Commons:Deletion requests/Archive/2016/04/17
 |
This is an archive, please do not edit. Post new cases at Commons:Deletion requests. You can visit the most recent archive here. |
 |
|
|
.jpg){kind=link}
![103 File:Мемориал по Насте, убитой Гюльчехрой Бобокуловой, возле входа в метро "Октябрьское поле".jpg](#File:Мемориал_по_Насте,_убитой_Гюльчехрой_Бобокуловой,_возле_входа_в_метро_"Октябрьское_поле".jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Republika_Srpska_-_church.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
_à_la_halte_de_la_Claie.JPG){kind=link}
.JPG){kind=link}
.png){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
This picture is in use in several sites. No OTRS release note has been received though I asked the uploader to obtain one on Feb 8 (the message was left in he.wiki). It has no place in the Commons in this situation. Ldorfman (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
This picture is in use in several sites. No OTRS release note has been received though I asked the uploader to obtain one on Feb 8 (the message was left in he.wiki). It has no place in the Commons in this situation. Ldorfman (talk) 23:28, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyright holder according to EXIF differs from uploader. Needs OTRS permission if we are to host this. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Marieke Eerdmans (talk · contribs)
[edit]Probably not own work because "photoshoots".
- File:FB sept 15 campagne II.jpg
- File:FB sept 15 campagne.jpg
- File:CHALROSE GOINGOUT SET01 08 FN PAG LR.jpg
- File:CHALROSE CASUAL SET03 07 FN PAG LR.jpg
- File:CHALROSE CASUAL SET02 08 FN PAG LR.jpg
- File:CHALROSE CASUAL SET01 05 FN PAG1 LR.jpg
- File:CHALROSE BUSINESS SET02 03 FN PAG LR.jpg
- File:CHALROSE BUSINESS SET01 05 FN PAG LR.jpg
Sismarinho (talk) 11:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC) Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 08:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Promotional clickbait Takeaway (talk) 11:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as technically copyvio's aswell. –Davey2010Talk 17:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, very promotional user, I'll delete most or even all his/her contributions, maybe I must block him/her. Taivo (talk) 18:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
--80.98.185.246 05:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)RIBANC
The file does not exist. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Possible copyright violation Sakhalinio (talk) 08:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Túrelio: Copyright violation; see Commons:Licensing: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpost.php?p=131297572&postcount=4690
Another freedom of panorama issue. The building dates from 2008 and Bosnian copyright law states that copyrighted works (such as this one) are allowed only if "they are not used for gaining economic profit". This makes them unsuitable for the Commons. Surtsicna (talk) 10:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted by Ronhjones: Copyright violation: Original photo from panoramio.com is copyrighted: http://www.panoramio.com/photo/32890759
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Modern sculpture, no FoP for sculptures in Russia
- File:Девушка его мечты - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Венедикту Ерофееву - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Веничке - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Веничке Ерофееву - panoramio.jpg
- File:Производители памятника ,-) - panoramio.jpg
- File:Цитата из ^quot,Москва-Петушки^quot - panoramio - Александр Спиридонов.jpg
- File:Цитата из ^quot,Москва-Петушки^quot - panoramio.jpg
_-_panoramio.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Stolbovsky (talk) 17:34, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Natuur12 (talk) 20:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Modern sculpture (1994), no FoP for sculptures in Russia
- File:Памятник Пушкину 1 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Пушкину 2 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Пушкину 3 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Памятник Пушкину 4 - panoramio.jpg
Stolbovsky (talk) 09:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Modern sculptures. No FoP for sculptures in Russia
- File:Скульптура 1 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Скульптура 2 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Скульптура 3 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Скульптура ^quot,К звездам^quot, 1 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Скульптура ^quot,К звездам^quot, 2 - panoramio.jpg
Stolbovsky (talk) 11:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 19:05, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Just personal travel photos?
Stolbovsky (talk) 20:19, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Keep No valid reason. Araz Yaquboğlu encyclopedic person. The name of the files more accurately are as follows:
►Cekli829 10:56, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
- Anyway even if the person has wikipedia article these photos look just like personal travel photos with no usage and any educational purpuses //Stolbovsky (talk) 20:42, 3 October 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: They might be useful, but the subject is the uploader and they are not selfies, so the actual photographer owns the copyright and these are copyvios. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 12:18, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Private photos. Maybe not notable persons.
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (1).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (10).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (2).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (3).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (5).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (6).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (7).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (8).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov (9).jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio - Oleg Yu.Novikov.jpg
- File:Воскресная прогулка, Влахернское-Кузьминки. Moscow, Russia. - panoramio.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Kulmalukko (talk) 13:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Out of scope, photos of unsuccessful photos of Moscow, which potentially cannot be used in Wikmedia projects.
- File:Wetlands under the electric line - panoramio.jpg
- File:Вася - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Въезд запрещен - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Деревья у гаражей - panoramio.jpg
- File:Деревья у дома - panoramio.jpg
- File:Огни в сумерках - panoramio.jpg
- File:Подземный переход, утреннее, 15.04.2012 - panoramio.jpg
- File:ПОКРЫВАЛО - panoramio.jpg
- File:Проход между домами - panoramio.jpg
- File:Пустырь - panoramio (139).jpg
- File:Пустырь недалеко от памятника - panoramio.jpg
- File:Пустырь у берегов Москвы-реки, Братеево - panoramio (1).jpg
- File:Пустырь у берегов Москвы-реки, Братеево - panoramio.jpg
- File:Руины цивилизации - panoramio.jpg
- File:Yard cleaners from Tajikistan and Uzbekistan play football. - panoramio.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Brateevsky {talk} 13:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination --A.Savin 14:07, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:54, 14 April 2018 (UTC)
Files in Category:Moscow
[edit]Sculptures by alive sculptor (Tsereteli). No FoP for scultures in Russia
- File:Moskvo100.jpg
- File:Moskvo102.jpg
- File:Moskvo103.jpg
- File:Moskvo104.jpg
- File:Moskvo105.jpg
- File:Moskvo106.jpg
- File:Moskvo107.jpg
- File:Moskvo108.jpg
- File:Moskvo110.jpg
- File:Moskvo111.jpg
- File:Moskvo112.jpg
- File:Moskvo113.jpg
- File:Moskvo115.jpg
- File:Moskvo116.jpg
- File:Moskvo117.jpg
- File:Moskvo89.jpg
- File:Moskvo90.jpg
- File:Moskvo91.jpg
- File:Moskvo94.jpg
- File:Moskvo96.jpg
- File:Moskvo98.jpg
- File:Moskvo99.jpg
Stolbovsky (talk) 10:28, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
- Interesting photos of Moscow, but none of them used in any wikipedia's. Support deletion. At least, most of photos can be found here — 55.767192, 37.613664. --Brateevsky {talk} 18:18, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Sealle (talk) 11:37, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
Created by mistake ArtTrapeza (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Typo, author's req. --Achim (talk) 20:26, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Wrong author i think. The image seems official (but not free to use) and can be found on various sites as http://www.revistacomotu.com/dove-y-ryan-a-tope-con-la-navidad/ or http://www.m-magazine.com/posts/dove-cameron-and-ryan-mccartan-planning-a-christmas-ep-for-2016-80353 Lacrymocéphale (talk) 13:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: speedy deleted. Christian Ferrer (talk) 11:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
this in copyright UsuárioMaster (talk) 14:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Info See also Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by RenataCosta2016 (both users meta blocked). Gunnex (talk) 21:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, Thuresson (talk) 19:04, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Historical and promo photos, TV screenshot, not own work.
- File:Karelina Preis 2015.jpg
- File:Карелина 9.jpg
- File:Карелина 8.jpg
- File:Карелина 6.jpg
- File:Карелина 4.jpg
- File:Карелина 5.jpg
- File:Карелина 3.jpg
- File:Карелина 1.jpg
- File:Карелина 2.jpg
- File:Карелина.jpg
- File:Мучник Борис Исаакович.jpg
EugeneZelenko (talk) 01:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Previously published elsewhere on the web (e.g. [1], [2]), no evidence for permission HaeB (talk) 02:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Unlikely to be uploaders own work; needs OTRS permission if so. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Created by mistake ArtTrapeza (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
No copyright details for the original newspaper. --ghouston (talk) 04:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Scans without source and copyright information for the original images. Own work seems unlikely.
- File:С.Н. Степанов.JPG
- File:М.Ф. Гизетдинов.jpg
- File:М.И. Олонцев.jpg
- File:В.А. Дробышева.jpg
- File:В.И. Ревтов.jpg
- File:А.А. Черемисина.jpg
- File:Н.В. Дворянов.jpg
- File:В.И. Сазонов.jpg
- File:Г.И. Синиченко.jpg
--ghouston (talk) 04:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:53, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Per this site not being a webhost. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
unused personal image : out of scope Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
unused personal image : out of scope Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own original work. An iphone image dated 1989 is not possible. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Non commercial license: http://www.nature.com/articles/srep07142 FunkMonk (talk) 07:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: We do not host NC licences. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
copyvio, cf watermark Pippobuono (talk) 08:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own work as claimed. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 02:59, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Possible copyriht violation Sakhalinio (talk) 08:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 08:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of project Sakhalinio (talk) 08:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: already deleted. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:11, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
promotional event with phone numbers and address — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vin09 (talk • contribs) 2016-04-08T06:52:11 (UTC)
Deleted: promotional. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The image is copyrighted on Flickr. There's no evidence of being released on CC-BY-SA. Dura-Ace (talk) 10:06, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
This particular photo hasn't got copyright. You can download without being registered on Flickr in fact. Cuentaprueba10 (talk)
- Delete, Obvious copyvio. @Cuentaprueba10: Copyright has nothing to do with being able to click "save as". Please read through our licensing policy. Thanks! Ariadacapo (talk) 06:44, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: all rights reserved on Flickr. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:14, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Unclear purpose of usage. Maybe just gibberish. Out of project scope. -- Geagea (talk) 10:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: unused apparently personal artwork with no description. Not useful for an educational purpose. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Photograph by Gerry Ebner, no evidence it has been released under the CC-BY-SA 4.0 license. Gyrostat (talk) 10:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Not own work as claimed. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Related ptwiki entries speedy deleted.
Gunnex (talk) 10:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:19, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Copyrighted by Andreas Fietz, no evidence it has been released under CC-BY-SA 4.0 Gyrostat (talk) 10:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no free licence on website from which this was apparently taken. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Copyrighted by Andreas Fietz, no evidence it has been released under CC-BY-SA 4.0 Gyrostat (talk) 10:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: no free licence on website from which this was apparently taken. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Thompzon da Silva Dinossauro (talk · contribs)
[edit]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. If In scope needs permission via https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=976216972461157&set=a.255361661213362.60248.100002185917945&type=3&theater (09.03.2016) and https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=964950390254482&set=a.146063575476505.36753.100002185917945&type=3&theater (02.2016)
Gunnex (talk) 10:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, user warned. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope, Commons is not a private photo album. Also a Wikipedia Zero upload. ★ Poké95 11:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Not realistically useful for educational purposes. Outside of Commons' project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:26, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Unused text-only content represented as PNG. Outside of Commons' project scope, particularly Commons:Project scope#Excluded educational content. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Emerson pint (talk · contribs)
[edit]Low-quality personal photos of subjects with no apparent notability. For some reason, they're all categorised as pertaining to a bus operator company in North Yorkshire, but there seems to be no actual connection to that whatsoever. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope.
—LX (talk, contribs) 11:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:29, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Low-quality personal photo of subject with no apparent notability. For some reason, it's categorised as pertaining to a bus operator company in North Yorkshire, but there seems to be no actual connection to that whatsoever. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
out of project scope ~ Nahid Talk 11:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Picture serves no educational purpose. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:30, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Picture serves no educational purpose. Only use so far was for cyberbullying on the Dutch Wikipedia. Mbch331 (talk) 11:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:31, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Serves no educational purpose. This isn't a notable person. User uses this to make fun of the person in the picture and hasn't got any serious plan with the photo. Mbch331 (talk) 11:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:34, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Outside of scope ~ Nahid Talk 12:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: personal image of no educational use. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:35, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
COPYVIO http://www.sportskeeda.com/wwe/5-rivalries-of-aj-styles-from-in-the-indies (pour information le bandeau copyvio a été placé hier à 17h24 (Paris) sans intervention d'admin). Sismarinho (talk) 13:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: not own work. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:36, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
COM:TOYS Ras67 (talk) 14:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: infringement of Pixar's copyright. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
COM:TOYS Ras67 (talk) 14:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: infringement of Pixar's copyright. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:37, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Probably copyrighted figures, COM:PCP Ras67 (talk) 14:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: personal artwork of no educational value. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:40, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
low resolution Leha-11 (talk) 14:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: personal photo of no educational value. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:41, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copyright infringement Leha-11 (talk) 14:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: not own work. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:43, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused non-trivial logos and advertisement of questionable notability. No evidence of permission(s).
- File:Hclapp web6 - Copy.jpg
- File:HCLAPP BANNER.jpg
- File:4237538-background-hd copy.jpg
- File:HCLAPP Tech proposal.pdf
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Unused personal image, out of COM:SCOPE eurodyne (talk) 16:39, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:46, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Pic taken within a museum, high res. photography of a copyright protected photography from the 1950s, no right to put it under a free license. Paulae (talk) 16:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: looks fine. The very small information board is de mininmis. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Self-promotional image, not in use, only contribution of uploader. Also, own work is doubtable. Sebari (talk) 17:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The creator of the original bronze statue has not provided a permission statement; permission to use the photo is not by itself sufficient. Unauthorized derivative work. KDS4444 (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
File:C Data Users DefApps AppData INTERNETEXPLORER Temp Saved Images 664318 1424055227846717 7533907909901075944 o.jpg
[edit]
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used (Wikipedia Zero upload). If IN scope, needs permission via https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=1424055227846717&set=a.1417262515192655.1073741830.100007267599714&type=1&theater (2014) Gunnex (talk) 18:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Escritoras JackMichel (talk · contribs)
[edit]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.
- File:Papel liso 03.png
- File:Modelo Padrão Michel 03.png
- File:Modelo Padrão Jack 05.png
- File:Livro Arco-Jesus-íris.png
- File:Citações Michel 03.png
- File:Modelo Padrão Jack 04.png
- File:Modelo Padrão Jack 03.png
Gunnex (talk) 18:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:53, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - promotional image INeverCry 20:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: personal image of no apparent educational use. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Sergeydorozhkin (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:Dosergey.jpg
- File:Diserega.jpg
- File:SergeyDorozhkin.jpg
- File:Сергей Дорожкин и Анастасия Сиваева.jpg
- File:Сергей Дорожкин и Алексей Рыжов.JPG
INeverCry 20:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:55, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 22:00, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:58, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 22:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:57, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used (Wikipedia Zero upload, probadly Angola). Gunnex (talk) 05:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:50, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 09:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The Little Mermaid is a copyrighted work of art by Edvard Eriksen (died 1959) according to Danish law. Thus the copyright for this work of art expires on 1 January 2030. Kürschner (talk) 09:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- This is an obvious deletion. — Fnielsen (talk) 11:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- It's obvious. Works by this artist cannot be in Wikimedia Commons, because the artist has not been dead for at least 70 years. --31.2.64.138 03:13, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:54, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Soulmwandi (talk · contribs)
[edit]Unused personal content. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. Commons:What Commons is not#Commons is not your personal free web host.
—LX (talk, contribs) 10:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
There are two problems here. First, the background mural has or had a copyright and there is no evidence here that it is PD. Second, the three skeletons are almost certainly not all original bones, but reconstructions. As such they fall under the copyright category of sculptures and it must be proven that they are PD. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The painting can be cropped out, but the fact that it was made for a US govenrment owned institution (museum at Petrified Forest National Park, "Rainbow Forest Museum") means it would be PD, as the painter was employed by the government. As for the skeletons, they are casts of bones, which cannot be copyrighted. Missing bone fragments are cast after related animals, or sometimes sculpted, and would be a very small part of the skeleton, so the latter would fall under Commons:De minimis. FunkMonk (talk) 11:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Comment The fact that a work of art is in a museum, even if this museum is also US government owned institution, don't mean at all the work of art was created by a government employee. It is much more common, and throughout the museum through the worlds, that museums buy their works of arts to private creators, collectors, artists... I mean, who can trust that the Smithsonian collections were created by Smithsonian Institution employees, maybe some works of arts are in PD for others reasons, but very likely not because they were created by a government employee.
All this to say that the fact for a work of art to be in a government museum is not at all an evidence that this work of art was created by a museum employee. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:24, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and per my comment above. Christian Ferrer (talk) 05:25, 24 April 2016 (UTC) Regarding "De Minimis" these bones until proved otherwise may be extrapolated castings arranged arbitrarily so are sculptures. Until the contrary is just speculation, then not DM. Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hüseyin.Huseyinov (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Commons is not private photo album. Not used.
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. --Steinsplitter (talk) 07:42, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
This photo comes from PortalGuarani.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosarino (talk • contribs) 2016-04-17T04:41:22 (UTC)
Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:47, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
copyright violation: http://artel.uz/uz/# — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nataev (talk • contribs) 2016-04-05T04:09:56 (UTC)
Deleted: likely copyright violation. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Osoby widniejące na zdjęciu nie wyraziły zgody na publikacje swojego wizerunku Yxyv (talk) 10:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: uploader's request, unused file. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Ymblanter (talk) 20:51, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Bizarre perspective or geometric choices makes it hard to see if the Cl are positioned correctly on the cyclohexane chair. Have a full set of ball-and-stick diagrams at Category:Hexachlorocyclohexane that make it clear which ones are "up" vs "down" and "axial" vs "equatorial". DMacks (talk) 21:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Leyo 08:21, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
http://www5e.biglobe.ne.jp/~och/f-access/sight_photo04.jpg からの無断転載。 愛されて100年コストパフォーマンス抜群 (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nom. --Yasu (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused map of questionable notability. Should be in SVG if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:51, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text document of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused document of questionable notability and unclear copyrights status. EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:55, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Bob852mason (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of Commons:Project scope: Unused text documents of questionable notability. Should be moved as wiki-text to relevant project if useful.
- File:Sample court bundle october 2015.pdf
- File:Generate compliant court bundle instantly.jpg
- File:Judicialreviewgeneratorscreenshot.jpg
- File:Edit witness statements.png
- File:Judicial review win screenshot.png
- File:Generate compliant court bundle instantly.png
- File:Edit particulars of claim.png
EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:54, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
DC Comics artwork
[edit]All copyvios, characters, logos and artwork property of DC Comics.
Files affected:
- File:BlackCanary.png
- File:Darkseidtrono1.png
- File:Diana Prince DC Comics.jpg
- File:Justice League Group.jpg
- File:4005678 143.png.jpg
Fma12 (talk) 21:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:56, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 21:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
bad image should not be here mistakenly put up DigDug66 (talk) 11:05, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Deleted, orphan file, uploader request. -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 21:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:00, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Ozan Can Ozan (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 21:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - no COM:EDUSE INeverCry 21:38, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Анастасия Хрущёва (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 21:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
File:Мемориал по Насте, убитой Гюльчехрой Бобокуловой, возле входа в метро "Октябрьское поле".jpg
[edit]
Out of scope - dark and blurry - no COM:EDUSE INeverCry 21:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by בן סימונובסקי (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
- File:בן סימנובסקי 3.jpg
- File:בן סימנובסקי .jpg
- File:בן סימנובסקי באולפן התוכנית בראש צעיר.jpg
- File:בן סימנובסקי 2.jpg
INeverCry 22:00, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:01, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by นันทา เหลืองทอง (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 22:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
As mentioned in the file's details, the uploader is not the photographer. On March 22, I asked the uploader to provide OTRS release approval (in his talk page in he.wiki, his home-project) but we have not received any response. The file has no place in the Commons in this situation. Ldorfman (talk) 23:24, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Lower-resolution copy of File:Malcolm X NYWTS.jpg, which is already on Commons. — Malik Shabazz (talk · contribs) 00:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Not the uploader's own work. Design appears too complicated for PD-simple. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Keep: Clearly bellow the COM:TOO in the US, but unused. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: PD-textlogo. --Jcb (talk) 21:06, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Krdbot as Copyvio (Copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: external source, no license, no permission. Bellow the TOO in Germany? Amitie 10g (talk) 03:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: although this one may be borderline. --Jcb (talk) 21:18, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Darwin Sarmiento10 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 20:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:07, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Song. No evidence of permission. Wikipedia Zero upload from Angola. Gunnex (talk) 05:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
"1920s" is not exact enough. PD-US requires that it was taken before 1926 if it really is anonymous. However, it doesn't say where this was published, so there is no way to confirm that the photo really was anonymous. Source isn't exact enough. Stefan4 (talk) 20:01, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
Keep In Turkey, per article 4 of {{PD-TR}} (In case the first owner of the work is a legal person, the protection period is 70 years from the date that the work is published.). As long as I known, works of public employee, taken or made during the course of an employee's official duties are public domain in the United States, Takabeg (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Per Takabeg.--Rapsar (talk) 09:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, so the photo was made by a legal person? I see that you also changed to a more specific date of publication. With publication in 1923, it entered the public domain in Turkey in 1994 which was before the URAA date, so I think it looks fine now. --Stefan4 (talk) 10:27, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Note: With the Turkish Copyright law numbered 4110/dated 12/06/1995, the duration of protection was extended to 70 years after death of author. Former duration of protection (from 1951 till 1995) was 20 years after death of author. Since the copyright expired, the right won't resurrect protection again (at least in Turkey). Takabeg (talk) 11:08, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Ah. So are you saying that works by people who died before 1975 are in the public domain in Turkey? Turkey's plans to join the European Union will of course break this, but it could prove very useful for COM:URAA. --Stefan4 (talk) 11:38, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
- Pardon. This is related only with films :) I'm continuing to research this, and waiting for reply of User:Hukukçu. Takabeg (talk) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- According to Erkan Karagöz (lawyer), former duration of protection was 50 years. Takabeg (talk) 09:35, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- Pardon. This is related only with films :) I'm continuing to research this, and waiting for reply of User:Hukukçu. Takabeg (talk) 09:28, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
- I know such but I'm not completely sure. So I've asked a lawyer from Turkey. I hope he will give more precise information for us. Takabeg (talk) 11:55, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
Kept: Problem seems to have been fixed FASTILY (TALK) 05:51, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
missing information about author (death), PD70 does not fit here Ceroles (talk) 14:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Keep per previous DR, no new and stronger reasoning provided (and is not PD-old-70, is PD-Turkey. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: this has been figured out in 2012. --Jcb (talk) 21:21, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
Apparently a problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2. The artist is not stated and it sculpture seems modern. Fnielsen (talk) 11:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 09:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2. Fnielsen (talk) 11:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 09:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 09:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 10:00, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Likely a problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Likely a problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- You can also see the iconic "corkscrew spire" of Church of Our Saviour. the protected Christianshavn Rampart and Stadsgraven so I think it should fall under freedam of panorama.Ramblersen (talk) 13:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Spire is OK, sculpture is not. See COM:FOP#Denmark. Storkk (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination - there is no Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. --Storkk (talk) 10:03, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
- @User:Storkk: Sorry but the Danish Property Rights Act (Ophavsretsloven) § 24, section 2 states that "Stk. 2. Kunstværker må afbildes, når de er varigt anbragt på eller ved en for almenheden tilgængelig plads eller vej. Bestemmelsen i 1. pkt. finder ikke anvendelse, såfremt kunstværket er hovedmotivet og gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt.": An artwork may be depeicted if they are permanently placed in a public plac (first sentence) unless they are the principal motif of the picture (second sentence). Section 3 then states that buildings can freely be depicted without any reservations. You can read it here. I admit that it is open to discussion in this specific case wheather the sculpture is the main motif of the photograph or wheather the spire and general setting was just as important but to claim that there is no freedom of panorama for sculpture in Denmark is wrong. Please be aware of that in the future and I think the image should be restored if possible since it was deleted on the wrong basis.Ramblersen (talk) 04:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Ramblersen: I should perhaps have been more clear. There is no Commons-compatible Freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark. As you yourself quoted, Freedom of Panorama does not apply to commercial reproductions. That is not an acceptable condition here. In any case, this discussion is closed, and this is the wrong place to discuss this. If you disagree, please raise the matter at COM:REFUND, where a third party will review. Best regards, Storkk (talk) 11:33, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
- @User:Storkk: Sorry but the Danish Property Rights Act (Ophavsretsloven) § 24, section 2 states that "Stk. 2. Kunstværker må afbildes, når de er varigt anbragt på eller ved en for almenheden tilgængelig plads eller vej. Bestemmelsen i 1. pkt. finder ikke anvendelse, såfremt kunstværket er hovedmotivet og gengivelsen udnyttes erhvervsmæssigt.": An artwork may be depeicted if they are permanently placed in a public plac (first sentence) unless they are the principal motif of the picture (second sentence). Section 3 then states that buildings can freely be depicted without any reservations. You can read it here. I admit that it is open to discussion in this specific case wheather the sculpture is the main motif of the photograph or wheather the spire and general setting was just as important but to claim that there is no freedom of panorama for sculpture in Denmark is wrong. Please be aware of that in the future and I think the image should be restored if possible since it was deleted on the wrong basis.Ramblersen (talk) 04:45, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Those are all low-resolution images of celebrities uploaded by the same user. EXIF data show they were taken with different cameras/phones. One of the images was taken in a prison (hard to believe the user claiming to be the author was in a prison). They were probably taken from various sources. One photo (File:Severina.Vuckovic.jpg) is credited to "MAPE agencija" in the EXIf data. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, likely copyright violations. --Storkk (talk) 10:05, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by DOrtegaNica as Speedy (Speedy) and the most recent rationale was: The logo is South Korean, and would more than meet COM:TOO. Didym (talk) 23:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete: Very above the TOO, and no FOP in the RoK. --Amitie 10g (talk) 00:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 10:07, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
,_Republika_Srpska_-_church.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
,_Republika_Srpska_-_church.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Another freedom of panorama issue. The building dates from 1996 and Bosnian copyright law states that copyrighted works (such as this one) are allowed only if "they are not used for gaining economic profit". This makes them unsuitable for the Commons. Surtsicna (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
,_Republika_Srpska_-_church.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination: there is no commons-compatible Freedom of Panorama in Bosnia-Herzegovina. --Storkk (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
,_Republika_Srpska_-_church.JPG){kind=link}
Questionable authorship claims. According to the file's metadata, this image may have been grabbed from eBay. —LX (talk, contribs) 10:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Storkk (talk) 10:16, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Another freedom of panorama issue. The church was recently constructed and Bosnian copyright law states that copyrighted works (such as this one) are allowed only if "they are not used for gaining economic profit". This makes them unsuitable for the Commons. Surtsicna (talk) 10:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: there is no commons-compatible Freedom of Panorama in Bosnia-Herzegovina. --Storkk (talk) 10:13, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Another freedom of panorama issue. The mosque was recently constructed and Bosnian copyright law states that copyrighted works (such as this one) are allowed only if "they are not used for gaining economic profit". This makes them unsuitable for the Commons. Surtsicna (talk) 10:49, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: there is no commons-compatible Freedom of Panorama in Bosnia-Herzegovina. --Storkk (talk) 10:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Another freedom of panorama issue. The mosque was recently constructed and Bosnian copyright law states that copyrighted works (such as this one) are allowed only if "they are not used for gaining economic profit". This makes them unsuitable for the Commons. Surtsicna (talk) 10:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination: there is no commons-compatible Freedom of Panorama in Bosnia-Herzegovina. --Storkk (talk) 10:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Files by صقر السويدي
[edit]All his files:Copyvio and unhelpful --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 08:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:42, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:Albrecht Dürer - The Penitent - WGA7169.jpg Årvasbåo (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
copy of File:Sona mohapatra.jpg ~ Moheen (talk) 09:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
ぼやけている — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.88.61.198 (talk • contribs) 2016-04-13T08:00:04 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. ~riley (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Possible nonsene or pranks making, see where used — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.10.191.73 (talk • contribs) 2016-04-09T14:33:09 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
非常に小さい、ぼやけている — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.88.61.198 (talk • contribs) 2016-04-13T08:18:08 (UTC)
- Delete: Unusably poor quality image, with no obvious educational purpose. Used only on the uploader's indiscriminate image gallery, so this is outside the project scope, as explained in COM:INUSE. Category:JR East 701 in Akita livery contains loads of infinitely better quality images of 701 series trains in this livery. --DAJF (talk) 01:21, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:43, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
self-promotion — Preceding unsigned comment added by P4K1T0 (talk • contribs) 2016-04-16T09:28:54 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:44, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Duplicate of the 1st version of TIROS-1-Earth.png, no need for this extra one! Ras67 (talk) 12:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- (uploader) - Uploaded these yesterday. Flickr2Commons didn't notice the duplicate and I hadn't yet looked manually. No objections to deleting. Question, though: when is it more appropriate to just redirect or tag as a duplicate rather than nominate for deletion? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: (and then redirected). ~riley (talk) 05:47, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
derivative work of trophy Christian Ferrer (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:47, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No need for this low resolution and bad quality one, we have a better one. Ras67 (talk) 12:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- (uploader) - Uploaded these yesterday. Flickr2Commons didn't notice the duplicate and I hadn't yet looked manually.
No objections to deleting. Question, though: when is it more appropriate to just redirect or tag as a duplicate rather than nominate for deletion? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)- Actually, as this image is
of the patch itselfa photo of the printed design and is a jpg, whereas the other is a vector graphic of the patch design, are they really considered duplicates? — Rhododendrites talk | 12:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)- Update: Reworded my follow-up comment above, and see that there is also File:Sts-6-patch.png, which this is more directly a duplicate of. As I can't conceive of a possible reason we'd need a photo of a printed design rather than the design itself (in this case), I return to my original position which is that I have no objection to deleting. — Rhododendrites talk | 15:40, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Actually, as this image is
Deleted: (and then redirected). ~riley (talk) 05:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Copyright violation : [3] World Golf Awards and all related titles and logos are trademarks of World Travel Events Ltd Skivsamlare (talk) 15:00, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:48, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
An almost exact copy of the File:Тонометр 003.jpg ПростоУчастник (talk) 15:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Looks like a private image. Not used. Maybe not notable person. Kulmalukko (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Owing a photo does not make you copyright holder. 1944 photo, maybe still protected with copyright. Taivo (talk) 15:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
_%C3%A0_la_halte_de_la_Claie.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_%C3%A0_la_halte_de_la_Claie.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
copie légèrement modifiée de la photo http://www.delcampe.com/page/item/id,371126117,var,Autorail-X-2400-a-La-Claie-Photo-Patrick-Ertaud-31-mai-1980,language,E.html Quoique (talk) 15:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
_à_la_halte_de_la_Claie.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
_à_la_halte_de_la_Claie.JPG){kind=link}
Duplication with File:פרדי ברק.jpg. We don't need both of them. Ldorfman (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. Not exact duplicate if you check it carefully. -- Geagea (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. ~riley (talk) 05:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext und Fotografien; keinerlei Nachweis, dass Text und Bilder unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlicht werden dürfen --> URV. Paulae (talk) 16:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Museums-Informationstafel in einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext und Fotografien; keinerlei Nachweis, dass Text und Bilder unter einer freien Lizenz veröffentlicht werden dürfen --> URV. Paulae (talk) 16:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
DDR-Werbung, abfotografiert in einem Museum. Keinerlein Erlaubnis ersichtlich, die Fotografie u. Gesamtgestaltung unter eine Freie Lizenz zu stellen, vi Lizenz falsche Urheberangabe, URV. Paulae (talk) 16:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:Geschichte der Kameraindustrie in Dresden Ernemannwerke fotografische Dokumentation VI.jpg
[edit]
Abfotografierte Fotografien in einem Museum, keinerlei Nachweis, dass diese urheberrechtlich geschützten Fotografien unter eine freie Lizenz gestellt werden dürfen --> URV. Paulae (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:4990010205058 - Kalapahar, Basu, Rasik Chandra, 104p, LANGUAGE. LINGUISTICS. LITERATURE, bengali (1910).pdf
[edit]incomplete book , please delte it Jayantanth (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:51, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:TSD Depot Unterhaltungs-, Ton-, Radio- und Fernsehtechnik , Rundfunkgeschichte in Deutschland.jpg
[edit]
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:TSD Depot Unterhaltungs-, Ton-, Radio- und Fernsehtechnik , Wurlitzer Casettenbox C110 von 1971 V.jpg
[edit]
Diverse geschützte MC-Cover, in einem Museum hochauflösend fotografiert; kein Recht erkennbar, die Cover, die im Fokus der Aufnahme sind, unter freier Lizenz verbreiten zu dürfen --> URV. Paulae (talk) 16:19, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Foto und Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text (+ Foto) unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Foto und Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text (+ Foto) unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Foto und Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text (+ Foto) unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:29, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Foto und Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text (+Foto) unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:35, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:36, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Informationsftafel einer Ausstellung mit Langfließtext (Schöpfungshöhe ist abseits der reinen technischen Daten gegeben), kein Nachweis, dass Text unter einer freien Lizenz steht bzw. so von Dritten lizensiert werden darf. Paulae (talk) 16:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:53, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:4990010216526 - Kanakanjali Ed. 2, Baral, Akshaykumar, 142p, LANGUAGE. LINGUISTICS. LITERATURE, bengali (1897).pdf
[edit]please delete Jayantanth (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Hikinglibrarian (talk · contribs)
[edit]Personal photos, out of scope
Mjrmtg (talk) 18:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:54, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Duplicate of File:Naval Ensign of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.svg. Fry1989 eh? 18:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Small unused personal photo without metadata, the uploader's only contribution. Out of project scope. Taivo (talk) 18:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
not sourced to a Tasnim photographer INeverCry 18:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Photos of president.ir, aren't under free licenses.Saman-1984 (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Fails {{Tasnim}} license review: listed photographer is not Tasnim staff and thus not subject to Tasnim license. Would need to be licensed and uploaded through its official source czar 02:56, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:President Rouhani and his cabinet visiting Ayatollah Khamenei in holy month of Ramadhan 01.jpg
[edit]
not sourced to a Tasnim photographer INeverCry 18:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- If we can't find this image in Khamenei.ir, we must delete this.Saman-1984 (talk) 19:52, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Fails {{Tasnim}} license review: listed photographer is not Tasnim staff and thus not subject to Tasnim license. Would need to be licensed and uploaded through its official source (khamenei.ir) czar 02:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
unused personal photo, out of scope Mjrmtg (talk) 18:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
File:President Rouhani and his cabinet visiting Ayatollah Khamenei in holy month of Ramadhan 02.jpg
[edit]
not sourced to a Tasnim photographer INeverCry 18:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- If we can't find this image in Khamenei.ir, we must delete this.Saman-1984 (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Fails {{Tasnim}} license (see license details) – photographer not on Tasnim staff czar 03:15, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
not sourced to a Tasnim photographer INeverCry 18:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- If we can't find this image in Khamenei.ir, we must delete this.Saman-1984 (talk) 19:49, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete Fails the {{Tasnim}} license. czar 03:13, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:55, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Thatonewikiguy as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Commons are not LinkedIn Ronhjones (Talk) 18:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: In use on userpage. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album + advertising or self-promotion. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 19:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used (Wikipedia Zero upload). Gunnex (talk) 19:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
en:ASE does not mention anything in Iran. Probably the studio is non-notable. Taivo (talk) 19:07, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Personal photo. Out of scope. -- Geagea (talk) 19:08, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by Elnatã.Seifer (talk · contribs)
[edit]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) 19:14, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Historical photo, own work is in doubt. OTRS-permission from photographer (if dead, then from heir) is needed. Taivo (talk) 19:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Most of depicted medals are protected with copyright. That case OTRS-permission from medal designers is needed. Taivo (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of project scope: Commons is not a private photo album. No educational purpose: Not used. Gunnex (talk) 19:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:56, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by СофияБратск (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 20:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
ce fichier n'a pas d'utilité Vatadoshu (talk) 20:24, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 20:25, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Files uploaded by CancerPatient123 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal images
INeverCry 20:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Unused low-quality personal photo of subjects with no apparent notability. Not realistically useful for educational purposes and therefore outside of Commons' project scope. —LX (talk, contribs) 20:38, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:57, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Private image, not realistically useful for an educational purpose: Out of project scope. Ies (talk) 15:59, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Gbawden (talk) 10:06, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:41, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
possible copyright problem 1, 2 Sakhalinio (talk) 20:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: COM:OTRS needed. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal/self-promotional image INeverCry 20:45, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 20:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - no COM:EDUSE INeverCry 21:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:11, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:13, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.JPG&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.JPG&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Although FoP is ok for Spain, the characters displayed (artwork by Alex Ross) are copyrighted by Marvel Comics. - Fma12 (talk) 21:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:58, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.JPG){kind=link}
Files uploaded by DpkKumar34 (talk · contribs)
[edit]Out of scope - unused personal/self-promotional images
- File:Gurjar Samrat Mihir Bhoj International Airport .jpg
- File:Lokesh Bhati Rapper .jpg
- File:Lokesh Bhati.jpg
INeverCry 21:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Out of scope - unused personal image INeverCry 21:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Collage of several probably copyrighted automobiles together with a description in no relationship with the picture. MMFE (talk) 22:20, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - Spotted the image & was gonna send it here myself - As noted above the logos are all copyrighted, Clearly not own work etc. –Davey2010Talk 20:42, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: Copyvio. ~riley (talk) 05:59, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.png&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.png&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
Unused logo of unclear notability with wrong copyright information. Out of project scope. Stefan2 (talk) 23:22, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 06:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
.png){kind=link}
Obscene, not educational Konto na chwilę (talk) 23:26, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: as above. ~riley (talk) 06:00, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
As owner and photographer of this shot this is a Personal decison not to share this file anymore. Thanks dario Giannobile Dario Giannobile (talk) 11:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Oppose Appears to have been up for six weeks when this DR was filed. Is already in use. I don't think this qualifies for a courtesy deletion. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 03:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The file have been used only once!!!! The subject can easily be replaced with other similar shots of the plaza and Duomo Dario Giannobile (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Dario Giannobile: It would be helpful if you could elaborate on why you are asking us to delete it. Please read Commons:Courtesy_deletions. As it stands, I am leaning towards declining your request. Storkk (talk) 10:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Storkk: Dear Storkk, there is one reason behind this choice. The reason is that i loaded an immage at full resolution and I think that it can be used for commercial purpose by people who do not care about the author effort in doing the shot (checking internet the file have been used many times outside wiki). I'm not a professional photographer but I try to pay back small expences (internet domain of my site for istance) selling these kind of images on microstock sites. I would like to avoid that this image is free of being downloaded expecially at this high resolution. For wiki this is not a significant damage since it is quite simple to replace this image with others similar. It has been used only to describe Siracusa and many shot are available on the same subject. So I kindly ask again to remove it. Thanks a lot. Dario Giannobile (talk) 15:17, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
|talk]]) 15:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Kept: @Dario Giannobile, that's exactly why we do not do such deletions. Once you release a file into a free license, people are entitled to reuse the file. We are not helping you getting those reusers into trouble. --Jcb (talk) 16:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Jcb: Dear Jcb, i do not want ot create troubles to anyone nor i will do. To load this image at such resolution was a mistake of mine. I'm just asking kindly to remove it for this time, knowing to pay more attention next time. that's all. Dario Giannobile (talk) 1:17, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, and you are to late for this picture. Jcb (talk) 22:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Created by the Cypriot government, not by the uploader. No evidence of permission from the government. Stefan2 (talk) 19:57, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Its my picture of my Passport for god sakes! Are all other passport images published in Wikipedia by official EU state representatives????— Preceding unsigned comment added by Euclidthalis (talk • contribs) 06:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC) (UTC+9)
- When you upload a picture of a passport, you need to obtain prior permission from the government which issued the passport, see COM:OTRS. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well it depends on a national law really. What does the Cyprus copyright law say? Are official documents in PD?--Twofortnights (talk) 17:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- Cyprus was part of the UK in the past, so presumably Cypriot law is similar to British law, meaning that government works are non-free. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:44, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well let's not presume, I am sure there is someone around here who knows the ins and outs of the Cypriot copyright law.--Twofortnights (talk) 17:01, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- If you are claiming that Cypriot passports aren't protected by copyright for some reason, then you have to provide evidence of this. Per COM:EVIDENCE, files which are unfree or have unknown copyright status are to be deleted. Also, government works of British Commonwealth countries are typically unfree. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep- Cypriot copyright law was amended in 1993, in which government works were rendered copyright-free. See section 6 of [4]. --LL212W (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- That section confirms that government works are unfree: the copyright expires 50 years after publication, as in most former British colonies. --Stefan2 (talk) 11:48, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep- Cypriot copyright law was amended in 1993, in which government works were rendered copyright-free. See section 6 of [4]. --LL212W (talk) 11:36, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- If you are claiming that Cypriot passports aren't protected by copyright for some reason, then you have to provide evidence of this. Per COM:EVIDENCE, files which are unfree or have unknown copyright status are to be deleted. Also, government works of British Commonwealth countries are typically unfree. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well let's not presume, I am sure there is someone around here who knows the ins and outs of the Cypriot copyright law.--Twofortnights (talk) 17:01, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
- Cyprus was part of the UK in the past, so presumably Cypriot law is similar to British law, meaning that government works are non-free. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:44, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well it depends on a national law really. What does the Cyprus copyright law say? Are official documents in PD?--Twofortnights (talk) 17:21, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- When you upload a picture of a passport, you need to obtain prior permission from the government which issued the passport, see COM:OTRS. --Stefan2 (talk) 21:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, I misread. What about common property? Are passports part of that? --LL212W (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure what you mean with 'common property'. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry, I misread. What about common property? Are passports part of that? --LL212W (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Also, what about EU government property? --LL212W (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Governments in the European Union have different rules. The Cypriot government protects its works by copyright, per the part of the law you referenced. --Stefan2 (talk) 12:24, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Also, what about EU government property? --LL212W (talk) 12:14, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
- Wait... The Cypriot government also mentioned that the passport is a form of personal identity document... so the uploader may be just uploading a scan of their own passport, which is acceptable on Commons. See [5]. --LL212W (talk) 13:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: The design of this passport (note the doves!) appear eligible for copyright. No proof was forthcoming that this is in the public domain. It does not help here that the uploader actually owns the depicted passport, the copyright is still with the government. --AFBorchert (talk) 09:12, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
The copyright tag used only covers text, not images, see the lead section of Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review. Stefan2 (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The image is a part of a German law (Verordnung zur Durchführung des Passgesetzes – Passverordnung, Anlage 1, http://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/passv_2007/anlage_1.html) and therefore in the public domain according to German copyright law.
- (Gesetz über Urheberrecht und verwandte Schutzrechte – Urheberrechtsgesetz: § 5 Amtliche Werke (1) „Gesetze, Verordnungen, amtliche Erlasse und Bekanntmachungen sowie Entscheidungen und amtlich verfaßte Leitsätze zu Entscheidungen genießen keinen urheberrechtlichen Schutz.“) --Lumu (talk)
- According to the lead section of Commons:WikiProject Public Domain/German stamps review, a German court decided that the part of the law which you are quoting only covers literary works but not other kinds of materials. This image is not a literary work, so it isn't covered by that part of the law. --Stefan2 (talk) 20:57, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: high risk of identity theft. --Jcb (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Dura-Ace as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: Website where the image was taken is copyrighted (© Fundación Telefónica) Old photo (and Fundación Telefónica is not the copyright holder but EFE). If the foto was first published in Chile before September 16, 1962, then, the photo is in the PD. Amitie 10g (talk) 04:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- This Monday I'll go to the location of the exhibition at Torre Telefónica in order to ask when and where has been first published these photos. --Amitie 10g (talk) 06:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Administrators: Please don't delete the file until I request information and permission to the Fundación Telefónica. --Amitie 10g (talk) 03:46, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: A Spain-based agency reports on a Spain-based airline with a picture taken in Spain, so the license is probably PD-Chile?!? This will need an explanation, which is missing. --Jcb (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Warko as no source, but I cannot find an external source to doubt own work as claimed. JuTa 16:50, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The same then applies to File:Carlos Balart G.jpg, a scaled down duplicate. --JuTa 16:53, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: out of scope. --Jcb (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
Problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2 Fnielsen (talk) 11:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
COM:TOYS Ras67 (talk) 19:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 00:15, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
No Freedom of panorama in Belarus. The graffity shown in the picture is made in Vitebsk, Belarus several years ago. Jarash (talk) 19:55, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination and also because I cannot see a license at the source. Green Giant (talk) 00:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Created by the French government, not by the uploader. No evidence of permission from the French government. Stefan2 (talk) 19:58, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Comment I see here a difficult case. First, we could say that a passport is an utilitarian object. But then, the seal (the armoiries officieuses de la République) is to be controlled. I guess that we'll need input from french colleagues... @Christian Ferrer: Tu es le premier à qui j'ai pensé. Qui est-ce qui pourrait bien se connaitre bien dans ces questions de droits et d'images gouvernementales? Regards, Grand-Duc (talk) 21:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- COM:CB#Utility objects only discusses United States law: There is normally no copyright in a 3D utilitarian object in the United States. Other countries may be different. See for example [6]: you can't take photos of French furniture. A passport doesn't seem to be a utilitarian object as defined under United States law. --Stefan2 (talk) 22:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment The author of the emblem used on French passports is Jules Chaplain died in 1909, the armoiries are in PD.
Even in USA 3D utilitarian object applies only on 3D object and it does not cancel com:packaging, usually a 2d work on a 3D work, then "utilitarian object" is IMO not relevant here.
Regarding the TOO in France, in my knowledge, TOO is very low in France, e.g. the text above this door is not free in France. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:53, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- I don't think {{Gouvernement.fr}} can apply here, as the french administration is not the government. So currently I will say Delete, I do not know the person who could help us on this topic, sorry. Christian Ferrer (talk) 04:58, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and Christian Ferrer. Green Giant (talk) 00:11, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Possible copy-vio see http://urduyouthforum.org/biography/biography_tasaweer_list-Shamim-Farooqui.html Eagleash (talk) 22:34, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and COM:PCP. Green Giant (talk) 00:03, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Magog the Ogre as no license. Well, there is a {{PD-URAA}}. JuTa 22:52, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- c.1924 is the best we can do on this one - see also [7]. {{PD-URAA}} looks ok, otherwise load locally instead of Commons?Rstory (talk) 09:28, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- Delete as I have pointed out previously, PD-URAA is not sufficient as a standalone license, as it plainly states right in its description. Delete unless someone can give it a local license. Magog the Ogre (talk) (contribs) 22:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- OK, local it is - how do I transfer it?Rstory (talk) 12:21, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
As with most of the user's uploads, there is no evidence of when and where this photo was first published, which is required to support the PD rationale. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The files are sourced from the Italian wikipedia and have been uploaded to commons using the transfer tool.--Danieletorino2 (talk) 11:08, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- The Italian Wikipedia is not the original source. We need information on when and where this photo was first published to determine if the PD rationale is correct. Please do not transfer any more files with incomplete source information. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- LOOK AT THE ACTUAL PAGE. THERE IS A SOURCE--Danieletorino2 (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- Stop shouting. There is a secondary source, a Facebook page. That in no way helps to verify the claims made in the PD rationale. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:52, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- The file states this on the Italian wikipedia page (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Torino_anni_%2770,_Stadio_Filadelfia_-_Graziani,_Sala_e_Zaccarelli.jpg)
- Stop shouting. There is a secondary source, a Facebook page. That in no way helps to verify the claims made in the PD rationale. —LX (talk, contribs) 14:52, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- LOOK AT THE ACTUAL PAGE. THERE IS A SOURCE--Danieletorino2 (talk) 12:43, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- The Italian Wikipedia is not the original source. We need information on when and where this photo was first published to determine if the PD rationale is correct. Please do not transfer any more files with incomplete source information. —LX (talk, contribs) 11:25, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
- "Dopo aver accuratamente verificato la validità della licenza, questa immagine potrà essere ricopiata su Wikimedia Commons, rendendola così disponibile anche a Wikipedia in altre lingue e agli altri progetti Wikimedia. Ma non va né richiesta la cancellazione di questa copia né inserito il template"
- It gives permission to upload it to Wikimedia Commons as the license has been validated so must not be cancelled :-).--Danieletorino2 (talk) 02:12, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- No, I may not know a whole lot of Italian, but that's not what it says. What it does say is that you must carefully verify that the license (actually: the PD rationale, as there is no license) is valid before copying the file to Commons. The problem here is exactly that: you're transferring files without verifying the copyright status.
- The instructions regarding deletion only apply to the copy on Italian Wikipedia. A template on Italian Wikipedia obviously can't dictate what can and cannot be done on Commons. —LX (talk, contribs) 08:03, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Facebook is not a good source so please do not upload from there. The unknown author is a serious problem. You should only use it when exhaustive investigations show that the author really is unknown. You also seem uncertain about the date of the photo, which is important because if the author us unknown then we need to know the date so we can work out when copyright will end. Green Giant (talk) 01:09, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2. The artist died in 1995. Fnielsen (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. No freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark unless the author died before 1945. Green Giant (talk) 01:14, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2. Fnielsen (talk) 11:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- It would be kind if not downright constructive if you would write and add a little more information as to the said law and relevant paragraph, or for the very least a link, your choice of vague words "likely problem" dose not help and it's unclear - to me, what is your argument and why you ask that this file will be deleted. Nettadi (talk) 12:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- I was quite taken aback by your unexplained vague deletion request that I took the trouble of finding the quoted law, something you should have done. the said clause. 24.2 say: "Works of art may be reproduced in pictorial form and then made available to the public if they are permanently situated in a public place or road. The provision of the first sentence shall not apply if the work of art is the chief motif and its reproduction is used for commercial purposes." it seems that we can agree that the "work of art" is indeed "permanently situated in a public place or road". I argue that there is NO "likely problem" with the File: Agnete and the Merman sculptures2.JPG as it shows only a minute part of the work of art, to such extant that one can't tell what it's shape or details so it is NOT a reproduction and it's definitely NOT the "chief motif" and the use is definitely NOT for commercial use. it seems to me that the image is NOT in infringement of the Danish copyright act. Nettadi (talk) 16:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: No freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark unless the author died before 1945. However, these are actually quite blurry and mostly indistinct, to the extent that it is a case of de minimis. Green Giant (talk) 01:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Likely problem with Danish copyright act § 24, 2. Fnielsen (talk) 11:16, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- It would be kind if not downright constructive if you would write and add a little more information as to the said law and relevant paragraph, or for the very least a link, your choice of vague words "likely problem" dose not help and it's unclear - to me, what is your argument and why you ask that this file will be deleted.Nettadi (talk) 15:56, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- I was quite taken aback by your unexplained vague deletion request that I took the trouble of finding the quoted law, something you should have done. the said clause. 24.2 say: "Works of art may be reproduced in pictorial form and then made available to the public if they are permanently situated in a public place or road. The provision of the first sentence shall not apply if the work of art is the chief motif and its reproduction is used for commercial purposes." it seems that we can agree that the "work of art" is indeed "permanently situated in a public place or road". I argue that there is NO "likely problem" with the File: Agnete and the Merman sculptures.JPG as it shows only a minute part of the work of art, to such extant that one can't tell what it's shape or details, so it is NOT a reproduction, the work of art is NOT the "chief motif" and the use is definitely NOT for commercial use. it seems to me that the image does NOT in infringement of the Danish copyright act. Nettadi (talk) 16:28, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: No freedom of panorama for sculptures in Denmark unless the author died before 1945. However, these are actually quite blurry and mostly indistinct, to the extent that it is a case of de minimis. Green Giant (talk) 01:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
There is no evidence that the artist, Randii Oliver, ever worked for the Federal government. see http://crimzon5.wix.com/randiioliver. In order to keep this on Commons we will need a free license from her. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:23, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- First: why should Randii Oliver be Creator here? --Itu (talk) 13:15, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- "Image courtesy of NASA, JPL, Caltech." --Itu (talk) 13:18, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Archived source page from 2004 says the artwork was created by Randii Oliver. Unless there is some evidence that this person worked for NASA, there is no PD license applicable. Green Giant (talk) 00:57, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This is not comprehensible. It means
- NASA just took (steals) an external picture without purchasing the rights.
- Despite 1., the claimed author credits NASA for the picture on his own site
That makes not sense at all to me. Please restore. --Itu (talk) 17:52, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
- @Itu: once a DR is closed, you should use either COM:UDR or the deleting admins talk page instead of re-opening like this. Nonetheless, did you read the link I gave above? It is an archived copy of the NASA page, where it unequivocally states it is "Art by Randii Oliver". There are also pictures by other artists, so it is likely they were invited to submit artwork to NASA. It happens all the time, just look at the current version of the same page. Unless Randii licenses the work, it cannot be hosted here (barring death of the artist followed by a 70-year period, which would end the copyright period). Green Giant (talk) 18:29, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/about-us/ Sciencia58 (talk) 19:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
https://phys.org/news/2019-05-declining-fertility-neanderthal-extinction.html Sciencia58 (talk) 22:43, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
https://www.colorado.edu/today/2019/06/26/neanderthals-used-resin-glue-craft-their-stone-tools Sciencia58 (talk) 22:44, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
http://chit-chak.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/CAN1758_11200.jpg from http://chit-chak.com/2015/06/12/cc-candychili-by-kaman-kong/ "Photography by Benana Ng" and "Copyright chit-chak.com 2014" Lacrymocéphale (talk) 13:04, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Wrong author and licence incompatibility; see Commons:Deletion requests/File:KAMANKONG@CHITCHAK.jpg --Lacrymocéphale (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 00:26, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Minions
[edit]The photographers have not the right to publish photos of the Minions under a free licence without permission of Universal Studios!
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9734885031).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9734915453).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9735071261).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9735075917).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9735082439).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9735121439).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9738061536).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9738101226).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9738303564).jpg
- File:G-DMEZ Cameron Minion-105 HAB (9738328282).jpg
- File:Moi, moche et méchant 2, Minion au Paquier d'Annecy.jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Ras67 (talk) 19:40, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
Files in Category:Minions 2
[edit]The photograph fails to meet the official guidelines of COM:TOYS, specifically:
- When uploading a picture of a toy, you must show that the toy is in the public domain in both the United States and in the source country of the toy. In the United States, copyright is granted for toys even if the toy is ineligible for copyright in the source country.
The focus of this photograph is a toy for which there is no evidence of copyright status, something that could be easily rectified by checking the label.
For an in-depth background and explanation of Commons copyright policies, refer to the Stuffed Animals essay and the precedent of prior closely related deletion requests:
- Petit tigre
- Erminig
- Wendy the Weasel & Percy Plush
- Wikimania 2014 Day 1
- Jimmy Wales meeting Mr Penguin
.JPG){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
- File:181020 스누퍼 롯데몰 김포공항점 팬싸인회 세빈 6.jpg
- File:Balloon of Minion in front of Hakata Station.jpg
- File:Bristol balloon fiesta.JPG
- File:ComicConSanJose2016-18.jpg
- File:Despicable Me Minion Mayhem building.jpg
- File:Einkaufszentrum Ettlinger Tor im Dezember 2015 - panoramio.jpg
- File:Globo Stuart the Minion, European Balloon Festival 2017.jpg
- File:Globus en forma de Minion, European Balloon Festival 2017.jpg
- File:Minion Plush II.jpg
- File:Minion Plush.jpg
- File:Minions einfach unverbesserlich - panoramio.jpg
- File:Minions keychain.jpg
- File:MINION：MEL.jpg
- File:Shihe, Xinyang, Henan, China - panoramio.jpg
Fæ (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Keep File:181020 스누퍼 롯데몰 김포공항점 팬싸인회 세빈 6.jpg. The Minion is not the subject of the photo, and if it's too large to be de minimis, picture can be cropped to exclude the Minion's eye. Abzeronow (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Keep File:181020 스누퍼 롯데몰 김포공항점 팬싸인회 세빈 6.jpg. The toy is not the main subject of the photo and is positioned in such a way that it could not realistically be used to infringed on its copyright. It's why I uploaded it with the {{De minimis}} tag. ℯxplicit 23:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delete I agree File:Balloon of Minion in front of Hakata Station.jpg to be deleted. Sorry for uploading this.--そらみみ (talk) 12:06, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom, COM:TOYS, Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Wikimedia Cuteness Association at Wikimania 2017, and plushies per COM:PLUSHIES. — Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me 14:11, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
Deleted: Most of them per nomination. Kept the one per above. Even by my, admittedly rather strict, interpretation of de minimis that appears to fit the policy. --Majora (talk) 01:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Minions 3
[edit]COM:DW of copyrighted characters.
- File:Candy bar minion.jpg
- File:Despicable Me Minion-Universal Studios Hollywood.JPG
- File:MEGA CONSTRUX MINIONS (1).jpg
- File:MEGA CONSTRUX MINIONS.jpg
- File:Minion (9118981032).jpg
- File:Minion by blender.png
- File:Minion Cake (17114342743).jpg
- File:Minion cake.jpg
- File:Out Of This World, Sheffield 2016 (30397907682).jpg
- File:【台北。圓山展覽】Hello Kitty嘉年華 (31586891651).jpg
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Yuraily Lic (talk) 03:19, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
- Delete Blurring or cropping any of these would make them useless. - Alexis Jazz ping plz 03:41, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Deleted. Taivo (talk) 20:57, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
Files in Category:Minions 4
[edit]Derivative work of the Minions from the Despicable Me film series
- File:"Minions" Wandmalereien, Kirchgasse, Obere Stadt, Wolfsberg (Kärnten) 01.jpg
- File:"Minions" Wandmalereien, Kirchgasse, Obere Stadt, Wolfsberg (Kärnten).jpg
- File:2017 09 07-09.53.15.582-CDT.jpg
- File:202312092233 IMG 5201.jpg
- File:64y25 2013.jpg
- File:AVBWU688 at Jordan, West Kowloon Station (20190320170144).jpg
- File:Bakejo de lavaŝo kaj vendejo de hejmfaritaj nutraĵoj en Kotajka provinco, Armenio 18.jpg
- File:Can Minion by FortisBC (7045072359).jpg
- File:Colorado Lt Gov tours Schriever AFB (210323-F-WR604-0009) (cropped).jpg
- File:Despicable Me cake! -minions (10227957984).jpg
_01.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
_(cropped).jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
Trade (talk) 20:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Mostly de minimis and fanart images, which yes I can agree are very risky to upload, but are acceptable according to Commons policies. File:202312092233 IMG 5201.jpg is the only one here you have a valid point with however as it appears to be a direct picture of three copyrighted toys, but even it may need further discussion. AuroraANovaUma ^-^ (talk) 23:06, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep File:AVBWU688 at Jordan, West Kowloon Station (20190320170144).jpg. COM:DM criterion 3 or 4. Plus there's quite a number of previous DRs which decided that photos of vehicles with copyrighted elements should not be deleted as a DW unless the photo is focused onto such a copyrighted element: Commons:Deletion requests/Pokemon Jet Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:JA8956 (aircraft) Commons:Deletion requests/File:Av1 (6107897658).jpg Commons:Deletion requests/Image:SBS9815H.jpg. 沪A 05683DS5A-0043 06:20, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
- What about the non-vehicles? Trade (talk) 04:49, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
- Delete all the non-vehicle ones per above. — 🇺🇦Jeff G. ツ please ping or talk to me🇺🇦 05:57, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
- Delete All, except do keep - File:AVBWU688 at Jordan, West Kowloon Station (20190320170144).jpg as de minimis. -- Ooligan (talk) 14:42, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination and discussion, deleted all except the photo of the Bus at Jordan. --Ellywa (talk) 12:07, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Unauthroized derivative work. No evidence that the author of this sculpture has given permission, and is not dead. Nicht autorisierte abgeleitete Arbeit. Kein Beweis, dass der Auto dieser Skulptur die Erlaubnis gegeben hat, und ist nicht tot. KDS4444 (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- freedom of panorama in Germany and Poland (including works of art). --Vincent Eisfeld (talk) 19:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Is this sculpture on permanent public display? It looks like it is located on private property somewhere. Can you clarify? Thank you! KDS4444 (talk) 19:48, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- I have had look at an aerial photograph— it looks like this sculpture can be viewed from a location accessible to the public, without fences or restrictions, therefore Freedom of Panorama in Germany applies, I have updated the license accordingly, and would withdraw the nomination for deletion. KDS4444 (talk) 20:01, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- yes, the apple is on permanent public display close to the Nordhausen theatre since 2013. [8] --Vincent Eisfeld (talk) 11:07, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: Withdrawn by nominator. Green Giant (talk) 00:19, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This file was initially tagged by Gampe as Speedy (Speedydelete) and the most recent rationale was: copyvio, author: Pavel Fárka, no OTRS permission. Actually Pavel Fárka is the uploader, but OTRS-permission would be good. Taivo (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Better to be cautious until and unless permission is sent through COM:OTRS. Green Giant (talk) 00:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
missing essential information about author (death) and date Ceroles (talk) 14:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 13:06, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This is apparently a photograph of a mural in a German museum. While the photograph is probably "own work" as claimed, I doubt that the mural is. We can't keep this on Commons without either proof that the mural is PD or a free lciense from the actual artist. . . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- There is freedom of panorama in Germany for art.[9] FunkMonk (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- That FoP description talks about the "public" accessibility for taking the photograph, including being fenced-in with admission control as a disqualifier, and also says that there are limits on derivative works. Does commons have precedent for museum works? DMacks (talk) 07:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
There is no evidence at Jay Matternes that he ever worked for the Federal government. In order to keep this, we will need a free license from him. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:17, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The mural was made for the US government-owned Smithsonian Museum. So he was employed by the US government when he made it. FunkMonk (talk) 11:32, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination, also notice that while this work was 'on display' at the Smithsonian Institution, the piece is not owned by nor was commissioned by the U.S. Governement, thus per Jameslwoodward we would need COM:OTRS from the still-living artist to release the copyright on images which were published in a Time-Life Book. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:16, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This is apparently a photograph of a mural in the Museum of Natural History. While the photograph is probably "own work" as claimed, I doubt that the mural is. We can't keep this on Commons without either proof that the mural is PD or a free lciense from the actual artist. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- The museum is US government owned, the artist would therefore be employees of the US government, and the work be PD. FunkMonk (talk) 11:44, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment National Museum of Natural History is administred by the Smithsonian and (...) more than two-thirds of the Smithsonian's workforce of some 6,300 persons are employees of the federal government..., it stay 2000 persons not employees of the federal government...Christian Ferrer (talk) 21:03, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Kept: no valid reason for deletion. It's a diorama created in-situ in the Smithsonian. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:20, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
The Flickr account looks very a copyright washing operation to me. Dereckson (talk) 16:54, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. Reviewing entire flickr gallery showed very uneven quality images, looks like flikrwashing. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:18, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1){kind=link}
.jpg&action=edit§ion=T-1){kind=link}
This file was initially tagged by KDS4444 as Copyvio (copyvio) and the most recent rationale was: romania does not recognize freedom of panorama. image shows base of sculptural monument erected in 1989. Unauthorized derivative work.
Converted by me to DR, as the uploader (?) has objected. -- Túrelio (talk) 20:33, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
This picture is a panorama that presents the whole place. I believe the presence of the (non-recognisable) base of the monuments falls under de minimis.--2A02:2F0B:8130:113B:76DA:38FF:FE1D:BCB6 17:37, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Maybe so, but I am concerned that the monument is the second thing mentioned in the file's description, and that it occupies the prominent dead center of the image. Would the image be as interesting/ useful without the monument? I think it would look like the monument had been blocked out if it were missing. De minimis contradicts these things. I grant you that it does not show the entire monument (especially the potato) but I think it is difficult to argue that it is a minimal part of the image as shown. KDS4444 (talk) 02:06, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
Deleted: per nomination. --Ellin Beltz (talk) 15:19, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
.jpg){kind=link}
According to w:File:Cimini di Messina.jpeg: This image belongs to Cimini Family, who owns to copyright. This contradicts with the copyright claims being made here. Stefan2 (talk) 23:31, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment Well if you have checked out the file history, you would notice that the "copyright claim" was added by an anonymous user (80.216.73.90). The description has already been changed to a different one by the same user. In any case, the coat of arms is too old. I think it can be hosted within the confines of {{PD-old-100}}.--Russian Rocky (talk) 20:04, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
- Do you have any evidence that this picture is {{PD-old-100}}? Without a real source, the copyright status is unknown, but it looks like a scan of something. See also COM:COA#Coat of Arms "found on the internet". --Stefan2 (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
- The holder of the original work, seemingly a replica of the medieval coat of arms of Cimini, and article's creator is Kummin. I assume, Kummin has some sort of connection to the Italian noble family Cimini, and ordered to produce a replica of the family coat of arms based on a provided sketch.--Russian Rocky (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- In that case, it is a drawing which has been recently made. Consequently, per COM:COA#Copyright on the representation, {{PD-old-100}} does not apply. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- That means the original work is a property of Kummin, that was ordered and made using his/her unique design. Then Kummin took a picture and uploaded the result under the license CC BY-SA 4.0.--Russian Rocky (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- As I wrote above, this looks like a scan of something, so it is unlikely to be own work by the uploader. Unfortunately, the real source remains unknown. --Stefan2 (talk) 10:57, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- That means the original work is a property of Kummin, that was ordered and made using his/her unique design. Then Kummin took a picture and uploaded the result under the license CC BY-SA 4.0.--Russian Rocky (talk) 10:32, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- In that case, it is a drawing which has been recently made. Consequently, per COM:COA#Copyright on the representation, {{PD-old-100}} does not apply. --Stefan2 (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- The holder of the original work, seemingly a replica of the medieval coat of arms of Cimini, and article's creator is Kummin. I assume, Kummin has some sort of connection to the Italian noble family Cimini, and ordered to produce a replica of the family coat of arms based on a provided sketch.--Russian Rocky (talk) 08:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
- Do you have any evidence that this picture is {{PD-old-100}}? Without a real source, the copyright status is unknown, but it looks like a scan of something. See also COM:COA#Coat of Arms "found on the internet". --Stefan2 (talk) 20:41, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 15:01, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
This is apparently a photograph of a mural in a German museum. While the photograph is probably "own work" as claimed, I doubt that the mural is. We can't keep this on Commons without either proof that the mural is PD or a free lciense from the actual artist. . Jim . . . . (Jameslwoodward) (talk to me) 11:27, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- There is freedom of panorama in Germany for art.[10] FunkMonk (talk) 11:42, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- That FoP description talks about the "public" accessibility for taking the photograph, including being fenced-in with admission control as a disqualifier, and also says that there are limits on derivative works. Does commons have precedent for museum works? DMacks (talk) 17:10, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. --Jcb (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2016 (UTC)
No FOP in Italy, see Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Stadio Giuseppe Meazza. Several other photos of the architecture have been uploaded since that deletion discussion in 2013. John of Reading (talk) 10:30, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted: per nomination. Green Giant (talk) 10:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)
Furong Village (芙蓉村) and Cangpo Village (苍坡村) are two different places. And it seems there are no medias related to Furong Village in the present.--578985s (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
Deleted, per nomination, misleading category redirect for an otherwise empty category. --Martin H. (talk) 12:43, 15 May 2016 (UTC)