Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/01/02

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Commons logo
Commons logo

This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests.

You can visit the most recent archive here.

Archive
Archive
Archive January 2nd, 2016
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Two identical pictures in the Category:Dolrachala Karel61 (talk) 10:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: processed as dupe Denniss (talk) 10:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Файл мой и он неправильный, не хочу вводить в заблуждение. Лещенко Юрий (talk) 10:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Túrelio 2 January 2016. --Achim (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Не хочу участвовать. Лещенко Юрий (talk) 10:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: DR + speedy by author. --Achim (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope per Commons:ADVERT Optimist on the run (talk) 11:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Blatant spam - gone Herby talk thyme 14:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Picture collection must collect from local picture from Commons, please upload first every picture to Commons and then collect it from those. Please take a look at File:Collage Rome.jpg as an example how to do it. See Commons:Collages for details. Motopark (talk) 11:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Obvious copyvio. Mys_721tx (talk) 17:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 14:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Denniss (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep Not notable? Take a look at en:Actiance. --Steinsplitter (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Natuur12 (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

advertisment or whatever but not in scope Avron (talk) 20:10, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Questionable notability of the text. Derivative use of the photo, unlikely to be own work Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 18:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

wrong spelling


Deleted: Empty & bad name. --Achim (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

There is a watermark on this image. Going for a quick search for the name on this watermark, I've come across some Facebook and Youtube channels of where this image could come from. Probably the person who uploaded that didn't have permission to upload it on Youtube, or used it under the fair use provision. In both cases, this image is not free (contradicting to the permission given by the upload on Commons). Wiki13 talk 15:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio, cut from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d9KHQm0sYbM . --Achim (talk) 20:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Seems copied from the internet. Probably not "own work". Possible copyright violation. Takeaway (talk) 18:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Copyvio. --Achim (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unused logo with wrong licence or missing permission, out of scope as textlogo without use in any article Bjarlin (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: spam Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

no quiero que siga esta foto en wikimedia El hobbit Guisen (talk) 17:34, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: No reason to delete Natuur12 (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
2.137.164.226 12:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Again no reason to delete --JuTa 16:54, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

1976 Tosi Beleffi in Friuli con Zamberletti.jpg Giomatobe (talk) 19:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

* Request to cancel this deletion request the request has been put on a service page (used to assist users from it.wiki in uploading files to Commons). It's clearly a mistake. --L736E (talk) 11:05, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy closed: Mistake DR. --Amitie 10g (talk) 02:26, 4 January 2016 (UTC) (Non-admin closure)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

violazione copyright LaGraziaFiorente (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Mistake DR, as above. --Jaqen (talk) 20:13, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

??? → en:76 (gas station) --Leyo 14:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Here is one more article: ja:76 (フィリップス66). The orange logo seems to be the old logo of the company, see the photos there, the red one is the new one then. Why isn't the new red logo en:File:Union 76 Logo.svg on Commons, but only the old one? --Bjarlin (talk) 20:06, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the red logo on the English Wikipedia fair use, a "non-free logo" and copyrighted, while this logo shall be ineligible for copyright? Sorry, but that makes no sense, they look both the same, they only have another colour. They should both have the same licence. If the logo on the English Wikipedia is fair use and non-free, then this would also be. If not, then the other has a wrong licence. --Bjarlin (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, correction, this logo has no textlogo licence, it has a CC 4.0 International licence. How could that be? The other logo is fair use and this one has a CC licence? That's not possible, there's something wrong. That has to be checked. --Bjarlin (talk) 20:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{PD-textlogo}} would be correct. --Leyo 22:18, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Withdrawn. Leyo 22:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright notice on image, unlikely to be own work Ytoyoda (talk) 01:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Domdomegg (talk) 23:23, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 04:50, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Extremely low quality, out of scope, used for vandalism on en.wikipedia.org IronGargoyle (talk) 21:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by HJ Mitchell: Mass deletion of pages added by No1kippo

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image found here and elsewhere on social media, unlikely to be uploader's own work. Ytoyoda (talk) 00:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Based on uploader's other works and lack of useful source info, unlikely to be own work Ytoyoda (talk) 01:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Paulina_Vega_Dieppa_Airport.jpg Carlita112001 (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, small photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 10:11, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

the file should be deleted cause has been added just for practise and there is no clear certanty on the author Giomatobe (talk) 20:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: 1976 photograph of Italy, it's PD in the USA too per URAA SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 12:46, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

the file should be deleted cause has been added just for practise and there is no clear certanty on the author Giomatobe (talk) 20:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: 1984 photograph taken in Italy. While it can be PD in Italy is not PD in the USA per URAA-1996 SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 12:43, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Mejiamejia (talk · contribs)

[edit]

A multitude of personal images. Please see the project scope.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 07:03, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Mejiamejia (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Personal images. Out of project scope.

Wiki13 talk 15:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Materialscientist (talk) 05:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload.. FJBaur Press (talk) 13:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 12:40, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload.. FJBaur Press (talk) 13:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:34, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload FJBaur Press (talk) 13:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading week. Taivo (talk) 12:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload FJBaur Press (talk) 13:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:37, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload FJBaur Press (talk) 13:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload.. FJBaur Press (talk) 13:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unexpected upload FJBaur Press (talk) 13:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, uploader's request on uploading day. Taivo (talk) 12:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This interface is copyright Microsoft. Derivative works, such as this screenshot, cannot be freely licenced. William Avery (talk) 20:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 17:55, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Derivative work, screenshot of non-free OS. ViperSnake151 (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Yann (talk) 17:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation (there's not any CC-BY-SA-3.0 on the source). 128.68.57.72 00:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

See COM:DW.

Stefan2 (talk) 00:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope edit of another file, also uncredited to original author. FunkMonk (talk) 01:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@User:FunkMonk: Delete this all you want. In fact, speedy delete all the images listed here that look out of scope as uploader requested deletion. If no one else does it I'll do it after looking over COM:CSD. Hop on Bananas (talk) 02:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Möglicherweise Urheberrechtsverletzung DOWIMA (talk) 02:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Die Google Bilder-Suche lässt erahnen, dass das Werk keinesfalls vom User selbst gemacht wurde. --Tombo208 (talk) 11:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das Bild habe ich von ArazhulHD persönlich zugeschickt bekommen. Beweis bei Anfrage. --Skayonas


Deleted: COM:OTRS required Krd 07:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Mögliche Urheberrechtsverletzung DOWIMA (talk) 02:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: COM:OTRS required Krd 07:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Screenshot of copyrighted game (http://www.nttgame.com/phantomers/en/) – publisher doesn't use the stated libre license czar 02:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Screenshot of copyrighted game (http://www.nttgame.com/phantomers/en/) – publisher doesn't use the stated libre license czar 02:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 06:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 06:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 06:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 06:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Dasratraimeghwar (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage. Bitte löschen. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage.Bitte löschen. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage.Bitte löschen. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Da es sich nicht um ein Bild von mir handelt, ziehe ich den LA hierfür zurück. --Bielibob (talk) 19:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: withdrawn Krd 07:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Per Commons:Nudity. Does not have a description and is of low quality. Therefore not worth keeping around. Wiki13 talk 14:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Most likely self-promotion, see words like "EXCLUSIVE". Therefore not useful for Wikimedia projects and out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 14:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Coast123 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Look like self-promotion. Not in use anywhere. Likely to be out of Commons:Project scope.

Wiki13 talk 14:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by HKelsey25 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF. Uploaded in a row on 29.12.2015 for en:Miss High School America.

Gunnex (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Only used on the English Wikipedia, where the subject's article was speedily deleted in June 2014 as a hoax. Out of project scope. xplicit 07:08, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination - out of scope. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Logo / graphic stated as own work. No usage on Wikimedia projects. No obvious educational use therefore out of Commons:Project scope. mattbr 16:52, 20 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Didym (talk) 15:47, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: per discussion Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

In the original form, at source, this file was readable. However only a thumbnail has been uploaded to Commons which even at largest size is illegible. Either please upload a version large enough to read, or consider deleting this file. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as is, the thumbnail is unreadable but the full-sized version is completely legible, at least to me. In fact, the version I uploaded is the original-sized version. Also @Ellin Beltz, why did you remove the deletion request notice from the file page? Hop on Bananas (talk) 17:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination I subsequently found how to open the file to full size. Perhaps it was a caching issue which kept it small? Ellin Beltz (talk) 22:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per discussion Krd 07:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Das Cover ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Das eigenhändige Foto des Covers setzt den Rechtsschutz nicht aus und ist keineswegs ein "eigenes Werk" DocNöck (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not below the threshold of originality in its home country (Italy) Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not below the threshold of originality in its home country (Spain) Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not below the threshold of originality Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no section for Oman. --Leyo 21:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Purely promotional image, only used on uploader's userpage for self promotion. And no proof that author holds rights to the cover photos. P 1 9 9   02:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Purely promotional image, only used on uploader's userpage for self promotion. And no proof that author holds rights to the cover photos. P 1 9 9   02:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Appears to be taken from the subject's Instagram account, judging by the dimensions Ytoyoda (talk) 02:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Incorrect structure (see dispute template), not used in any article. Leyo 02:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete per nom. The labels do appear to be residue identifiers as a local region of a large protein (agrees with use at en:User:Joilybbi/5-HT3 antagonists drug discovery and development), but in that respect it's also incorrect, since the residues would be peptide chains (with amide bonds) not isolated amino acids (with carboxyls). And the structure of the Granisetron ligand looks incorrect (lower portion fused [3.2.0] rather than bridged [3.3.1])--possibly just poor choice of perspective, but again making it further less educationally useful). DMacks (talk) 05:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Orphaned/replaced by File:Von-Richter Reaction V3.svg (fixes in steps 1 and 2). Leyo 03:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personl photo which would have little to no scope The Plonker (talk) 05:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Roundel of the Ukrainian Naval Aviation.svg. Kwasura (talk) 05:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with you, raster version of his SVG: useless. --F l a n k e r (talk) 19:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support. --Kwasura (talk) 03:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 07:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Aamir Khan Lepzerrin (talk · contribs)

[edit]

All images seem to have been copied from elsewhere on the internet and uploaded as "own work". Possible copyright violations.

Takeaway (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused {{Userpage image}} Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 06:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by No1kippo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Nonsense upload of a seemingly copyrighted image. The image has nothing to do with the file name and the description. Not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 10:38, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Steinsplitter (talk) 10:45, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by No1kippo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Low quality private / nonsense image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. One image was already used to vandalize in en:Dr. Seuss' How the Grinch Stole Christmas (film).

Ies (talk) 18:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 07:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal file, out of scope. C messier (talk) 23:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unknown sources used to make this file. Probably a mix of copyrighted material used to troll someone. C messier (talk) 23:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused photo of a non-notable personal C messier (talk) 10:12, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal photo, out of scope. C messier (talk) 12:00, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused photo, vandalism, possible copyright violation C messier (talk) 12:03, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal photo C messier (talk) 12:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No indication of free license, the same photo is also here http://longnhanphohien.com/long-nhan-pho-hien/ C messier (talk) 14:36, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:07, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

quite impropable it is an own work, the photo is on the net at least since March 2014, http://www.dhammathai.org/sounds/somphop.php C messier (talk) 14:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:05, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused photo of a non notable person, out of scope C messier (talk) 14:40, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:04, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not own work, copyright violation see http://zulumakeba.blogspot.gr/ C messier (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of file:Іменна вогнепальна зброя.png. Kwasura (talk) 01:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: different image, no reason for deletion Krd 09:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of file:Іменна вогнепальна зброя.png. Kwasura (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: different image, no reason for deletion Krd 09:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

It certainly does meet the threshold for originality in my view. This is not simple shapes. Anna F remote (talk) 01:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is of simple geometrical shapes and the lettering is of standard fonts. I don't think it meets the threshold for originality.
Logos such as this, and this are also uploaded to the Commons with the same tag.
-JesseW900 (talk) 01:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: borderline case; I consider this below too Krd 09:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The uploader didnt provide a reliable source of the use from the rights of the photo. TheBellaTwins1445 (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no evidence given to doubt own work Krd 09:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

By mistake, this edit of an original photo licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 (which requires that remixes of the photo be licensed in the same way) was uploaded under the GNU Free Documentation License. Radiant Urbanism (talk) 01:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 09:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

I just uploaded this file. I don't think i used the correct copyright licence, given this is technically a traffic control device. Ltgrxr (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Not a reason to delete -- I corrected the license. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Duplicates File:To plate.svg which is 10 years older than this file. –Fredddie 00:59, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted Unused dupe. (Requested by uploader within an hour of uploading - I would have honored the first request, per prompt uploader request.) -- Infrogmation of New Orleans (talk) 04:36, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

suspected copyright violation Offenbacherjung (talk) 04:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

there is no copyright violation involved. the picture is intended for the use with the specific entry as it is the official theatrical poster of the film. the deletion request is objected by the copyright holder.


Kept: OTRS #2016010210007154.. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This is surely a (an?) historic moment, but I don't think we have the copyright on this image. This is more likely than not a still image from an amateur video and not from the White House. I only searched for a little bit but didn't find any clear authorship attributions. You can find unattributed copies by searching YouTube for George W. Bush Booker Elementary School 9/11. All in all, this listing doesn't give us a source and I've found no evidence that this video belongs to the POTUS Photography Office. Eric Draper's iconic photos are all from the classroom where Bush is briefed after leaving the room where he read to the children (pictured in this image). czar 05:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delete: Spent a good deal of time trying to find out who the photo/videographer was for this as well (mostly out of genuine personal curiosity) and was unable to locate this information. Poked around on various .GOV sites as well -- both current versions and via Internet Archive's Wayback Machine -- and still didn't turn up anything. Even the BBC doesn't source it [1]. It doesn't have to belong to the Photog Offc., just an employee or someone working on behalf of either the U.S. or State of Florida Governments. The $64,000 Question is who actually filmed it? Until that can be answered definitively, we should remove the photo from our archive here on Commons as the provenance of this content is entirely unknown. --dsprc (talk) 08:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Mural completed in 2005 (see bottom right). There is no freedom of panorama in the United States, per COM:PACUSA. Magnolia677 (talk) 05:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file shows Chumar and Demchok as not part of Jammu & Kashmir and both of these are under control of Indian administration. 2001:56A:73DC:4A00:B5F9:1370:E3D1:4758 06:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ehm, what is the reason for deletion? Btw: in this map light grey means "controversial" and as far as I know China wants to occupy Demchok. NNW 12:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: THe map is widely used and cannot be deleted for this reason. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image of table of text, with layout errors (border alignment, line-wrap), long ago replaced at en:Cognitive sociolinguistics by wikitable DMacks (talk) 07:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 07:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Personal picture of a non notable person, out of scope EvilFreD overleg 07:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This image is possibly non-free, as an exact copy has been found on the University of the Ozarks Facebook page with little to no copyright information. The summary of this image also does not help clear up the copyright, as it does not have the correct data. LoremIpsumDolorSitAsmet (talk) 07:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Screenshot of a copyrighted software. Яй (talk) 08:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No FoP in Kazakhstan. Яй (talk) 08:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused image of a non-notable person. Richard Avery (talk) 08:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Per COM:EDUSE. Out of sope Rodrigolopes (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:24, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyvios Please read COM:OTRS an send the authorization. Rodrigolopes (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:24, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

For personal reasons and an in order to bring the article up to date, Prof. Michael Wolter requests the deletion of his photograph from the article. If desired, he will be pleased to provide an alternative image to improve the quality of the article. We hope for your kind understanding regarding this request. Yours sincerely Anne Wächtershäuser on behalf of Prof. Wolter/ Aus persönlichen Gründen und zur Aktualisierung des Portraits bittet Professor Wolter um die Löschung der Bilddatei aus dem Artikel. Gerne stellt er aber zur Verbesserung der Qualität des Artikels ein alternatives Bild zur Verfügung, sofern dies erwünscht ist. Ich bitte hinsichtlich dieses Einwandes um Ihr Verständnis. Herzliche Grüße i.A. Anne Wächstershäuser, studentische Hilfskraft am Lehrstuhl Prof. Dr. Michael Wolter Nt-theo (talk) 11:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Einfach die alte Datei überschreiben mit einem neuen Bild (Freigabe vom Fotographen von diesem mailen lassen). Überschreiben von mir ausdrücklich erlaubt/erwünscht. Anschließend Löschung der bisherigen Datei.--Tohma (talk) 12:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: We rarely delete images at the request of the subject and never at the request of anonymous third parties who claim to represent the subject. Also, do not upload a different image over this one as suggested above -- that is a serious violation of Commons rules. If Wolter provides a new freely licensed image (with a different file name), the editors at WP:DE will be free to choose which one they want to use. If they choose the new image, we may delete this one if Wolter himself requests it via an e-mail to OTRS. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unused personal photo, not sure about scope wise Look at the stars (talk) 11:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Replaced by File:Paul Delaroche - L’assassinat du duc de Guise au château de Blois en 1588 - Google Art Project.jpg Zoupan (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 12:37, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Replaced by File:Paul Delaroche - L’assassinat du duc de Guise au château de Blois en 1588 - Google Art Project.jpg Zoupan (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: In use. Yann (talk) 12:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Іменна вогнепальна зброя.png Kwasura (talk) 01:40, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: This is a JPEG, which is better for pictures. Yann (talk) 12:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Source says nothing about a cc0 license and the special A in the logo and custom effects would likely not qualify this image for pd-textlogo qualification either czar 02:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:39, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Roundel of the Ukrainian Naval Aviation.svg. Kwasura (talk) 05:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Ukrainian Armed force emblem 1992.svg Kwasura (talk) 06:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 07:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC) Seemoramee (talk) 15:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)it's quality suffered after conversion process. Any suggestions? Thank you.Seemoramee (talk) 15:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)seemoramee[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Bad file format. Replacement is here Rehman 07:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Bad file format. Replacement is here Rehman 07:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep: not according to the fiel formats listed here: [3]. Ww2censor (talk) 00:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

this is not an "own work" 2003:45:5C21:3401:4C59:D653:E26F:FD90 09:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: http://www.bitajarod.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/MBC1-MBC-MASR-the-Voice-S3-Battle-1-Assis-team-winner-Omar-Dean.jpg Yann (talk) 12:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

(c) privat. OTRS needed. 217.50.117.31 09:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation : https://www.flickr.com/photos/juanemergencias/16386507314 Kyah117 [Let's talk about it!] 10:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto no es de el hobbit guisen 2.137.164.226 12:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:38, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal photo Look at the stars (talk) 12:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto no es de el hobbit guisen 2.137.164.226 12:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto no es de el hobbit guisen 2.137.164.226 12:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Per Commons:Stamps/Public domain#United Kingdom DrKay (talk) 12:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

License on flickr has been changed to all rights reserved. Bentley does not appear to own the copyright. DrKay (talk) 12:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unused personal photo 95.213.182.5 12:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete The thing where he sits can very well be copyrighted art. No freedom of panorama in Iceland for that. Taivo (talk) 17:43, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Product packaging featuring art that is likely copyrighted Themightyquill (talk) 12:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation: owned by Werner Bischof/Magnum, per [4]. DrKay (talk) 12:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Looks to be a commercially purchased product, rather than something made by the photographer. As such, copyright still applies. Themightyquill (talk) 12:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not sure why this was undeleted – at least not in the state the file description is in now. Firstly, a file can't be both in the public domain (=not covered by copyright) and covered by a copyright license (which can only apply to copyrighted works). Secondly, if the author is unknown, how can one make the assertion that they died more than 70 years ago? There is no evidence that the photo was published anonymously, the date of the photo isn't really known either, and there is no source country identified, so there's nothing to support a {{PD-anon-70-EU}} tagging or similar. Thirdly, there is no PD rationale for the US. LX (talk, contribs) 13:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: I assume that the Admin who undleted it did so because it was an unknown author 70 years after creation. However, the subject is from Catalonia, so the old Spanish rule, which is 80 years from creation applies in any event. An Admin ten years from now can decide if "anonymous" can be applied here. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not used anywhere globally. No descriptive filename, doubts about permission. Could be a personal image, would then be out of Commons:Project scope Wiki13 talk 13:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not used anywhere globally. No descriptive filename, doubts about permission. Could be a personal image, would then be out of Commons:Project scope Wiki13 talk 13:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: https://pp.vk.me/c628727/v628727591/392d/mFxODYUYaSw.jpg Yann (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Small image with bad qulaity. EVC marked though the image. What does it mean? Description is not useful in figuring this out.. Not used anywhere. Wiki13 talk 13:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 13:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 13:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:50, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation of trademarked logo. Takeaway (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Too complex, no permission. Yann (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 14:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 14:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Wiki13 talk 14:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation. Gunnar S. Gestsson, the painter of this painting died on the 24th of June, 1980. This painting is from the year 1970, as per the description from the uploader of this image. The copyright therm in iceland is 70 years after the death of the author + end of the year. Snaevar (talk) 14:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation of logo of http://www.smulweb.nl/ Takeaway (talk) 14:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: DR of http://www.apk20.com/image/icon-487929 Yann (talk) 12:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage.Bitte löschen. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das Urheberrecht wird da nicht berührt. Tatsächlich gilt auf Friedhöfen sogar Panoramafreiheit. --Magnus (talk) 18:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tsungam! In der Satzung ist das gewerbsmäßige Fotographieren nicht erlaubt. Die Lizensierung würde aber eine kommerzielle Nutzung erlauben. Da ist die Frage, ob der Urheber mit verantwortlich ist. So gibt es Fälle, wo die kommerzielle Weiterverwertung untersagt werden kann. Durch die Commonslizensierung wäre sie aber erlaubt. Siehe hier: [5]. Tendiere auch zu deiner Sicht, aber würde einfach bei der Friedhofs GmbH fragen wollen und die Bilder neu hochladen. --Bielibob (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2016

(UTC)

Nachtrag: Mir ist dabei der Unterschied zwischen Kommerzieller Nutzung und eigener Gewerbsmäßigkeit schon klar. --Bielibob (talk) 14:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: w:de:Panoramafreiheit#Deutschland
Dieses Bild einer geschützten Arbeit fällt unter den Artikel § 59 des deutschen Urheberrechtsgesetzes, nach dem es „zulässig ist, Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden, mit Mitteln der Malerei oder Graphik, durch Lichtbild oder durch Film zu vervielfältigen, zu verbreiten und öffentlich wiederzugeben. “
Die Grabplatten sind nicht erkennbar, es ist ein oeffentlicher Platz, und klar permanent. Die Friedhofssatzung kann kein Bundesrecht brechen. Zusammengefasst: Was auch immer die Satzung schreibt ist Quark. :-). Klar  Keep. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Bielibob as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Unklar, ob Veröffentlichung erlaubt, will ich klären. Bitte daher löschen. Evt. folgt erneuter Upload später. Stefan2 (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not sure about the license or the following possible commercial use. I want to clear the case. --Bielibob (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage.Bitte löschen. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:05, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Das Urheberrecht wird da nicht berührt. Tatsächlich gilt auf Friedhöfen sogar Panoramafreiheit. --Magnus (talk) 18:38, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Tsungam! In der Satzung ist das gewerbsmäßige Fotographieren nicht erlaubt. Die Lizensierung würde aber eine kommerzielle Nutzung erlauben. Da ist die Frage, ob der Urheber mit verantwortlich ist. So gibt es Fälle, wo die kommerzielle Weiterverwertung untersagt werden kann. Durch die Commonslizensierung wäre sie aber erlaubt. Siehe hier: [6]. Tendiere auch zu deiner Sicht, aber würde einfach bei der Friedhofs GmbH fragen wollen und die Bilder neu hochladen. --Bielibob (talk) 14:08, 2 January 2016

(UTC)

Nachtrag: Mir ist dabei der Unterschied zwischen Kommerzieller Nutzung und eigener Gewerbsmäßigkeit schon klar. --Bielibob (talk) 14:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
FYI: w:de:Panoramafreiheit#Deutschland
Dieses Bild einer geschützten Arbeit fällt unter den Artikel § 59 des deutschen Urheberrechtsgesetzes, nach dem es „zulässig ist, Werke, die sich bleibend an öffentlichen Wegen, Straßen oder Plätzen befinden, mit Mitteln der Malerei oder Graphik, durch Lichtbild oder durch Film zu vervielfältigen, zu verbreiten und öffentlich wiederzugeben. “
Die Grabplatten sind nicht erkennbar, es ist ein oeffentlicher Platz, und klar permanent. Die Friedhofssatzung kann kein Bundesrecht brechen. Zusammengefasst: Was auch immer die Satzung schreibt ist Quark. :-). Klar  Keep. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:52, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This file was initially tagged by Bielibob as Speedy (speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: Unklar, ob Veröffentlichung erlaubt, will ich klären. Bitte daher löschen. Evt. folgt erneuter Upload später. Stefan2 (talk) 14:46, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'm not sure about the license or the following possible commercial use. I want to clear the case. --Bielibob (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

According to the description a capture from a movie, which is, unless more info is given about the permission, copyrighted and should be deleted Wiki13 talk 15:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

[7] May not be own work. 1989 15:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Duplicate of File:125x200 px Misra.jpg. 1989 15:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Duplicate of File:Ksblogo.png. 1989 15:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional 1989 15:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Could be useful. Yann (talk) 12:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No FoP in the US, no evidence the pole is PD in the US Thank god for aircon (talk) 14:38, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Policy is to use FOP status of the country where the work is located -- there are many US sculptors whose work in UK or Germany is on Commons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:01, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Nandi Group (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Complex logos, if they are in scope they need apermission

Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:08, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:30, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Lower resolution duplicate of File:(Nina and Edvard by the piano) (4008480240).jpg TommyG (talk) 15:32, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion is okay for me. --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:35, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:12, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not an own work, the source provided is facebook and of more is broken. Also looks like a derivative work Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:13, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:14, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation Paris brune (talk) 23:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We do not delete user talk pages. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:03, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

The picture has watermark and copyright notice in EXIF data. Not an own work. C messier (talk) 12:43, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:02, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto es no es de guiljer 2.137.164.226 12:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: ARR at source, no license review. Yann (talk) 14:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No quiero que siga esta imagen en wikimedia El hobbit Guisen (talk) 17:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Natuur12 (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto no es de el hobbit guisen 2.137.164.226 12:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 14:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

La foto es robada. No es del usuario el hobbit guisen. 83.37.107.143 15:47, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:18, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:20, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:03, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:23, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused document of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:05, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:26, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:37, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:37, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:40, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality out of scope image 200.91.39.154 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Should be in SVG if useful. Yann (talk) 14:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. Should be in SVG if useful. Yann (talk) 14:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality, needlessly censored, unoriginal case of COM:PENIS? -- Tuválkin 16:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:44, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

it cuts out BBC news AND g 105.228.85.90 17:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 14:45, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unneeded Commons screenshot (not in use), with browser window above, out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Seems to be a drivative works of something Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:46, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Zerocervo (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikey to be own works, the source say "www.victortransistor.ch" that leads to https://victortdeluxe.bandcamp.com/ I did not find the image however we can read a "all rights reserved"

Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

1915 poem with multiple authors. Their names and information are almost certainly available from French army records. In order to keep this, it will be necessary to prove that either (a) all of them died before 1946 or (b) all of them have given a free license to this work. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nice shot!--Madelgarius (talk) 17:33, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Looks OK to me. Yann (talk) 14:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

complex logo, iuf it is in scope it need a permission Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:48, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

bad quality, very low resolution better files File:Rogier van der Weyden (1399of1400-1464) - Buste van de H. Jozef - Lissabon Museu Calouste Gulbenkian 21-10-2010 13-11-59. Jozef 21-10-2010 13-11-59.jpg, File:Rogier van der Weyden - St Joseph - WGA25722.jpg Oursana (talk) 17:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. Ceoil (talk) 22:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work, derivative works Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: vykort = postcard --Achim (talk) 20:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:51, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Leah Feldheim (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own works, one PDF and one file derivative from a drawing coming from the pdf

Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Stephen Milborrow (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Those paintings are not free as the painter died in 1982 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Battiss

Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I Stephen Milborrow own the original painting File:Walter Battiss painting "Wandering Nude 2".jpg and allow this image to be reproduced for Wikimedia Commons. Stephen Milborrow (talk) 6 January 2016


Deleted: as above. Owning the painting doesn't give you the copyright. Yann (talk) 14:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Low quality private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose, out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Info: Not worth a penny but user page image. --Achim (talk) 20:23, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not sure if there would be scope for this photo, apart from "messy desks", but likely not 176.53.17.221 18:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Delete No real educational value. Taivo (talk) 17:45, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Oeuvre de VIGDIS (voir http://www.vigdis.paris/img/oeuvres/001.jpg) publiée sur Commons snas autorisation OTRS Habertix (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

obvious mistake, no encyclopedic value, etc F (talk) 18:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

bad picture, and good copies do exist F (talk) 18:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copie de la photo publiée sur https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Helene_Wlodarczyk Habertix (talk) 18:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:54, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:49, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 18:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unused personal image : out of scope Christian Ferrer (talk) 19:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Seems to be scanned from a newspaper 4ing (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Seems to be scanned from a newspaper 4ing (talk) 19:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

out of project scope Didym (talk) 19:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:57, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not own work. jdx Re: 20:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not own work. jdx Re: 20:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-textlogo. Yann (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Without use Wikimasterbz (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 14:59, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Tmcw (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These logos are not below the threshold of originality in the US.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 20:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Not own work, crappy quality. jdx Re: 20:41, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD-textlogo Yann (talk) 15:00, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

No quiero que siga esta foto en wikimedia. El hobbit Guisen (talk) 17:30, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Natuur12 (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

la foto no es de el hobbit guisen. 2.137.164.226 12:06, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no reason for deletion Yann (talk) 14:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

La foto es robada. No pertenece al usuario de el hobbit guisen 83.37.107.143 15:50, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 22:54, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 15:25, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 18:51, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 15:50, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Completely out of focus. Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 16:38, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 15:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 18:19, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . Krd 13:30, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 15:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Yann (talk) 13:16, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 16:49, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as per nom. --P 1 9 9   15:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

A series of toy cars, please see COM:TOYS. The cars were not created by the uploader, so cannot be licensed by them for Commons.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:32, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as per nom. --P 1 9 9   15:13, 27 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 16:22, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by Jualve (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Too low quality to be realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope.

Ies (talk) 16:26, 31 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as per nom. --P 1 9 9   17:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file contains a logo which is definitely not free, of the Technion – Israel Institute of Technology. This is a picture from a slideshow or a book cover, and with no OTRS release approval, it has no place in the Commons. Ldorfman (talk) 21:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this picture shows me. It should not be deleted.Jacobrubinovitz (talk) 14:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This file shows more than you only. There's no OTRS release approval for it and the Technion's logo is certainly not free. Therefore, it should be deleted from the Commons. Ldorfman (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: no permission Krd 18:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope, btw the Yoda character is still under a copyright.--Kopiersperre (talk) 21:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

See watermark. Stefan2 (talk) 22:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Really blurry (low quality), and not in scope IMHO (what is the educational value?). There are much better photos of ladybug. C messier (talk) 22:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation Paris brune (talk) 23:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyright violation Paris brune (talk) 23:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 18:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Incorrect structure (see dispute template); correct alternative in Category:Trifluralin. Leyo 02:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above DMacks (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Incorrect structure (see dispute template); correct alternative in Category:Trifluralin. Leyo 02:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above DMacks (talk) 19:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

besseres Bild vom selben Standort verfügbar: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Vertriebenengedenkst%C3%A4tte_Deisterfriedhof_neu.jpg Mehlauge (talk) 10:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination Krd 10:32, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Відзнака Тернопільської міської ради.gif. Kwasura (talk) 03:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Inferior duplicate of File:Відзнака Тернопільської міської ради.gif. Kwasura (talk) 03:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A sculpture made of chocolate, unlikely to have been made by the photographer. I expect this is copyrighted art. Themightyquill (talk) 12:28, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Sush63 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Because there is no camera data I doubt the uploader's rights to upload this material, which must be provided via Commons:OTRS. There is a commonality between the uploader's ID and the name in one of the pictures, so they may assume that "it is of me, so I have the right to upload it" which is by no means always the case

Timtrent (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:17, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:19, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:36, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Personal image : out of scope. The image is used in a user page, however user page images are allowed for contributors. The only contributions of the user were to upload the image and to create the user page. Commons is not facebook, contibutions should come first. Christian Ferrer (talk) 15:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:54, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:57, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:59, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:13, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:04, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment Birla is a notable company, but may not be free, or simple enough. Yann (talk) 13:25, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: as above. Above TOO. Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Zilma SNReis (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:07, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Possible copyvio: no metadata, and a 1000*1000 version appears here. -mattbuck (Talk) 09:55, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted.      Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk to me) 12:44, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Professional photo, found in many other places. That said, this one is fairly sizable and has metadata. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Abdessamad Sbai (talk · contribs)

[edit]

No confidence that uploader created any of these files, all credited to "self". There are double copies of two images that look like stars, another set of doubles of a file box, another set of doubles of a bit of hand written script. The rest seem to be taken from website borders and such. Probable COM:COPYVIOs without additional information. No metadata, file names in various "joke" or "afafafa" format.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:26, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:15, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Looks like a copyrighted screengrab (note JPG haze, blow-up artifacts, distorted ratio, and heterogenous bottom area), unlikely the (unique, singular) uploader’s own work as claimed. (Unused.) -- Tuválkin 17:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Wikiwlod (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copie de http://perso.numericable.com/andre.wlodarczyk/ (et photos en doublon)

Habertix (talk) 18:47, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Aamir Leghari (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Some unused personal / family images. Some copyvios and the rest very unlikely to be own work to see the size of some images (82px!)

Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Already Published here, no OTRS, no proof that "Denis Gliksman" gave his agreement. Mel22 (talk) 19:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above Natuur12 (talk) 20:20, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A duplicate of better res. file File:Barney Mausoleum in Forest Park, Springfield, Mass (61520).jpg Taterian (talk) 20:52, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 22:14, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was initially tagged by 1Veertje as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: derivative work

Sorry but com:PACKAGING related cases should have a proper DR since those cases can become complicated. Natuur12 (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: The printed design is no insignificant enough nor simple enough. The photo is a DW. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:19, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A duplicate of better res. file File:Entrance to Barney's Mausoleum location, Forest Park, Springfield, Mass (66443).jpg Taterian (talk) 21:02, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:21, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

As source link is given flickr.com without a direct link to the source image. This appears to be a crop of https://www.flickr.com/photos/therevsteve/2115339018/in/photolist-4dVEAo which is unfortunately CC-NC-SA, i.e. with a non-commercial restriction. AFBorchert (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:24, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

A duplicate of better res. file File:Pecousic villa home of Everett H. Barney, Forest Park, Springfield, Mass (61524).jpg Taterian (talk) 21:16, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

unused private image, out of scope Indeedous (talk) 21:27, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.
This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

쓸모없는 파일 외 되 돌릴수 없는 파일 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eszny1367 (talk • contribs) 2014-10-27T09:45:18‎ (UTC)

 Keep PD-textlogo. Fry1989 eh? 04:05, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no comment. :p  revimsg 07:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Out of scope - promotional - unused text logo of non-notable company 1989 15:53, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: unused promotional logo. P 1 9 9   16:56, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

DR started to verify 'facebook' as source, and imho rather commercial advertisements that's not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 21:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: unused promotional logo. P 1 9 9   16:59, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

It's not clear what this file is in the Commons for, as it is not in use and there's no understandable description (who's this man, named Ofer, that is "at home"?). Wikimedia Commons is not a repository for just anything. Ldorfman (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: unused personal photo. P 1 9 9   16:59, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyrighted logo without permission, wrong licence, it's unclear, if this is still a {{PD-textlogo}} and maybe it is out of scope, because it's unused. Bjarlin (talk) 23:01, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   17:00, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Flickr user just signed up; No Camera EXIF; Flickr user is unlikely to own this work. 1989 23:14, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely COM:Flickr washing. P 1 9 9   17:01, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Delete. Painting by a living artist [10]. 2 other versions by the same uploader were deleted earlier. Traumrune (talk) 22:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Basically per nomination; work still under copyright. If a free release for the file is obtained, please forward it to OTRS at permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and nominate the file for undeletion citing the relevant ticket number; thanks. --odder (talk) 23:20, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Incorrect mechanism according to current knowledge, replaced by File:Von-Richter Reaction V3.svg. Leyo 03:15, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Unused file, a newer reaction diagram has replaced it on the en:wiki (and all other wikis) pages. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:23, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

mutmaßliche Urheberrechtsverletzung, da der Einsteller sicher nicht der Fotograf ist, Majo statt Senf (talk) 04:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Entschuldigung, ich habe den Urheber neu eingegeben.--WilhelmCommandeur (talk) 17:12, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kannst Du nachweisen, dass Du die Einwilligung des Urhebers hast? Ansonsten bleibt es eine Urheberrechtsverletzung.
Gruß --Baumfreund-FFM (talk) 19:29, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination, photo from 1990 book (c). --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:24, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

perchè errato. Le rose non sono cinque, ma solo tre poste in orizzontalesullo stesso piano. 80.180.179.174 09:58, 2 January 2016 (UTC) il file dovrebbe essere modifica to - f.to Oggerino[reply]

Se le rose sono solo tre e sono ordinate in fascia è evidente che il disegno deve essere modificato (come ho visto che è stato modificato il disegno sul Blasonario Subalpino). La versione in discussione è stata determinata dalla blasonatura esistente che parla di rose di rosso e basta, senza specificarne né il numero né la disposizione, mentre sarebbe stato più esatto dire caricata di tre rose di rosso ordinate in fascia. Sarebbe possibile conoscere qualche altro documento ? --Massimop (talk) 20:37, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: File is in use on Italian Wikipedia. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Screenshot of a deleted Wikipedia article. Incorrect licensing tags: image included needs attribution as does the text. BethNaught (talk) 13:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would be delighted to revise tags, etc, as requested. There is an on-going disputer regarding this page, including allegations of vandalism. This record of a previous edit is important evidence therein. This is my first time engaging in such a dispute. Any advice as to the proper way to proceed would be very much appreciated indeed. Thanks Horse Dancing (talk) 10:22, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. The file led only to a closed discussion on Wiki. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

[11] May not be own work 1989 15:09, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Logo was found on U.S. Marines website, work of U.S. Government, PD-USGov. I amended the file template. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:30, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF. [[User:EugeneZelenko|EugeneZelenko]. The ] (talk) 16:10, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is my first article creation and first image uploaded, so please bear with me. This is my photo taken at a restaurant of several people. The uploaded image is a small section cropped from the original larger image...it has been saved under another name and modified from the original file. If this needs to be saved at a higher resolution I can attempt to do that. Thank you for your attention, much appreciated. Happy New Year.


Deleted: per nomination, article to which it was attached is non-notable. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:32, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Unlikely to be own work: could be found on official web sites with Google Images: http://static.wixstatic.com/media/408041_bea8fb76f6574b80aea4854c04ffd885.jpg/v1/fill/w_293,h_445,al_c,q_75,usm_0.50_1.20_0.00/408041_bea8fb76f6574b80aea4854c04ffd885.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:33, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was superceded by a larger, better, and more recent file [File:Vronda from Kastro 1July2012.jpg] Kevin Glowacki (talk) 17:39, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Older file is not same as newer file, shows landscape and historical land use changes. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:34, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

This file was superceded by a larger and better image [File:Panorama of Vronda ridge from southeast 2003.jpg]. Kevin Glowacki (talk) 17:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Files are not same, views are not same. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 19:35, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Aufgrund der Friedhofssatzung unklare Urheberrechtsfrage. Möchte die Frage erst klären und bei der Verwaltung nachfragen.Bielibob (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Kein rechtliches Problem hier. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:47, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:11, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: PD by age. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:48, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Poor quality logo drawing, not in use. Yes the design is CC0 at source, but it is non-notable and the link essentially serves to send people to that site where they can buy teeshirts and cups and stuff, making this more of a promotional upload than a gift. Ellin Beltz (talk) 17:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note that since I uploaded this, the source website was taken by domain squatters. Hop on Bananas (talk) 17:31, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. The site was down for a bit, but now it's back. Hop on Bananas (talk) 18:03, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Copyright violation, no source for 2D work (photo). It's not «a faithful photographic reproduction of a two-dimensional, public domain work of art». PS. It can't be 1930 year, because this code was published only in 1947. 128.68.57.72 23:25, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

La data inserita è quella a cui risale la manifattura della tavoletta ad opera del re Amorreo Lipit Ishtar. Il 1930 avanti Cristo (Before Christ) secondo la cronologia media e non dopo Cristo (After Christ). La motivazione per la quale si chiede la cancellazione è in parte errata, poiché la fotografia a colori non è presente nella pubblicazione indicata dal pregiatissimo 128.68.57.72. --Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 15:09, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
L'immagine a colori della tavoletta è una mia personale rielaborazione della vecchia fotografia in bianco e nero. Vi prego, per favore, di interrompere la procedura di cancellazione. Grazie.--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 16:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Alla luce di nuovi elementi in mio possesso, ho aggiunto nuove informazioni nella descrizione del file.--Roberto.Amerighi (talk) 20:41, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep It's a derivative work of the original black&white. -- Fulvio 314 18:28, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: not a com:DW, not published w/ or w/o notice. no author given. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:00, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

There is no camera data. This leads me to wonder about the uploader's right to upload this here. Commons:OTRS assertions of the right to upload it are required Timtrent (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry for the confusion. The pictures involved are indeed mine.

I apologise but I'm not certain what I need to do to prove this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sush63 (talk • contribs)

 Info I left a message his talk page today. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: COM:OTRS required. --Krd 15:26, 24 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Madelgarius (1) (talk · contribs)

[edit]
first discussion (closed)
This is a collection of obviously old photographs. I have selected only those that appear to be from the 20th century -- too recent to assume that the author has been dead for 70 years. All of them are tagged either PD-OLD or "Own Work". I doubt that any are actually "Own Work" and, while a few may actually be PD-OLD, that will have to be proven.
Files
* File:Youra Livchitz (avant 1943).jpg

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 17:50, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ces images ont été publiées pour la première fois il y a plus de septante ans et sont d'un auteur inconnu.
These images were published for the first time there are more than seventy years ago and the author is unknown or anonymous.
--H2O(talk) 18:00, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Unknown" and "Anonymous" are two very different things. If the photographer is merely unknown to us, then in most countries the image is an Orphan Work and is not PD until a long time has passed, maybe never. Only in the UK, as far as I know, can you do a diligent search for information about the creator and, after not finding his name, use the image as if it were PD. In order to use the provisions in most copyright laws for "Anonymous Works", you must show beyond a significant doubt that the creator actually intended to remain anonymous. That is rarely the case and is always very hard to prove.
Also note that many of these images are younger than 70 years and after looking at many (but not all) of them, I can say that none of them have any proof of publication. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 21:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. You say "I have selected only those that appear to be from the 20th century ". Well, File:François Laurent (1810-1887).jpg looks very young for somebody dead more than 10 years before. I would have a question : what kind of proof would you accept to ensure that photographers are anonymous, and not unknown ? (stating that it is impossible to show any certificate signed by their hands, as they are just...anonymous). Cheers. --La femme de menage (talk) 23:31, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thinking about it, I strongly suggest to add the media of the day, File:San Francisco Earthquake footage.ogv : it is from 1906, and the author is stated to be unknown, and not anonymous. Yours, --La femme de menage (talk) 23:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(sorry for my bad english) The author of File:François Laurent (1810-1887).jpg seems to be known : it's Charles d'Hoy, who died in 1895 (see here, under "Afbeeldingen"). The problem is that the file desciption in commons is wrong, or at least not precise enough. It comes from Gent University, and the author is well known. But he died more than 70 years ago.--Rehtse (talk) 14:47, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the two files noted above. On the other hand,La femme de menage, File:San Francisco Earthquake footage.ogv is a USA work and comes under the USA rules -- anything published before 1923 is PD even if the creator is still living.

In PMA 70 countries, a person born in 1866 could easily have taken a photo in 1886 and not died before 1946, age 80. Thus I generally use 130 years ago as the cutoff for assuming that the photographer has probably been dead for 70 years. Note that in both France and Belgium the law is that an anonymous work becomes PD 70 years after publication -- not creation. As I noted above, there is no proof of publication that I have seen on any of these files. If their appearance here is their first publication, it will be 2086 before they become PD.

If you can find proof of publication for any of them, the next step is to prove that "anonymous" applies. Proof that a work was published anonymously is very difficult, largely because works are rarely anonymous -- the creator wants both payment and credit in almost every case. In order to achieve anonymity within the meaning of the law, the creator would have to engage a lawyer or other third party to submit the work for publication or would have to submit the work anonymously himself, eliminating any possibility of payment. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:37, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment FYI, there is a discussion on the French VP about this. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:30, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Jim, the majority of works from that period are anonymous. Most of the time the photographer received a one-time payment, he is not credited, and he was not supposed to use his work again. It was assumed in fact that it was a work for hire. A proof of publication and that the work was not credited should be the norm on Commons, but we shouldn't very strict for old works. Regards, Yann (talk) 20:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take your word for the anonymous part in France -- for me (and in the US), for a creator to be "Anonymous", he must be unknown to the publisher, so there can be no payment except through a lawyer or other intermediary.
We're still left with the fact that none of these image files have any evidence of prior publication. I would be happy to have someone who wants these kept to go through the files one by one and add the necessary information. We can certainly hold off on closing this until that is done.
Finally, fair warning -- many of the remaining files uploaded by User:Madelgarius have similar problems. Once this closed, I will go through all of them again, looking for more problems. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:19, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Global deletion request

Je ne vais pas tout commenter mais relayer ici juste assez d'éléments pour expliquer qu'un traitement global de mes contributions n'est absolument pas justifié (j'ignorais d'abord que cela puisse se faire). Voici donc quelques commentaires:
more information about me on Commons (in french but translations are welcome)


already kept (since the procedure began)

list
* [kept] - File:L'assassinat d'Henriette Evenepoel (1847).jpg - Comme le mentionne la page commons, la première publication était in Drames judiciaires. Scènes correctionnelles. Causes célèbres de tous les peuples. Première série, rédigée par Ch. Dupressoir - 1849. L'auteur de la gravure n'est pas identifié -> domaine public.

Some more files to be kept (I am not exhaustive)

Bon, j'arrête là, en voici assez pour démontrer que le traitement "par lot" de mes contributions sur Commons n'est pas justifié et s'apparente fort à une chasse aux sorcières que je qualifie volontiers - c'est mon ressenti - de harcèlement et d'une volonté de vouloir faire passer son point de vue "en force" sans laisser la possibilité de s'expliquer (je suis actuellement bloqué pour trois jours). Bref tout ceci est disproportionné, déloyal et pour tout dire, navrant. Sur base de ceci, je vous prie instamment de clore sans suite cette requête et d'appliquer les règles de commons avec un peu plus de sérénité et moins d'envies de vouloir faire la leçon aux contributeurs dont l'unique crime est de vouloir illustrer Wikipedia. J'espère encore que des administrateurs disposant de davantage de recul pourront valablement intervenir ici pour apaiser les esprits. Je suis conscient que mon troisième upload du fichier Youra Livchitz ait pu être perçu comme vexatoire par certains. Dans l'analyse du fait, il ne faut pas perdre cependant de vue qu'en toute hypothèse - et de l'aveu même de celui qui a demandé mon blocage - cette photographie est probablement dans le domaine public. Le côté heurtant de mon enième upload doit donc être tempéré par un positionnement rigide, heurtant également, en vis à vis. Pourriez-vous m'indiquer enfin le lien vers la procédure de Commons qui permet de traiter en une seule requête l'ensemble des contributions d'un utilisateur? Bien à vous, --Madelgarius (talk) 12:46, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Madelgarius: Les photographies font le tour du monde sans copyright ni vélléité de le faire valoir-> domaine public Désolé, mais ça ne fonctionne pas comme ça. Il faut au moins une justification plausible que la photo ait été publiée sans mention de l'auteur. Idéalement une faut une preuve. Cordialement, Yann (talk) 23:40, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above, I would be very happy to keep all of these, but in order for that to happen, Madelgarius or someone else must change all of the file descriptions with the information he has provided above. We can wait a reasonable time for that, but that would be a few days, perhaps another week or so. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 16:27, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Jameslwoodward: Hi Jim, I red your post on the Commons:Bistro#Us et coutumes sur Commons and this one. I know now that's not obvious to deal with 10000 pictures/day. I'm not angry with this anymore (only disappointed;-)). I never drop a picture on Commons if I'm convinced that doing so is "cheating" (in good ugly english). Often (and for the WWII that's regularly the case) Images are "on the border". And I decide to drop them. I will took as an example the serie of pictures @Yann: is speaking about just above, the one concerning Masha Bruskina. The pictures were taken by a lithuanian working for the Nazis. Those pictures were widely distributed by the nazis in the late 1941, beginning 1942. They wanted to terrorize the populations. Afterwards, in 1968, the picture were published once again in a russian journal for identification of the protagonists (I explain that with sources in the french article - an english source can be found here second § after the picture). So we have pictures from Nazis, published in 1941. From my point of view they are in the public domain. Unfortunately I can't find anymore the source saying that this lithuanian died during the war (but i'm still searching) anyway, I think - but I can be wrong - that all the propaganda support materials of the nazis are in the public domain and no one can ask for royalties for those publications.
You fairly propose to take time for this deletion request. That's kind of you. I have another proposition to submit, we stopped this procedure, and you propose once at a time one (not more than a hundred at a time;-)) of my picture you think not to be PD. We could disccuss about it and I promise if I do not have any argument for keeping to agree for deletion. On the other hand, if you think that's a probable pd picture but with the wrong licence or description or whatever... You 'll help me to correct this. A bit more collaborative way of doing things ;-) What do you think about that? Sincerely, --Madelgarius (talk) 17:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so. As they stand right now, all of the images above should be deleted because the file descriptions do not have the necessary information to allow us to keep them. Many of them can probably be kept, but doing so will require someone, probably you, to go through them all one by one and change the file descriptions. We can certainly allow some time for that, but I have no interest in closing this Dr and then opening 200+ new individual DRs for the same files.

I have commented on some of your comments above. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 19:24, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

From my point of view, global deletion request are justified if all (almost) all the contributions are to be deleted. It's not the case. Wrong procedure. --Madelgarius (talk) 19:48, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Again, as I said above, as they stand right now, all -- not almost all -- of the files above should, according to Commons rules, be deleted because they do not have any evidence that they are PD. Merely saying that an old-looking file is PD without including the date of the author's death or the date of publication is not enough unless the file is a photograph of a known person taken before 1886. Since drawings and paintings can be done after the subject's death, they must always have date of publication or author's death. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:31, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So you recognize to work too fast and to proposed some of my uploads too quickly for deletion (25 already kept + 7 advise for conservation) but the procedure is still running. You were upset by my third upload and decide to drag all my files to give me a lesson. I correctly understand now that all reupload must be discussed. Anyway this procedure is unfair. Three days blocked was sufficient, was'nt it? You can apply this treatment to anybody working around the WWII and the result would be the same. I made the test with three random contributors of that kind. With such an amount of picture proposed at once and the fact that you seem to argue that by default pictures will be deleted and finally the fact that you drop them without discernement, I ask you, for the last time to renounce to this procedure. If you still want to achieve it. I will definitively stop my contributions here because I can't admit that contributions made in five years receive such a bad treatment at once, this is not respectfull and if a project like this one accept that, I will no more contribute. (But maybe this is what you are looking for). Best regards, --Madelgarius (talk) 12:11, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Point of procedure

If the procedure is maintained, it's obvious that we will discuss picture by picture and certainly not according to one felt global on my contributions.
Si la procédure est maintenue, il est évident que nous discuterons image par image et non en fonction d'un ressenti global à l'égard de mes contributions.
I reserve the right to speak in French every time the sharpness of the language would be lacking to me in English.
Je me réserve le droit de parler en français à chaque fois que la finesse de la langue me ferait défaut en anglais
--Madelgarius (talk) 20:43, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: Procedural keep now, as there are no recent comments and this is going to be incomprehensible. Please renominate in smaller batches if applicable. --Krd 17:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Files uploaded by Madelgarius (2) (talk · contribs)

[edit]

These are all PD or otherwise licensed images present on Commons that have been enhanced using the Remini. AI app. The uploader claims copyright in the enhanced image and has licensed them CC-BY-SA. However, since there is no human creative input in the enhancement process, no new copyright has been created. These can be kept if the community believes that such enhancements are useful and the licenses are all changed to the same license as the originals.

.     Jim . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 22:29, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Couldn't this be handled by a single question at Village Pump, rather than starting the deletion process? I think they should be kept but the warning on the page enhanced. --RAN (talk) 00:03, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not convinced that this deletion procedure is the best one either.
This issue has already been discussed on the Village Pump" on the Bistro commons and on the fr:WP bistro. The result was that retouched files should appear in separate files with a link in a warning banner and a link to the original image. all these files are included in a maintenance category (Category:Remini.ai retouched pictures). On French Wikipedia, it was decided that a message below the edited image would inform that it has been edited by an AI and link to the original image. In addition, the template used categorises pages with an AI-edited image in a maintenance category. all these things have been achieved.
I don't mind if an adapted license is put on these files or if the same license as the original is also included or whatever other formula would be agreed upon.
and by the same token, commons procedures are not meant to be used to retaliate against your opponents either. It is one thing to disagree, but it is quite another to initiate proceedings to "lecture". This is the second time you have done this to me. This practice is disloyal, questionable and should be sanctioned.Best regards, --Madelgarius (talk) 07:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This DR has its merit.
  1. The processed images should be retagged as retouched images (e.g. using our standard template {{Retouched picture}}).
  2. It must be clearly said who is the original author and who is the author of modifications - in some cases like File:Charlotte of Belgium-(Remini enhanced - handcolor).jpg, modifications are non-trivial, and Madelgarius has a right to claim themselves as a co-author. Most other cases do appear as if Madelgarius has hijacked the image, replacing the original author with themselves (e.g. File:Alain Souchon 2012 (Remini enhanced).jpg and many others). Materialscientist (talk) 01:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: It does not appear to me that deletion is appropriate. It seems to me that most of the images were PD and have been manipulated or edited; it's within the uploader's right to upload them under that licence. If images have been retouched in a way that breaches the licence (maybe a FAL image relicensed as CC-BY-SA which is incompatible) then this can be nominated individually. --Stifle (talk) 15:03, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If the circumstances surrounding this file have changed in a notable manner, you may re-nominate this file or ask for it to be undeleted.

Image from French Wikipedia tagged as not eligible for transferring to Commons. Eureka Lott 01:34, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just wait !
The architects of the monument Cité du vin (Anouk Legendre & Nicolas Desmazières - XTU agency) have been asked to give authorization for the publication of this picture.
--CéCédille (talk) 13:23, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have got the autorisation from Anouk Legendre et Nicolas Desmazières, architects (agence XTU architects) by e-mail; Date : 15 janvier 2016 à 19:44; Objet : Re: Illustration article Wikipedia sur la Cité du vin; Agathe Czapek, Chargée de communication, XTU architects, 32 rue de paradis _ 75010 paris, 01 45 23 37 10, www.x-tu.com . I asked by ORTS to permissions-commons-fr@wikimedia.org the autorisation.--CéCédille (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OTRS received in ticket:2016011610017135. --Krd 17:57, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per COM:PCP, can be restored when OTRS permission is confirmed. --Krd 17:58, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]