Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/02/15

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 February 15th, 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.

This file was initially tagged by Smooth O as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Per: Commons:Currency#Bosnia_and_Herzegovina If I understand the uploader correctly, they are suggesting that the 25 year rule applies here? Green Giant (talk) 14:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment This banknote is issued by National Bank of Bosnia and Herzegovina (not National Bank of Yugoslavia as stated). Uploader change license to Template:PD-BH-exempt, but again this is not exempt of B&H copyright law. --Smooth_O (talk) 15:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per Smooth O. Green Giant (talk) 15:14, 15 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.

Files uploaded by Aline Rodr (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Disney Channel logos, unlikely {{PD-textlogo}}. Uploads via sock of Jhonny Balth (talk · contributions · Statistics) (indef blocked in 01.2016), considering edits on Jhonny Balth's testpage at ptwiki.

Gunnex (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Non-trivial logos. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 15 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.

Files uploaded by Moisesbcampos (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unused text document of questionable notability, out of project scope, should be converted to text if notable

Motopark (talk) 18:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, screenshots of copyrighted content, consist files of unknown origin. Also self-promotion. Taivo (talk) 18:22, 15 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 image is already in Wikimedia Commons. ChiaraS91 (talk) 11:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: dupe of File:Trouser suit.jpg.--Wdwd (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC). --Wdwd (talk) 21:27, 15 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.

Probably copyvio IMHO. Really pretty sceptical about the claimed rationale for it being "public domain" (yes, I appreciate that even though something's a trademark it could still be out of copyright). "The Caidin Show" only brings up some (apparently) fictitious project with scraps of nonsense on YouTube (e.g.[1] [2] [3]) User's only other upload was of recent (digital age) MGM logo that was obvious copyvio. Ubcule (talk) 20:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 00:08, 16 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.

Misleading description — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kattenkruid (talk • contribs) 2016-01-24T23:42:18‎ (UTC)

Misleading description/ out of scope Kattenkruid (talk) 21:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Joke description, no cats, non-descriptive title = useless. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:39, 16 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.

Test - erreur de manipulation Presse Bouygues SA (talk) 14:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Uploader request. --Thibaut120094 (talk) 14:14, 16 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 is a logo of my website www.100bestbooks.ru. I'm a copyright owner of this file and I don't want it to be used in wikipedia in the article about 100 best books of Norwegian book klub 212.17.10.114 11:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Deleted: per nomination. --McZusatz (talk) 18:13, 19 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.

Wird nicht mehr benögigt. Besten Dank. ST 22:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Req by author = user. --Achim (talk) 09:17, 20 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.

Category:Moline Universal Tractor two-wheel tractors is no longer needed, as its manufacturer, the en:Moline Plow Company of Moline, Illinois, built only this type of tractor. Meantime, I have added Category:Moline Universal (were most files of this tractors already were) to Category:Two-wheel tractors by brand, and Category:Two-wheel tractors in the United States. Before, two files in Category:Moline Universal Tractor two-wheel tractors were transferred to Category:Moline Universal.--Chief tin cloud (talk) 10:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: empty category. --JuTa 17:46, 21 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.

Not too simple image, even with the presence of text in almost the entire poster, the "dove and fist".symbol it's not too simple, and therefore could be copyrighted and that it's not accepted here in Commons. Sfs90 (talk) 00:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: clear copyvio. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:57, 22 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.

Not too simple image, even with the presence of text in almost the entire poster, the "dove and fist".symbol it's not too simple, and therefore could be copyrighted and that it's not accepted here in Commons. Sfs90 (talk) 00:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:57, 22 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.

Per COM:SCOPE. This image, with others repeatedly uploaded to Commons by the uploader, are merely for promotional purposes and have no realistic use within the scope of any project. The article at enwiki is facing speedy deletion for what appears to be the fifth or sixth time. This is just here for promotion. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 01:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 22 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.

advertising. copyvio. missing legal information. not own work. DavidIvar (talk) 03:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 22 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.

See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 22 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.

See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 22 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.

See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 04:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:58, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Ai lov biuti (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Half of the images are clearly Screenshots (or parts of a screenshot), others are promo images or have watermarks. For sure not own work of the uploader.

Marcus Cyron (talk) 05:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:59, 22 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.

not covered by German freedom of panorama, as object is not permanent. Also documenta probably defines some restrictions. 2003:8C:4F6A:993A:A9A6:4584:4EE1:93B 07:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 10:59, 22 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.

Self-promotional or promotional artwork with Facebook source. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

Promotional or self-promotional image with facebook source, is out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

Promotional or self-promotional uploads are out of COM:SCOPE. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Casta03 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

COM:COPYVIOs Photograph of Michael Jackson cannot have been taken by uploader on April 26, 2015 as stated and it's unlikely the uploader took the picture on any date.

Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

Looks to be above COM:TOO with the drawings of the brightly colored building/s. The other copy of this was removed as copyvio. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 07:51, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:00, 22 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.

The depicted person does not want this picture on Wikimedia Commons. Due to a misunderstanding this picture was uploaded nevertheless. So please delete, thank you, the uploader Hansmuller (talk) 08:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:01, 22 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.

The depicted person does not want this picture on Wikimedia Commons. Due to a misunderstanding this picture was uploaded nevertheless. So please delete, thank you, the uploader Hansmuller (Overleg) 07:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC) Hansmuller (talk) 08:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 22 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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 08:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Victor Helder (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Most likely derived from copyrighted content. Eventually also attack images.

Gunnex (talk) 08:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Grupo WG rede de sites (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used.

Gunnex (talk) 08:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 22 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.

Spamer's contribution, not in use Bilderling (talk) 08:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:04, 22 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.

The picture is out-dated with a new one being uploaded. Tclcommir (talk) 08:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We keep out of date versions for historical reasons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:04, 22 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.

The picture is out-dated with a new one being uploaded. Tclcommir (talk) 08:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We keep out of date versions for historical reasons. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 22 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Eventually taken from http://www.vivareal.com.br/imovel/property-id-54375649/?utm_source=mitula_ppc&utm_medium=vertical&utm_content=54375649&utm_keyword=venda = http://resizedimgs.vivareal.com/fOce0RSC3L4Tw9LvTzWtk9DrAYE=/fit-in/870x653/vr.images.sp/45400d356dd45336c1d531c9f23f51eb.jpg. Uploaded by 1-upload user Fabiano.ssp (talk · contributions · Statistics) on 16.11.2015. Gunnex (talk) 08:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 22 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.

Files uploaded by SoulOfDarkness8 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Nonsense/copyvio uploader + out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted.

Gunnex (talk) 09:18, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Molgreen (talk · contribs)

[edit]

out of project scope

Krd 09:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 22 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.

I could not verify the license. Source link is dead. No proof, that the file is published under free license. Taivo (talk) 09:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:08, 22 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.

Files uploaded by CVR Alentejana (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:CVR Alentejana (= most likely "Comissão Vitivinícola Regional Alentejana (CVRA)/http://www.vinhosdoalentejo.pt". Used for pt:Vinhos do Alentejo, uploaded since 08.2015 to promote a wine region in Portugal. Multiple authors involved, considering...

Multiple copyright issues to solve/further details and/or permissions needed.

Gunnex (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:09, 22 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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 09:56, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:09, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Tatiana minsk (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Spamer's contribution, not in use

Bilderling (talk) 09:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:09, 22 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.

out of scope, no use Stolbovsky (talk) 10:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

Copyrighted packaging. Taivo (talk) 10:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

Copyrighted packaging. Taivo (talk) 10:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

No evidence uploader owns license for the actual poster of which this is a photograph. India's FoP only permits for 3D works, not 2D. DMacks (talk) 10:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

If the source is The Montreal Gazette, as stated, then it's presumbly a copyright violation John of Reading (talk) 10:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Pulgrossi (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work, per COM:PRP, considering also User talk:Pulgrossi: uploaded in a row on 24.11.2015 for pt:Caio Ferreira (Brazilian magician), the whole photoset (4 images/2 duplicates) like File:Caio Ferreira - Ilusionista 2015.jpg appears to be — considering previously published via (example) http://g1.globo.com/sp/sao-carlos-regiao/noticia/2014/05/virada-cultural-em-sao-carlos-tem-show-gratuito-de-ilusionismo-no-sesc.html (2014) — a copyrighted work by "Foto: Marcel Fatibello". See also — for File:Caio Ferreira - ilusionista 4.jpg — a magazine scan via https://www.flickr.com/photos/fabiomauricio/21498412498/ (09.2015, © by "Fabio Mauricio" / "Kappa magazine").

Permission needed.

Gunnex (talk) 10:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

Small photo without metadata, the uploader's last remaining contribution. His/her all other uploads were deleted as copyvios, some even speedily. I suspect here also not own work, but copyright violation. Taivo (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:10, 22 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.

The source I found clearly attributes this as the artistic work of Saskatoon artist Marie Lannoo so under Canadian law it is questionable if this complies with their freedom of panorama exception because it does not look like this is: permanently situated in a public place or building but a temporary installtion. Ww2censor (talk) 10:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 22 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.

Metadata and image name suggest that this is a screenshot, therefore copyrighted. John of Reading (talk) 10:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 22 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.

Files uploaded by AlbuquerqueFigueira (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, including 2x images of Portuguese bishops (which seems to be "photos of "photos"). Considering also File:TeodoroFaria.jpg (another related bishop), uploaded on 17.11.2015 which was grabbed from Internet.

Gunnex (talk) 10:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Renato Ponciano (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, considering also file title File:PQAAAMgC8ZXfJ1kOIahLlNwJyScM92qG0PbFHUgCYoTRoKcpFCJjTuufavojYIwIQp4XtK4AgifVo-BengZ2Prg51K4Am1T1UMUjpu21TCthtI-y0BYWwZx4AFil.jpg (grabbed from a blog?). They may be also out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used.. Related ptwiki entry "Renato Ponciano Barbosa" speedy deleted.

Gunnex (talk) 10:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 22 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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry speedy deleted. Gunnex (talk) 10:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:11, 22 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.

Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entry "Boombaser" speedy deleted. Uploader blocked at ptwiki. If IN scope needs permission via https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=610041035757621&set=a.106552459439817.11903.100002551909337&type=3&theater (2014, © by "Lucas Santos") Gunnex (talk) 10:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:12, 22 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.

Doit à la personne physique Peter Klasen souhaite faire disparaitre cette image 194.150.40.231 10:54, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Klasen souhaiterait exercer son Droit à l'image (sur sa personne physique) et faire retirer définitivement cette image non conforme à ses souhaits. Merci de votre compréhension. 194.150.40.231 10:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: We rarely remove images at the request of the subject, still more rarely when the image is in use, and never on request from an anonymous IP editor. Klasen may request this removal by sending a message himself to OTRS and a decision will be made there. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 22 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.

Catalogues La Redoute

[edit]

No proof of authorization. --TwoWings * to talk or not to talk... 14:59, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:14, 22 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.

Image clearly looks like not being an original photography, but captured from a screen or projection. Thereby, the original is not own work by uploader. -- Túrelio (talk) 11:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 22 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Gunnex (talk) 11:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:15, 22 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.

the image, being a derivative work, requires permission from the artist as well as the photographer to be kept here. Maybe de minimis applies but there is too much artwork in my opinion. Ww2censor (talk) 11:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I agree. The focus of this image was to showcase the artists work, and it was just a coincidence there were people in the way. If only we had a picture of the artist! Missvain (talk) 18:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 22 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.

Heavily edited photo, educational value is not big. I think, that the image is out of project scope. This is the uploader's only contribution. Taivo (talk) 11:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 22 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.

Apparent copyright violation of http://www.imdb.com/media/rm4237615360/nm2247148?ref_=nm_ov_ph John of Reading (talk) 12:08, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:16, 22 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.

 Delete tineye find many versions of this image, including this copy so it is highly unlikely the uploader own the copyright. Ww2censor (talk) 12:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Kleins (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Uploaded in a row on 11.09.2007 from a ptwiki based user. Considering also:


Gunnex (talk) 12:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 22 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.

Unused personal photo, out of scope Gbawden (talk) 13:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 22 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.

Derivative work. No freedom of panorama for 2D works in the UK. Kelly (talk) 13:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 22 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.

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:18, 22 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.

Adolphe Beaufrère is dead in 1960. Copyright violation. 90.2.28.52 13:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 22 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.

Adolphe Beaufrère is dead in 1960. Copyright violation. 90.2.28.52 13:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:19, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение, кроме того это Самарканд. Bobyrr (talk) 13:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование таких объектов нужно разрешение Bobyrr (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. When uploading I did not think about a different copyright system in Uzbekistan. Sorry... --Max nr 323 (talk) 16:50, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

Copyright violation, downsampled from http://intersport-images.photoshelter.com/image/I0000YKKZ7UX.eH0 John of Reading (talk) 13:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:20, 22 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.

Files uploaded by PokestarFan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

If these are own work, as claimed, they are personal art of a non-notable artist and therefore out of scope. If they are someone else's work, then they are copyright violations. Either way, we cannot keep them.

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Files uploaded by PokestarFan (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Seven blocks of color, not categorized. No educational purpose.

.     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:05, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:36, 24 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.

Dear webmaster, Hello. This is Seong Woo who studies oceanography in South Korea. I have a project and research about marine environment and ecosystem, using your website. I really thank you for your website which provides useful contents for my research. However, I have found some minor different information in your website from other sources during the research. In the map of your website, the name of the sea between Korea and Japan is described as "Sea of Japan". It seems unreasonable to use the name "Sea of Japan" which is decided in the period of imperialism because its original name is "East Sea" which has been used throughout history. Therefore, I believe that the body of water between Korea and Japan should be described as the “East Sea” or at least with the simultaneous use of both names; “East Sea/Sea of Japan.” I would like to attach some references to help your understanding of this matter. I hope that errors in your website will be corrected. If you do not mind, could you let me know an e-mail address of the person in charge or another possible way to correction, please? Thank you again for your help. I look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Seong Woo. 58.226.218.81 14:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep It is quite possible that there be some imperialism in this name but as long as there is an article named Sea of Japan in the English wikipedia I fail to see what could be done about the map. Shouldn't a student of oceanography know about such things?

Interesting idea that WC should have a (one) “webmaster” who could decide such things. And how could we notify a person that leaves nothing but an IP address? -- Aisano (talk) 18:55, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep and Speedy close This request is a spam mail from a Korean nationalist organization. The template of this request can be found here.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 09:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: The map is widely used. It is therefore against Commons rules to delete it. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:25, 22 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.

Dear Wikimedia Commons,

With my deepest respect and gratitude, I take it as an honor to write to your website. I am Ye-Won Jung, and I am proud to introduce myself to be one of the people of the Republic of Korea and a student of Hana Academy Seoul.

I also work as an active member of the Dokdo Cyber Press, a non-governmental and voluntary organization with the mandate to provide correct information about Korea to the international community, including text book publishers.

I am writing to you as I have important suggestions to make in regards to your articles titled the “Sea of Japan Map".

To my great surprise, I found out that an article of yours have wrongly named the “East Sea” as the “Sea of Japan”. The name of the sea between the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese archipelago, currently named as the “Sea of Japan” in your article, should be corrected to the “East sea”. At present, as many international organizations including U.N. agencies have corrected “Sea of Japan” to “East sea”, I’d truly appreciate if your website could join this trend.

I humbly ask for your website to seriously consider the issue of changing the “Sea of Japan” to “East sea”. Or, at least, name it both “Sea of Japan” and “East Sea”. I would like to once again appreciate your time or reviewing my letter and will be more than honored to get reply from your university via my e-mail (yewonj0809@gmail.com). Yours sincerely, Ye-Won, Jung 58.29.17.135 03:16, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep and Speedy close This request is a spam mail from a Korean nationalist organization. The template of this request can be found here.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 04:06, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Speedy kept: Nominated twice by the same person, may be considered as vandalism. --Amitie 10g (talk) 11:44, 26 December 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.

Files uploaded by Hjbarten (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Historical photos. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:26, 22 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.

just a test upload. not useful for wikipedia. Mikima (talk) 15:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with deletion

I agree --DensityDesign (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 22 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 22 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused Wikipedia screenshot. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:28, 22 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.

Files uploaded by ANBI (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Copyright protected book covers.

ebraminiotalk 22:46, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ebraminio why have you enlisted my uploaded files in the deletion list? --ANBI (talk) 05:21, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Book covers are copyright protected. Under certain circumstances you can upload them on a local like like English Wikipedia but there is no way to keep them here, sorry. There is just one exception, if you own copyright of these, you should tell users on the below and email permissions-commons@wikimedia.org and show needed evidence that you have right for publish these here. Anyway there is nothing personal here. Thanks −ebraminiotalk 06:10, 3 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: Per nom .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:52, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 ANBI (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Historical photos and drawings. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 22 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Wiki autor25 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Innulia 07 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promo photo. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 22 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://yolandasargeant.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/together1.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 22 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small resolutions, missing EXIF, could be found on other web sites with Google Images, like http://www.belarus.by/relimages/001252_355241.jpg. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Brbrvanderlinden (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Movie posters, screenshots and promo photos. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 22 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 22 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.

Files uploaded by IlyaARX500 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Promo photos and non-trivial logo. No evidence of permission(s).

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:33, 22 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.

Is it work of city or California? EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a work of the City of Pasadena in the state of California. This is a local agency and due to the CA gov't use law, any work made by a state, county, or local agency is copyright-free--TJH2018 (talk) 18:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)TJH2018[reply]


Kept: .All California works, whether by the state or by any local jurisdiction (city, town, county) are free of copyirght. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 22 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.

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:58, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:35, 22 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.

Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:40, 22 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.

Mire el alcance del proyecto.

Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:40, 22 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.

See Commons:Project scope#PDF and DjVu formats Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:40, 22 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.

Véase Commons:Alcance del proyecto#Formatos PDF y DjVu Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 03:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:41, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Jocelio (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Quite unlikely that Jocelio (talk · contribs) was commissioned by Brazilian authorities to create all these official coats of arms and flags for (+/-) 240 Brazilian cities. Mostly uploaded in 02.2014 (and ignoring for today older, similar problematic uploads), all these files were grabbed from official sites/blogs/Facebook etc. and were declared arbitrarily as "own work" without providing — per COM:EVID — details why all these official symbols may be may in public domain. Ignore exif infos: Mostly overwritten by uploader.

Examples:

To anticipate it immediately. See also Commons:Deletion requests/File:Brasão Forquilha CE.png, regarding the confusion between Brazilian trademark and copyright law. {{PD-BrazilGov}} is decisive.

PS: Ignoring (for today) some files (like File:Brasão de Feira Nova-PE.jpg) which may be in public domain by other means

Gunnex (talk) 01:10, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: INeverCry 00:30, 21 January 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 Jocelio (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Per previous DR: Quite unlikely that Jocelio (talk · contribs) was commissioned by Brazilian authorities to create all these official coats of arms and flags for X Brazilian municipalities. Uploaded since 13.02.2016, all these files were grabbed from official sites/blogs/Facebook etc. and were declared arbitrarily as "own work" without providing — per COM:EVID — details why all these official symbols may be may in public domain.

Gunnex (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:43, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Jocelio (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Unclear copyright status, per previous DRs. {{PD-self}} licensed uploads regarding official symbols (coat of arms / brasão + flag / bandeira) of Brazilian municipalities, based on arguments derived from Brazilian trademark law (Lei de Propriedade Industrial Brasileira 9.279) which does not apply (see also the long-term misunderstanding reflected in Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-BrazilGov 2, when template was updated). Btw, art. 191 from this law (used as reference by uploader) says "DOS CRIMES COMETIDOS POR MEIO DE MARCA, TÍTULO DE ESTABELECIMENTO E SINAL DE PROPAGANDA: Reproduzir ou imitar, de modo que possa induzir em erro ou confusão, armas, brasões ou distintivos oficiais nacionais, estrangeiros ou internacionais, sem a necessária autorização, no todo ou em parte, em marca, título de estabelecimento, nome comercial, insígnia ou sinal de propaganda, ou usar essas reproduções ou imitações com fins econômicos." = [more or less] It is prohibited to use coats of arms and other distinctive [inter]national symbols in trademarks, establishment titles , commercial names, advertising (...) or use this reproductions/imitations for economic [commercial] purposes.

They may be in public domain only via {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "published or commissioned by a Brazilian government (federal, state, or municipal) prior to 1983" or by other means (I ignored obvious PD-shape/PD-whatever cases like this one) but relevant info — per COM:EVID — must be provided. In detail, we need always the date of the related municipal law to determine the PD-status — which is not given (btw, not given for almost all coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities, however they are currently licensed)

All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established individually by municipal law (mostly some years after official federal constitution, often citing the original designers), as also further redesigns of the symbols which [often] are completely different to the historic ones (see also this case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols only 81 years after emancipation: in 2014). Brazilian coats of arms and flags created after 1982 are [if above COM:TOO) protected 70 pma or (if anonymous or pseudonymous works) +70 years from the first publication. See also: http://jus.com.br/artigos/14982/orgaos-publicos-dominio-publico-e-licencas-publicas.

A quick run reveals also that, even trying to apply {{PD-BrazilGov}}, fails for (examples): Obs.: the year of emanicpation is the year of the related federal law, deciding to create the municipality. The official installation of the municipality occurs only year(s) later. So, even municipalities established before 1983 may have needed several years to create and adopt their official symbols by own municipal legislation.

For the others: I don't know (detailed information about the origin of these symbols are mostly not available online or only hardly to find) and for the uploader Jocelio: it did not matter...


Gunnex (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note to the admins: A lot of files were uploaded as .gif, later converted/redirected to a .png version, made by bot GifTagger... Gunnex (talk) 19:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 00:32, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion discussion is now closed. Please do not make any edits to this archive. You can read the deletion policy or ask a question at the Village pump. If 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 Jocelio (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Per previous DRs: Quite unlikely that Jocelio (talk · contribs) was commissioned by Brazilian authorities to create all these official coats of arms and flags for X Brazilian municipalities. Uploaded since 20.08.2016, all these files were grabbed from official sites/blogs/Facebook etc. and were declared arbitrarily as "own work" without providing — per COM:EVID — details why all these official symbols may be in public domain.

Gunnex (talk) 08:35, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Daphne Lantier 17:53, 30 July 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.

Files uploaded by Ivar Connheim (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Website screenshots. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader.

Stefan2 (talk) 16:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:44, 22 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.

Files created by User:Mandramunjak

[edit]

These files were created by User:Mandramunjak in May–June 2014. I came across one of them (Europe in 900) in this dispute on English Wikipedia, where it is claimed that the area given for Bulgaria is exaggerated. Looking more closely at all the maps, I see that they are highly problematic. 1) Comparing the maps to several different History Atlases on my bookshelves and on the Internet, I find that all of them are grossly exaggerating the size of Bulgaria (and Volga Bulgaria) at the given times. 2) They are all "sourced" to "World Atlas, Berlin, 2011" plus a page number. Needless to say, this isn't a proper sourcing, so they are in fact not sourced. --TU-nor (talk) 16:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept It is well established Commons policy that we do not get in the middle of boundary disputes of this kind. These are all in use and therefore cannot be removed from Commons except for copyvio. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:51, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Kritkitty (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Questionable authorship claims based on the low/inconsistent resolutions, missing/inconsistent metadata (at least nine different cameras used for these photos), and the uploader's history of uploading a very large number of copyright violations with false authorship claims.

LX (talk, contribs) 17:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:49, 22 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.

Files uploaded by Kritkitty (talk · contribs)

[edit]

False authorship claims and false Creative Commons licensing claims. The uploader is a prolific serial copyright violator and sockpuppeteer (see User talk:Kritkitty/Archive 1, User talk:Kritkitty/Archive 2, User talk:Kritkitty and Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kritkitty) who either doesn't understand or doesn't care what the words "author", "own work" or "I, the copyright holder" mean. Some of these files may be in the public domain, but will need correct source, authorship and copyright information in order to be kept.

LX (talk, contribs) 11:51, 27 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --INeverCry 01:33, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Questionable usability, notability of the depicted persons is not argued; misleading category Aisano (talk) 18:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The uploader added eleven pictures in less than a minute, with misleading categories (such as German railway engine types). They are his only contributions. The description is always “this is my photos that i love so much about the people that am seeing” or “life is all that i need”. I respect that but Wikimedia Commons is not Facebook, and the lack of any meaningful description makes me doubt that the persons depicted bear any relevance for the scope of Wikimedia Commons.

Here are the other ten:

File:David batemuel 3.jpg
File:David batemuel 2.png
File:David batemuel 1.jpg
File:David batemuel.jpg
File:David batemuel 4.jpg
File:Blue man.jpg
File:Me and her.jpg
File:Me alone.jpg
File:David b 1.jpg
File:Me and us all.jpg

-- Aisano (talk) 18:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Policy allows one or two personal images for user pages of active contributors, but "active" and "contributor" must come first. Commons is not Facebook.. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:53, 22 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolutions, missing EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:LuizHenriqueBarth (with similar deleted files). Gunnex (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 11:58, 22 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.

Original uploader asks because a much better picture is uploaded. E4024 (talk) 08:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What "much better picture"? .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:06, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which? Choose from the Category:Papaz yahnisi. --E4024 (talk) 13:34, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: I disagree. No reason to delete this. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 13:38, 22 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.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maschinenhalle_Kempten-Kottern.jpg hilarmont \\ talk, talk, talk 00:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: author's request. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:37, 22 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 was initially tagged by Nemo bis as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Set of logos is above threshold of originality Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:39, 22 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.

screenshot of non free site ShinePhantom (talk) 04:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 22 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.

Copyright violation - taken from http://www.rtvslo.si/zabava/druzabna-kronika/foto-in-video-kaj-se-dogaja-s-slovensko-popevko/318928 without attribution or permission. — Yerpo Eh? 06:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:41, 22 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.

They are images uploaded for vandalism in Russian Wikipedia.

Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 06:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:42, 22 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.

Copyrighted logo, http://www.dialog-semiconductor.com/ John of Reading (talk) 09:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 22 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.

Unused (jpg) logo. No clear scope. Josve05a (talk) 09:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 22 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.

Unused logo. No clear scope. Josve05a (talk) 09:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:44, 22 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.

[Commons:Freedom of panorama#Uzbekistan]] на фотографирование памятников нужно особое разрешение, кроме того оно очень плохого качества. Bobyrr (talk) 13:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Зачем? На каких основаниях? --Wiki Tiki Tavi rus (talk) 19:52, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: no FoP in Uzbekistan. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:46, 22 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.

Spamer's. Logo under free license Bilderling (talk) 13:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:45, 22 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.

Dubius "own" work (12 KB) 2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 14:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 19:46, 22 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.

Questionable usability: small, no information about depicted persons (question of notability). Grand-Duc (talk) 12:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted by Hedwig in Washington: Missing essential information such as license, permission or source. Media missing permission as of 15 February 2016 - Using VisualFileChange.

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

Uncategorized picture from a flickr-batch. I've put it in Category:Unusual fruit forms (which is botanically incorrect – it's a root) and Category:Humor photos (actual funniness of this might be subject to discussion). Question is: is this realistically useful for an educational purpose? El Grafo (talk) 13:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Keep EV includes cultural interest and images for illustration. -- (talk) 14:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 Keep clearly in scope. Bad catgorization is fixable. --MB-one (talk) 18:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
 I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your opinions! --El Grafo (talk) 13:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: Nomination withdrawn. --Riley Huntley (talk) 09:22, 2 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.

Es wird das Firmenzeichen der Firma ALDI verwendet. Ich weiß nicht, ob das in dieser Form auf einem Faschingswagen zulässig ist. A. Köppl (talk) 13:54, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: uploader request and no license. --JuTa 20:02, 5 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.

Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 20:55, 5 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.

This looks like a screenshot of Google Maps. Stefan2 (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --JuTa 02:18, 6 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.

Inferior render duplicate of File:R+V-Betriebskrankenkasse.svg, only usage is the Graphic Lab for the replacement request. ↔ User: Perhelion 00:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: superseded file. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:28, 11 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.

DR started to verify claimed 'own work' as p.e. imho rather thumbnail format and missing exif, as well as media not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 00:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: dubious authorship and out of scope (unused private image). --BrightRaven (talk) 08:34, 11 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.

It is an duplicate of an existing file here hilarmont \\ talk, talk, talk 00:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: there is no exact duplicate and it is difficult to assess which version is the best. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:36, 11 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.

duplicate https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Franziskanerkloster_St_Bernhardin_Lenzfried.jpg hilarmont \\ talk, talk, talk 01:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: These are not exact duplicates. More importantly this file has a higher resolution than the other, so we should not delete it. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:38, 11 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.

duplicate https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Franz_Wei%C3%9F_Lindenbergschule_1.jpg hilarmont \\ talk, talk, talk 01:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Please use {{Duplicate}} for similar cases in the future. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:42, 11 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.

Per COM:SCOPE. This image, with others repeatedly uploaded to Commons by the uploader, are merely for promotional purposes and have no realistic use within the scope of any project. The article at enwiki is facing speedy deletion for what appears to be the fifth or sixth time. This is just here for promotion. —/Mendaliv//Δ's/ 01:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:42, 11 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.

Copy of http://africaesimprescindible.org/?attachment_id=1866 reddogsix (talk) 01:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: copyvio. --BrightRaven (talk) 08:43, 11 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.

DR started to verify claimed 'own work' as p.e. imho rather thumbnail format and missing exif, as well as media not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 00:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination http://images.google.fr/imgres?imgurl=http://muruganidlishop.com/assets/layerslider/img/murugan-idli-oothappam.jpg&imgrefurl=http://read-online-books.xyz/south-indian-food-idli-and-dosa&h=500&w=1300&tbnid=kXMDMMRs3CqLBM&tbnh=139&tbnw=362&usg=__ELQKyEnt6i8ZxytqXSaB5S1Zcv4=&docid=jLt7miKGhC5QiM. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:05, 11 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.

copiato da http://www.tagesspiegel.de/berlin/bezirke/zehlendorf/jazz-im-alliiertenmuseum-bata-illic-swingt-in-zehlendorf/9719596.html Updown (talk) 02:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:06, 11 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.

copiato da http://www.stadtrand-nachrichten.de/wordpress/bata-illic-singt-im-alliiertenmuseum-stadtrandnachrichten-verlosen-freikarten/ Updown (talk) 02:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:12, 11 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.

copiato da http://stars-forever.com/v/bata_illic/00454532_jbh.jpg.html Updown (talk) 02:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

uploaded by a notorious sockpuppeteer and copyvioler (here one of his last glocks and here a confirming CU on it.wiki), I call upon you to delete all of his uploads. See Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_of_User:Enzo_Bhigazzi_and_several_SPs --Shivanarayana (talk) 11:38, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:13, 11 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.

copiato da http://www.vebidoo.de/manuela+ilic Updown (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, copyvio. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:16, 11 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.

Non OTRS received Y.haruo (talk) 10:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: No tickets found matching any plausible string. --Storkk (talk) 12:08, 11 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, unused for personal purposes. This is user's only upload. Ubcule (talk) 21:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:13, 11 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.

likely derived from Google Maps screenshot Denniss (talk) 22:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I take your point, it wasn't Google Maps but something akin. I'll resubmit in a short while. Sefdik.

83.196.249.20 11:34, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:10, 11 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.

No reason to think the underlying work is Public Domain. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:11, 11 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.

Unfortunately, given this has to have been published in 1950 or later, there's no real reason to think the book's cover is out of copyright in Italy. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:11, 11 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.

The 1957 artwork on the cover (it's signed and dated) is probably in copyright. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:50, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:12, 11 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.

No reason to think the underlying 1952 work is out of copyright. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:51, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 12:11, 11 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.

not own work Fetx2002 (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:19, 11 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.

not own work Fetx2002 (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, unlikely to be own work. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:20, 11 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.

Commons is not a private web host. Sismarinho (talk) 12:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:18, 11 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 Sanjeevni today (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Spam (w:Special:Undelete/User:Sanjeevni_today).

MER-C 13:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:18, 11 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.

no permission 2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 14:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: derivative work. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:21, 11 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.

Own work ? see http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4843019/resumephotos?v=me706904327 2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 14:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:22, 11 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.

spam, out of scope, del. on DE Nolispanmo 15:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:23, 11 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 Tabaradiop (talk · contribs)

[edit]

dubious "own" works

2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 15:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, some derivatives, some obvious copyvio (exemple : [4] ). Delete the others per PRP. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:28, 11 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.

Both the text and the image have copyrights. There is no evidence that the uploader has permission to freely license them. .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:31, 11 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.

Canadian and Ontario law prohibits publication of images of identifiable people in non-public settings without their consent, see Commons:Country_specific_consent_requirements#Canada .     Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 15:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:34, 11 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.

no permission 2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 15:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination : source facebook. Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:35, 11 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 Mark Magidson (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Appear to be derivative works of unclear status (the test card photo with the girl and puppet in one of them will definitely be under copyright as it's less than fifty years old. )

Ubcule (talk) 20:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:52, 14 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.

Low-quality image, limited in-scope use, not used for personal purposes. Ubcule (talk) 20:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:53, 14 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 image, uploader's only contribution. COM:NOTHOST. Ubcule (talk) 20:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:53, 14 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.

Unused personal image (person is not apparently famous). Ubcule (talk) 20:50, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:53, 14 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 Leonardomatogrosso (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Highly questionable that these are user's own images (and thus probably not freely licensed). Several are explicitly watermarked, others have that "very professionally photographed but low web resolution" warning sign. The photograph of the dancers is clearly in widespread use dating back to before their upload here, and the general mishmash of content and style without the sort of background detail you'd expect if these were the user's own work is incredibly suspicious.

In short, PCP.

(Google Portuguese translation: "Altamente questionável que estes são imagens próprias do usuário (e, portanto, provavelmente não livremente licenciado). Vários são explicitamente com marca d'água, outros têm que "muito profissionalmente fotografado, mas de baixa resolução web" sinal de alerta. A fotografia dos dançarinos é claramente em uso generalizado que remonta a antes do seu carregamento aqui, ea miscelânea geral de conteúdo e estilo sem o tipo de detalhe de fundo que seria de esperar se estas fossem próprio trabalho do usuário é extremamente suspeito. Em suma, o Princípio da precaução.")

Ubcule (talk) 21:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, the images can be found previously published on the web. Christian Ferrer (talk) 17:58, 14 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.

Je ne souhaite pas que cette image me représentant soit utilisée. Merci de la supprimer. Guillaume de Tonquédec Guillaume de Tonquédec (talk) 21:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion, as per my colleagues above. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:01, 14 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 in Category:Ibatiba regarding official symbols

[edit]

Unlikely to be own work. Most likely grabbed from official site http://ibatiba.es.gov.br (see also wayback versions) for Brazilian municipality pt:Ibatiba via http://ibatiba.es.gov.br/pagina/bandeira-e-brasao.html = http://ibatiba.es.gov.br/arquivos/images/galeria/ibatiba/bandeira.jpg, regarding a official symbol (coat of arms [brasão] and/or flag [bandeira])), established by municipal law "Lei Municipal nº 576 de 12 de abril de 2010" in 2010, failing also {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "(...) published or commissioned (...) prior to 1983.".

Uploaded in 09.2014 by 1-upload user Ifesv03 (talk · contributions · Statistics).

Gunnex (talk) 21:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:05, 14 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.

Apparently unused personal image. Not usefully in-scope. Ubcule (talk) 21:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:05, 14 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.

These apparent selfies are only uploads from this user. Commons is not your personal webhost.


Estos son sólo aparentes autofotos archivos de este usuario.. Commons_no_es_tu_alojamiento_web_gratuito_personal

Ubcule (talk) 21:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:07, 14 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 selfie unused for personal purposes. This is user's only upload on record at this point. Ubcule (talk) 21:22, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:07, 14 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 Nayan ahmed zibon (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of scope - unused personal images

INeverCry 08:28, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Per nom. Green Giant (talk) 22:22, 4 July 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 Nayan ahmed zibon (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Bunch of out-of-scope selfies from otherwise non-contributing user. User already had two previous selfies (going by filenames) deleted before he uploaded these ones, so it's quite clear he's only using Commons as personal webspace and not a legitimate contributor, perhaps blockable?

Ubcule (talk) 21:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:08, 14 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.

DR started to verify claimed 'own work' as p.e. missing exif, as well as media not in use within Wikimedia projects, Roland zh (talk) 00:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion, I found no other versions on the Web, and regharding the EXIF, some of my first uploads too don't have EXIF. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:43, 16 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.

This file was initially tagged by GZWDer as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Page including others' text Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Screenshot of no-free web site. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:47, 16 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.

Logo under free license Bilderling (talk) 10:30, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:54, 16 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.

Unused (jpg) logo. No clear scope. Josve05a (talk) 11:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, also likely protected, even work below TOO are protected in Peru. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:53, 16 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 土橋篤志 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

likely, cropped from img: [5] on the official site, says "All rights reserved".

Tokorokoko (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:03, 16 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 FeDeRaL v (talk · contribs)

[edit]

w:copyfraud

2003:45:5C21:3401:9195:3D7C:4FC5:853F 14:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, one is an obvious derivative of unknow copyright statut, the other, a Russian currency fall under PD-RU-exempt. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:09, 16 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.

Building rendering with no proper attribution. Source: http://federacia.moscow/federacia.html Doblecaña (talk) 14:53, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, unlikely to be own work. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:11, 16 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.

Copyvio http://udnii.ru/ob-institute/sotrudniki/zagrebin-alexey-yegorovich Bilderling (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, but likely more form http://udnii.ru/ob-institute/struktura/direktsiya/direktor. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:14, 16 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.

private photo Mitte27 (talk) 17:41, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: out of scope. --Well-Informed Optimist (talk) 19:30, 18 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.

Files uploaded by Vladis159 (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo. Should be in SVG if useful.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:15, 16 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.

This seems to be out of scope. Stefan2 (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:15, 16 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 Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:01, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:15, 16 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 Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability and Unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:16, 16 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.

This seems to be out of scope. Stefan2 (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination, also screeshot of unclear copyright statut. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:17, 16 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.

i want my image removed Dalags (talk) 20:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep That is not possible. Your CC licence is irrevocable unless you were incompetent (underage etc.) or deceitfully induced to contract at the time you uploaded these files, in which case the burden of proof is on you. Unfitlouie (talk) 15:24, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 03:30, 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.

i want my image removed Dalags (talk) 20:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 03:28, 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.

i want my image removed Dalags (talk) 20:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 03:27, 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.

i want my image removed Dalags (talk) 20:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. --Riley Huntley (talk) 03:27, 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.

and

Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused diagram of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, Taivo (talk) 11:01, 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.

Historical photo. Proper author/date/country of creation information should be supplied to determine copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:03, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


 Deleted, no response. Taivo (talk) 11:03, 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.

Clear copyvio - see https://i.guim.co.uk/img/static/sys-images/Football/Pix/pictures/2015/9/24/1443091600718/Arsenals-Calum-Chambers-007.jpg?w=1200&q=85&auto=format&sharp=10&s=4216068005c2efe9f995d758e5f1f8e9 78.147.170.168 16:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: . --Krd 12:37, 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 selfie, unused for personal purposes. Ubcule (talk) 21:41, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Krd 12:41, 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.

Der Urheber der Grafik ist nicht der hier als Urheber genannte Benutzer Archive Aurora. Scannen einer Grafik aus dem Jahr 1937 schafft meiner Meinung nach kein Urheberrecht. Goesseln (talk) 23:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hallo! Ich sah in der "Zick-Zack-Grafik" keinen Grund, einen Urheber anzugeben. Aber weil dies tatsächlich zu einem Löscheintrag geführt hat, habe ich mittlerweile den Urheber ergänzt: Friedrich Witz war von 1930 bis 1940 Redaktor für Literatur bei der "Zürcher Illustrierten".--Archive Aurora (talk) 07:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

P.S.: Wikipedia hat seit längerem ein Problem, neue Autoren zu rekrutieren; zudem liest man immer wieder, dass Wikipedia nicht mehr zeitgemäss sei. Wenn nun also ein Löschantrag, wohlgemerkt nur wegen einer gedruckten Zickzack-Linie aus dem Jahre 1937(!) entsteht, dann verstehe ich die genannten Kritikpunkte an Wikpedia. Ich meine: Ich recherchiere in Archiven für spannende Bilder (in diesem Fall eine Zeitungsseite des Erstdrucks), um den Artikel attraktiver zu gestalten, habe Unkosten und dann sowas... Das sind für mich wirklich unnötige Probleme, wenn man bedenkt, dass lediglich eine Titelüberschrift nicht gerade gedruckt wurde.--Archive Aurora (talk) 08:00, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hat die Gestaltung des Titels überhaupt Schöpfungshöhe? -- Gruß Sir Gawain (talk) 20:26, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nachtrag: inzwischen steht dort als Urheber

de:Friedrich Witz, Redaktor für Literatur bei der "Zürcher Illustrierten" von 1930-40

Falls Witz eine Schöpfungshöhe reklamieren kann, dann sollten seine Lebensdaten berücksichtigt werden: gestorben 1984
--Goesseln (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. Unabhängig davon hat der Text auf jeden Fall SH. --Krd 12:40, 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.

smaller duplicate of File:Dinos Gorgon Painter Louvre E874.jpg Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom. --Yasu (talk) 15:18, 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.

smaller duplicate of File:Athena Herakles Staatliche Antikensammlungen 2301 B.jpg Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nom. --Yasu (talk) 15:18, 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.

to see this talk page and the very small size of this image, it is very unlikely an own work Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:07, 21 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.

Unused (jpg) logo. No clear scope. Josve05a (talk) 10:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment This is a repository. Most of the pictures are not used. And we have tons of not used logos too. We can discuss moreover if is a relevant logo.--Pierpao.lo (listening) 09:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: no educational value, promotional, out of scope. P 1 9 9   13:08, 21 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.

Per COM:FOP#Slovenia: the lamps, work by J. Plečnik (d. 1957), in the front. In my opinion, not de minimis. Eleassar (t/p) 11:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]



Kept: clearly DM. The focus of the photo is the entire cityscape. P 1 9 9   13:09, 21 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.

This image is already in Wikimedia Commons. Plus, the name of it doesn't correspond to image itself. ChiaraS91 (talk) 11:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:10, 21 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.

Duplicate of MK 14518 Olympiastadion München.jpg Martin K. (talk) 12:10, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

for duplicate file you can use {{Speedy}} the next time. regards--Pierpao.lo (listening) 09:28, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:11, 21 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 Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:11, 21 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 Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:12, 21 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 Commons:Project scope: Unused trivial logo of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:12, 21 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.

This is a screenshot of software. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Out of project scope. Stefan2 (talk) 16:05, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:13, 21 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 project scope. Tables should be encoded as wikitables, not uploaded as images. Stefan2 (talk) 16:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:14, 21 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.

Cant be own - it's a part of computer game package Bilderling (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:14, 21 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.

Website screenshot. The website is unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Out of project scope. Stefan2 (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:14, 21 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.

This seems to be out of project scope. Stefan2 (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:15, 21 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.

Probably not own work Hedwig in Washington (mail?) 01:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 13:59, 21 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.

Could originally be found on the twitter account page of this person https://twitter.com/grashu no exif data present so no permission nor maker known MoiraMoira (talk) 09:06, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Pumuckl ist eine geschützte Figur. Ich weiß nicht, ob die Verwendung auf einem Faschingswagen in dieser Form erlaubt ist. A. Köppl (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: Uploader requested at the day of the upload. --Natuur12 (talk) 13:50, 21 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.

This seems to be a screenshot of a website. Note the "close" button in the bottom right. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 16:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Copyrighted artwork. 201.241.193.16 16:33, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:15, 21 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.

Scan or download of the front page of a newspaper. "Own work" seems unlikely; copyright will be held by the newspaper company. John of Reading (talk) 16:43, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:16, 21 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.

Seems to be a screenshot of an unknown source. Other copies of the picture exist here and here. Stefan2 (talk) 16:44, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:16, 21 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.

Possible BLPvio; no reason to assume that the person depicted is in fact a "drug user" and the implication may be defamatory to the (unknown) subject. General Ization (talk) 17:21, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:17, 21 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.

False claim of own work, improper claim of copyright status. Clearly copyright to the AP. Cannot be included here. Oknazevad (talk) 17:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:19, 21 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.

Not own work, derivative of a copyright photo, and the whole thing is copyright. Oknazevad (talk) 17:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:20, 21 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 without a more accurate description or title Christian Ferrer (talk) 18:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Keep It is a glass of tea typically sold in North India in roadside tea stalls. Artistic composition, Hi-res and uploaded as part of Wiki-Loves-Food. So I would say it is in scope. Unfitlouie (talk) 15:35, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept: per User:Unfitlouie. P 1 9 9   13:21, 21 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.

This file was initially tagged by Paasikivi as Speedy (Speedy delete) and the most recent rationale was: crooked size. Uploader's request one year after uploading. Taivo (talk) 18:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Kept: no valid reason for deletion. Just overwrite it with a better version using "Upload a new version of this file". P 1 9 9   13:23, 21 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 COM:SCOPE, personal unused. Steinsplitter (talk) 18:48, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:24, 21 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.

Sandra Semchuk is unknown to en.wiki and fr.wiki. Probably the photo is out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 19:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:25, 21 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. Ubcule (talk) 19:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:25, 21 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.

unused for three years, the publisher seems to want it no more on the internet Pippobuono (talk) 19:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I disagree with Pippobuono's rationale, I feel that this unused photo is not within project scope. DS (talk) 20:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per DragonflySixtySeven, also the user wants it deleted anyways so it should be speedy deleted if necessary. Electrico96 (talk) 22:47, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:26, 21 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 spam image from a sockpuppeting Wikipedia spammer. (I speedied it as such but User:Taivo rejected it as "The file is used and cannot be deleted in any other reason than copyright violation." - file was being used on a now-deleted spam article at the time.) McGeddon (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment If it is unused spam, then I agree to delete. Taivo (talk) 19:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:26, 21 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.

Apparent self-upload, no obvious signs that this person is especially well-known or notable. Not used for personal purposes. Ubcule (talk) 19:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:27, 21 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.

Seems likely to be out of scope. Themightyquill (talk) 19:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:27, 21 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 Алекс Амирян (talk · contribs)

[edit]

Apparent self-upload ("Alex Amirian" is simply a transliteration of (Алекс Амирян). Can't find any clear evidence of notability to Commons' standards. His site is apparently here.

Ubcule (talk) 20:14, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:28, 21 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.

Personal image, only contribution of uploader. Commons is not a host for your selfies. Ubcule (talk) 20:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:28, 21 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.

Poor-quality selfie not useful for Commons' purposes, not used for personal use. Ubcule (talk) 20:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:29, 21 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.

I can see that this is a map of the world and apparently it's got something to do with "travel" and.... we need to know more than that, else it's of little use to us. Ubcule (talk) 21:35, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:29, 21 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.

Commercial spam for some small Joomla-based supplier of computer components. Ubcule (talk) 21:36, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:30, 21 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.

Not plausibly useful in-scope, and not used for personal purposes. (Google translation: 不确切有用的调查范围,而不是用于个人目的。) Ubcule (talk) 21:42, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:30, 21 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.

Misloeading description/ out of scope. Kattenkruid (talk) 21:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:30, 21 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.

Duplicate of File:Lifetime tv logo.svg. Fry1989 eh? 22:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. P 1 9 9   13:31, 21 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.

This is a screenshot of computer software and of a film of unknown origin. Unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Stefan2 (talk) 16:11, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

This seems to be a crop of a larger image, but I can only find small thumbnails of it. The file is named "screenshot" on Commons, suggesting that the picture is a screenshot of a picture on an unknown website. Stefan2 (talk) 16:23, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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 in Category:Vitória do Jari regarding official symbols

[edit]

Coat of arms (brasão) of Brazilian municipality pt:Vitória do Jari emancipated in 1994, failing {{PD-BrazilGov}} = "(...) published or commissioned (...) prior to 1983." No trivial text/shape logo, failing {{PD-textlogo}}/{{PD-shape}}. All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established by municipal law. Generally for most of the Brazilian coats of arms and flags: unlikely also that these symbols were digitized in there present form prior to 1983 (when "Internet" was available only for a few institutions, TCP/IP was standardized in 1982). Their creation date could be quite recent, maybe not even by an employee of the Brazilian government (mostly some years after official federal constitution, see also this extreme case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols in 2014: 81 years after emancipation...).

Gunnex (talk) 16:24, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Duplicate of File:Flag of Tunisia.svg. Fry1989 eh? 16:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Raster file, superseded by Badge of Italy.svg. — TintoMeches, 16:37, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Missing evidence of permission from the Instagram user. Stefan2 (talk) 16:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing/inconsistent EXIF, per COM:PRP, considering User talk:Anapaula1978 = 5 uploads since 21.11.2015 = 4x copyvio. Gunnex (talk) 17:13, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Unlikely to be own work: small/inconsistent resolution, missing EXIF. Uploaded by 1-upload user Augustus silveirado (talk · contributions · Statistics) on 24.01.2016. Gunnex (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:00, 21 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.

Copyright violation link Sakhalinio (talk) 19:04, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:11, 21 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.

Keine Angabe, wann welcher Fotograf das Porträt von en:Leonard Ornstein aufgenommen hat, möglicherweise um 1930. User:BehnamFarid ist nicht der Urheber, der ehemalige Besitzers des Fotos en:Bert_Broer ist 1991 gestorben. Goesseln (talk) 19:15, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:11, 21 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.

Possible copyvio. Web-resolution image with professional-looking (albeit likely telephoto) closeup found here with publication date of Nov 2014 (i.e. 7 months before upload here). Typical single-image-uploader with suspicious lack of background detail. Ubcule (talk) 19:28, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:11, 21 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.

Derivative work. — ξxplicit 20:19, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:12, 21 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.

In terms of quality, this is probably usable as a picture of a bodybuilder (even if the person himself isn't notable). However, does the person have the right to upload it. Note the EXIF data "Original transmission location code"; is this something we'd expect to find on some non-professional's photo? Ubcule (talk) 20:29, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:12, 21 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.

I can't see any reason to believe that this 1933 work comes under life+70. We don't know if the artist is credited inside the book; we don't know who he is at the moment. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:47, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:12, 21 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.

From 1942. Without seeing the book, it's impossible to check whether the author is credited; Unless the work is anonymous, the cover itself is probably in copyright. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:52, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:12, 21 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.

usunąc plik .SVG - miniaturka źle wyrenderowana - tekst na miniaturce w formacie .PNG nieczytelny, rozjechany; ten sam plik w formacie .PDF jest OK Ololuki (talk) 22:49, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: self nomination of same day upload. P 1 9 9   16:01, 21 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 in Category:Santa Teresa (Espírito Santo) regarding official symbols

[edit]

Unclear copyright status. Claim that these official symbols (coat of arms / brasão + flag / bandeira) of Brazilian municipality pt:Santa Teresa (Espírito Santo) were published or commissioned by a Brazilian government prior to 1983 ({{PD-BrazilGov}}) is not supported (files are undated). Taken from official site http://www.santateresa.es.gov.br. No trivial text/shape logos, failing also {{PD-textlogo}}/{{PD-shape}}. All coats of arms and flags of Brazilian municipalities are established individually by municipal law (mostly some years after official federal constitution, often citing the original designers), as also further redesigns of the symbols which [often] are completely different to the historic ones (see also this case, where a Brazilian municipality created his official symbols only 81 years after emancipation: in 2014). Generally for most of the Brazilian coats of arms and flags: unlikely also that these symbols were digitized in there present form prior to 1983 (when "Internet" was available only for a few institutions, TCP/IP was standardized in 1982). Their creation date could be quite recent, maybe not even by an employee of the Brazilian government.

Gunnex (talk) 20:32, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

According with Brazil's Federal Constitution:[1][footnote 1]

Art. 13. The Portuguese language is the official idiom of the Federative Republic of Brazil.

§ 1º The symbols of the Federative Republic of Brazil are the flag, the anthem, the coat of arms and the national seal.
§ 2º The States, the Federal District and the Municipalities can have their own symbols.
(...)
Art. 18. The political and administrative organization of the Federative Republic of Brazil comprises the Union, the States, the Federal District and the Municipalities, all autonomous, under the terms of this Constitution.
(...)
Art. 30. It's the responsibility of the Municipalities:
I - to legislate on matters of local interest;

Because of what Brazil's Federal Constitution states, the symbols of any municipality (e.g. flag, coat of arms et cetera) are created by municipal law. In the case of the municipality of Santa Teresa (at the brazilian state of Espírito Santo), the municipality's selo (seal) and escudo (a.k.a. brasão, which means "coat of arms") were created by a municipal law.[2] Furthermore, these symbols had some of their characteristics changed by another municipal law, which also defined the characteristics of the flag of the municipality.[3]

Hence, the images BrasaoSantaTeresa.png (Santa Teresa's brasão or "coat of arms") and BandeiraSantaTeresa.png (Santa Teresa's bandeira or "flag") were defined by the mentioned municipal laws.

Now let's see what Brazil's Copyright Law[4] states about governmental/public documents (flags, seals, coats of arms, laws et cetera):[footnote 1]

Art. 8º Are not subjected to the protection on authorship rights, discussed in this law:

I - the ideas, normative procedures, systems, methods, projects or mathematical concepts as such;
(...)
IV - the texts of treaties and conventions, the laws, decrees, regulations, court/judicial decisions and other official acts;

In a nutshell: because of Brazil's Federal Constitution and Brazil's Copyright Law, all federal, state and municipal symbols (flags, coats of arms et cetera) are created by laws, and, because these laws are not protected by copyright / intellectual property rights,[footnote 2] these (law) documents, as well as everything they contain (normative and descriptive texts, pictures of official/governmental/political entities - seals, flags, coats of arms et cetera) are in the public domain. Hence, they can all be used by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose.Sampayu 22:26, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

[edit]
  1. Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil.
  2. Municipal Law No. 356 of Nov. 20, 1962.
  3. Municipal Law No. 1252 of Apr. 13, 1998.

Footnotes

[edit]
  1. a b The original text was translated here from Brazilian Portuguese to English.
  2. In Brazilian Portuguese, we write direitos autorais, which means "authorship rights".
Hi! Thx for the feedback. If you can guarantee, that these symbols were made official due to the municipal law (as indicated) LEI Nº 356, DE 20 DE NOVEMBRO DE 1962 from 1962, and they (the symbols) were not significantly redesigned by (as indicated) municipal law LEI Nº 1252, DE 13 DE ABRIL DE 1998 from 1998 (which — btw — often occurs for "old" coat of arms of Brazilian municipalities), I can life with that and I will withdraw the nomination. But this information should have been placed right from the start in the file information to clarify & fullfill {{PD-BrazilGov}}-staus ("prior to 1983").
But, generally talking:
"they can all be used by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose"
No. You forgot to underline above "text". The actual Brazilian copyright law from 1998 makes no exception for government works. Please see also http://jus.com.br/artigos/14982/orgaos-publicos-dominio-publico-e-licencas-publicas. (2010, by Christiano Lacorte, MA in [Brazilian] law)
Btw: In Brazilian trademark law "they can all be used by anyone, anywhere, for any purpose" leads to L9279, art. 191 ("DOS CRIMES COMETIDOS POR MEIO DE MARCA, TÍTULO DE ESTABELECIMENTO E SINAL DE PROPAGANDA): Reproduzir ou imitar, de modo que possa induzir em erro ou confusão, armas, brasões ou distintivos oficiais nacionais, estrangeiros ou internacionais, sem a necessária autorização, no todo ou em parte, em marca, título de estabelecimento, nome comercial, insígnia ou sinal de propaganda, ou usar essas reproduções ou imitações com fins econômicos." = [more or less] It is prohibited to use coats of arms and other distinctive [inter]national symbols in trademarks, establishment titles, commercial names, advertising (...) or use this reproductions/imitations for economic [commercial] purposes. --> but this is trademark law, mostly irrelevant for Commons — but just FYI. Further readings: Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-BrazilGov 2 and Template talk:PD-BrazilGov. Gunnex (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
BrasaoSantaTeresa.png was defined by law #356/62 (prior to 1983). Hence, this one (in its original version) can be used, but the actual design (the one which includes the coffee plant) can't be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Only now I also noticed that BandeiraSantaTeresa.png was defined only by law #1252/98 (after 1983). Hence, this one has to be deleted, too.Sampayu 01:27, 16 February 2016 (UTC), updated 01:37, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The flag is OK too. It is just the coat of arms from 1962 wrapped in a simple, blue-white {{PD-ineligible}} environment (derivative work). I'll try to do the related corrections and  I withdraw my nomination for both files. Thx again. Gunnex (talk) 08:13, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
According with those two laws, prior to 1983 the symbols were a hummingbird and the Canaan Valley. In such times, there was no flag yet, and the coat of arms existed but had only the hummingbir and the Canaan Valley. After 1983 (in 1998), the second law added the coffee as a symbol, too, so from then on the symbols became hummingbird, coffee and Canaan Valley for both the coat of arms and the (now created) flag.Sampayu 19:41, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... the original version of the municipal law from 1962 does not have an attachment showing details of the design of the coat of arms. The 1998 law — in its original version — on the other hand shows the design (rotate it 90° to the right) which we know. If http://www.legislacaoonline.com.br/santateresa/ is able to index all historic municipal laws related to "escudo"/"bandeira"/"brasão"/"café"/"símbolos"/etc. (these and more search terms I tried out) and considering that adding a coffee plant to the coat of arms most likely would have resulted in a separate law before the 1998 law AND even trying [unsuccessfully] to obtain a version of the 1962 coat of arms, surfing around and opening old laws from 1962—1998, in the hope, that they [the laws] may have been printed [and scanned] at official papers showing the coat of arms... --> I must admit that... you are probadly right. Definitely, as also indicated at article 1 of the 1998 law, the coffee plant is for now on part of the coat of arms — which was most likely done by a complete redesign of the 1962 coat of arms. In other words: I withdraw my withdraw, opting for  Delete. Gunnex (talk) 21:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I must admit that I hadn't paid sufficient attention to the dates of these laws. Because these two current drawings use the coffee plant, they're both as described in the law of 1998, hence I must agree that both these images have to be  deleted.Sampayu 00:39, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Deleted: per discussion. --Krd 09:49, 28 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 of Tasnim News Agency

[edit]

There is a big misunderstanding: The text on all pages of http://www.tasnimnews.com says "All Content by Tasnim News Agency is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License". But this does not mean that all content on the WEBSITE is CC. This applies only for "Content by Tasnim News Agency" itself. I didn't find a single image which says it is from Tasnim News Agency (despite the fact that this is claimed on the Commons file pages), they all have a different author note, if any at all. Probably some of them really are "by Tasnim News" but this is not indicated.

One example for a file definitely not under CC is the image of the Russian spokesman Dmitry Peskov at http://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2016/02/15/1001987/kremlin-calls-for-creation-of-united-anti-terrorist-front. The same image is at http://www.vg.no/sport/russland/putins-talsmann-gifter-seg-med-ol-mester/a/23498392/ clearly saying "Foto: Alexander Zemlianichenko, Ap" (meaning Associated Press). It is also in general highly implausible that this rather small Tasnim News Agency should have own photographers at any event in the world or would be able or willing to buy all rights from huge news agencies like Associated Press to be able to put the images under a free license.

So, the fact is: it does not say "All Content on this website is licensed under a Creative Commons..." but "All Content by Tasnim News Agency is licensed under a Creative Commons...". This is a huge difference. And since on the Tasnim pages not a single image is tagged as "by Tasnim News" all have to be deleted. --146.60.149.254 18:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Info
= (example) most likely NOT work by Tasnim News Agency is e.g. File:Mohammad Panjali.jpg, taken from a news story by tasnimnews.com via http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news/(...) = http://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1393/04/24/139304241005468973208434.jpg (no exif/no watermarks/no credits), considering previously published via (example) mehrnews.com (© 2015 Mehr News Agency (www.mehrnews.com). All rights reserved) = http://media.mehrnews.com/old/Original/1393/04/23/IMG11455105.jpg (exif available).
On the other hand: most likely a work by Tasnim News Agency is (example) File:Velayat 94 Military exercise 17 by Mbazri.jpg, taken from a Tasnim News Agency's gallery via http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/media(...) = http://newsmedia.tasnimnews.com/Tasnim/Uploaded/Image/1394/11/08/139411081016419526984184.jpg (watermarked by Tasnim News Agency, credit given [but no exif]).
So, it may be that all files taken from urls like http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/news(...) (used as embedded header photos in an article/in a news story) are most likely NOT works by Tasnim News Agency. Files which are sourced with links to galleries typo http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/media/(...) and which are watermarked by Tasnim News Agency und where a credit to the photographer is given may be works by Tasnim News Agency...
Considering all this, I would say that (as another examples)
are NOT works by Tasnim News Agency, considering the source.
But:
  • File:Vahid Hashemian.jpg: although sourced with an article/newsstory ("news") link via [6] it has Tasnim News Agency's waterrmark and a credit to the photographer.
So: the "last standing" rationale to differ between works by Tasnim News Agency and third party content may depend of an existing watermark AND the credit to the photographer. An email to Tasnim News Agency may clarify the license stuff...
Gunnex (talk) 09:52, 26 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Gunnex and GRuban: . You're Right! Only files under http://www.tasnimnews.com/fa/media/ (or /en/media) are created by Tasnim and every image in this directory is watermarked by Tasnim(bottom left corner). And it should credit to the photographer(black bar under image) and the photographer should be Human!(not a website) some images like this and this are not created by Tasnim but have Tasnim's watermark(these images are from khamenei.ir and president.ir and are copyrighted) In2wiki (talk) 14:01, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I want explain about the misundrestanding for one time: There are two kinds of images in the website: 1-loaned images from international news agencies with obvious watermark (example 1 or example 2) or none watermark (example).

2-own work images of the news agency by official photographers of the news agency around the world (often in the middle east (example)) or in Iran. We just upload images with watermarks included photographers names of the news agency. You can investigate about this.Saman-1984 (talk) 21:36, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed many of these images at Category:License review needed and am happy to see you are addressing the issue as I was unsure how to approach these uploads. Thanks Ww2censor (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I created a template to use for this queue: {{Tasnim}}. You can use {{subst:Tasnim/subst}}, which includes the {{LicenseReview}} template so a reviewer can verify its status. (There's also {{subst:Tasnim/subst+rev|http://}} for reviewers, where "http://" should be the image's location.) The existing category for the queue is Category:Tasnimnews review needed. czar 21:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment An idea would be to create a category for each Tasnim News photographer. For example, Category:Tasnim News Photographer/Mohammad Hassanzadeh. The category home page could be used to document details that establish that this person works for Tasnim News.

  • If there's no watermark then it's not a Tasnim image - delete.
  • Add the photo to the category for that photographer and see if we have documented that he/she works for Tasnim News.

Unfortunately, it seems some of the people uploading are removing or blanking out the watermark which is creating extra work. For example File:Fallaq Tank by Tasnimnews.jpg has a blank watermark. The original file is watermarked "photo: Mohammad Hassanzadeh". Mr. Hassanzadeh appears to work for Tasnim News.[7] and [8]

Another unfortunate aspect is that Tasnim News itself never seems to mention their photographers on the English language pages meaning we'd be relying on less reliable sources. Marc Kupper (talk) 07:27, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

At Commons we deal in evidence not the balance of probabilities (see COM:EVID). How about images like [9] in the MEDIA folder ?. Privacy violating - no subject consent, tampered EXIFs, no watermark. Uploader issues. Unfitlouie (talk) 02:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:watermarks encourages removal of visible watermarks, which is all that was done. If that is your only objection to the uploader, I encourage you to remove it as a personal attack. We're discussing content not contributor here, unless I'm mistaken. --GRuban (talk) 00:06, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Commons:watermarks is a proposal which is not yet accepted by the community. If the watermark is removed, the unwatermarked version should also be uploaded and displayed alongside the image under the same or better licence. Furthermore, the WMF and some courts have made it very clear that removal of watermarks containing copyright information is a serious legal issue [10],[11]. An additional ground for my objection was privacy violation of subjects. My comment about the uploader is that he /she has an evident conflict of interest, and the permissions /clarifications from the concerned news agency would be better sent officially through OTRS instead of via such discussion pages. Unfitlouie (talk) 02:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What is the uploader's evident conflict of interest again? Are you saying he works for the agency? What makes you think that? The privacy violation allegation seems reaching and guesswork and a bit derogatory - after all, this is a professional photographer from a professional news agency, we have no reason to believe he did not follow all proper requirements, and saying that we should assume he didn't impugns his professionalism. We've got a whole category Category:People voting, with loads of similar photos, including from such highly respected sources as the Brazil senate, Al Jazeera, the US Navy - what have all those photos got that this one hasn't? The OTRS seems similarly hypothetical and, in addition, unrealistic: assuming we could even get the attention of the agency, what could an email to OTRS even say, other than the release that has already been written on every single Tasnim News Agency page? --GRuban (talk) 13:49, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
eg. the usage of "We" above. It is very clear that these uploads are mostly against COM policy. It is better to delete all of them under COM:PRP. Unfitlouie (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think we have to delete all. We cant trust a source that tags all material as CC licence when then don’t own the rights to the images. /Hangsna (talk) 21:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
But they don't "tag all material as CC licence", they just say that all material that they produce is. This is exactly the situation of Voice of America, and all other US government web sites - all material they produce is public domain, but they also use material that they don't produce. --GRuban (talk) 02:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on what is written above, it seems that the website contains a mixture of licensed and unlicensed images, and files which have made it past the licence reviewing process may have had incorrect reviews. It seems that there are 1494 images with {{Tasnim}} and 1247 images which are awaiting a review. Proposed remedies:
  1. Request a review of all of the 1494 images, regardless of whether a review previously has been done. If many reviews are incorrect, then it's safer to re-review the files.
  2. Add a review template to {{Tasnim}} which works in the same way as the review templates in {{Cc-by-sa-3.0-FilmiTadka}} and {{Cc-by-3.0-BollywoodHungama}}. This will ensure that all users uploading files from this website will request a review of the licence.
  3. Make it more clear from the template that there are lots of images on the website which are not covered by {{Tasnim}}.
  4. Close this deletion request and nominate non-free images for deletion separately, once the licence has been reviewed. --Stefan2 (talk) 15:26, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I can accept that. One question about who is to do the reviews, though - should license reviewers that have reviewed any of these before be forbidden from reviewing any others, or encouraged to review the others? --GRuban (talk) 17:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@GRuban: I reviewed a small number of these a month or so ago. I also reviewed about 50 of them today, following the guidelines layed out in this discussion (before you asked this question). Now that we have a template on these that gives a summary of how to review them and a link to this discussion, I don't see any reason why reviewers should have difficulty reviewing them properly. As for forbidding a reviewer to do reviews, the only way of doing that that I know of is taking away the reviewer right. That's usually only done if a reviewer is consistently making mistakes, or, far more rarely, if a reviewer is doing something dishonest. I don't see any problem giving reviewers a 2nd chance at these now that the reviewing process for the uploads has been clarified. INeverCry 23:15, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kept per consensus above - Jcb (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]