan4 (talk) 11:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- A painting would not be the same thing as sculpture. A photograph of a painting would not be derivative work, but only a copy, since the photograph would not meet the threshold of originality, therefore the source country would be the source country of the painting. When you photograph a 3d object such a sculpture and its surroundings, that photograph would meet the threshold of originality and a new copyright is created, therefore the source country is the country of the photograph, even if you photograph a copyrighted object. So I do not think paintings and sculptures are the same thing. At least if we forget for a moment that some jurisdictions might consider photos of paintings to be above the threshold.
But to clarify, I think this is more of a policy decision on how aggressively we want to interpret our "free in the source country"-rule than it is a copyright question. Do you think the bit in Commons:Licensing should be rewritten from "… and in the source country of the work" to "… and in all source countries of the work" or something like that? Peter Alberti (talk) 12:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)- If you make a faithful reproduction of a painting, then the reproduction is below the threshold of originality in Denmark, meaning that it is protected for 50 years since creation (if it is a photo), or not at all (if it is not a photo). However, the reproduction does not need to be faithful. Check http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/6-16-09yawnersRGB20090616095504.jpg and http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qnUbmG-dYTM/Trzhc3SU4eI/AAAAAAAAABY/3Pa2Ri4_KA0/s1600/skriethomer_29544134.jpg for example. Both are obviously derivative works of nb:Skrik and they are in no way faithful to the original painting. The original painting is in the public domain in a large number of countries, such as USA, Canada, China, Japan, Australia and Korea, but it is still copyrighted in Norway. If you make a derivative work like those two, but make the derivative work in a country where the original painting is in the public domain, would the derivative work then be acceptable on Commons? I'd assume not. I think that we had a case like that where someone in Germany had made a derivative work of a work from Afghanistan, but I don't remember what the outcome was. Works from Afghanistan are in the public domain outside Afghanistan since the country hasn't signed any copyright treaties with other countries. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about those derivatives of The Scream other than what I see, but if they have educational value in their own right, I would lean towards allowing them. Another possible more interesting example in the world of Scream-derivatives could be Andy Warhol's popart versions (e.g. [5]). If they were public domain in the US due to lack of notice (which I doubt), I'd like to see them included here. I understand if others feel differently, and — as it seems I might be in a minority — I'm striking my keep-vote.
Regarding the example with works from Afghanistan, I see other issues with those. When Afghanistan signs the treaties, copyright to works from Afghanistan will be applied retroactively elsewhere in the world, meaning that that derivative may very well not be free in Germany or anywhere else a couple of years from now. I wouldn't consider that to be acceptable for us. There's an interesting discussion to be had there, but it's one that could reach a different conclusion. Peter Alberti (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- I don't know anything about those derivatives of The Scream other than what I see, but if they have educational value in their own right, I would lean towards allowing them. Another possible more interesting example in the world of Scream-derivatives could be Andy Warhol's popart versions (e.g. [5]). If they were public domain in the US due to lack of notice (which I doubt), I'd like to see them included here. I understand if others feel differently, and — as it seems I might be in a minority — I'm striking my keep-vote.
- If you make a faithful reproduction of a painting, then the reproduction is below the threshold of originality in Denmark, meaning that it is protected for 50 years since creation (if it is a photo), or not at all (if it is not a photo). However, the reproduction does not need to be faithful. Check http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/6-16-09yawnersRGB20090616095504.jpg and http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-qnUbmG-dYTM/Trzhc3SU4eI/AAAAAAAAABY/3Pa2Ri4_KA0/s1600/skriethomer_29544134.jpg for example. Both are obviously derivative works of nb:Skrik and they are in no way faithful to the original painting. The original painting is in the public domain in a large number of countries, such as USA, Canada, China, Japan, Australia and Korea, but it is still copyrighted in Norway. If you make a derivative work like those two, but make the derivative work in a country where the original painting is in the public domain, would the derivative work then be acceptable on Commons? I'd assume not. I think that we had a case like that where someone in Germany had made a derivative work of a work from Afghanistan, but I don't remember what the outcome was. Works from Afghanistan are in the public domain outside Afghanistan since the country hasn't signed any copyright treaties with other countries. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- A painting would not be the same thing as sculpture. A photograph of a painting would not be derivative work, but only a copy, since the photograph would not meet the threshold of originality, therefore the source country would be the source country of the painting. When you photograph a 3d object such a sculpture and its surroundings, that photograph would meet the threshold of originality and a new copyright is created, therefore the source country is the country of the photograph, even if you photograph a copyrighted object. So I do not think paintings and sculptures are the same thing. At least if we forget for a moment that some jurisdictions might consider photos of paintings to be above the threshold.
I think there are two issues, which are not well distinguished above:
- First, if a sculpture is permanently moved to an FOP country and meets the FOP rules there, then we accept images of it. See, for example, Category:Alexander Calder where we have many images of sculpture by Calder, an American, which were fabricated in America and shipped to Germany, where they are on permanent public display. Thus our rule about country of origin speaks to the country where the image was taken, not the country where the subject was created. If the Mermaid, or a cast of it, met the FOP rules in China, then images of that piece would be acceptable here.
- Second is the question of whether taking a sculpture from its country of origin, a 70 year pma country, into a 50 year pma country makes it acceptable on Commons. I would think not.
- The difference is that an image taken with an FOP rule in place does not change the copyright status of the sculpture. A sculpture in an FOP country is not PD, it is still copyrighted, but the image is a legal DW. The change from 70 pma to 50 pma is a change in the copyright status of the sculpture and I don't think we're going to recognize that for a temporary move. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
- Those are not unreasonable distinctions, but they are to the best of my knowledge neither dictated by copyright law nor written down as policy or guidelines anywhere. Distinguishing between a temporary and a permanent move when it isn't required by freedom of panorama-rules seems to be just a random line in the sand. (And I don't see why the Mermaid shouldn't meet the freedom of panorama-exceptions in China, by the way, per Stevenliuyi's comment.) Likewise distinguishing between FOP-exceptions and shorter copyright durations seems to be a random line in the sand, when neither necessarily makes any difference elsewhere in the world. Maybe I just don't know where to look, but I think such things, if they are to be applied as general rules, ideally should be written down somewhere in the project namespace to allow uploaders to take them into account and to make it easier for administrators to apply them consistently. But that's just a thought, feel free to ignore it. Peter Alberti (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
- Delete ALL ! For all reasons stated above as well as the legal issue to WMF. The copyright holders have won cash settlements. They may see the images on all the wiki articles. They most probably will be pissed. They have every right to sue or ask for an office action. My perssonal reasons may also seem valid: Countries and creators that don't allow the masses to view them are losing out. They will have articles of text only, low sales of legitimate copies, etc, etc, etc.......--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Note that there is no legal issue for the WMF. The statue was "published" in 1913, so it is in the public domain in the United States. This is only an issue about the copyright status in Denmark. See for example w:Den lille Havfrue#Copyright issues: a replica was placed in the United States and the sculptor's heirs asked for royalties, but the case was later reported dropped without giving a reason for this. Presumably, the heirs had realised that USA has different copyright rules (at that time requiring copyright notices+renewals for Danish statues without any protection for pre-1919 statues) and that the copyright claim was invalid in the United States. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:35, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- I can see valid reasons for legally keeping them. But do we want to spend WMF money on legal battles to keep them or is their a better use for the funds? The heirs have won other battles and may file on this one. Not to win but for publicity or other reasons.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
- Well, the policy is that Commons files have to be free in both the source country and in the United States. My claim is that the images violate Danish law and thus violate COM:L (and so need to be deleted). On the other hand, I don't think that the images violate US law. --Stefan4 (talk) 00:32, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- I can see valid reasons for legally keeping them. But do we want to spend WMF money on legal battles to keep them or is their a better use for the funds? The heirs have won other battles and may file on this one. Not to win but for publicity or other reasons.--Canoe1967 (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I see one retracted keep and most others lean on delete. Should we just tag them speedy and see if a bold admin will remove them? We can still discuss and seek consenus on whether any should be undeleted. I am just worried about Danish lawyers waking up to messages monday morning.--Canoe1967 (talk) 01:47, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Delete those that shows the silhouette of and actual statue in Copenhagen and Keep the rest, including those taken in China. While those taken at the site in Copenhagen are clearly in violation of copyright, File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg is a bit more dubious to me (I was also the creator initially), as the Danish artist Bjørn Nørgaard in 2008 was found to be legally using a photo of the little Mermaid in a collage, by the Eastern High Court in Denmark, in part because the statue was not the main motif in the collage. The statue is clearly not the main motive as it is not depicted on the photo. However the silhoutte could be a derivative, as it is so tight, which would make it a copyrighted item after all. A short notice about the case outcome is available in Danish here. So I'm still a bit in doubt regarding the silhoutte photo, but I guess it comes down to, whither one consider the silhoutte a main motif and a derivative. If the answers to both of these questions are yes, then it's a clear cut delete. I think it actually might be.
For those taken in China, I believe that taking a photo of a sculpture on temporary display is okay per Chinese FOP as it doesn't specifically mention permanent display, which is the case in other places - i.e. in the German nuances example. As PMA is 50 in China and the photo was taken about 5 months after the expiry of those 50 years, I am of the opinion that they are okay for Commons. --heb [T C E] 15:43, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem with {{FoP-China}} is that it only applies to works located in a "室外公共场所". It is unclear if the image fulfils that requirement.
- The Danish page tells that you may use a photo of the statue if it is not the main purpose of the photo. It's unclear if it is the main purpose of this photo or not, since you clearly see its silhouette. --Stefan4 (talk) 23:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
- This blog-entry shows the Danish pavilion at the Expo from various angles. As far as I can see from then this is an outdoor public place (室外公共场所) as per article 22 in Chinese copyright law (unless there was an entry fee or something similar to the Expo-area, which would put everything in a different light). I haven't found anything indicating that Chinese law supports a distinguishing between outdoor and partially covered.
- Regarding the silhouette, I actually believe that I (as the uploader) have stretched it a bit to far with that silhouette and that the photo is in fact a derivative of a copyrighted work, and that the photo should be deleted under the COM:PCP. In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 08:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that it looks as if the place has walls but no roof. I don't know if something with a wall but no roof is treated as "indoors" or "outdoors" in China. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- If you put 室外公共场所 into Google Translate it would appear that 外 is the outside-word, translating to multiple meanings such as 'outside', 'external', 'outer' and 'foreign'. I guess it could be anything without a door for this sake. The only source I have been able to find, that gives any hint in any direction regarding article 22 is this and it doesn't help terribly much (though it does provide some nice insights into the Chinese Copyright Act (CCA)).
- But I found another angle for this could which might perhaps make the question is much simpler. I actually believe that the CCA Article 22 is describing fair use (as defined on EnWiki), and the paper I refer to above also uses the expression 'fair use' on Article 22, as do this Chinese law firm. Commons:Fair use states (at the very beginning): "Wikimedia Commons does not accept fair use media files (such as non-free logos, covers, screenshots, or reproductions of other copyrighted works) because fair use laws vary from country to country—thus, content deemed acceptable under, for instance, US fair use concepts (which are very broad) is not usable in the majority of other countries."
- 室 = room
- 外 = outside
- i.e. outside a room. I'm not sure whether this can be considered to be outside a room or not.
- "Fair use" is a thing in United States copyright law (s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 107) which says that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder. There are also other sections in United States copyright law (e.g. s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 120) which say that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, and those sections are not denoted "fair use". The former is considered insufficient for Commons whereas the latter is considered sufficient for Commons.
- The copyright laws of other countries sometimes also allow you to use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, but the copyright laws of other countries generally don't use the term fair use. The idea is that Commons files can be reused freely by anyone for any purpose, and this means that we need to analyse the terms in the copyright law to determine whether each kind of use is sufficient or not. For example, the Danish copyright law has multiple sections which say that you may sometimes use a copyrighted work without permission from the copyright holder, and you could denote those fair use if you wish. § 24.2 is a type of insufficient fair use since it doesn't apply if "gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt", whereas § 24.3 is a type of sufficient fair use since it just says that "Bygninger må [...] afbildes [frit]" without giving any further restrictions. § 24.2 allows any use of the image unless "kunstværket er hovedmotivet", but it may be dubious whether something is a "hovedmotiv" or not, and this may depend on how you use the images. However, this is an issue with COM:DM in its entirety and not only an issue with Danish images.
- {{FoP-China}} looks like a kind of sufficient fair use to me, similar to s:United States Code/Title 17/Chapter 1/Section 120 and Danish § 24.3. --Stefan4 (talk) 14:58, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- I was referring more to the concept of fair use than the actual American use of the words. I find it worth noting that the licensing resolution doesn't use the term fair use either, but it would similar apply to parallel fair dealing rules of the Commonwealth countries as do other national limitations and exceptions. That stated I do agree whole-heartedly with you in that "we need to analyse the terms in the copyright law to determine whether each kind of use is sufficient or not". Unfortunately this is a bigger issue for Commons than simply this little mermaid :( --heb [T C E] 17:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
- The problem is that it looks as if the place has walls but no roof. I don't know if something with a wall but no roof is treated as "indoors" or "outdoors" in China. --Stefan4 (talk) 13:06, 4 January 2013 (UTC)
Summary per 8 January 2013
I'm going to try with a summary as of today. Basically I noted remarks and votes from seven users (User:Canoe1967, User:Heb, User:Jameslwoodward, User:Peter Alberti, User:Stefan4 and User:Stevenliuyi plus anonymous Special:Contributions/62.97.140.2). There seem to be a clear consensus about deletion of the following:
- File:Sireneta.JPG: Close-up of The Little Mermaid on "her normal" stone in Copenhagen
- File:Sirenita Copenhague.jpg: Same as the above, but from a different angle
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg: The actual statue has been masked out and replaced by white, leaving a distinct silhouette
Then there are the three photos from the Denmark Pavilion of Expo 2010 in China:
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg: The statue is a significant part of the photo, but not nessecarily the main subject
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg: Same as the above, but from a slightly different angle
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg: The statue is the subject, but the surroundings make a good part of the photo
File:Danish Pavilion 8.jpg could perhaps also be mentioned on above list, as it shows the statue, but it is clearly not the main subject. The discussion revolves mainly on the subjects of:
- what is considered the source country (of the photo (China) or of the statue (Denmark)),
- wither a temporary/short-term move to another country should be considered "equal" to (more) permanent move, and
- if it is indoor or outdoor per {{FoP-China}}
Regarding the source country precedence (per User:Jameslwoodward's comment) indicates that on Commons, source country is the source of the (in this case) photograph, not the statue as such, however as User:Peter Alberti remarks, it is very much a question of interpretation of COM:L. For the purpose of this summary, I'd say that consensus of this discussion points towards source country being China in this case.
For the temporary vs. permanent move, I don't see a particular clear direction in the comments above, though for this summary I would summarize it as a small overweight towards it not really mattering - or as User:Peter Alberti puts it: "[J]ust a random line in the sand".
Last there is the question on indoor vs. outdoor, which I believe this is the most tricky part, as none of the participants has much knowledge of Chinese Copyright Act court cases. Outside of this summary, I believe that COM:PCP would dictate that they should be considered indoor though and thus the three photos from China should also be deleted, though I personally am in favour of the more "relaxed" interpretation of "outdoor".
Finally there are three more photos in Category:Statue of the Little Mermaid (Copenhagen) that I would like to mention (for good measures):
- File:Denmark. Capital Region. Copenhagen 250.JPG: Close-up of the Mermaid's "normal" stone in Copenhagen, while the statue was in China
- File:Denmark. Capital Region. Copenhagen 255.JPG: Same as above but at a distance
- File:DK ophavsrets udløb (Den lille havfrue).svg: An illustration regarding the copyright of the Mermaid - no visual representation of the actual statue
.svg){kind=link}
These three files are not included in the deletion discussion, even though a part of the category in mention. In kind regards, Henrik/heb [T C E] 12:50, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Deleted, As per discussion and my unchallenged resume above, the following files should be deleted under COM:PCP:
- File:Sireneta.JPG
- File:Sirenita Copenhague.jpg
- File:Surroundings of The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen.jpeg
- File:Danish Pavilion 2.jpg
- File:Denmark's Pavillion at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai.jpg
- File:Danish Pavilion 4.jpg
The remainder of the files (currently) in Category:Statue of the Little Mermaid (Copenhagen) will be kept. --heb [T C E] 16:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
The sculptor died less than 70 years ago.
- File:Birka Stockholm and The Little Mermaid 2013.JPG
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg
- File:Little Mermaid, Copenhagen (2169039556).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I would also include:
- File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 2F (8184260307).jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 1F (8184299754).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Though both have an OTRS-ticket, I wonder whether a permission by the heir(s) of sculptor Edvard Eriksen is included. In addition, there is the statement "Photo manipulation is not allowed." (Bilden får ej manipuleras.) in the image description, which translates into "no derivatives" IMO, making them unfree. It seems that the given permission is intended for press/promotional purposes. --Túrelio (talk) 10:24, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- I asked about those at COM:OTRS/N#File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 1F (8184299754).jpg & File:Den lille havfrue Kobenhavn 20110602 2F (8184260307).jpg and decided to postpone nominating those for deletion before receiving an answer. I didn't notice the text in the EXIF. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg is from the Royal Library, and I am fairly certain that they know the Danish legal situation better than most of us. I'll ask them if they can assist in this discussion. --Palnatoke (talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- See also the comments by User:MGA73 and User:Pieter Kuiper on the page on Flickr about that photo. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Also the name of photographer Sven Türck was missing from our description, though that's not an issue here. --Túrelio (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He's in the description. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- After I had added him to the author entry ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He was there all of the time (in the "Description" parameter). --Stefan4 (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- Yeah, but that is hardly read/recognized by automated scripts which read-out the image data. Anyway, a minor matter. --Túrelio (talk) 10:54, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He was there all of the time (in the "Description" parameter). --Stefan4 (talk) 10:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- After I had added him to the author entry ;-). --Túrelio (talk) 10:50, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- He's in the description. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- I have now asked the Royal Library. They can react in several ways:
- They can pull the picture from Flickr
- They can give us a letter from their legal department explaining why they say "no known copyright restrictions"
- Or they can just ignore us.
- In the first or third case, we should delete. --Palnatoke (talk) 11:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- File:Den lille Havfrue (5884298802).jpg is from the Royal Library, and I am fairly certain that they know the Danish legal situation better than most of us. I'll ask them if they can assist in this discussion. --Palnatoke (talk) 10:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
- The separate issue regarding the contradictory statements from News Øresund is apparently a non-issue; see Commons:OTRS/Noticeboard/archive/2013#ticket:2013052310008773. I'll be monumentally surprised if they have a sublicensing agreement from the sculptor's heirs, though. —LX (talk, contribs) 17:13, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
File:Birka Stockholm and The Little Mermaid 2013.JPG: Deletion accepted. --Morten Haagensen
Deleted, there have been enough time for answer. If copyright owner (sculptor or his/her heirs) sends an OTRS-permission, then it is possible to restore the files. Taivo (talk) 14:25, 14 November 2013 (UTC)
Unfree sculpture. The sculptor hasn't been dead for at least 70 years yet.
- File:Den Lille Havfrue I (4483560253).jpg
- File:Sereia-Copenhaga, Dinamarca.jpg
- File:Sirinìna Cupenàghen.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stefan4 (talk) 21:37, 29 January 2015 (UTC)
Deleted. INeverCry 05:08, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
The Little Mermaid will be under copyright until 1/1/2030. These images are derivaitve works and cannot be kept on Commons. No doubt that someone will claim the de minimis applies, because she is small in some of these images, but de minimis cannot be applied to images where the copyrighted work is the only reason for taking the picture and is the central focus of the the photograph.
- File:20140705 Denmark 0133 Copenhagen (15159288612).jpg
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 177.JPG
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 178.JPG
- File:Kopenhagen Mai 2009 PD 333.JPG
- File:Tourist ship at the Mermaid, Copenhagen, June 1975.jpg
- File:Unidentified couple posing in front of the Mermaid sculpture, Copenhagen, Denmark (5075034448).jpg
- File:Visiting the Little Mermaid.JPG
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
. Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- I'm the photograph of the picture "Visiting the Little Mermaid". It´s been in my focus to show, that the statue is one of the most visited places if interest in Copenhagen. For that you only see the statue from the back.--Schorle (talk) 18:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Delete If the statue was really of minimal importance to these images, it could be cropped out and the rest of the photograph would be fine, but I find that unlikely. I can sympathize with Schorle but the back of the statue is no less copyrighted than the front. - Themightyquill (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Delete both sides of a statue are copyright, the Little Mermaid is well known to be in copyright until 2030. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Statue of the Little Mermaid is still copyrighted. Its author Edvard Eriksen died in 1959, so copyright will expire in 2030. Per COM:FOP Denmark photographs of copyrighted public art may be used only for noncommercial purposes.
- File:408DK (1) Kleine Meerjungfrau (15174992498).jpg
- File:408DK (2) Kleine Meerjungfrau (15338597356).jpg
- File:409DK Kleine Meerjungfrau (15338534816).jpg
_Kleine_Meerjungfrau_(15174992498).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_Kleine_Meerjungfrau_(15338597356).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Michalg95 (talk) 12:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
- Delete! See also this Associated Press article on a new copyright lawsuit and subsequent hefty fine against Berlingske, which strengthens no commercial FOP in Denmark for non-architecture. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 17:43, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 23:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- File:Copenhagen 2014 - Day One (7) (16947904443).jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue front.jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue side1.jpg
- File:Den lille havfrue side2.jpg
_(16947904443).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Files showing The Little Mermaid in Copenhagen, whose author Edvard Eriksen, died in 1959, Denmark forbids commercial usage of images showing copyrighted artwork. --Michalg95 (talk) 16:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Rosenzweig τ 10:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Files uploaded by LDMC(el Dalton MC) (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal images : out of scope
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
unused personal image : out of scope --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: User's only upload, unused head shot of someone. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Photo montage : lacks the sources --Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no sources. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Igwe Friday Collins (talk · contribs)
[edit]Two unused personal images and two images used in user page, however the only contributions were to create the page. This is not Facebook here, user page images are allowed for contributors and contributions should come first.
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:59, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Commons is not social media, this upload series would be great on Facebook. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation: not so sure about source Gravabreo (talk) 18:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Unused headshot of non-notable man, not in use for over one year, no obvious source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Copyright violation: not so sure about source Gravabreo (talk) 18:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, no source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:07, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Melos as Speedy (Speedy) and the most recent rationale was: CW spam + logo In use. Yann (talk) 18:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Promotional upload, out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Scope. No encyclopaedic use. Dandelo (talk) 18:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Also the matter of "Lisa Lux" in the metadata having no apparent connection to uploader. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
COM:TOYS "On the legal rationale of toys as art in the US" and Lucas Film (Copyright owner of Star Wars) has registered copyright in the US, therefore is this toy replica copyighted and a per out policies need to be deleted.. Josve05a (talk) 21:18, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: R2D2 is copyright by Disney/Lucas Films. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Unlikely to be own work, no source, no permission. Yann (talk) 21:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
COM:DW of logo Josve05a (talk) 22:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Is the artist dead or alive? Is this PD? Josve05a (talk) 22:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: http://www.fondation-andre-sangsue.ch/ says (C) Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Derivative works Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Also nominating
- File:Oficina de Zines do Festival CONTATO (9721668492).jpg
- File:Oficina de Zines do Festival CONTATO (9721674178).jpg
- File:Oficina de Zines do Festival CONTATO (9718451727).jpg
- File:Oficina de Zines do Festival CONTATO (9721675954).jpg
- File:Oficina de Zines do Festival CONTATO (9721670290).jpg
- File:Ubuntu (428390615).jpg
- File:Marx tinha razão! (3632882202).jpg
- File:Re-publica 2015 - Tag 3 (17202693107).jpg
- File:Oficina de manutençao de bikes (9725729675).jpg
- File:Debate " Liberdade de Expressão - Desafios no Mundo Digital" (9726152426).jpg
- File:Catarse- Financiamento Colaborativo-6 (9730913169).jpg
- File:CONTATO Eletrônico (9732875727).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Rodrigolopes (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:02, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Most likely not uploader's own work. The image existed online a month before it was uploaded here. AuroralColibri (talk) 22:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Most likely not uploader's own work. Widely dispersed online before being uploaded here. AuroralColibri (talk) 22:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Low res, small size. No valid EXIF. Doubtfull claim of ownership Natuur12 (talk) 23:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:01, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
out of scope. Selfie Natuur12 (talk) 23:47, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Ellin Beltz (talk) 21:00, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of scope. Small size, no EXIF data, uncertain copyright. Yann (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Érico (msg) 04:03, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal images : out of scope
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Érico (msg) 04:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused personal images / self promotion : out of scope
--Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Érico (msg) 04:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Unknown person, no evidence of permission, out of scope. Josve05a (talk) 20:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Érico (msg) 04:04, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
Low quality file, replaced by better images of same car at Category:Ford Festiva (WD/WF) OSX (talk • contributions) 03:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: there is not so much images from the same point of view (of the same part of the car) --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:05, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bartallen2 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Possible copyright violations - small sizes - no EXIF - own work claim doubtful
- File:Dillian Whyte vs. Mike Holden.jpg
- File:Dillianwhyte.png
- File:Dillian Whyte and Wladimir Klitschko.jpg
INeverCry 03:32, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- That's because they are from Instagram. You can tell by the filters https://www.instagram.com/p/1GoBLluG9O/ 92.237.211.110 05:45, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:10, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
source missing, picture not founded and at the bottom will be read © 1998—2015 Agava. All rights reserved. Motopark (talk) 08:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- the source was down for some time, is okay now. I own the picture. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris-Mexx (talk • contribs)
- In page will be read © Production Center "Imedzhin Productions", 2015, so need OTRS--Motopark (talk) 11:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: the source provided is not free --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:14, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
These files all appear to be copyright violations and are missing permission for reuse under a free license. The "Missing permission" tags I initially added to the images were removed by the uploader without comment.
Info: Reupload of File:Крук Галина.jpg. --Achim (talk) 19:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
DAJF (talk) 09:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:24, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
No source indicated (unlikely to be 'own work': iPhone indicated in the metadata) Gyrostat (talk) 10:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: derivative ; the description say "affiche" --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
bbb ggbvcf 62.65.32.66 11:06, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: nonsense Krd 08:52, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Paintings by Raún Domínguez (d. 1999) so his work is under copyright until 2069.
Files affected:
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (1).JPG
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (2).JPG
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (3).JPG
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (4).JPG
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (5).JPG
- File:Raúl Domínguez - Mural de la Estacion Fluvial de Rosario (6).JPG
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Fma12 (talk) 12:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: the paintings are display in a public place, however FoP in Argentina is not ok for artwork, as per nomination, they will be free in 2070. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:31, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Although there is freedom of Panorama in Argentina (only for buildings), the main subject here is the painting by Antonio Berni, who died in 1981, so this work is under copyright until 2051. Fma12 (talk) 02:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Small compressed image, missing a lot of EXIF information. High doubt if the uploader is the copyright owner. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Support Uploader has a history of uploading copyrighted images, even in falsifying EXIF information to make it look like he's the copyright owner. Mbch331 (talk) 18:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)- Support As per Mbch331
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Source is File:Rottweiler standing facing left.jpg. Out of scope? Yann (talk) 13:02, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
wrong spelling of city in category name
Deleted: . Krd 14:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_WSwSFw8QNd0/THSKASd4bDI/AAAAAAAAA48/FenIQkJ-xe8/s1600/escanear0001.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:28, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:40, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination Krd 14:40, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No FOP in France Rodrigolopes (talk) 23:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination Krd 16:20, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Missing EXIF information. High doubt if uploader is the owner, given the history of uploading copyvio by this user. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:09, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Unused, there are several copies of the fresco in colour available in Category:Frescos of Saint Sava. Zoupan (talk) 10:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality. OSX (talk • contributions) 03:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
Kept, not so bad. Taivo (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg){kind=link}
_Classic_hatchback_01.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Self nomination, low quality, replaced by File:2005-2007 Mazda 6 (GG Series 2) Classic hatchback 03.jpg. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:58, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
_Classic_hatchback_03.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no reason to delete. Natuur12 (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
redirection inutile Lepsyleon (talk) 12:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: no reason to delete Natuur12 (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Small size, no EXIF data, user with bad history, unlikely to be own work. Yann (talk) 13:13, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Alan (talk) 13:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Keep: PD-textlogo, in use. Alan (talk) 15:16, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Vikoula5 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://www.africantradebeads.com/assets/images/Fulani_lady.jpg Might be old enough, but more info needed. Source? Photographer? Yann (talk) 13:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
_ST_sedan_03.jpg){kind=link}
_ST_sedan_03.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Low quality. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:59, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
_ST_sedan_03.jpg){kind=link}
Kept, not so bad. Taivo (talk) 16:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
_ST_sedan_03.jpg){kind=link}
_ST_sedan_03.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-2){kind=link}
Self nomination, low quality distorted image, replaced by File:2003 Nissan Pulsar (N16 S2) ST sedan (2015-08-07) 01.jpg. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
_ST_sedan_(2015-08-07)_01.jpg){kind=link}
Kept: no reason to delete. Natuur12 (talk) 16:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
per COM:PRP Geohakkeri (talk) 14:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
probably a copyvio - En wiki has the same file under fair use WereSpielChequers (talk) 14:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
file error - HappyMidnight (talk) 14:44, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- I rescind to request to delete this file since it has been fixed for unknown reason. HappyMidnight (talk) 15:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/628015686112161793/teevcsjA_400x400.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:59, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://cms.ipressroom.com.s3.amazonaws.com/173/files/20125/532caae6af4460264b000060_250193_Billy-Woodberry/250193_Billy-Woodberry_9483cbd3-507e-491d-bcf6-b1cbf1eb2443-prv.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
empty and wrong name Fiver, der Hellseher (talk) 21:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:50, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Kurioziteti123 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small size, no EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.
Yann (talk) 21:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Carlmartinfaurby (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small size, no EXIF data, unlikely to be own works.
Yann (talk) 17:07, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:34, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
No indication that the uploader is the copyright owner. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Too complex for PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 19:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
No indication that the uploader is the copyright holder. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:01, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 17:45, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
PD-textlogo? Yann (talk) 19:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: If it was a US logo I would say yes but I don't think it is also free of copyright in Finland. Natuur12 (talk) 17:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
no offense, but DR started to verify "ARK Media" as source, Roland zh (talk) 19:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
no offence, but DR started to verify claimed 'own work', imho commercial advertisements and file not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 19:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Duplicate of SVG flag of New Zealand. Fry1989 eh? 20:31, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:27, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
no offence, but DR started to verify claimed 'own work', imho commercial advertisements, and file not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
again, no offense, but DR as per File:Flash Frame Visuals Academy of Film & Television.jpg, Roland zh (talk) 20:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
This seems to be a photo of Matthew Medhurst, uploaded by Matthew Medhurst. However, it doesn't seem to be a self-shot, so evidence of permission is needed from the photographer. Stefan2 (talk) 21:03, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Image quite identical to File:Le Louvre IMG 20141107 121132 (15141161364).jpg ; no information about any difference Tangopaso (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:28, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
no offence, but DR started to verify claimed 'own work' as p.e. thumbnail format and missing exif, Roland zh (talk) 21:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
File:C. Hart Merriam papers - including correspondence, papers relating to career with the United States Biological Survey, 1798-1972 (bulk 1871-1942) (1871) (20570306546).jpg
[edit]_(1871)_(20570306546).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(1871)_(20570306546).jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
While this image is correctly sourced and licensed, it doesn't contain any educational material being a scan of an inside cover page of a book. There is no useful educational material at all on this page outside of the template. Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The appreciated Samantha Cristoforetti can't release this derived work of Korolev's statue under a free licence. She must get the permission of the sculptor or of his heirs! Ras67 (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Josef Prokeš, author of the depicted work of art, has not given permission, although I am in contact with him (and the uploader might be too) and we will try to acquire such permission ex post Marek BLAHUŠ (talk) 18:52, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Josef Prokeš, author of the depicted work of art, has not given permission, although I am in contact with him (and the uploader might be too) and we will try to acquire such permission ex post Marek BLAHUŠ (talk) 18:53, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:38, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
This has conflicting copyright information: the uploader claims himself as the author, but the source is given as Boeing (not bizarre, because according to en:Burro Flats Painted Cave, the site is owned by Boeing, and there's no public access), so which one should we trust? Nyttend (talk) 18:57, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: The uploader. Iphone photograph. Natuur12 (talk) 19:37, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
I already nominated this with a previous DR, but it was kept with a bizarre rationale. My rationale for deletion remains the same. (1) Since when do we close an unopposed DR as "keep"? (2) What does the iPhone origin of this photograph have to do with anything? Nyttend (talk) 05:58, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- It’s less bizarre when one reads Natuur12’s explanation for it — less easy to find it, though, after you supressed it, User:Nyttend. Now, why did you?… -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 07:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- The objection that an unopposed DR should not be closed as kept is not reasonable, especially for a DR that had been open for 3 weeks and in the context of a backlogged DR queue. But in the future Natuur12 could 1st add a {{vk}} and then (immediately after?), close the DR as kept. A bit slower but good enough to keep some admins from threatening others with rides to COM:AN/U? (For when a mere peon dares to do the same the result is less momentous…) -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 07:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, per Natuur12. -- Tuválkin ✉ ✇ 07:22, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, per Natuur12. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:49, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, per Natuur12. -- Geagea (talk) 23:17, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Jcb (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Josve05a as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: http://ostvigtree.com/our-history/ Might be old enough. Yann (talk) 21:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Might be or might be not but without aditional evidence com:PCP applies. Natuur12 (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Younis khosa qatar (talk · contribs)
[edit]These images are of personal things that would be of limited eduational use:
- File:Fort Munro, hotel.jpg
- File:Fort Munro,nice.jpg
- File:Fort Munro, Younis khosa House.jpg
- File:Khosa farm house.jpg
- File:Village school.jpg
- File:Main entrance of haveli.jpg
- File:Baithak.jpg
- File:Way to khalid abad.jpg
- File:D.G.Cement,D.G.Khan.gif
Green Giant (talk) 20:58, 10 January 2014 (UTC)
Deleted: INeverCry 19:12, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Younis khosa qatar (talk · contribs)
[edit]Small size, no EXIF data, user with bad history, unlikely to be own works.
- File:HEAVY SNOWFALL FORT MUNRO,D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:SNOW FALL FORT MUNRO,D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:D.G.KHAN MEDICAL COLLEGE,DGK.jpg
- File:D.G.KHAN CANTONMENT.jpg
- File:SUZUKI MOTORS,D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:BEAUTIFUL SCENE.D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:GHAZI GHAT BRIDGE,D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:Medical College Road,D.G.Khan.jpg
- File:AGRICULTURE COLLEGE D.G.KHAN.jpg
- File:Snow fall, fort munro.jpg
- File:Fort Munro,road.jpg
- File:Biggest Charpai,D.G.Khan.jpg
- File:Ghazi University,Dera Ghazi Khan.jpg
- File:Ghazi Medical College.jpg
- File:Ghazi University,D.G.Khan.jpg
- File:University Chowk.jpg
- File:Ghazi University.jpg
- File:Pachad Desert, D.G.Khan.jpg
- File:Ghazi University Chowk.jpg
Yann (talk) 22:05, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Info Per User talk:Younis khosa qatar I am currently "cleaning" uploads by this user. The difficulty here is to differ between uploads previously published on uploaders 1530 images heavy Panoramio stream via http://www.panoramio.com/user/3308075?show=all (see also [6] + [7] + etc.) and works which were taken from copyrighted images by other (mostly Panoramio) user. So, files like File:Heavy snowfall, Fort Munro, D.G. Khan.jpg (and it's nominated redirect File:HEAVY SNOWFALL FORT MUNRO,D.G.KHAN.jpg) may be okay as also File:Snow fall, Fort Munro, D.G. Khan.jpg (nominated redirect: File:SNOW FALL FORT MUNRO,D.G.KHAN.jpg), considering cropped from http://www.panoramio.com/photo/84859868.
- But e.g. File:Danish School, D.G. Khan.jpg (exif: Canon PowerShot A550, an obvious cropped photo) offers a digicam which (so far I could verify) was never used on his Commons and/or Panoramio uploads and might be a copyright violation too = nominating. Gunnex (talk) 23:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
![[6]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:University_Building,_D.G._Khan.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=181401097){kind=link}
![[7]](https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:Medical_College_and_Hospital.jpg&diff=prev&oldid=181400574){kind=link}
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:36, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Screenshot of non-free software. See eg the English Wikipedia file of this name where Microsoft's usage conditions are demonstrated to be unfree. BethNaught (talk) 22:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
This Coat of Arms is wrong; The good one is File:Escudo de Lourenzá.svg Estevoaei (talk) 23:22, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Kept: No reason to delete Natuur12 (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
Reasons for deletion request -2A02:908:37A:7080:A1E9:B6D8:CBF:9E29 06:29, 29 August 2015 (UTC) This image is unused. The Information to This Picture are not correct. and invalid.
Kept: That an image is unused is not a reason for deletion. en:Kabir Stori is a notable person. Revent (talk) 06:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation and suggested courtesy deletion. Emal Stori thinks that it was an unauthorized upload by someone using his name. On that ground, he recently asked for deletion in an email to us.
Note that this file was transferred from English Wikipedia, where it was first uploaded in 2007. [8] I consulted GorillaWarfare and she confirmed that the original (now deleted) file description and license statement were copied intact to the Commons file page. whym (talk) 13:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
![[8]](https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=&page=File%3AStori.jpg&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1&hide_tag_log=1&hide_review_log=1&hide_thanks_log=1){kind=link}
- Delete Considering the quality of the photo, it could well be taken using a professional photographer and Emal Stori might not have rights to release it (whether he initially uploaded it or not). whym (talk) 13:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 16:45, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Mdann52 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Appears to go against EXIF data, at least permission needed. No copy found. Yann (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Yann: This is not an online copyvio - it is from a photoshoot done for a school, the permission attached appears to be copyrighted, and incompatible with the tagged licence, supported by an OTRS ticket I recently handled. --Mdann52talk to me! 17:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Mdann52: could you, please, link the permission ticket here for future tracking purposes? (The one concerning this image.) Ankry (talk) 06:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Ankry: this is a unassociated image to the ticket, however it is mentioned in the ticket. I can't remember the number off the top of my head, I'll take a look and see what I can find. --Mdann52talk to me! 21:13, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Mdann52: could you, please, link the permission ticket here for future tracking purposes? (The one concerning this image.) Ankry (talk) 06:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: Honestly, I fail to see how this statisfies com:IDENT Natuur12 (talk) 16:52, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
File with no license template. Uploded to Flickr after upload to commons Jarekt (talk) 13:55, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Hi All. This file is created and uploaded by me. I am in contact with this person, and he gave me his photo, With his permission I am using his image with related article to him. I do not know what category suits best, but yeah this picture is given to me, and he gave me instruction to scan it. When I upload it to Commons, the photo was tagged for deletion. So I do not know what to do now. I need your help. Please help me, what can I do now in this scenario? FWd82 (talk) 17:34, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- FWd82, I would start with reading COM:OTRS than you will need to figure out the copyright status of this photograph. If the person who gave it to you took the photograph or inherited it than this person can release it under any license he wants (for example {{Cc-by-4.0}} or {{CC-zero}}). Also depending on the country you are from, the image might be already PD, you should check Commons:Copyright rules by territory. --Jarekt (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Jarekt Hi thanks for the help. I just added {'{self|cc-by-sa-4.0}'} (Quotations just to convey my message and not intrupted by Wiki). I hope this will resolve the issue, if not please tell me, I do not know what to do. What tag I need to put where? Kindly guide me. Thanks --FWd82 (talk) 19:11, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- FWd82 only copyright-holder (usually photographer) of the photo can choose a license like {{Cc-by-4.0}}. If you are not the photographer or heir of the photographer than you need to ask the copyright-holder to send the permission to OTRS. Please read COM:OTRS so you know what to do. --Jarekt (talk) 19:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Jarekt Hi! I am happy because I am photographer and actually I have scanned this photo and upload it to Commons. So what can I do now? If this solves the problem, please let me know what should and what tag I add? Thanks for the help so far.
- PS: The personality in photo is actually my Grandfather. :)
- That is great. If you are the photographer and since it was published before, than you still need to email permission to OTRS. You should also put your name in the author field and change the date to when the photo was taken (may be it is). Also it would be better if you upload the original photo not a scan of the book cover, but that is optional.--Jarekt (talk) 13:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- FWd82, Thanks for the clarification; however since the photo was published before, than you still need to email permission to OTRS team. Please read COM:OTRS on how to do it. The process is quite simple. --Jarekt (talk) 12:52, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: It is unlikely that the subject of a photo actuallyowns the copyright. We need an OTRS license from the actual photographer. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Image is from a copyrighted publication http://bulletin.geoscienceworld.org/content/121/5-6/869 with © 2009 Geological Society of America. No evidence found to support a "PD-ineligible" licence is appropriate or valid. On the contrary, the image includes e.g. representations of rock distributions and angles of tilt that are likely to be the result of the authors' original scientific research. This mage should be deleted because the copyright licence on the source web page is not compatible with Wikimedia Commons. GeoWriter (talk) 16:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Keep (from original uploader) I have been wondering about this a bit myself, and actually was hoping someone would nominate it for deletion so that I could have this discussion. Hear me out. My argument for retaining it goes like this: that the creator of the image claims an image is copyright protected and has marked it as such doesn't necessarily protect it: a photo taken by a US naval midshipman in the course of his duties and then uploaded as fully copyright protected on Flickr cannot be copyright protected because it was created by a member of the US military in the course of his duties and nothing by such persons can be copyright protected-- so the presence of one kind of claim of copyright on a an image by its creator I don't think necessarily means it cannot be uploaded to Commons under a different kind of copyright. Now, that the images represent the result of the authors' own original research is not in dispute, but the presentation of this "research" in the form of an illustration is a presentation of "facts", and facts, like ideas, are not tangible and therefore not copyrightable because they do not "come from" the person who is illustrating them: the patterns of rock types visible on the surface of a caldera are facts about the caldera, and in theory could be discovered by anyone looking at those exact same rocks. I think the real question, however, hinges on the presentation of those facts: are they somehow "artistic" or representative of the personality of the creator? As a line drawing specifically devoid of artistic personality but only showing "the facts", I claim it falls into the same category of images as most patent illustrations: complicated, perhaps, but achievable by anyone examining and illustrating the same device ("sweat of the brow" in producing such an illustration having no bearing in US copyright law). I believe there is no room for creative freedom in such a drawing: one cannot decide, for example, to make a volcano deliberately look taller "for poetic effect", because then it could not be used in a scientific journal. And if the author tried to insert it, the editor wouldn't publish it. So while I grant that the text of the article is entitled to copyright in that the words chosen by the authors and their style of presentation of the facts are the result of their personalities, I claim that the illustrations are not. KDS4444 (talk) 19:38, 8 December 2015 (UTC)- Delete It seems virtually all maps are covered. So be it. KDS4444 (talk) 04:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
- I understand your general point about facts not being copyrightable, and it's true that facts are reproduced in some types of diagrams under some specific circumstances, but I don't think that is the situation for is particular image. Ironically, and contrary to your belief, it is a fact that a few limited types of non-factual information are accepted by publishers of scientific books and journals, because much of science is about best interpretations of incomplete data, rather than facts. (I'm not saying that facts don't play a big part in science, of course they do).
- Publishers of textbooks and journals have devised a payment and attribution system to allow them to legally include already-copyrighted diagrams in their publications, without modification of the original, in effect copy and paste. You are claiming that you can copy and paste copyrighted diagrams into and across Wikimedia Commons and Wikipedias. I think that your approach is not allowed by copyright law, because the copyright holder has not agreed to publication on Wikimedia's terms.
- Do you think you have found an "absence of creativity in scientific diagrams" loophole in international copyright law that these multi-billion dollar publishing corporations have never thought of? They would love to be able to claim that diagrams (of other publishers, of course) are not copyrightable, because it would save them money on copyright fees. I suggest that they don't do this because copyright laws do not allow it.
- This image has been copyrighted by the publisher of the journal, and this will have been agreed by the authors of the image as a condition of publication in the journal. The copyright of this journal image is not subject to the law you mention, that mandates unchangeable public domain copyright (in the US) for work produced by employees of the US Federal Government, because that law applies only to employees of the US Federal Government.
- I think your argument is built on a false premise that, in your opinion, the image contains only facts and is devoid of personal interpretation or creativity. The image shows fewer facts than you seem to think. It's not an aerial photo, it's a drawing, so inaccuracies are unavoidable. The distribution of rock types shown in the map is not factual. It is a "best interpretation" of the limited evidence found from a set of discontinuous exposed outcrops of rocks, modified for display at the scales and resolutions allowed by the journal publisher. Ten geologists would produce ten different maps, even if the differences were only small, and each map would have its own copyright. (If these ten geologists were mapping the area as a student fieldwork exam and they all submitted the same identical map, it's quite likely that they would be punished for cheating, because it would be clear to the examiner that incomplete evidence is extremely unlikely to produce ten identical maps). The cross-sectional arrangement of underground subsurface layers is also an interpretation by the authors, because nobody knows the complete factual layout of the rock layers underground. Again the depiction will be a best interpretation subject to various personal biases as well as compromises and limitations linked to printing of the image. Even if the distribution of rocks was known in great detail, it would be too complex to show factually on a small diagram. Even if boreholes have been drilled, the representation of rock structure in the gaps between the boreholes cannot be factual because it is actually unknown. I think there is also additional evidence that these authors have exercised their creative freedom and interpretation in other ways e.g.their representation of the coastal outline of the island on the map is not factual, because the coast shows only the curves that the authors decided to include.
- I am convinced that this image has a copyright status that is not allowed on Wikipedia/Wikimedia Commons and therefore I suggest that it should be deleted. GeoWriter (talk) 22:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: While it is true that facts cannot be copyrighted and that a simple graph of a data set or sets such as those produced by MS Excel cannot have a copyright, an interpretive map such as this certainly has a copyright. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:13, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Queryzo as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: owner is Urbán Tamás, permission is missing
Converted by me to DR, as this needs some discussion. The source website states "FORTEPAN ©2010-2014. under Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-3.0 licence". However, this does not necessarily include this image. -- Túrelio (talk) 17:00, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- @Queryzo and Túrelio: Fortepan is an online photo archives. All of the images are licensed under Creative Commons CC-BY-SA-3.0 and can be freely used. If you wish to publish any of them, please give the credit in the following format: FOTO:FORTEPAN / name of donor. See the sourcelink. --Pallerti (talk) 18:27, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: While Fortepan has a CC-BY-SA license on it, it says nothing about how it acquired the rights to this and all of its other images. I strongly suspect COM:LIcense laundering. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:17, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Queryzo as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: movie screenshot, seems not to be free May be "PD-US no notice" or "not renewed". This is from "Between Two Women" (1937). Yann (talk) 17:15, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Queryzo as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: uploader is not the owner, assumed copyvio from same user: File:Between500.jpg Might be "PD-US no notice" or "PD-US not renewed". Yann (talk) 17:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:26, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Files in Category:Bruno Paul
[edit]Copyright violation, the creator of these drawings de:Bruno Paul died in 1968, so his works won't come into public domain before 2039. Permission from Flickr should rely on the US copyright law, but German copyright law is also to apply here.
- In theory should we not rely on when the drawings/paintings were first published. Before 1923? If so they would be PD. Of course we would have to find out if the ones with the 1910 in there label were published before 1923. Rybkovich (talk) 21:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
--Every file states the year and the book/journal it was published in and every one except for the stamp are before 1923 so they are public domain as stated. Rybkovich (talk) 22:23, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- But they aren't in public domain in Germany where these drawings were published first.--Correlatio (talk) 14:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- Something that was published before 1923 may not be in the public domain in Germany? Rybkovich (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- But they aren't in public domain in Germany where these drawings were published first.--Correlatio (talk) 14:06, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
- File:"L'oncle de l'Europe" devant l'objectif caricatural - images anglaises, françaises, italiennes, allemandes, autrichiennes, hollandaises, belges, suisses, espagnoles, portugaises, américaines, etc. (14776522725).jpg
- File:03 12 096 Simplicissimus 1898 H12 S96.jpg
- File:Skämtbilden och dess historia i konsten (1910) (14578238190).jpg
- File:Skämtbilden och dess historia i konsten (1910) (14741930116).jpg
- File:Skämtbilden och dess historia i konsten (1910) (14741930676).jpg
- File:Skämtbilden och dess historia i konsten (1910) (14764600852).jpg
- File:Skämtbilden och dess historia i konsten (1910) (14784795413).jpg
- File:Stamp Germany 1996 Briefmarke Ludwig Thoma.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14578238190).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14741930116).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14741930676).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14764600852).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(14784795413).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Correlatio (talk) 18:37, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: 1923 is relevant only if it can be shown that a work was first published in the USA. Since these are by a German, that seems unlikely. He died in 1968, so these will be PD on 1/1/2039. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:30, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
It is unlikely that this is out of copyright. František Jozef Turček died in 1977. The picture comes form an archive, and that archive may have released the picture to the uploader for onward use, but I believe we need to see the proof of that via Commons:OTRS for it to remain Timtrent (talk) 20:45, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
I have obtained the image from the family archive of son of FJ Turček - Ivan Turček - for such purposes as that wiki-page is. I will obtain OTRS permission from him. Benjamín Jarčuška (talk) 21:12, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: The copyright belongs to the photographer, not the owner of a copy of the image. Therefore the owner of the family archive cannot freely license the image -- the license must come from the photographer or his heirs. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:33, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
Old file. Not own work. Could be PD but we need evidence for that. Natuur12 (talk) 23:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
- Natuur12, not that old, year 2000, so own work is quite likely while PD-old is excluded. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 07:18, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- It looks older than 2000 which makes me doubt and it looks like a studio portrait. It is going to need some explaining. Natuur12 (talk) 14:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
- Looks older but Wiesław Ptak lived in 1941-2004, so the year 2000 is adequate to the age of 60 for the man in the picture. I see another problem: we need confirmation that User:PXP it is Wojciech Plewiński (the author) or he has the rights to upload the picture. Michał Sobkowski (talk) 07:56, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
- It looks older than 2000 which makes me doubt and it looks like a studio portrait. It is going to need some explaining. Natuur12 (talk) 14:11, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Deleted: . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:35, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
